| Crashsector | 08-01-2006 10:58 PM |
The future of rally in the USA...
�
�
I've been doing a lot of thinking lately, especially with the hype of the X-games.
It's no secret that rally popularity has been declining in the past few years in the US. Until now, rally has appealed mostly to dedicated motor sports enthusiasts, in the same way they are attracted to Forumula 1, GT racing, etc. (as opposed to "the masses" preferring drag, NASCAR, etc.)
Maybe the powers that be are going about this the wrong way. Do you think a better way to market rally events in the US (and maybe even the world) would be as more of an "extreme sport?"
I personally think it could be grouped in the same category as BMXing, dirt bike racing, snowboarding, etc. This would attract a different (younger) crowd that doesn't necessarily come from a motorsport background.
Look at the recent evidence...
- The X-Games Rally
- Red Bull (an "extreme sport" sponsor for many years) sponsoring countless US and world rally teams and events
- Shoe companies pumping out rally teams (provided their owners are interested)
- Athletic clothing companies sponsoring teams
And a few other things I can't think of right now.
So, could the future of rally be as an "extreme sport" rather than a "motor sport?"
Most of this is probably evident, but I just wanted to discuss it.
It's no secret that rally popularity has been declining in the past few years in the US. Until now, rally has appealed mostly to dedicated motor sports enthusiasts, in the same way they are attracted to Forumula 1, GT racing, etc. (as opposed to "the masses" preferring drag, NASCAR, etc.)
Maybe the powers that be are going about this the wrong way. Do you think a better way to market rally events in the US (and maybe even the world) would be as more of an "extreme sport?"
I personally think it could be grouped in the same category as BMXing, dirt bike racing, snowboarding, etc. This would attract a different (younger) crowd that doesn't necessarily come from a motorsport background.
Look at the recent evidence...
- The X-Games Rally
- Red Bull (an "extreme sport" sponsor for many years) sponsoring countless US and world rally teams and events
- Shoe companies pumping out rally teams (provided their owners are interested)
- Athletic clothing companies sponsoring teams
And a few other things I can't think of right now.
So, could the future of rally be as an "extreme sport" rather than a "motor sport?"
Most of this is probably evident, but I just wanted to discuss it.
| NYEJ25 | 08-01-2006 11:04 PM |
Motor sport......All motor sports are extreme. 1 of only 3 real sports.
| wvallwheeldrive | 08-01-2006 11:05 PM |
how about an extreme motor sport
| So Cal STI | 08-01-2006 11:36 PM |
Regrettingly, I think the popularity of NAstyCAR is based uppon the "soap oppera effect", it has become more the driver then car, where as other motorsports its the car then driver. However I do agree that you have to put rally (at least in the US) in the "extream sports" category. I hope that the "shiloutte" racing trend for the US dose'nt get out of hand. I think that production based Race (or Win) on Sunday, Sell on Monday style of racing is very good for auto sales and fan support. My two cents.
| Evo3Codriver | 08-01-2006 11:40 PM |
The popularity of rally has not decreased in recent years.
True, there are not the 120 car entry list like back in 1999, but the reason is the costs associated with being competitve have weeded out all but the weathly and those willing to compete on credit. Now days you need multiple sets each of different tires, spare trannies, engine mapping, an additional ~ $150 per event for stagenotes and/or extra funds and time for recce, more stringent car contruction rules increasing costs, entry fees have more than doubled mostly due to event insurance hikes following the fatalities in 2003, the split between 2 sanctioning bodies and fact the SCCA drove out many before dumping rally. Before, it was install a cage in dad's old VW and go have fun.
I think the popularity is same as before if not better (thanks to internet and video games), its just that less people are competing now. If more kids with multiple peircings, tattos and mohawks weaing their pants low to show their underwear want to start rallying, SoBe it.
True, there are not the 120 car entry list like back in 1999, but the reason is the costs associated with being competitve have weeded out all but the weathly and those willing to compete on credit. Now days you need multiple sets each of different tires, spare trannies, engine mapping, an additional ~ $150 per event for stagenotes and/or extra funds and time for recce, more stringent car contruction rules increasing costs, entry fees have more than doubled mostly due to event insurance hikes following the fatalities in 2003, the split between 2 sanctioning bodies and fact the SCCA drove out many before dumping rally. Before, it was install a cage in dad's old VW and go have fun.
I think the popularity is same as before if not better (thanks to internet and video games), its just that less people are competing now. If more kids with multiple peircings, tattos and mohawks weaing their pants low to show their underwear want to start rallying, SoBe it.
| RichardM | 08-02-2006 12:29 AM |
[QUOTE=Evo3Codriver]The popularity of rally has not decreased in recent years.
Before, it was install a cage in dad's old VW and go have fun.
[/QUOTE]
You can still rally like that if you want. And you will have fun. But in the past, if you did that, you wouldn't win. You won't win that way today either.
One way you could win in the past that has gone away is the competition by seed. You used to compete against drivers that had finishing averages equal to yours and not against cars that were allegedly as fast as yours.
Car 701
Before, it was install a cage in dad's old VW and go have fun.
[/QUOTE]
You can still rally like that if you want. And you will have fun. But in the past, if you did that, you wouldn't win. You won't win that way today either.
One way you could win in the past that has gone away is the competition by seed. You used to compete against drivers that had finishing averages equal to yours and not against cars that were allegedly as fast as yours.
Car 701
| Evo3Codriver | 08-02-2006 12:32 AM |
[QUOTE=RichardM]You can still rally like that if you want. And you will have fun. But in the past, if you did that, you wouldn't win. You won't win that way today either.[/QUOTE]
And certainly not in a Saab.
But I have been on a National podium with a VW.
And certainly not in a Saab.
But I have been on a National podium with a VW.
| fastfreddy | 08-02-2006 07:48 AM |
The SCCA is doing the right thing by pushing Rallycross - it is the ideal way to get people in to the sport at a level that is both affordable and sensible.
Once people get hooked, they will gradually move on up into one of the rally series.
Also, regional championships should be further pushed, as the distances needed to be travelled here to compete in top flight rallying are far too much for the profile of the spots as it is - things like the X-Games are a good way of increasing the profile, but there needs to be more awareness of the fact that viewers can turn up and try this themselves in a rallycross.
I don't think that the SCCA currently does enough to promote their autocross and rallycross alternatives for beginners to motorsport. 99% or people I know have no idea that you can do this in your own car in a safe environment, event though many would love to do it.
Once you get a healthy base level to the sport, the top flight should look after itself.
Once people get hooked, they will gradually move on up into one of the rally series.
Also, regional championships should be further pushed, as the distances needed to be travelled here to compete in top flight rallying are far too much for the profile of the spots as it is - things like the X-Games are a good way of increasing the profile, but there needs to be more awareness of the fact that viewers can turn up and try this themselves in a rallycross.
I don't think that the SCCA currently does enough to promote their autocross and rallycross alternatives for beginners to motorsport. 99% or people I know have no idea that you can do this in your own car in a safe environment, event though many would love to do it.
Once you get a healthy base level to the sport, the top flight should look after itself.
| KC | 08-02-2006 07:57 AM |
[QUOTE=So Cal STI]Regrettingly, I think the popularity of NAstyCAR is based uppon the "soap oppera effect", it has become more the driver then car, where as other motorsports its the car then driver. [/QUOTE]
I disagree. Pretty much all motorsports are about the driver 1st. (Rally in the very least is more about driver than car also) They're the ones that the teams hire to make their cars do well, and also expect results from the drivers. The driver/navvy are the ones that get talked about more than the car.
A good driver in a good car does well. A good driver in a mediochre car can also do well, just not as often if up against the G/G driver/car combo. A mediochre driver in a good car doesn't do as well.
--kC
I disagree. Pretty much all motorsports are about the driver 1st. (Rally in the very least is more about driver than car also) They're the ones that the teams hire to make their cars do well, and also expect results from the drivers. The driver/navvy are the ones that get talked about more than the car.
A good driver in a good car does well. A good driver in a mediochre car can also do well, just not as often if up against the G/G driver/car combo. A mediochre driver in a good car doesn't do as well.
--kC
| KC | 08-02-2006 08:15 AM |
[QUOTE=fastfreddy]I don't think that the SCCA currently does enough to promote their autocross and rallycross alternatives for beginners to motorsport. 99% or people I know have no idea that you can do this in your own car in a safe environment, event though many would love to do it.[/QUOTE]
I also agree to a point. Beginnners in the sport need to be widely accpeted in the sport, and, IMHO mentored, if you can call it that, for a while. The regions can only do/help as much as the beginner asks for. If the beginner doesn't ask much, then they may be left flailing in the wind. If they ask questions (like many experienced people tell them to when they go to events, get an instructor, etc...) then they feel welcomed and accepted and come back.
Let me ask you this tho. Imagine 250 cars at Devens on a 90 degree day. 200 drivers up at a CMC auto-x. Or for those that don't know our area... add 100+ drivers more than what you're maximum capability to run an event can handle.
What would that do to the sport? What kind of pressure would that put on the strapped voluenteer core that put on the events already? What would that mean in the amount of runs vs. time standing around? Or getting the event up and running at the beginning of the day? The course would have to be adjusted, possibly shrunk, to allow more cars through in a day, further decreasing seat time. (Speaking about Devens because they get 300 cars a day through each course at nationals).
See what I'm getting at? It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. We would love to see more people, but the biggest complaint heard is 'auto-x sucks because you don't get a lot of seat time'. Well, with more people at a site that's not indusive to having many people attend (why all clubs other than one, the same club that most people that complain about lack of seat time, limit entires to maximize seat time) and the answer is clear. Advertising only helps to a certain extent. You can advertise, but limit entries, or advertise and not limit entries, but limit runs/course size. :)
With Devens going the way of the DoDo in a year or two, this is why it's important to find new sites, or in the very least have the Palmer track built. Not only will there be a track for club racing, but a big auto-x pad that's square that can afford quality, nationals type courses. You would then probably be able to allow more cars, and even have less time working because less workers would be able to cover more of the course (instead of like Devens where you get a small section).
At least with rally-x, the participation numbers are relatively low, so they get plenty of time to make more runs happen, go out re-set the course, more walk throughs, etc. Rallyx could handle a little more participation without affecting much. Auto-x... not as much. At least not up in NER.
--kC
I also agree to a point. Beginnners in the sport need to be widely accpeted in the sport, and, IMHO mentored, if you can call it that, for a while. The regions can only do/help as much as the beginner asks for. If the beginner doesn't ask much, then they may be left flailing in the wind. If they ask questions (like many experienced people tell them to when they go to events, get an instructor, etc...) then they feel welcomed and accepted and come back.
Let me ask you this tho. Imagine 250 cars at Devens on a 90 degree day. 200 drivers up at a CMC auto-x. Or for those that don't know our area... add 100+ drivers more than what you're maximum capability to run an event can handle.
