Printable View
I'm cross posting this from the Cal-Club's message board:
http://www.calclub.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3782
Mike Lewis asks:
informal poll. your area director wants to know :)
how many in cal club would participate if the runoffs were more 'geographically convenient'?
say on the west coast?
or barring that, how about utah?
How about the Nor-Pac or even the Rocky-Mountain guys?
I'd love to hear how it would be structured, because, there are a lot of interrelated factors that make this harder than just geography.
S huge number of west coasters run regional classes that wouldn't be invited to the runoffs. So the event would have to move *and* people would need to switch cars, or the class structure at the Runoffs would have to change to make the numbers work out.
I'd wager that if the Runoffs were at a west coast track, we'd lose a HUGE number of east coasters too.
One option being discussed is Miller, have visited there but no driven the course, I'd say that'd probably be the best with a full Run-offs group. Otherwise, there's always the option of splitting the production and formula classes and having two RO groups. Actuall IKF ( International Karting Federation ) has seperate championships for sprint Karts, Dirt Karts, and Road-Race Karts, but all three have a Duffys.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshS
As for us we could slap on some 16" rims and slicks and run E-Prod or stick with our IT set-up and run STU and probably be in the top half.
Sorry to change the subject, but who makes 16" slicks that fit?Quote:
Originally Posted by Z3_GoCar
Funny you should ask that... Just ask a friend of mine who races a FC that very same question. His replay is why would we have to stick with radial slicks? After a quick visit to the prod board looks like Sam Moore is using the Purple Crack's radial tires.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshS
After a little more digging I came up with Hankook F200 radial slicks in 210/620-16 but they'll only go down to 7.5" wide rims. No one seems to have them in stock though. Might be a new suggestion, the Rx-8, S-2000, and Mx-5 are already classed with 18x8 rims, why can't the Z3 get 17x8's? There's more options in the 17" rim diameter.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshS
we could get into so many arguments why the west coast is not the best coast but I will not get into that.... lol
I don't generally go either way (I have gone to crew) but how many people are lost when it moves from place to place? I think that the reagion whom has the most entries throughout the season gets to host the event the following year.
Raymond
Like if new England had the most entries, they'd hold it at Lime Rock?!
If a weekend is $58K, can you imagine how much the rental for the entire event would be!? But that's irrelevant, the track just isn't appropriate. Too small, too short, no paddock space. That's the issue, not all regions have an appropriate track.
Further, some regions run more races, so they will naturally have more entries. Season is longer in Florida, so maybe THEY'LL have the most entries.
Bottom line is that there are only a few tracks in America that can handle an event of the size of the runoffs. Road America, Mid Ohio, Road Atlanta, Miller (yech) mayyyybe the Glen, and Daytona. I don't think that Sears (Infineon) is big enough, and Laguna is possibly big enough but there are so many restrictions there, I'm not sure it's feasible to deal with those. I've never been to Willow...the west coast guys can correct me on all this of course.
I think you could throw out Daytona, the California tracks and Watkins Glen as being "too far" for most ...unless the BoD has decided the Runoffs will move around every year visiting east then west then middle, and they will live with the attendance varying .
Hey Ray,Quote:
Originally Posted by RSTPerformance
I'm just quoting Jim Morrison.
By your plan we'd just go back to holding the run-offs at Road-Antlanta, that plan lead to stagnation and NASA. If the event moves both East and West, then why would someone leave? If the events too far, then wait a couple years and it'll move back to a location that's closer. Tom Misseradino's already talking about it being in either Antlanta or Daytona, talk about loosing more of the West coast participants, but if it'll swing back West again then it won't be too bad.
Jake,
I don't get what's wrong with Miller, while I've not raced there, it's a great facillity.
The track @ Miller isn't very challenging. Not much elevation change, and dusty as all hell.
Sears Point = NO. Relationship with SCCA SUCKS
Laguna Seca = NO. Sound limitations would kill anybody from out of Region.
ThunderHill = NO. Wouldn't be able to handle that many people: ie. hotels, restaurants
Tim,
I have not driven Miller, but there are a lot of tracks with limited elevation that are considered challenging. I hear Miller is quite fast and fun to drive. If you have driven Miller what are your thoughts?
Sebring
Daytona
Silverstone
Monza
Portland
All have limited elevation change. I think Miller is 33' top to bottom. Thunderhill can't be much more(not listed on website) I wouldn't guess over 70' on the 2 hills
VIR !!!!!!! Miller is one of the best tracks you will ever visit for a team, and the worst for drivers and good racing. Most passes include a nudge and because it has no real passing zones except the front straight. Waste of good pavement and another Alan Wilson style FU.
Watkins Glen - rated as one of the most historic, challenging and entertaining places to race. Plenty of room to host the Runoffs and lots of cool stuff to do off the track.
My suggestion is that it rotates across a few courses in this list - VIR, WG, Mid-Ohio, Road Atlanta, Road America and pick one of the west coast tracks and a soutwest track. Don't know which is the best. Being a Yankee I still have to acknowledge that the west coast gets a unfair deal on the track location for the Runoffs.
Pure economics Ben, look at a map of licensed drivers and you see where the center is. Very East coast dominated. They can not loose them and make it pay regardless of the politics.
You're right Steve. Pure economics shouldn't be denied but somehow our club seems to do that. Great example is this weekend at the NARRC runoffs. No willingness to allow IT drivers to double dip in the STU race at a discount. Full price only. Pure foolishness to push away revenue with no additional operating costs...
If we did rotate the Runoffs we'd have one west coast track say every 4-5 years....but maybe I'm being too altruistic.
Make it the Glen!
Meanwhile, racers out here will increasingly race with NASA because they will put their championship at Miller. Maybe CalClub should split off of the SCCA and become its own sanctioning body again.Quote:
Originally Posted by seckerich
NASA Nationals at Miller really hurt their growth. Too far from everywhere. If you want the runoffs on the west coast then do them there. Do it where you can get a date.
Otherwise plan to travel.
Here's the bottom line. There are few tracks in the country that can accomidate the number of rigs and race cars that the runoffs requires. I doubt WG can. ViR is borderline. Daytona can. MidOhio perhaps.
Its also true that dates are very hard to get. The better tracks are full now. They are not going to upset their regular customer schedule and jump thru the hoops required to host an event like the runoffs for just one year. They want an extended deal.
If you want to rotate it, it needs to be part of the contracted plan. 3 years here. Then 3 years at venue #2 and then 3 year back and venue #1. All in the same contract.