Are there too many race formula's?

[youngoldy]

Are there too many race formula's?

Vote yes or no and say why please.

Cheers

[greenamex2]

Because people keep starting new ones out of vested interest rather than joining existing ones.

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by Denis Bassom

Because people keep starting new ones out of vested interest rather than joining existing ones.

what he said, although occaisionally a series will run up a blind alley with blinkers on and we do need some choices

[R59]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

what he said, although occaisionally a series will run up a blind alley with blinkers on and we do need some choices

Like they used to have in the old days....

Have a look on the racing70's website,
1978/79

Formula Ford 1600 (BARC)
Formula Ford 1600 (British Fusegear)
Formula Ford 1600 (Kent Messanger)
Formula Ford 1600 (Northern)
Formula Ford 1600 (RAC)
Formula Ford 1600 (Scottish)
Formula Ford 1600 (Townsend Thorenson)

OK, so there are two, maybe three, regional series in there.

There were two F3 championships: the BP one, and the Vandervel one.
Two FF2000 championships
SEVEN Clubman's championships
Six Modsports
Four Prod Saloons
Five Special Saloons

What was noticeable was the lack of "slightly modified from this or that spec saloon car" championships. There were two Mini 7 series', and what looks to be four manufacturer backed one-make "challenges" - Escort (Mexico's I'll assume), 1275GT's, Regie 5's, and Porsche 924's.

Then take a look at 79, and you'll see things starting to go mad, with three Escort championships, ok, one for the laydeeees.

More FF1600 championships... Must be popular (eh Ian?)

But Special Saloons appears to be the "mainstay" of saloon racing.

Rob.

[Al Weyman]

The formulas that really get me down are the ones that attempt to perpetulate a one make challenge after a manufacturer has finished with it. One of the reasons we set up championships like the ModProds was to give these cars somewhere to run but oh no someone always seems to come along and want to keep them going.

IMHO I think that when people sign up for a one make challenge they should be told then and there how long a period the championship will run and that under no circumstances will a licence be granted to continue with the old model in its own championship or series once the original has ended. They can then decide if they really do want to come out to play in a machine that may have its value drastically reduced after that period.

[carrera]

Far too many series chasing too few drivers.

Have still not decided in which series to run this year - choice of three.

[Peter Mallett]

Which three?

[Larry J-Croft]

No - but a qualified no. As long as people want to race then there should be as many championships/series as they want to set up. However if you want to entertain spectators and make money then there are probably too many. Personally I don't give a stuff how many people come to watch a race I am in - I just want to have fun.
I was in Zandvoort some years ago chatting up a rather nice lady with an even nicer Dolly Sprint (at least that is what I told the wife). She said she could only race it 6 times a year as all their rules were FIA based. When I was doing the TR series, Bert Smeets would come over to race weekends from Belgium because he couldn't compete in Europe. I would hate to see the strength and depth of UK motorsport diluted just because the suits want more of a spectacle for the paying punter.

[diz]

IMHO there is a need for Libre "catch all" races to cover the three main types of cars.
Formula Libre - Single Seaters
Sports Libre - Sports Cars
Saloon Libre - Saloon Cars
Almost a "Run what you Brung" idea where you could race when and where you wanted and against continually changing opposition.
If one, or more, of these classes were to be put onto every club race meeting programme, there should be at least one full grid on the day.

[Al Weyman]

As long as it was handicapped or you would have the usual scenario of one or two cars dissappearing in to the distance.

[Tim Wilkinson]

Is it possible that it's not more series, but fewer drivers? (at least at club level)

[carrera]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Which three?

Classic Thunder - car too heavy and not enough horses.
Pre'93 - under the new rules it should be called Classic Thunder on road tyres, car too heavy not enough horses.
TRC - car too heavy not enough horses but with 4 races at Brands Hatch.

[Al Weyman]

Pre'93 - under the new rules it should be called Classic Thunder on road tyres, car too heavy not enough horses.

Read them again Carrera I think you may have that a bit wrong, the CT allows far more flexibility, the pre-93 is more or less as the the other pre-whatever classes.

[ascarmarshal]

I voted yes because we see more championships and falling grids

[carrera]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

Read them again Carrera I think you may have that a bit wrong, the CT allows far more flexibility, the pre-93 is more or less as the the other pre-whatever classes.

In Pre'93 you are now allowed to replace the door trims with ally sheet. Replace the bonnet and boot etc with fibre glass. Lower the car. Discard bonnet and boot hinges. Fit throttle bodies. None of this was allowed as a Pre'90.

Not as much freedom as CT granted but closer to it than a production car.

[Al Weyman]

Apart from those minor points though which would save a few pounds in weight but you have a minimum weight limit anyhow so can't go below that and that has not changed I can't see it is that much difference than say pre-83. I could run my black car in CT but not in pre-93 as apart from anything else I would have to bolt on 150kgs of lead (no way!).