What would that do to the sport? What kind of pressure would that put on the strapped voluenteer core that put on the events already? What would that mean in the amount of runs vs. time standing around? Or getting the event up and running at the beginning of the day? The course would have to be adjusted, possibly shrunk, to allow more cars through in a day, further decreasing seat time. (Speaking about Devens because they get 300 cars a day through each course at nationals).
See what I'm getting at? It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. We would love to see more people, but the biggest complaint heard is 'auto-x sucks because you don't get a lot of seat time'. Well, with more people at a site that's not indusive to having many people attend (why all clubs other than one, the same club that most people that complain about lack of seat time, limit entires to maximize seat time) and the answer is clear. Advertising only helps to a certain extent. You can advertise, but limit entries, or advertise and not limit entries, but limit runs/course size. :)
With Devens going the way of the DoDo in a year or two, this is why it's important to find new sites, or in the very least have the Palmer track built. Not only will there be a track for club racing, but a big auto-x pad that's square that can afford quality, nationals type courses. You would then probably be able to allow more cars, and even have less time working because less workers would be able to cover more of the course (instead of like Devens where you get a small section).
At least with rally-x, the participation numbers are relatively low, so they get plenty of time to make more runs happen, go out re-set the course, more walk throughs, etc. Rallyx could handle a little more participation without affecting much. Auto-x... not as much. At least not up in NER.
--kC
| fastfreddy | 08-02-2006 09:28 AM |
Agree with you in the fact that more competitors means less seat time for everyone.
It's a tough tradeoff. But with all motorsport, the aim must be towards the future, and encouraging new drivers has to be encouraged for the good of the sport - more competitors would hopefully mean more money going to the sport, which would in turn hopefully mean better facilities for the future.
Otherwise you'll have a situation where all kids think that motorsport is nascar and drag racing, two branches of the sport which gain all the attention, but none of the skill.
I was always curious, why is devens going to become unavailable in the near future - always heard this would happen, but never knew the reasons behind it.
It's a tough tradeoff. But with all motorsport, the aim must be towards the future, and encouraging new drivers has to be encouraged for the good of the sport - more competitors would hopefully mean more money going to the sport, which would in turn hopefully mean better facilities for the future.
Otherwise you'll have a situation where all kids think that motorsport is nascar and drag racing, two branches of the sport which gain all the attention, but none of the skill.
I was always curious, why is devens going to become unavailable in the near future - always heard this would happen, but never knew the reasons behind it.
| KC | 08-02-2006 09:45 AM |
[QUOTE=fastfreddy]I was always curious, why is devens going to become unavailable in the near future - always heard this would happen, but never knew the reasons behind it.[/QUOTE]The land that it is on is returning to the three towns that it currently resides on. IIRC, the airstrip crosses 2 town lines. So the future of it is uncertain at best.
--kC
--kC
| Vampyr | 08-02-2006 10:16 AM |
I think it's all about marketing, regardless of the type of motorsport.
The mass of people... especially in the US, are nothing more than sheep. They will follow the sheep in front of them, not really caring where they are going.
Product sponsorship is one of the biggest factors. Alcohol, more specifically, beer is a strong product endorsement for NASCAR. We all know who drives the #8 Bud car. We all knew who drove the #2 Miller Lite car. Can you remember who drove the Cartoon Network car?
The honest truth is... if you want to make a type of motorsport get alot of following... then you have to have something other than the actual race to have the sheep come see.
Rally is difficult to market because... 1.) Other than a helicopter, you can't get good coverage of the sponsors on the car. 2.) the people really don't have a place to sit and watch the entire race. 3.) the location is not necessarily owned by 1 individual... you don't build a rally course complex, you find one. So that cuts out ALOT of your financial backing for teams.
And the #1 problem that makes Rally, and other motorsports not as popular to the sheep? These motorsports venues are usually run by professional drivers.... not drama queens like Tony Stewart. NASCAR's audience likes reality shows, and the more that NASCAR is like reality show rather than just a race... the more that the sheep will follow.
You want Rally to get more of a following? Start marketing how dangerous it is... show the crashes, or the people getting hurt... turn it into a reality tv show with characters, rather than drivers. Unfortunately... the people who race in Rally have more dignity and moral ethics than NASCAR or other popular motorsports venues.
Again... it's not about the race, it's about the event in whole.
The mass of people... especially in the US, are nothing more than sheep. They will follow the sheep in front of them, not really caring where they are going.
Product sponsorship is one of the biggest factors. Alcohol, more specifically, beer is a strong product endorsement for NASCAR. We all know who drives the #8 Bud car. We all knew who drove the #2 Miller Lite car. Can you remember who drove the Cartoon Network car?
The honest truth is... if you want to make a type of motorsport get alot of following... then you have to have something other than the actual race to have the sheep come see.
Rally is difficult to market because... 1.) Other than a helicopter, you can't get good coverage of the sponsors on the car. 2.) the people really don't have a place to sit and watch the entire race. 3.) the location is not necessarily owned by 1 individual... you don't build a rally course complex, you find one. So that cuts out ALOT of your financial backing for teams.
And the #1 problem that makes Rally, and other motorsports not as popular to the sheep? These motorsports venues are usually run by professional drivers.... not drama queens like Tony Stewart. NASCAR's audience likes reality shows, and the more that NASCAR is like reality show rather than just a race... the more that the sheep will follow.
You want Rally to get more of a following? Start marketing how dangerous it is... show the crashes, or the people getting hurt... turn it into a reality tv show with characters, rather than drivers. Unfortunately... the people who race in Rally have more dignity and moral ethics than NASCAR or other popular motorsports venues.
Again... it's not about the race, it's about the event in whole.
| RichardM | 08-02-2006 10:36 AM |
[QUOTE=Evo3Codriver]And certainly not in a Saab.
But I have been on a National podium with a VW.[/QUOTE]
I probably couldn't podium in an open class Subaru without a restrictor plate. :)
I take that back, I did win Seed 6 at the Big Bend Bash in a Saab 96 in 1981.
But I have been on a National podium with a VW.[/QUOTE]
I probably couldn't podium in an open class Subaru without a restrictor plate. :)
I take that back, I did win Seed 6 at the Big Bend Bash in a Saab 96 in 1981.
| REDrum | 08-02-2006 10:53 AM |
[QUOTE=Crashsector]It's no secret that rally popularity has been declining in the past few years in the US. [/QUOTE]
I cannot agreed.
Support of rally dropped off when SCCA drop it. While I have no stats, I bet the # of people in the US who consider themselves 'rally enthusist' over the past 10 years has been level or has increased slightly. Historically, resources to grow that # have been lean, but RA is now doing what SCCA tried to do for years.
IMO, motorsports fans (and the masses) 'tend' to support what they are exposed to; if its on TV they will watch it. What % of motorsports fans in the US actully go to a race? Compared to NASCAR there has been little no TV coverage of rally in the US. In a response to the question of WRC in the US, I overheard someone pretty famous to rally state "...don't try to bring people to the rally, but rather bring rally to the people"
Had rally had 50% of the TV covergage of NASCAR over the past 10 years, I predict, we'd have the 'Special Stage Buger' @ BK and many of the rally drivers/teams, who post here regularly, would be making a living at doing what they love to do. Exposure builds sponsorship, sponsorship gains resources, resources provide growth and quality opportunity.
I have been a rally fan since I was kid in the 70s and sadly the sport has not had the same growth and maturtity as other peir motorsports have had in the past 30 years. While I have no expecations rally in the x-games will suddenly launch US Rally into the leagues of NASCAR and F1, I do think it may be the begining of a exciting �L4-/crest verylong off-camber� type turn for the sport.
Off to go buy some Right Guard Extreme....
I cannot agreed.
Support of rally dropped off when SCCA drop it. While I have no stats, I bet the # of people in the US who consider themselves 'rally enthusist' over the past 10 years has been level or has increased slightly. Historically, resources to grow that # have been lean, but RA is now doing what SCCA tried to do for years.
IMO, motorsports fans (and the masses) 'tend' to support what they are exposed to; if its on TV they will watch it. What % of motorsports fans in the US actully go to a race? Compared to NASCAR there has been little no TV coverage of rally in the US. In a response to the question of WRC in the US, I overheard someone pretty famous to rally state "...don't try to bring people to the rally, but rather bring rally to the people"
Had rally had 50% of the TV covergage of NASCAR over the past 10 years, I predict, we'd have the 'Special Stage Buger' @ BK and many of the rally drivers/teams, who post here regularly, would be making a living at doing what they love to do. Exposure builds sponsorship, sponsorship gains resources, resources provide growth and quality opportunity.
I have been a rally fan since I was kid in the 70s and sadly the sport has not had the same growth and maturtity as other peir motorsports have had in the past 30 years. While I have no expecations rally in the x-games will suddenly launch US Rally into the leagues of NASCAR and F1, I do think it may be the begining of a exciting �L4-/crest verylong off-camber� type turn for the sport.
Off to go buy some Right Guard Extreme....
| Evo3Codriver | 08-02-2006 10:48 PM |
[QUOTE=fastfreddy]The SCCA is doing the right thing by pushing Rallycross - [/QUOTE]
SCCA sucks and mis-managed rally to the brink of killing rally in US. Headed by a bunch of stingy road-racers and cone-squishers hoarding all the operating $ for their interests, not rally.
Would be better if Rally America and NASA began sanctioning rallyXs so that newbies could mingle with rally veterans. Currently most veterans no longer hold SCCA memberships. RA & NASA rallies would benefit by holding rallyx in conjunction with rallies to provide an event worker pool, give crew and codrivers a chance to drive and allow the rallyXers to race against more prepped rallycars than normally show up at SCCA rallyXs.
SCCA is barely hanging onto performance rally in attempt to keep a handleful of diehard members. The local national SCCA rallyX was a joke, maybe 1/4 the entrylist we had 4-5 years ago when it was just a local event.
SCCA sucks and mis-managed rally to the brink of killing rally in US. Headed by a bunch of stingy road-racers and cone-squishers hoarding all the operating $ for their interests, not rally.
Would be better if Rally America and NASA began sanctioning rallyXs so that newbies could mingle with rally veterans. Currently most veterans no longer hold SCCA memberships. RA & NASA rallies would benefit by holding rallyx in conjunction with rallies to provide an event worker pool, give crew and codrivers a chance to drive and allow the rallyXers to race against more prepped rallycars than normally show up at SCCA rallyXs.
SCCA is barely hanging onto performance rally in attempt to keep a handleful of diehard members. The local national SCCA rallyX was a joke, maybe 1/4 the entrylist we had 4-5 years ago when it was just a local event.
| TyranosaurusWRX | 08-03-2006 09:42 AM |
[QUOTE=Vampyr]I think it's all about marketing, regardless of the type of motorsport.
The mass of people... especially in the US, are nothing more than sheep. They will follow the sheep in front of them, not really caring where they are going.
Product sponsorship is one of the biggest factors. Alcohol, more specifically, beer is a strong product endorsement for NASCAR. We all know who drives the #8 Bud car. We all knew who drove the #2 Miller Lite car. Can you remember who drove the Cartoon Network car?
