Hadn't seen this posted yet, although I've been known to be pretty oblivious at times, but apparently SCCA is looking for feedback from anybody and everybody regarding the autocross program. With the variety of thoughts, opinions, and experiences people here have/had with it, this is a group they probably want to hear from...
https://www.scca.com/articles/2018386-keep-autocross-awesome-everyone-needs-to-take-this-survey
Just went through the survey. Nothing out of the ordinary than what I've seen asked at more local levels.
In reply to Driven5 :
Hahahah, the pop-up at that link says the survey should take 5 minutes. Then when you go to the actual survey, it says it will take 10.
Classic.
Feel like they are missing a big chunk here.... lots of people probably fall into the "Have done it, don't do it anymore" camp.
It took me six minutes, and that includes the open questions at the end.
In reply to prodarwin :
Agreed. The more people in that bucket who include that in their comments at the end, probably the better.
I provided feedback on a few other questions that didn't hit well for me either.
prodarwin said:Feel like they are missing a big chunk here.... lots of people probably fall into the "Have done it, don't do it anymore" camp.
The problem, and I don't think it's malicious it's just how it goes, is that these things are always written by someone that's way too invested in "the system" that can't/doesn't consider what an actual outside perspective might be and so the questions end up being geared towards staying on the current path. Another example...honestly all else equal I'd prefer restricted or maybe even spec classes, but the big caveat is that they need to be well executed with half decent cars. But there's no way to express that when ranking the options so my vote ended up being to prioritize unlimited classes because at least those are pretty difficult (though clearly not impossible) to screw up.
I guess I can take the survey but there are no AutoX's within 50 miles of me.
There was no option for "I used to go to them". They seem to assume you are either a regular participant, or never went.
When I did go, many years ago, I only went to a few SCCA ones. Quickly found out an all day event for three runs was no fun (I didn't care about being competitive). Open, fun run events where way more interesting to me.
In reply to dps214 :
Same with the only option being for cars used either on the street or for autox. What if the cars primary motorsport purpose is time trials, road racing, or whatever else, and regular autocross participation is merely a side benefit for fun and driver development?
Not to mention that how heavily I want to mod the car, how I use the car, and how old the car is, and how expensive the car is, are all heavily intertwined. The survey treats them like they are completely independent though, like there's only one desired scenario of car that I want to autox. More expensive means newer, mostly street driven, and mildly modified for me. Conversely, motorsports specific means older, less expensive, and heavily modified or spec. Either way, autocross wouldn't be the sole focus of it though. No matter what I answer is going to give partially false indication.
The survey also didn't dig into event proximity at all, which is a serious issue when you live in a major metro area but SCCA events are 2.5+ hours (each way) away.
In reply to aircooled :
They actually have multiple questions directed at your fun/runs concerns, so that is at least something on their radar that you would be reinforcing.
In reply to Driven5 :
When I took it, they had several questions about how far you'd be willing to drive for a 1-day event, 2-day event, etc.
Some of that, I think, it dependent upon where you live. We’re spoiled by local events, for example, so I have less need/desire to travel too far for to autocross.
If they want to mix things up try this:
Fastest Time of the Day awarded 100%. Sort everyone by FTD ranking. Slower people are some percentage higher than FTD's 100%.
(100% is top class, 105% the next slowest class, etc.)
Cut off classes every so many % points (5%? TBD), award 3 trophies per ranked class. This way cheating to bypass class rules is not an incentive and less scrutineering is needed to check for compliance. Really only safety issues need to be inspected. Also you find out who your competition is during the event. More time is put into improving driving and not having to try to find the edge of the rules for an advantage.
prodarwin said:Feel like they are missing a big chunk here.... lots of people probably fall into the "Have done it, don't do it anymore" camp.
If you have never done it and are not interested the survey is over. LOL They need a have done it and are not interested in continuing to do it. Then they could quiz us on why.
In reply to Duke :
You're right. I guess I wasn't thinking about it like that, because functionally time is more important than distance. I'd also argue that using 100 mile increments is going to bias the results towards the the status quo and old guard, rather than new blood. Some people's "up to 100 miles" may be downward of <1.5 hours, while that's up to a solid 2 hours each way (specific venue 99 miles away) for me... And I generally still can't justify that either.
I did two of these over the winter for different racing organizations. In both of them there were a few overlapping answers and comments.
No more weekend long doubleheaders!
Both organizations are running just as many doubleheaders this season and I know for sure that one of them has no intention of changing that.
jharry3 said:If they want to mix things up try this:
Fastest Time of the Day awarded 100%. Sort everyone by FTD ranking. Slower people are some percentage higher than FTD's 100%.
(100% is top class, 105% the next slowest class, etc.)