[R59]

Originally Posted by carrera

Classic Thunder - car too heavy and not enough horses.
Pre'93 - under the new rules it should be called Classic Thunder on road tyres, car too heavy not enough horses.
TRC - car too heavy not enough horses but with 4 races at Brands Hatch.

Strange how you don't mention LMA Eurosaloons.

Then again, not many people do these days.....

Odd that, it's a very much "run what ya brung" series, probably more so than TRC, letting just about anything road-going, like Ferrari's, Caterhams, etc....
Though it's more expensive to run in it, and you get less track time than TRC, and far too often, it's produced thin grids for a series with such a wide catchment.

[carsten.meurer]

while i never was a fan of mixed classes grids ( being brung up in karting, ff
and fvl before changing to clios for a short time ), they seem needed now, to cater for the vast variety of cars of all sort of performance and age.

too many clubs with even slightly different rules ( if only tires ), and mostly
a costly organising quat make racing more expensive than it needs to be !

i would rather see grids for a final decided by heats, rather than need to decide which track to go to for a choice of races on the same date !

there are not enough mad, insane spending people out there to fill all grids,
so they need to be reduced !

if your class can't fill a full grid, join with someing very similar in performance to not hinder free racing !

also the variety in full grids makes races fun for spectators, a lot more than 15 one make tin tops on theire own !

and races are more fun with packed grandstands !
i raced in france for some years ( great circuits, you know ! ), and those tiny tracks, filled with people till it bursts give it a very special athmosphere !
they give you some sort of payback for all your time and money spend, just bacause they come and watch you whÃ*le you do what you love best...

[Tim Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by racing59

Strange how you don't mention LMA Eurosaloons.

Then again, not many people do these days.....

Odd that, it's a very much "run what ya brung" series, probably more so than TRC, letting just about anything road-going, like Ferrari's, Caterhams, etc....
Though it's more expensive to run in it, and you get less track time than TRC, and far too often, it's produced thin grids for a series with such a wide catchment.

Yep, more expensive and less track time. Plus from stories i've heard it's the race that suffers when time is tight, and the BRSCC seem to pack their cards so it happens too much. While it might only be stories it makes a difference when deciding where to run.

Although the series is "catch all", the regs seem to be very outdated and too specific with regard to things like engine management, and the class structure is far more complicated than something like TRC (although that is changing this year, apparently).
Through a combination of aftermarket engine management, too harsh cams, and being over 1950cc, my roadsaloon spec astra would have ended up in the same class as the super-tourers. Obviously that's less than ideal, and maybe that's something that's been acted on for this year's regs.

I think that for the last couple of years it's "catch all" nature has been a hinderance rather than a help.

I'm narrowed down to the same three as Carrera. Are CTCRC properly allowing throttle bodies etc in pre-93, or is that just a waiving of a rule to get cars on the grid? I'd be interested to see Classic Thunder become a pre-93 "catch all", with an anything and everything philosophy, much the same as Rob is trying to organise for the special saloons etc.

[Al Weyman]

Are CTCRC properly allowing throttle bodies etc in pre-93,

I don't see any mention of that in the new Regs TeeJ.

[carrera]

Yes, I could do LMA or even the Castle Combe series and others, but the choice was kept to series that I know and have participated in recently. The guys are friendly enough and the racing, on the whole, clean. Probably just the same in the other championships.

[carrera]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I don't see any mention of that in the new Regs TeeJ.

It would appear that for Pre'93 in 2006 that multiple throttle bodies are allowed, hence my calling it CT on road tyres.

Reg 5.7.6 in conjunction with 5.7.13

[Al Weyman]

Well I read that totally different and I think one of the reasons they may have allowed that at my suggestion for cars like my black car that were fitted from the factory with direct port injection but I would rather run a simple Holley 4 barrel as it is technolgy I understand, (just rebuilt one today as it happens) although as they have left the weights the same I would have to enter at 1450 kgs and the car weighs in at less than 1300 so no point entering. I can't see no mention of throttle bodies or converting say webbers into throttle bodies, as I read it it is either carbs or injection not a combination of both. Maybe Stacy could clarify.

[Tim Wilkinson]

I'll be quite honest - I don't understand that part of the regs, but with pre-93 being in the spirit of group 1 etc, they shouldn't be allowed and my engine is being built with that in mind. The whole, free plenum, ducting, and manifold, but "original location" injectors is all a bit confusing. Maybe it should say ""inlet manifold and plenum free if using carbs". As I said, tho, it's all over my head.

All this just goes to illustrate how many series are available and fighting for the same compeititors.

LMA Eurosaloons, Pre-93, Classic Thunder, TRC, 750mc Hot Hatch, SE Saloons, NW Saloons, Tin Tops, and i'm sure i've forgotten a couple.

[Al Weyman]

I think that is what they do mean teej, it was the same as when I was responsible for ModProd regs, some bright spark would want something changed (like me asking about having to run injection when fitted as standard) and it would get voted in but it could upset the balance of the rules in another almost unrelated area for eg. allowing larger diameter rims allows bigger brakes and so it goes on. It is not an easy thing getting it right you have to be very careful with the correct wording.