The honest truth is... if you want to make a type of motorsport get alot of following... then you have to have something other than the actual race to have the sheep come see.
Rally is difficult to market because... 1.) Other than a helicopter, you can't get good coverage of the sponsors on the car. 2.) the people really don't have a place to sit and watch the entire race. 3.) the location is not necessarily owned by 1 individual... you don't build a rally course complex, you find one. So that cuts out ALOT of your financial backing for teams.
And the #1 problem that makes Rally, and other motorsports not as popular to the sheep? These motorsports venues are usually run by professional drivers.... not drama queens like Tony Stewart. NASCAR's audience likes reality shows, and the more that NASCAR is like reality show rather than just a race... the more that the sheep will follow.
You want Rally to get more of a following? Start marketing how dangerous it is... show the crashes, or the people getting hurt... turn it into a reality tv show with characters, rather than drivers. Unfortunately... the people who race in Rally have more dignity and moral ethics than NASCAR or other popular motorsports venues.
Again... it's not about the race, it's about the event in whole.[/QUOTE]
Aaaaaamen
The mass of people... especially in the US, are nothing more than sheep. They will follow the sheep in front of them, not really caring where they are going.
Product sponsorship is one of the biggest factors. Alcohol, more specifically, beer is a strong product endorsement for NASCAR. We all know who drives the #8 Bud car. We all knew who drove the #2 Miller Lite car. Can you remember who drove the Cartoon Network car?
The honest truth is... if you want to make a type of motorsport get alot of following... then you have to have something other than the actual race to have the sheep come see.
Rally is difficult to market because... 1.) Other than a helicopter, you can't get good coverage of the sponsors on the car. 2.) the people really don't have a place to sit and watch the entire race. 3.) the location is not necessarily owned by 1 individual... you don't build a rally course complex, you find one. So that cuts out ALOT of your financial backing for teams.
And the #1 problem that makes Rally, and other motorsports not as popular to the sheep? These motorsports venues are usually run by professional drivers.... not drama queens like Tony Stewart. NASCAR's audience likes reality shows, and the more that NASCAR is like reality show rather than just a race... the more that the sheep will follow.
You want Rally to get more of a following? Start marketing how dangerous it is... show the crashes, or the people getting hurt... turn it into a reality tv show with characters, rather than drivers. Unfortunately... the people who race in Rally have more dignity and moral ethics than NASCAR or other popular motorsports venues.
Again... it's not about the race, it's about the event in whole.[/QUOTE]
Aaaaaamen
| RRR-K2 | 08-03-2006 11:21 AM |
[QUOTE=Evo3Codriver]SCCA sucks and mis-managed rally to the brink of killing RA & NASA rallies would benefit by holding rallyx in conjunction with rallies to provide an event worker pool...[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, part of the agreement when SCCA "handed off" rallying to RA was that RA wouldn't put on/sanction any RallyCrosses, and SCCA wouldn't put on/sanction any "stage" rallies. (But wouldn't you know it, two months later SCCA announced a "CircuitRally" series which has yet to materialize , but that's a whole nother issue...)
In fact, in the latest SportsCar (Aug. '06) There was a "commentary" by Robert Introne (Chairman, SCCA Board of Directors).
In it he talks about how SCCA had to "discontinue sanctioning of stage rally event." "With a major program void to fill," <that's not how they described it when they dumped the program, though, isn't it :confused:> "the Rally department developed the Closed Circuit Rally program..."
"The current three tiered program includes RallyCross, RallySprint, and CircuitRally." "CircuitRally is still a concept waiting on the launching pad..."
He also talks about the the 10% increase of events in 2004 (over 2005) and the 40% increase in entries over the same span.
After reading that, good luck trying to pry RallyCrossing out of their cold, dead hands :rolleyes:
The funniest thing is the last paragraph:
"In conclusion, the Rally program's two divisions, CircuitRally and RoadRally, provide plenty of opportunities for you motorsport enthusiasts' to come out and play, meet with friends - both old and new - and have the time of your lives."
Matt Kennedy
[URL=http://www.RockyRoadRacing.com][U][COLOR=DarkRed]www.RockyRoadRacing.com[/COLOR][/U][/URL]
Unfortunately, part of the agreement when SCCA "handed off" rallying to RA was that RA wouldn't put on/sanction any RallyCrosses, and SCCA wouldn't put on/sanction any "stage" rallies. (But wouldn't you know it, two months later SCCA announced a "CircuitRally" series which has yet to materialize , but that's a whole nother issue...)
In fact, in the latest SportsCar (Aug. '06) There was a "commentary" by Robert Introne (Chairman, SCCA Board of Directors).
In it he talks about how SCCA had to "discontinue sanctioning of stage rally event." "With a major program void to fill," <that's not how they described it when they dumped the program, though, isn't it :confused:> "the Rally department developed the Closed Circuit Rally program..."
"The current three tiered program includes RallyCross, RallySprint, and CircuitRally." "CircuitRally is still a concept waiting on the launching pad..."
He also talks about the the 10% increase of events in 2004 (over 2005) and the 40% increase in entries over the same span.
After reading that, good luck trying to pry RallyCrossing out of their cold, dead hands :rolleyes:
The funniest thing is the last paragraph:
"In conclusion, the Rally program's two divisions, CircuitRally and RoadRally, provide plenty of opportunities for you motorsport enthusiasts' to come out and play, meet with friends - both old and new - and have the time of your lives."
Matt Kennedy
[URL=http://www.RockyRoadRacing.com][U][COLOR=DarkRed]www.RockyRoadRacing.com[/COLOR][/U][/URL]
| MattDell | 08-03-2006 11:23 AM |
[QUOTE=NYEJ25]Motor sport......All motor sports are extreme. 1 of only 3 real sports.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Plus bull fighting and mountaineering are boring to watch. ;)
Agreed. Plus bull fighting and mountaineering are boring to watch. ;)
| JMS Landshark | 08-03-2006 12:53 PM |
[QUOTE=REDrum]IMO, motorsports fans (and the masses) 'tend' to support what they are exposed to; if its on TV they will watch it. What % of motorsports fans in the US actully go to a race? Compared to NASCAR there has been little no TV coverage of rally in the US. In a response to the question of WRC in the US, I overheard someone pretty famous to rally state "...don't try to bring people to the rally, but rather bring rally to the people"
[/QUOTE]
exactly
When people move to a new area, after a short while, they end up liking the football team, the baseball team, cornhole (those of you who ever lived near Cincinnati) and other "activities" they are exposed to.
Reality TV didn't become popular because people were craving it. They were exposed to it and then people started to get entertained (not me). Fox didn't go to 12hrs a day of NASCAR on SpeedTV [I]because[/I] people couldn't get enough of it. They did it because the programming was a tool they used to get NASCAR race coverage for Fox, and they made it interesting enough that people are watching.
Know one reason people didn't really see or care about the WRC in the States? It was on at 3 am, only highlights, and people knew nothing about the drivers or teams....therefore, no one cared (except a few of us). If you put some interesting content about the technology, teams, drivers, GOOD race coverage, and do it consistantly; people [B]will[/B] start to watch.
Sponsorship WILL NOT get on board until they see a system that gets them the exposure they want for their product. If they aren't getting the exposure, why would they fork over money?
Example of exposure. Sobe signs Boris Said for 4 races (2 run already). He gets a top 10 (with a tiny pit crew and a rented trailor), then he gets Pole and takes a top 5. People are talking about the Sobe car and its been in the news how much support people are trying to show to Sobe specifically for Boris.
I would get into rally if it wasn't meaning buying yet another car, and spending alot more $$ when I am blowing it on other types of racing. One day, I would love to.
[/QUOTE]
exactly
When people move to a new area, after a short while, they end up liking the football team, the baseball team, cornhole (those of you who ever lived near Cincinnati) and other "activities" they are exposed to.
Reality TV didn't become popular because people were craving it. They were exposed to it and then people started to get entertained (not me). Fox didn't go to 12hrs a day of NASCAR on SpeedTV [I]because[/I] people couldn't get enough of it. They did it because the programming was a tool they used to get NASCAR race coverage for Fox, and they made it interesting enough that people are watching.
Know one reason people didn't really see or care about the WRC in the States? It was on at 3 am, only highlights, and people knew nothing about the drivers or teams....therefore, no one cared (except a few of us). If you put some interesting content about the technology, teams, drivers, GOOD race coverage, and do it consistantly; people [B]will[/B] start to watch.
Sponsorship WILL NOT get on board until they see a system that gets them the exposure they want for their product. If they aren't getting the exposure, why would they fork over money?
Example of exposure. Sobe signs Boris Said for 4 races (2 run already). He gets a top 10 (with a tiny pit crew and a rented trailor), then he gets Pole and takes a top 5. People are talking about the Sobe car and its been in the news how much support people are trying to show to Sobe specifically for Boris.
I would get into rally if it wasn't meaning buying yet another car, and spending alot more $$ when I am blowing it on other types of racing. One day, I would love to.
| Jon Bogert | 08-03-2006 01:00 PM |
[quote]good luck trying to pry RallyCrossing out of their cold, dead hands[/quote]RA may have an agreement to not produce rallycross events, but nothing is stopping another organization from doing so.
If you want a laugh, SCCA registered "rallycross" as a trademark. :lol:
[url]http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=3tif5h.2.1[/url]
Like they made it up or something. Maybe they should trademark "racing" next.
If you want a laugh, SCCA registered "rallycross" as a trademark. :lol:
[url]http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=3tif5h.2.1[/url]
Like they made it up or something. Maybe they should trademark "racing" next.
| sachilles | 08-03-2006 01:01 PM |
Someone touched on it above. Its marketing. For marketing to work, you need spectators.
Unlike Europe, Asia and Australia, you will not get a million people into the woods to watch an event.
You need a more defined venue, one that is safe for spectating. The sport as it exist is at odds with safe viewing of the entire event.
In order for it to prosper in the US. It will need to be something like you will see in the x games super special stage. Kind of a combo of motorcross/arena cross. Need a circuit rally, that spectators can see much of the course at one seat.
In my opinion, that kills the spirit of rally....no need for a co-driver at that point.
It won't propser without sponsors, it won't get sponsors unless the event gets people to watch it and see the sponsor ship.
I can see circuit rally being popular in the US. Rally as it exist today, will not be popular in the US beyond what exists now. Wish it wasn't true....but that is life
Unlike Europe, Asia and Australia, you will not get a million people into the woods to watch an event.
You need a more defined venue, one that is safe for spectating. The sport as it exist is at odds with safe viewing of the entire event.
In order for it to prosper in the US. It will need to be something like you will see in the x games super special stage. Kind of a combo of motorcross/arena cross. Need a circuit rally, that spectators can see much of the course at one seat.
In my opinion, that kills the spirit of rally....no need for a co-driver at that point.
It won't propser without sponsors, it won't get sponsors unless the event gets people to watch it and see the sponsor ship.