Cut off classes every so many % points (5%? TBD), award 3 trophies per ranked class. This way cheating to bypass class rules is not an incentive and less scrutineering is needed to check for compliance. Really only safety issues need to be inspected. Also you find out who your competition is during the event. More time is put into improving driving and not having to try to find the edge of the rules for an advantage.
SCCA classing is a mess IMHO. It likes to pick favorites that the lists of mods for the class happen to work out for. If you do one thing for your car to make it safer on the track you get thrown into insane classes really quickly and unless you prep to the limit of the rules you dont have a lot of chance of being competitive.
Another club I ran with had a points system. All cars had a base points and then mods had a certain points cost to them. Overall points determined your class. Picking mods that worked for your chassis well was part of the fun. It meant you could show up in almost any random configuration of mods and get placed appropriately. Its probably not as viable at a hyper competitive national level, but it felt so much better at a local club level.
I like the idea of a handicap classing system too. Give them a personal PAX based on raw times over the last 3 events. You wouldn't need classing for something like this, but you'd need a way have competitors notify the admin if they made car changes. That way you could apply some sort of adjustment. Again it would be fun local. Serious people might not like it.
Breaking up the FTD every X people feels a little like iracing splits where you only win because you happened to get lucky and were the top rated driver in your split. Though you could probably go through and group people in a similar way at the start of the season. Then you have set groups of people competing through the year. You'd know the racing should be close and it would come down to which of you executed better that day.
It their first marketing survey in probably decades, it's a learning process for the scca. They only just discovered the internet in 2021 anyway.
I did the survey. The thing I'd like to see instituted for classing/PAX would be some sort of multiplyer based of the cost of the vehicle. So the $5,000 car in the same class as the $50,000 car have at least a fighting chance of being on an even playing field. Right now nearly every class rewards the person with the deepest pockets more than their more frugal competitor.
But for the health of the sport, the SCCA and local municipalities need to work together to develop venues that can be used for all sorts of vehicle activities. Police car driver training on Monday, Cars and Coffee Tuesday night, Schoolbus driver training Wednesday, new driver street survival classes Friday and Saturday, autocross Sunday, etc. Get racers off the street and generally improve the skills of everyone who uses the roads in the entire community. 20-30 acres should do it, and if marketed properly it could even make money by having bleachers and a dedicated spectator area. Communities spend money for baseball, football, soccer fields so why not a "car" field?
KyAllroad said:I did the survey. The thing I'd like to see instituted for classing/PAX would be some sort of multiplyer based of the cost of the vehicle. So the $5,000 car in the same class as the $50,000 car have at least a fighting chance of being on an even playing field. Right now nearly every class rewards the person with the deepest pockets more than their more frugal competitor.
But for the health of the sport, the SCCA and local municipalities need to work together to develop venues that can be used for all sorts of vehicle activities. Police car driver training on Monday, Cars and Coffee Tuesday night, Schoolbus driver training Wednesday, new driver street survival classes Friday and Saturday, autocross Sunday, etc. Get racers off the street and generally improve the skills of everyone who uses the roads in the entire community. 20-30 acres should do it, and if marketed properly it could even make money by having bleachers and a dedicated spectator area. Communities spend money for baseball, football, soccer fields so why not a "car" field?
NIMBY applies. TBH I'd settle for parking lots without curbing and planters everywhere. It seems more and more of the places we'd typically run are being built with these structures that make it useless for autox. Though I'd think a county fair ground would be perfect if we could just get them to put a little thought into how lots are laid out.
PAX by $$$ is a whole other sort of competition. I wouldn't oppose a special class with rules like the $2k challenge however. It might make some interesting racing. I just don't know that there are enough people who built their own cars like that to have much turnout at a local level.
In reply to theruleslawyer :
Steel Cities does it. Called meme street
This drag racer filled it out.
Done it a few times. Not interested.
KyAllroad said:So the $5,000 car in the same class as the $50,000 car have at least a fighting chance of being on an even playing field.
Which class are you talking about? CAM rewards people with deep pockets but I am pretty sure it is intentional. I have found the street, street touring, and street prepared rulesets do a good job of limiting spend.
Did the survey. I would like to race more.
I started completing the survey and closed it halfway through after coming to the same conclusion as others, i.e. I am not the target audience with my 30yo street/hpde car. I started doing performance driving in autox before evolving into a trackday bro, but quickly realized that the rules were stacked against me since the lower classes cater to newer cars that are already engineered for modern 200tw rubber. Getting pushed into higher classes is also an insanely slippery slope and a lot of mild or cheap streetcar mods [that are mandatory for older cars to be competitive] will get you there in a heartbeat, so the build costs balloon.
The classing rules really need a revamp. I agree that a points based system would help, maybe like Champ or COMSCC.
You'll need to log in to post.