I can see circuit rally being popular in the US. Rally as it exist today, will not be popular in the US beyond what exists now. Wish it wasn't true....but that is life
| REDrum | 08-03-2006 01:55 PM |
[QUOTE=sachilles] For marketing to work, you need spectators.
[/QUOTE]
Albeit, spectators come in two colors: attendees and TV watchers.
Your point applies well to attendees, but its small % of any motorsport audience. Get more rally on TV, in the afternoon, and you'll get a higher # of specators and sponsors.
The US has got to be hitting its satauration point w/ NASCAR by now....
[/QUOTE]
Albeit, spectators come in two colors: attendees and TV watchers.
Your point applies well to attendees, but its small % of any motorsport audience. Get more rally on TV, in the afternoon, and you'll get a higher # of specators and sponsors.
The US has got to be hitting its satauration point w/ NASCAR by now....
| SWortham | 08-03-2006 02:48 PM |
I'll be very interested to see what comes of the X Games Rally. Personally, it's my favorite form of racing to watch, 2nd only to Formula One.
It's also my favorite kind of racing game: Xpand Rally, Rallisport Challenge, etc... good stuff.
It's also my favorite kind of racing game: Xpand Rally, Rallisport Challenge, etc... good stuff.
| Car 102 | 08-03-2006 03:09 PM |
[QUOTE=Vampyr]I think it's all about marketing, regardless of the type of motorsport.
The mass of people... especially in the US, are nothing more than sheep. They will follow the sheep in front of them, not really caring where they are going.
Product sponsorship is one of the biggest factors. Alcohol, more specifically, beer is a strong product endorsement for NASCAR. We all know who drives the #8 Bud car. We all knew who drove the #2 Miller Lite car. Can you remember who drove the Cartoon Network car?
The honest truth is... if you want to make a type of motorsport get alot of following... then you have to have something other than the actual race to have the sheep come see.
Rally is difficult to market because... 1.) Other than a helicopter, you can't get good coverage of the sponsors on the car. 2.) the people really don't have a place to sit and watch the entire race. 3.) the location is not necessarily owned by 1 individual... you don't build a rally course complex, you find one. So that cuts out ALOT of your financial backing for teams.
And the #1 problem that makes Rally, and other motorsports not as popular to the sheep? These motorsports venues are usually run by professional drivers.... not drama queens like Tony Stewart. NASCAR's audience likes reality shows, and the more that NASCAR is like reality show rather than just a race... the more that the sheep will follow.
You want Rally to get more of a following? Start marketing how dangerous it is... show the crashes, or the people getting hurt... turn it into a reality tv show with characters, rather than drivers. Unfortunately... the people who race in Rally have more dignity and moral ethics than NASCAR or other popular motorsports venues.
Again... it's not about the race, it's about the event in whole.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you 100 percent. Unfortunately, everything in US is profit-driven only. Rally cannot sell hot dogs and 4 dollars a cup beer, in the middle of the forest.It is not a "cool dude" sport with cowboy hats, hip hop pants and macho products.You do not want to have the fat sheeps run in the middle of the forest without getting drunk with something.
The mass of people... especially in the US, are nothing more than sheep. They will follow the sheep in front of them, not really caring where they are going.
Product sponsorship is one of the biggest factors. Alcohol, more specifically, beer is a strong product endorsement for NASCAR. We all know who drives the #8 Bud car. We all knew who drove the #2 Miller Lite car. Can you remember who drove the Cartoon Network car?
The honest truth is... if you want to make a type of motorsport get alot of following... then you have to have something other than the actual race to have the sheep come see.
Rally is difficult to market because... 1.) Other than a helicopter, you can't get good coverage of the sponsors on the car. 2.) the people really don't have a place to sit and watch the entire race. 3.) the location is not necessarily owned by 1 individual... you don't build a rally course complex, you find one. So that cuts out ALOT of your financial backing for teams.
And the #1 problem that makes Rally, and other motorsports not as popular to the sheep? These motorsports venues are usually run by professional drivers.... not drama queens like Tony Stewart. NASCAR's audience likes reality shows, and the more that NASCAR is like reality show rather than just a race... the more that the sheep will follow.
You want Rally to get more of a following? Start marketing how dangerous it is... show the crashes, or the people getting hurt... turn it into a reality tv show with characters, rather than drivers. Unfortunately... the people who race in Rally have more dignity and moral ethics than NASCAR or other popular motorsports venues.
Again... it's not about the race, it's about the event in whole.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you 100 percent. Unfortunately, everything in US is profit-driven only. Rally cannot sell hot dogs and 4 dollars a cup beer, in the middle of the forest.It is not a "cool dude" sport with cowboy hats, hip hop pants and macho products.You do not want to have the fat sheeps run in the middle of the forest without getting drunk with something.
| REDrum | 08-03-2006 03:19 PM |
[QUOTE=Car 102]It is not a "cool dude" sport with cowboy hats, hip hop pants and macho products.[/QUOTE]
I disagree with you 100%
Obviously you didn't see me @ MFR in my baggy pants, cowboy hat, and Mr "T" starter kit..... :disco:
I disagree with you 100%
Obviously you didn't see me @ MFR in my baggy pants, cowboy hat, and Mr "T" starter kit..... :disco:
| sachilles | 08-03-2006 03:21 PM |
[QUOTE=REDrum]Albeit, spectators come in two colors: attendees and TV watchers.
Your point applies well to attendees, but its small % of any motorsport audience. Get more rally on TV, in the afternoon, and you'll get a higher # of specators and sponsors.
The US has got to be hitting its satauration point w/ NASCAR by now....[/QUOTE]
ah, but it won't get on TV unless they know there is a market for it.
And I'm sorry, rally as it exists, on tv is about as exciting to watch as golf. TV doesn't convey speed well. You have less head to head battles than any other form of racing. To the average viewer, it would be as exciting as viewing an autocross. That leaves the viewers wanting to see crashes as the only excitement to look forward too.
We all love it....but we are a very small market. You need to make bubba like it, along with Biff.
I think motocross is bigger business than rally in the US, and how much do you see it on TV?
Only way I can see to spice it up, to make it exciting for Bubba, Biff and the rest of us, and retain its character is this.
Shorten up the start intervals. Its more dangerous for the competitors, but it will encourage more head to head action. I don't think the drivers would like that much, but it would increase spectator interst.
Then do as they are in the x games. Have a stadium/track final superstage. One might be able to argue for a superstage for the start and finish of the rally.
In that superstage, have start intervals of 15 seconds. Have the competitors do ten laps. Figuring one minute per lap. This would put up to 40 cars on the course at one time. Advantages would be to the leaders as they'd get laps with less cars on course.
I can see that concept working in that the superstage stadium area being at the end of a typical out in the woods stage. Rally in the woods for miles, then they all finish after 10 laps in a one mile loop at the end of the stage. This area would be spectator friendly. It would allow the spectators to see everyone come in....and see (and understand) who won the event. You would see head to head action.
There again, its appeasing the spectators. I think drivers would hate the concept because a-more head to head action means more carnage, which is more risk to their skin and their wallets. B-Dust, visability would suck...and at some point even for the leader once they got to the circuit portion. C- Field repairs and carnage in the circuit area would have to be addressed...how do you "yellow" flag a circuit rally? I wouldn't want to change a flat in those conditions with that much congested traffic. Perhaps a pit could be built. Still doesn't solve a problem if some one were to roll it.
These are just random thoughts....I'm bored at work. Bottom line, you need spectator interest to get the marketing dollars. Right now you can foster that interest. TV isn't the answer yet either, as don't think what is broadcast is creating any new fans to the sport.
I'll be anxious to see how the x-games broadcast handles stuff.
Your point applies well to attendees, but its small % of any motorsport audience. Get more rally on TV, in the afternoon, and you'll get a higher # of specators and sponsors.
The US has got to be hitting its satauration point w/ NASCAR by now....[/QUOTE]
ah, but it won't get on TV unless they know there is a market for it.
And I'm sorry, rally as it exists, on tv is about as exciting to watch as golf. TV doesn't convey speed well. You have less head to head battles than any other form of racing. To the average viewer, it would be as exciting as viewing an autocross. That leaves the viewers wanting to see crashes as the only excitement to look forward too.
We all love it....but we are a very small market. You need to make bubba like it, along with Biff.
I think motocross is bigger business than rally in the US, and how much do you see it on TV?
Only way I can see to spice it up, to make it exciting for Bubba, Biff and the rest of us, and retain its character is this.
Shorten up the start intervals. Its more dangerous for the competitors, but it will encourage more head to head action. I don't think the drivers would like that much, but it would increase spectator interst.
Then do as they are in the x games. Have a stadium/track final superstage. One might be able to argue for a superstage for the start and finish of the rally.
In that superstage, have start intervals of 15 seconds. Have the competitors do ten laps. Figuring one minute per lap. This would put up to 40 cars on the course at one time. Advantages would be to the leaders as they'd get laps with less cars on course.
I can see that concept working in that the superstage stadium area being at the end of a typical out in the woods stage. Rally in the woods for miles, then they all finish after 10 laps in a one mile loop at the end of the stage. This area would be spectator friendly. It would allow the spectators to see everyone come in....and see (and understand) who won the event. You would see head to head action.
There again, its appeasing the spectators. I think drivers would hate the concept because a-more head to head action means more carnage, which is more risk to their skin and their wallets. B-Dust, visability would suck...and at some point even for the leader once they got to the circuit portion. C- Field repairs and carnage in the circuit area would have to be addressed...how do you "yellow" flag a circuit rally? I wouldn't want to change a flat in those conditions with that much congested traffic. Perhaps a pit could be built. Still doesn't solve a problem if some one were to roll it.
These are just random thoughts....I'm bored at work. Bottom line, you need spectator interest to get the marketing dollars. Right now you can foster that interest. TV isn't the answer yet either, as don't think what is broadcast is creating any new fans to the sport.
I'll be anxious to see how the x-games broadcast handles stuff.
| JMS Landshark | 08-03-2006 03:58 PM |
[QUOTE=sachilles]TV isn't the answer yet either, as don't think what is broadcast is creating any new fans to the sport.
I'll be anxious to see how the x-games broadcast handles stuff.[/QUOTE]
I agree with TV isn't the answer YET for smaller Rallies, though I do think its time for WRC coverage. When it was here in the states, I had people watch a few minutes withme and they were in awe of the "stunts" those guys would pull along the route. TV [I]can and does[/I] create fans to a degree. If people don't really have any exposure to it, then see it on TV, they may take a look and realize that they do enjoy watching it.
For example, I never knew people drive "Figure 8" races with trailors and the sole purpose to knock the other guys' trailors off. I never knew people did that, but when I see it on Speed, I can't take my eyes off it. :lol:
I'll be anxious to see how the x-games broadcast handles stuff.[/QUOTE]
I agree with TV isn't the answer YET for smaller Rallies, though I do think its time for WRC coverage. When it was here in the states, I had people watch a few minutes withme and they were in awe of the "stunts" those guys would pull along the route. TV [I]can and does[/I] create fans to a degree. If people don't really have any exposure to it, then see it on TV, they may take a look and realize that they do enjoy watching it.
For example, I never knew people drive "Figure 8" races with trailors and the sole purpose to knock the other guys' trailors off. I never knew people did that, but when I see it on Speed, I can't take my eyes off it. :lol:
| sachilles | 08-03-2006 04:08 PM |
[QUOTE=JMS Landshark]
For example, I never knew people drive "Figure 8" races with trailors and the sole purpose to knock the other guys' trailors off. I never knew people did that, but when I see it on Speed, I can't take my eyes off it. :lol:[/QUOTE]
Have you never seen "carpocolypse" on spike tv? They do that stuff right in your back yard....its great. Filmed right in florida.
For example, I never knew people drive "Figure 8" races with trailors and the sole purpose to knock the other guys' trailors off. I never knew people did that, but when I see it on Speed, I can't take my eyes off it. :lol:[/QUOTE]
Have you never seen "carpocolypse" on spike tv? They do that stuff right in your back yard....its great. Filmed right in florida.
| thechickencow | 08-04-2006 09:29 AM |
What I'm wondering is how approachable it is for average joe to compete in rally.
I rallied a couple years in a G5 plymouth laser turbo, fun fast car. I managed to do what I considered to be reasonably well. I never had money for new tires, scraped up money to enter events, and did fine. I sold the car about 1 year ago now because costs were too high for me to continue to enter/run events on a regular basis.
I toyed with the idea last year of building my 02 WRX into a PGT car. I have enough money to build the car, but wasn't excited about going back to the point where all of my cash goes into rallying again. I know its partially just me for wanting to get into rally again on a budget that isn't as big as others but it'd be great to be able to get more support to get more competitors.
I'm choosing to sit while longer until it seems like I can sustain more entries in rallies, and possibly better support comes from different series sponsors to help lower entry fees, prize funds (gasp!), etc.
I think having rally in teh x-games and what RA have been doing is moving in the right direction, I just dont' know how far it will end up going. Hopefully I'll be out there in my Subie soon, otherwise I may go to a boring old vw.
I rallied a couple years in a G5 plymouth laser turbo, fun fast car. I managed to do what I considered to be reasonably well. I never had money for new tires, scraped up money to enter events, and did fine. I sold the car about 1 year ago now because costs were too high for me to continue to enter/run events on a regular basis.
I toyed with the idea last year of building my 02 WRX into a PGT car. I have enough money to build the car, but wasn't excited about going back to the point where all of my cash goes into rallying again. I know its partially just me for wanting to get into rally again on a budget that isn't as big as others but it'd be great to be able to get more support to get more competitors.
I'm choosing to sit while longer until it seems like I can sustain more entries in rallies, and possibly better support comes from different series sponsors to help lower entry fees, prize funds (gasp!), etc.
I think having rally in teh x-games and what RA have been doing is moving in the right direction, I just dont' know how far it will end up going. Hopefully I'll be out there in my Subie soon, otherwise I may go to a boring old vw.
| fliz | 08-04-2006 10:01 AM |
My VW is anything but boring.
I thought rally was starting to make a comeback, but now that gas prices have risen, it's wiped out a couple more competitors. My fuel (tow and race) fees for a weekend are over half what the entry fee is.
Rally needs to attract "little guys" who can afford to rally. With the X-Games, competitive Open class cars jumped to $200K+. If you want to attract a major sponsor that may come our way...that's what you need to spend to run up front. First in class, middle of the pack isn't going to attract much money.
I thought rally was starting to make a comeback, but now that gas prices have risen, it's wiped out a couple more competitors. My fuel (tow and race) fees for a weekend are over half what the entry fee is.
Rally needs to attract "little guys" who can afford to rally. With the X-Games, competitive Open class cars jumped to $200K+. If you want to attract a major sponsor that may come our way...that's what you need to spend to run up front. First in class, middle of the pack isn't going to attract much money.
| REDrum | 08-04-2006 12:20 PM |
[QUOTE=fliz] My fuel (tow and race) fees for a weekend are over half what the entry fee is.[/QUOTE]
So sad yet so true...
Rally is one hell of a lot of fun, but ain't cheap. No wonder my father had to gave it up to put me in private school. (and yet I can't spell...)
Even at regional club level in a G2, the cost of runing a half dozen rallies a year can easily go north of $20K (in after tax dollars).
As just a co-driver, MFR cost me ~1,200.00 for a weekend.
So sad yet so true...
Rally is one hell of a lot of fun, but ain't cheap. No wonder my father had to gave it up to put me in private school. (and yet I can't spell...)
Even at regional club level in a G2, the cost of runing a half dozen rallies a year can easily go north of $20K (in after tax dollars).
As just a co-driver, MFR cost me ~1,200.00 for a weekend.
| JC_595 | 08-04-2006 12:25 PM |
Jay-
I bet I can beat you in yer WRX with Chad's VW. ;)
hehehe <poke poke>
I bet I can beat you in yer WRX with Chad's VW. ;)
hehehe <poke poke>
| rallynutdon | 08-04-2006 01:32 PM |
[QUOTE=REDrum]So sad yet so true...
Rally is one hell of a lot of fun, but ain't cheap. No wonder my father had to gave it up to put me in private school. (and yet I can't spell...)
Even at regional club level in a G2, the cost of runing a half dozen rallies a year can easily go north of $20K (in after tax dollars).
As just a co-driver, MFR cost me ~1,200.00 for a weekend.[/QUOTE]
Whoa, what did you spend $1200 on if I may ask?
Rally is one hell of a lot of fun, but ain't cheap. No wonder my father had to gave it up to put me in private school. (and yet I can't spell...)
Even at regional club level in a G2, the cost of runing a half dozen rallies a year can easily go north of $20K (in after tax dollars).
As just a co-driver, MFR cost me ~1,200.00 for a weekend.[/QUOTE]
Whoa, what did you spend $1200 on if I may ask?
| REDrum | 08-04-2006 03:02 PM |
[QUOTE=rallynutdon]Whoa, what did you spend $1200 on if I may ask?
[/QUOTE]
Sure!
1/2 entry and jemba notes 500.00
RA license 100.00
(3) hotel nights 375.00
(2) tanks of gas 80.00
(1) tank of race fuel 35.00
Food and drink for me and GF for 3 days 135.00
Food and drinks for service crew Sat night 180.00
Lunching off boulder and rolling for the first time: Priceless! :banana:
[/QUOTE]
Sure!
1/2 entry and jemba notes 500.00
RA license 100.00
(3) hotel nights 375.00
(2) tanks of gas 80.00
(1) tank of race fuel 35.00
Food and drink for me and GF for 3 days 135.00
Food and drinks for service crew Sat night 180.00
Lunching off boulder and rolling for the first time: Priceless! :banana:
| RichardM | 08-04-2006 03:17 PM |
You sure your a co-driver? That totals to $1405. :)
And speaking of being on the podium in a Saab, we finshed 3rd in Group 5 at the last SCCA ClubRally Championships. Surprised Beryl Ann that someone as slow as me could do that. :)
And speaking of being on the podium in a Saab, we finshed 3rd in Group 5 at the last SCCA ClubRally Championships. Surprised Beryl Ann that someone as slow as me could do that. :)
| SubieRacer | 08-04-2006 05:41 PM |
[QUOTE=Evo3Codriver]SCCA sucks and mis-managed rally to the brink of killing rally in US. Headed by a bunch of stingy road-racers and cone-squishers hoarding all the operating $ for their interests, not rally.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure where you are getting your facts.
Rally in America died when Steve Johnson became CEO of SCCA and systematically removed the key people who were helping it progress and who had brought America to the forefront of the WRC event bid. Because of his actions the hunt for the WRC and the ProRally series fell off, only to be dropped completely later. Mexico won the bid for the WRC and even won rally of the year that year I believe.
Rally wasn't the only program that suffered from Mr. Johnson's tenure.
That is truth.
I understand you are upset about all this, but know that your disappointment pales in comparison to those who put their lives into making a dream happen only to have it yanked out from under them.
I'm not sure where you are getting your facts.
Rally in America died when Steve Johnson became CEO of SCCA and systematically removed the key people who were helping it progress and who had brought America to the forefront of the WRC event bid. Because of his actions the hunt for the WRC and the ProRally series fell off, only to be dropped completely later. Mexico won the bid for the WRC and even won rally of the year that year I believe.
Rally wasn't the only program that suffered from Mr. Johnson's tenure.
That is truth.
I understand you are upset about all this, but know that your disappointment pales in comparison to those who put their lives into making a dream happen only to have it yanked out from under them.
| thechickencow | 08-04-2006 05:47 PM |
[QUOTE=JC_595]Jay-
I bet I can beat you in yer WRX with Chad's VW. ;)
hehehe <poke poke>[/QUOTE]
Put your money where your mouth is. :lol:
You've still gotta keep it out of the trees!
I bet I can beat you in yer WRX with Chad's VW. ;)
hehehe <poke poke>[/QUOTE]
Put your money where your mouth is. :lol:
You've still gotta keep it out of the trees!
| legacydreamz | 08-04-2006 06:24 PM |
[QUOTE=Crashsector]I've been doing a lot of thinking lately, especially with the hype of the X-games.
It's no secret that rally popularity has been declining in the past few years in the US. Until now, rally has appealed mostly to dedicated motor sports enthusiasts, in the same way they are attracted to Forumula 1, GT racing, etc. (as opposed to "the masses" preferring drag, NASCAR, etc.)
Maybe the powers that be are going about this the wrong way. Do you think a better way to market rally events in the US (and maybe even the world) would be as more of an "extreme sport?"
I personally think it could be grouped in the same category as BMXing, dirt bike racing, snowboarding, etc. This would attract a different (younger) crowd that doesn't necessarily come from a motorsport background.
Look at the recent evidence...
- The X-Games Rally
- Red Bull (an "extreme sport" sponsor for many years) sponsoring countless US and world rally teams and events
- Shoe companies pumping out rally teams (provided their owners are interested)
- Athletic clothing companies sponsoring teams
And a few other things I can't think of right now.
So, could the future of rally be as an "extreme sport" rather than a "motor sport?"
Most of this is probably evident, but I just wanted to discuss it.[/QUOTE]
i think a good, well thought out motion picture would do good for rally.
It's no secret that rally popularity has been declining in the past few years in the US. Until now, rally has appealed mostly to dedicated motor sports enthusiasts, in the same way they are attracted to Forumula 1, GT racing, etc. (as opposed to "the masses" preferring drag, NASCAR, etc.)
Maybe the powers that be are going about this the wrong way. Do you think a better way to market rally events in the US (and maybe even the world) would be as more of an "extreme sport?"
I personally think it could be grouped in the same category as BMXing, dirt bike racing, snowboarding, etc. This would attract a different (younger) crowd that doesn't necessarily come from a motorsport background.
Look at the recent evidence...
- The X-Games Rally
- Red Bull (an "extreme sport" sponsor for many years) sponsoring countless US and world rally teams and events
- Shoe companies pumping out rally teams (provided their owners are interested)
- Athletic clothing companies sponsoring teams
And a few other things I can't think of right now.
So, could the future of rally be as an "extreme sport" rather than a "motor sport?"
Most of this is probably evident, but I just wanted to discuss it.[/QUOTE]
i think a good, well thought out motion picture would do good for rally.
| REDrum | 08-04-2006 06:55 PM |
[QUOTE=legacydreamz]i think a good, well thought out motion picture would do good for rally.[/QUOTE]
Now you're talkin' My feeling for a while. Nothing promotes better than Hollywood. It's how De Beers, and countless others, made it.
'Days of Gravel' Written by Kevin Smith.... :devil:
Now you're talkin' My feeling for a while. Nothing promotes better than Hollywood. It's how De Beers, and countless others, made it.
'Days of Gravel' Written by Kevin Smith.... :devil:
| dedrooster | 08-04-2006 07:36 PM |
I follow rally a bit, which is why I started reading this thread. But I found the thread very interesting because many of the problems that are stunting the growth of rally in the US are many of the same ones which affect me in my sport of mountain biking. As a top-20 nationally ranked 'pro' mountain biker, I still lose money racing my bike in spite of sponsorship. Our sport almost had a mainstream breakthrough in the mid to late 90's with some TV exposure and an 'extreme' label. Public interest was fleeting and combined with poor handling of sponsorship funds and misguidance by our governing body (USA Cycling) our sport is a shadow of what it was 10 years ago. The competition at the top is just as tough as it ever has been but the spectators, tv, and money aren't there.
The packaging, like in rally, seems to be the sticking point. Take for example, this weekend, I am racing in Utah. It's one of the most beautiful places you'll see, but it is so far from a major population center I can understand why a casual fan of cycling wouldn't want to drive here to catch the racers on their single lap of a 27 mile course. There is no way to televise it without spending _alot_of_money_ on multiple ground cameras, helicopter cameras, and moto cameras. There simply isn't anyone there to make that investment and to really throw the money into quality coverage in hopes of really getting the 'sheep' excited and eventually turning a profit. In europe, this isn't a problem. People will go spend all day in the woods drinking beer to cheer their favorite rider up the hill, much like what I see in WRC.
Like rally, mountain biking is not an easy sport to participate in, which hurts the grassroots numbers. Sure, cost of entry is lower, but most people don't have the time to put into learning to really ride their bike, and furthermore, the extraordinary amount of time you need to put into training to get good at it.
I'll be interested to see if Rally's entry into the X-Games will cause that fleeting public excitement, or if it will really work and bring rally into the mainstream.
-Charlie
The packaging, like in rally, seems to be the sticking point. Take for example, this weekend, I am racing in Utah. It's one of the most beautiful places you'll see, but it is so far from a major population center I can understand why a casual fan of cycling wouldn't want to drive here to catch the racers on their single lap of a 27 mile course. There is no way to televise it without spending _alot_of_money_ on multiple ground cameras, helicopter cameras, and moto cameras. There simply isn't anyone there to make that investment and to really throw the money into quality coverage in hopes of really getting the 'sheep' excited and eventually turning a profit. In europe, this isn't a problem. People will go spend all day in the woods drinking beer to cheer their favorite rider up the hill, much like what I see in WRC.
Like rally, mountain biking is not an easy sport to participate in, which hurts the grassroots numbers. Sure, cost of entry is lower, but most people don't have the time to put into learning to really ride their bike, and furthermore, the extraordinary amount of time you need to put into training to get good at it.
I'll be interested to see if Rally's entry into the X-Games will cause that fleeting public excitement, or if it will really work and bring rally into the mainstream.
-Charlie
| REDrum | 08-04-2006 07:56 PM |
[QUOTE=dedrooster]...many of the problems that are stunting the growth of rally in the US are many of the same ones which affect...mountain biking.[/QUOTE]
Excellent example!!! Sponsorship has its liabilities.
Shaun Palmer's entry into MTB seemed to mark the beginning of the end of NORBA and cross country events. And, I pray Rally doesn't evolve into simply a stadium drift and dirt jump sport...
[ok I'll stop post whoring now...]
Excellent example!!! Sponsorship has its liabilities.
Shaun Palmer's entry into MTB seemed to mark the beginning of the end of NORBA and cross country events. And, I pray Rally doesn't evolve into simply a stadium drift and dirt jump sport...
[ok I'll stop post whoring now...]
| legacydreamz | 08-08-2006 01:40 PM |
[QUOTE=REDrum]Now you're talkin' My feeling for a while. Nothing promotes better than Hollywood. It's how De Beers, and countless others, made it.
'Days of Gravel' Written by Kevin Smith.... :devil:[/QUOTE]
im actually working on one :banana:
'Days of Gravel' Written by Kevin Smith.... :devil:[/QUOTE]
im actually working on one :banana:
| REDrum | 08-08-2006 02:09 PM |
[QUOTE=legacydreamz]im actually working on one :banana:[/QUOTE]
Me too.
Along the lines of 'Best in Show'. Sort of a spoofumentary but with real racing. Action/comedy FTW!
Who should play Christian on the big screen? :D
Me too.
Along the lines of 'Best in Show'. Sort of a spoofumentary but with real racing. Action/comedy FTW!
Who should play Christian on the big screen? :D
| OBShahn | 08-08-2006 02:25 PM |
[QUOTE=fliz]
Rally needs to attract "little guys" who can afford to rally. With the X-Games, competitive Open class cars jumped to $200K+. If you want to attract a major sponsor that may come our way...that's what you need to spend to run up front. First in class, middle of the pack isn't going to attract much money.[/QUOTE]
A top of the podium open class car has cost $150-300,000.00 for the last 10+ years. We have seen this come and go in terms of necessity because of a lack of people running them but that has been the status quo since the late 90s.
Last year nobody was making a big stink about the cost of being on the podium (like is being made this year with VSC's cars) and those top spec N4 cars were $100-150,000.00 easy...
The only way to stop complaining about the cost of winning an event overall is to mandate a class with fairly fixed costs ceilings, otherwise you could spend 400,000.00 if you wanted to...
Rally needs to attract "little guys" who can afford to rally. With the X-Games, competitive Open class cars jumped to $200K+. If you want to attract a major sponsor that may come our way...that's what you need to spend to run up front. First in class, middle of the pack isn't going to attract much money.[/QUOTE]
A top of the podium open class car has cost $150-300,000.00 for the last 10+ years. We have seen this come and go in terms of necessity because of a lack of people running them but that has been the status quo since the late 90s.
Last year nobody was making a big stink about the cost of being on the podium (like is being made this year with VSC's cars) and those top spec N4 cars were $100-150,000.00 easy...
The only way to stop complaining about the cost of winning an event overall is to mandate a class with fairly fixed costs ceilings, otherwise you could spend 400,000.00 if you wanted to...
| rallymaniac | 08-08-2006 02:50 PM |
[QUOTE=sachilles]ah, but it won't get on TV unless they know there is a market for it.
And I'm sorry, rally as it exists, on tv is about as exciting to watch as golf. TV doesn't convey speed well. You have less head to head battles than any other form of racing. To the average viewer, it would be as exciting as viewing an autocross. That leaves the viewers wanting to see crashes as the only excitement to look forward too.
We all love it....but we are a very small market. You need to make bubba like it, along with Biff.
I think motocross is bigger business than rally in the US, and how much do you see it on TV?
Only way I can see to spice it up, to make it exciting for Bubba, Biff and the rest of us, and retain its character is this.
Shorten up the start intervals. Its more dangerous for the competitors, but it will encourage more head to head action. I don't think the drivers would like that much, but it would increase spectator interst.
Then do as they are in the x games. Have a stadium/track final superstage. One might be able to argue for a superstage for the start and finish of the rally.
In that superstage, have start intervals of 15 seconds. Have the competitors do ten laps. Figuring one minute per lap. This would put up to 40 cars on the course at one time. Advantages would be to the leaders as they'd get laps with less cars on course.
I can see that concept working in that the superstage stadium area being at the end of a typical out in the woods stage. Rally in the woods for miles, then they all finish after 10 laps in a one mile loop at the end of the stage. This area would be spectator friendly. It would allow the spectators to see everyone come in....and see (and understand) who won the event. You would see head to head action.
There again, its appeasing the spectators. I think drivers would hate the concept because a-more head to head action means more carnage, which is more risk to their skin and their wallets. B-Dust, visability would suck...and at some point even for the leader once they got to the circuit portion. C- Field repairs and carnage in the circuit area would have to be addressed...how do you "yellow" flag a circuit rally? I wouldn't want to change a flat in those conditions with that much congested traffic. Perhaps a pit could be built. Still doesn't solve a problem if some one were to roll it.
These are just random thoughts....I'm bored at work. Bottom line, you need spectator interest to get the marketing dollars. Right now you can foster that interest. TV isn't the answer yet either, as don't think what is broadcast is creating any new fans to the sport.
I'll be anxious to see how the x-games broadcast handles stuff.[/QUOTE]
oh man, you are so wrong on some of your points :rolleyes:
just because american fat butts don't want to move out of the house and the couch, doesn't mean that we should change the entire structure of this sport just to get attention. The Super Special you propose will not work, it will be more dangerous. Where do you want to find a decent stadium to fit 40 cars at the same time???
US rally needs better organization for the current spectators who are willing to go out and watch, because what i've seen being a spectator here is just plainly not fun. Restricted viewing areas in one spot on the stage, poor notes on how to get to the stage and overall poor location of the stages. During one day we were unable to see more than 3 stages. That's just dissapointing if you have to drive a considerable amount of time just to get to the place where the rally is taking place.
Why don't they have this problem in Europe and other countries???
There is as much or even less TV coverage on Local and Regional Rallies yet it produces huge amount of crowd that watches the rally live.
Some of you mentioned ability for private/"small" drivers to enter with not too much money. I understand this but what makes crowd is the "show" and small guys can never put up the show big enough to keep the crowd happy.
I'd love to do it myself but i don't have enough money to do it the "right way". Dumping all of my savings to a rally car and competing one rally here and there just doesn't cut it for me.
I've been to US rallies and i have to tell you that it surely wasn't worth 11 hours of driving to see 5 guys drive at a decent level. I know this sport and it wasn't exciting for me, so how is that supposed to be exciting for someone who's just heard about rally and wants to get on it more. Tv and crowd needs stars who drive and compete closely, not some guys that are pasionate about the rally and run for fun.
Another solution is sponsorship from major oompanies that can shell out money for those small guys to become better and dive better cars.
How much more comfortable would you be knowing that if you go 100% and crash, you're not gonna crash your entire savings without ability to rebuild the car?
And I'm sorry, rally as it exists, on tv is about as exciting to watch as golf. TV doesn't convey speed well. You have less head to head battles than any other form of racing. To the average viewer, it would be as exciting as viewing an autocross. That leaves the viewers wanting to see crashes as the only excitement to look forward too.
We all love it....but we are a very small market. You need to make bubba like it, along with Biff.
I think motocross is bigger business than rally in the US, and how much do you see it on TV?
Only way I can see to spice it up, to make it exciting for Bubba, Biff and the rest of us, and retain its character is this.
Shorten up the start intervals. Its more dangerous for the competitors, but it will encourage more head to head action. I don't think the drivers would like that much, but it would increase spectator interst.
Then do as they are in the x games. Have a stadium/track final superstage. One might be able to argue for a superstage for the start and finish of the rally.
In that superstage, have start intervals of 15 seconds. Have the competitors do ten laps. Figuring one minute per lap. This would put up to 40 cars on the course at one time. Advantages would be to the leaders as they'd get laps with less cars on course.
I can see that concept working in that the superstage stadium area being at the end of a typical out in the woods stage. Rally in the woods for miles, then they all finish after 10 laps in a one mile loop at the end of the stage. This area would be spectator friendly. It would allow the spectators to see everyone come in....and see (and understand) who won the event. You would see head to head action.
There again, its appeasing the spectators. I think drivers would hate the concept because a-more head to head action means more carnage, which is more risk to their skin and their wallets. B-Dust, visability would suck...and at some point even for the leader once they got to the circuit portion. C- Field repairs and carnage in the circuit area would have to be addressed...how do you "yellow" flag a circuit rally? I wouldn't want to change a flat in those conditions with that much congested traffic. Perhaps a pit could be built. Still doesn't solve a problem if some one were to roll it.
These are just random thoughts....I'm bored at work. Bottom line, you need spectator interest to get the marketing dollars. Right now you can foster that interest. TV isn't the answer yet either, as don't think what is broadcast is creating any new fans to the sport.
I'll be anxious to see how the x-games broadcast handles stuff.[/QUOTE]
oh man, you are so wrong on some of your points :rolleyes:
just because american fat butts don't want to move out of the house and the couch, doesn't mean that we should change the entire structure of this sport just to get attention. The Super Special you propose will not work, it will be more dangerous. Where do you want to find a decent stadium to fit 40 cars at the same time???
US rally needs better organization for the current spectators who are willing to go out and watch, because what i've seen being a spectator here is just plainly not fun. Restricted viewing areas in one spot on the stage, poor notes on how to get to the stage and overall poor location of the stages. During one day we were unable to see more than 3 stages. That's just dissapointing if you have to drive a considerable amount of time just to get to the place where the rally is taking place.
Why don't they have this problem in Europe and other countries???
There is as much or even less TV coverage on Local and Regional Rallies yet it produces huge amount of crowd that watches the rally live.
Some of you mentioned ability for private/"small" drivers to enter with not too much money. I understand this but what makes crowd is the "show" and small guys can never put up the show big enough to keep the crowd happy.
I'd love to do it myself but i don't have enough money to do it the "right way". Dumping all of my savings to a rally car and competing one rally here and there just doesn't cut it for me.
I've been to US rallies and i have to tell you that it surely wasn't worth 11 hours of driving to see 5 guys drive at a decent level. I know this sport and it wasn't exciting for me, so how is that supposed to be exciting for someone who's just heard about rally and wants to get on it more. Tv and crowd needs stars who drive and compete closely, not some guys that are pasionate about the rally and run for fun.
Another solution is sponsorship from major oompanies that can shell out money for those small guys to become better and dive better cars.
How much more comfortable would you be knowing that if you go 100% and crash, you're not gonna crash your entire savings without ability to rebuild the car?
| Howl | 08-08-2006 03:23 PM |
In Europe is seems people aren't as adverse to closing down a whole region and running a rally through the middle of all the towns and villages. In North America there are only few municipalites that have discovered the benefits of hosting an event, so usually you have to find locations where there are very few people. That means spectators have to drive for hours and then stand out in the middle of the forest to see a couple of dozen cars go by.
With the advent of smaller, more mobile cameras it is now possible to have a camera in every car and a camera at every exciting turn, but you still need to collect all the footage and edit it into a coherent show (usually one hour long, a lot gets cut). With better communitcation systems it may soon be possible to get live feeds from all the cameras at once. Then you could broadcast the rally live, either showing all the camera's at once on a dozen or more screens in a central hall or stadium (perhaps followed by a super-special), or as a live editted-on-the-fly TV show al� NASCAR.
With the advent of smaller, more mobile cameras it is now possible to have a camera in every car and a camera at every exciting turn, but you still need to collect all the footage and edit it into a coherent show (usually one hour long, a lot gets cut). With better communitcation systems it may soon be possible to get live feeds from all the cameras at once. Then you could broadcast the rally live, either showing all the camera's at once on a dozen or more screens in a central hall or stadium (perhaps followed by a super-special), or as a live editted-on-the-fly TV show al� NASCAR.
| TheRipler | 08-08-2006 03:56 PM |
One of the things I liked about the X-games event was the way they finished it off in traditional X-games style. There were 6 teams left going into the last round, and you saw each get a full run. I don't know if I've ever seen a full rally stage before in my life. Every car got faster than the last, building excitement.
The camera work was just plain awesome on the last stage. I normally HATE cable cams, but they had the speed just right coming down that staight. The direction and production were top notch. It looked amazing. Of course, the X-games camera guys are used to working hard, following moto-x and the like.
Another thing I liked that was different than traditional motorsports was everyone's reaction when it was over. These were X-games people, and you don't have to come in first to win. Like Travis, pulling off gnarly double backflips, but he'll be right there watching and rooting for the guy he's competing with. ...beacuse he wants to see it happen too! That comes from competitions based more on style than time. It looked like Travis was more excited about Colin's roll'n'go than actually winning! You'd never see anything like that in F1 or WRC.
It was Americanized. It was youthfull. It was refreshing. Would watch again. It was good TV.
The camera work was just plain awesome on the last stage. I normally HATE cable cams, but they had the speed just right coming down that staight. The direction and production were top notch. It looked amazing. Of course, the X-games camera guys are used to working hard, following moto-x and the like.
Another thing I liked that was different than traditional motorsports was everyone's reaction when it was over. These were X-games people, and you don't have to come in first to win. Like Travis, pulling off gnarly double backflips, but he'll be right there watching and rooting for the guy he's competing with. ...beacuse he wants to see it happen too! That comes from competitions based more on style than time. It looked like Travis was more excited about Colin's roll'n'go than actually winning! You'd never see anything like that in F1 or WRC.
It was Americanized. It was youthfull. It was refreshing. Would watch again. It was good TV.
| RichardM | 08-08-2006 04:00 PM |
And as a general note, to improve the future of rally, get out there and help your local organizer.
Ripler, put the Saturday after Thanksgiving on your calender and come up to Paris for the Rallye de Paris. Can't promise any roll n goes because most of the time we just roll. :)
Ripler, put the Saturday after Thanksgiving on your calender and come up to Paris for the Rallye de Paris. Can't promise any roll n goes because most of the time we just roll. :)
| TheRipler | 08-08-2006 04:27 PM |
Richard, I was so bummed that I missed last year. I'm going to have to clear this with the family (read: Mom), though. It should be doable, but I don't want to get disowned! :lol:
[QUOTE=REDrum] I pray Rally doesn't evolve into simply a stadium drift and dirt jump sport...[/QUOTE]
OK, I'll admit... I had sort of started dreaming of a stadium dirt drift and jump competition based loosely of Rally to form an interesting show for TV. The down side being that it would probably eclipse and pull resources from traditional stage rally in the US. It would be alot easier to watch, but co-drivers would probably be in the soup line.
...but then again, I've been dreaming about something like that for 20 years, since I started driving. I always wanted a jacked up 4WD AC Cobra replica that you could drive on small dirt circuits like the CORR truck guys. It just always seemed like it would be fun.
Obviously, I'm not right in the head.. ;)
[QUOTE=REDrum] I pray Rally doesn't evolve into simply a stadium drift and dirt jump sport...[/QUOTE]
OK, I'll admit... I had sort of started dreaming of a stadium dirt drift and jump competition based loosely of Rally to form an interesting show for TV. The down side being that it would probably eclipse and pull resources from traditional stage rally in the US. It would be alot easier to watch, but co-drivers would probably be in the soup line.
...but then again, I've been dreaming about something like that for 20 years, since I started driving. I always wanted a jacked up 4WD AC Cobra replica that you could drive on small dirt circuits like the CORR truck guys. It just always seemed like it would be fun.
Obviously, I'm not right in the head.. ;)
| RichardM | 08-08-2006 05:40 PM |
[QUOTE=TheRipler]Richard, I was so bummed that I missed last year. I'm going to have to clear this with the family (read: Mom), though. It should be doable, but I don't want to get disowned! :lol: [/QUOTE]
That's why the rally is on Saturday. So you can have the traditional dinner and Cowboys football game with the family on Thursday, go to the rally Friday, rally Saturday, and go home Sunday.
[QUOTE=TheRipler]Obviously, I'm not right in the head.. ;)[/QUOTE]
Join the crowd. Why do you think I compete and organize rally?
That's why the rally is on Saturday. So you can have the traditional dinner and Cowboys football game with the family on Thursday, go to the rally Friday, rally Saturday, and go home Sunday.
[QUOTE=TheRipler]Obviously, I'm not right in the head.. ;)[/QUOTE]
Join the crowd. Why do you think I compete and organize rally?
| Evo3Codriver | 08-08-2006 11:40 PM |
[QUOTE=SubieRacer]I'm not sure where you are getting your facts..[/QUOTE]
I get my facts from me, I was there.
[QUOTE=SubieRacer]Rally in America died when Steve Johnson became CEO of SCCA and systematically removed the key people who were helping it progress and who had brought America to the forefront of the WRC event bid. Because of his actions the hunt for the WRC and the ProRally series fell off, only to be dropped completely later. [/QUOTE]
SCCA never had a serious bid for WRC nor ever had FIA observers at any of their events. Canada was light-years ahead with 2 of their rallies (Charlevoix and Rally Quebec) over any US event. I have yet to run a US event with all the FIA prescriptions (refueling, recce, routebook in FIA format, timecards, tire rules and marking them following services, service schedule,...) that the Canadians had.
[QUOTE=SubieRacer]I understand you are upset about all this, but know that your disappointment pales in comparison to those who put their lives into making a dream happen only to have it yanked out from under them.[/QUOTE]
Upset nothing. Both Rally America and NASA are doing a better job with rally than SCCA ever did. Good riddens SCCA. Too bad SCCA hung on so long causing one group (NASA) to splinter off for something better and then finally Rally America taking over mostly SCCA events causing the small rally community to become split.
I'm no fool. I wouldn't dedicate anything or volunteer much to SCCA. However I was chairman of a SCCA ClubRally, SCCA Rallysprints and held a position with local region. I jumped ship long before SCCA dumped rally.
I get my facts from me, I was there.
[QUOTE=SubieRacer]Rally in America died when Steve Johnson became CEO of SCCA and systematically removed the key people who were helping it progress and who had brought America to the forefront of the WRC event bid. Because of his actions the hunt for the WRC and the ProRally series fell off, only to be dropped completely later. [/QUOTE]
SCCA never had a serious bid for WRC nor ever had FIA observers at any of their events. Canada was light-years ahead with 2 of their rallies (Charlevoix and Rally Quebec) over any US event. I have yet to run a US event with all the FIA prescriptions (refueling, recce, routebook in FIA format, timecards, tire rules and marking them following services, service schedule,...) that the Canadians had.
[QUOTE=SubieRacer]I understand you are upset about all this, but know that your disappointment pales in comparison to those who put their lives into making a dream happen only to have it yanked out from under them.[/QUOTE]
Upset nothing. Both Rally America and NASA are doing a better job with rally than SCCA ever did. Good riddens SCCA. Too bad SCCA hung on so long causing one group (NASA) to splinter off for something better and then finally Rally America taking over mostly SCCA events causing the small rally community to become split.
I'm no fool. I wouldn't dedicate anything or volunteer much to SCCA. However I was chairman of a SCCA ClubRally, SCCA Rallysprints and held a position with local region. I jumped ship long before SCCA dumped rally.
| Evo3Codriver | 08-08-2006 11:47 PM |
[QUOTE=OBShahn]The only way to stop complaining about the cost of winning an event overall is to mandate a class with fairly fixed costs ceilings, otherwise you could spend 400,000.00 if you wanted to...[/QUOTE]
We have that already, its called open class.
6. Open Class Technology Allowances
...
a. Weight: The absolute minimum real weight of the car is set at
2700 pounds.
...
b. Electronic Controls: No type or form of electronic control is
permitted for the following components:
i. Suspension, steering, braking, gear change/clutch,
front and rear differentials.
ii. Simple engine cut operating during a mechanically
activated gear change is permitted.
c. Gear Change: The use of an unassisted manual sequential
gear change mechanism is allowed.
d. General Specification:
i. The use of any unmodified component which complies
with a currently valid FIA Group N homologation for any
vehicle is permitted subject to such components
complying with the regulations regarding the use of
electronic controls set out in (2) above.
ii. The definition of �Unmodified Component� includes, but
is not limited to, any electronic mechanisms or controls
that are essential for said homologated components
operation.
Its why you don't see former GrB and present day WRC cars running in US.
We have that already, its called open class.
6. Open Class Technology Allowances
...
a. Weight: The absolute minimum real weight of the car is set at
2700 pounds.
...
b. Electronic Controls: No type or form of electronic control is
permitted for the following components:
i. Suspension, steering, braking, gear change/clutch,
front and rear differentials.
ii. Simple engine cut operating during a mechanically
activated gear change is permitted.
c. Gear Change: The use of an unassisted manual sequential
gear change mechanism is allowed.
d. General Specification:
i. The use of any unmodified component which complies
with a currently valid FIA Group N homologation for any
vehicle is permitted subject to such components
complying with the regulations regarding the use of
electronic controls set out in (2) above.
ii. The definition of �Unmodified Component� includes, but
is not limited to, any electronic mechanisms or controls
that are essential for said homologated components
operation.
Its why you don't see former GrB and present day WRC cars running in US.
| OBShahn | 08-09-2006 12:20 AM |
[QUOTE=Evo3Codriver]We have that already, its called open class.
6. Open Class Technology Allowances
...
a. Weight: The absolute minimum real weight of the car is set at
2700 pounds.
...
b. Electronic Controls: No type or form of electronic control is
permitted for the following components:
i. Suspension, steering, braking, gear change/clutch,
front and rear differentials.
ii. Simple engine cut operating during a mechanically
activated gear change is permitted.
c. Gear Change: The use of an unassisted manual sequential
gear change mechanism is allowed.
d. General Specification:
i. The use of any unmodified component which complies
with a currently valid FIA Group N homologation for any
vehicle is permitted subject to such components
complying with the regulations regarding the use of
electronic controls set out in (2) above.
ii. The definition of �Unmodified Component� includes, but
is not limited to, any electronic mechanisms or controls
that are essential for said homologated components
operation.
Its why you don't see former GrB and present day WRC cars running in US.[/QUOTE]
Dave,
you missed my point.
My point was we have an open class where you can SPEND lots and lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
The only way to stop that is to have a lower spec class that has a real price celing (n4).
We both know there is only so much money you can spend in Open, and it is a lot. $400,000.00 is about the ceiling from a good shop for an open car when you factor in everything built to pushing the limits and gray areas of all of the rules possible...
A top spec built to the nuts N4 car is going to be about $150,000.00.... hence my point....
6. Open Class Technology Allowances
...
a. Weight: The absolute minimum real weight of the car is set at
2700 pounds.
...
b. Electronic Controls: No type or form of electronic control is
permitted for the following components:
i. Suspension, steering, braking, gear change/clutch,
front and rear differentials.
ii. Simple engine cut operating during a mechanically
activated gear change is permitted.
c. Gear Change: The use of an unassisted manual sequential
gear change mechanism is allowed.
d. General Specification:
i. The use of any unmodified component which complies
with a currently valid FIA Group N homologation for any
vehicle is permitted subject to such components
complying with the regulations regarding the use of
electronic controls set out in (2) above.
ii. The definition of �Unmodified Component� includes, but
is not limited to, any electronic mechanisms or controls
that are essential for said homologated components
operation.
Its why you don't see former GrB and present day WRC cars running in US.[/QUOTE]
Dave,
you missed my point.
My point was we have an open class where you can SPEND lots and lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
The only way to stop that is to have a lower spec class that has a real price celing (n4).
We both know there is only so much money you can spend in Open, and it is a lot. $400,000.00 is about the ceiling from a good shop for an open car when you factor in everything built to pushing the limits and gray areas of all of the rules possible...
A top spec built to the nuts N4 car is going to be about $150,000.00.... hence my point....
| KC | 08-09-2006 08:23 AM |
[QUOTE=SubieRacer]
Rally in America died when Steve Johnson became CEO of SCCA and systematically removed the key people who were helping it progress and who had brought America to the forefront of the WRC event bid. Because of his actions the hunt for the WRC and the ProRally series fell off, only to be dropped completely later. [/QUOTE]
So you're saying that rising insurance costs and litigation against SCCA due to a couple high-profile accidents (both drivers and spectators injured/killed) and subsequent insurance issues that would have made coverage of rally so prohibitive, had nothing to do with SCCAs dropping of Rally? OK. I guess I have to believe you because I read it on the internet.
I'm not defending SCCA here, but It's interesting to see how history re-writes itself when you have a grudge.
--kC
Rally in America died when Steve Johnson became CEO of SCCA and systematically removed the key people who were helping it progress and who had brought America to the forefront of the WRC event bid. Because of his actions the hunt for the WRC and the ProRally series fell off, only to be dropped completely later. [/QUOTE]
So you're saying that rising insurance costs and litigation against SCCA due to a couple high-profile accidents (both drivers and spectators injured/killed) and subsequent insurance issues that would have made coverage of rally so prohibitive, had nothing to do with SCCAs dropping of Rally? OK. I guess I have to believe you because I read it on the internet.
I'm not defending SCCA here, but It's interesting to see how history re-writes itself when you have a grudge.
--kC
| sachilles | 08-09-2006 10:34 AM |
Tough call on the high cost of running a top notch rally car.
I think where it is at is OK...the problem is the popularity of the sport.
I'm sure Nascar, IRL have easily as much into there cars if not more, along with the support gear.
The difference is those groups have supporting series, and then even more at the grass routes level.
I'm willing to bet there isn't a member on this board that isn't within a reasonable drive of an oval track that has weekly races. I have a local track, whose most expensive cars are up there in price....maybe not open class rally car prices...but they are up there in price. On the same night, you will see what they call the junkyard warrior class. The cars have a $450 budget, and the track reserves the right to purchase the car for $450 if they feel someone is investing too much into a car. Its about as entry level as you can get into oval racing.
The racers only need to buy a pit pass. As the track earns its money at the gate and through sponsorship.
I think one key concept that needs to change a bit is the entry fees to a competitor. Fielding a car has destroyed the credit score of many if not most of the competitors as is. Higher entry fees will surely discourage some folks.
If you can offset the fees with sponsorship money...by renaming the event to the "Red Bull" Rim of the world rally or something like that. More cars means more exposure for the events.
As the sport grows, you'll be able to foster more club style rallies.
I also think cross marketing to other racing populations is worth the effort and any expense needed to make it happen.
Have a rally cross on the infield of a track during one of their typical oval events. Let an already motorsports liking person, see what rally is about even if its in an abreviated form.....think like the x games final stage.
Ultimately, the money is in entertaining people.
I think where it is at is OK...the problem is the popularity of the sport.
I'm sure Nascar, IRL have easily as much into there cars if not more, along with the support gear.
The difference is those groups have supporting series, and then even more at the grass routes level.
I'm willing to bet there isn't a member on this board that isn't within a reasonable drive of an oval track that has weekly races. I have a local track, whose most expensive cars are up there in price....maybe not open class rally car prices...but they are up there in price. On the same night, you will see what they call the junkyard warrior class. The cars have a $450 budget, and the track reserves the right to purchase the car for $450 if they feel someone is investing too much into a car. Its about as entry level as you can get into oval racing.
The racers only need to buy a pit pass. As the track earns its money at the gate and through sponsorship.
I think one key concept that needs to change a bit is the entry fees to a competitor. Fielding a car has destroyed the credit score of many if not most of the competitors as is. Higher entry fees will surely discourage some folks.
If you can offset the fees with sponsorship money...by renaming the event to the "Red Bull" Rim of the world rally or something like that. More cars means more exposure for the events.
As the sport grows, you'll be able to foster more club style rallies.
I also think cross marketing to other racing populations is worth the effort and any expense needed to make it happen.
Have a rally cross on the infield of a track during one of their typical oval events. Let an already motorsports liking person, see what rally is about even if its in an abreviated form.....think like the x games final stage.
Ultimately, the money is in entertaining people.
| ROC pit-bull | 08-09-2006 01:40 PM |
1. As soon as you consider this an extreme sport over it being a motor sport you quite possibly are going to ruin it.
2. Although the exposure is great for the sport in america. The fact remains exposure of WRC events on national TV would be better. The FIA should push to have some of their races on television in the US. You can't tell me that the spelling bee, or even cheerleading will get a better share of viewers.
2. Although the exposure is great for the sport in america. The fact remains exposure of WRC events on national TV would be better. The FIA should push to have some of their races on television in the US. You can't tell me that the spelling bee, or even cheerleading will get a better share of viewers.
| RichardM | 08-09-2006 01:50 PM |
A spelling bee will certainly have better speelers than on almost every motorsport forum of every type. :)
| TheRipler | 08-09-2006 02:13 PM |
Lets not even start comparing rally drivers to cheerleaders... My loyalty may waiver.. ;)
| RichardM | 08-09-2006 03:57 PM |
The have much better looking legs. You know how some people are bowlegged while others are knock kneed? Well, I have one of each. :)
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét