The figures won't look so rosy with out the 50th celebrations.
Let's all keep racing togetherin 2016 and beyond.

I have sent the following response back to Anne about the paper discussing the future of the Proto and other classes.

Sadly I am not available to attend the Drivers Meeting on the 18th October as I have another long standing engagement that day.

Clearly I am a very new member of the Register, and have not yet raced with you as my car is still not ready to race, despite being out with you at Curborough, but I would like to comment on the paper that has been produced about the future of the Proto class and class structure. I, of course, have built a car to Proto regs, or at least the old front engined Vauxhall Supersport regs) as that was the cheapest option for me, with the chassis I bought. I hope my views will be considered and discussed despite my lack of track record with the Register.

To be fair, I don't anticipate ever racing a full season. I just cant afford that and certainly cannot afford the time, or the divorce, if I raced in 2 races over a full weekend, meaning weekends away. (edited to add) A calendar of full weekends away racing is a definite barrier to entry for me. As a result I am likely to only ever race at one day of the Midlands races.

Whether a disappointment or not, having introduced the class, a number of people have prepared cars to suit the regulations and it would be a slap in the face to those that have spent time and money on their cars if they are now not allowed to race. The Register has a moral obligation to support those people that responded to the regs and provide them with a place to race. It is not realistic to expect people to spend further money on changing engines again.

It is not sensible to talk about K Series "Cup" only races until the Register can guarantee full grids at every race. Until that happens every eligible car, whether Proto or Classic is an entry fee that benefits the accounts and helps provide competition. The more cars on the grids the better. Only when the Register is receiving full grids plus reserves at the majority of races should it consider running two grids.

Splitting grids into one of 6-16 Cup cars (6 being the smallest grid and 16 being the largest this year) and one of 8-14 Proto and Classic Cars doesnt appear to be a recipe for sustainable success. Adding the Class B car to the Cup cars would mean one grid of circa 20 cars and one grid of 6-8 Class A and Proto cars. Great. The death of those two classes would then be self fulfilling prophecy. At least the Class A cars still have Classic Clubmans to race with, but Proto would be hung out to dry.

I dont understand why Proto is considered "embarrassing, a distraction or confusing". Plenty of series have multi class racing and I would rather have a battle with someone within a full grid, whether they are in the same class or not, than be in a smaller grid with fewer competitors to play with. Club racing is not a spectator sport and most of us are racing for our own enjoyment not for the enjoyment of a handful of people on the banks. When the spectators are so numerous that they are paying us to race, then I suggest we listen to what they want. Until that time, its what the participants want that matters.

Changing Proto to an engine regulated class is, I'm afraid, a horse that has bolted. Again, it would not be fair on those that have built cars to suit existing regulations and unreasonable to expect people to change.

Instead of reducing the numbers of classes, Clubmans should be encouraging more cars to race - the Scandanvians have a Zetec powered class and a number of their cars have been for sale on the register's site this year. The Register should provide them with a class to race, maybe some of the Scandanavians would come over to race ocassionally? The Zetec would also be a cheap option for someone to fit to a rolling chassis. Perhaps Clubmans should Keep Proto for its existing racers AND introduce new classes, one to Scandanaviua regs and one with engine regs the same as adopted by the Monoposto Racing Club for their 2000cc class (see here para 5.7 -
http://www.monoposto.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2015-Monoposto-Championship-Sporting-Technical-Regulations-Published-Copy-Version-1.pdf
(Edited to add) Engines to Monoposto 2000 regs are very robust, driveable and cheap to run and fit in with the 180-190 bhp idea, their regs are specificallly aimed at the Vauxhall Lotus and similar engine.

So, in summary:
1. Clubmans needs as many cars on the grid as possible and it is wrong to abandon those people that have built cars to Proto regs
2. Introduce a class for Scandanavia spec Zetec cars and a class for cars with engines to "Monoposto 2000" engine regs (ie about 190 Bhp engine as for the original Formula Vauxhall-Lotus/ Vauxhall Supersport regs and similar Zetec or Toyota engined cars)
3. Only have one grid of cars, until the register can guarantee 2 grids of 20 cars each
4. Only race on one day of a weekend - ie 1 x practice and 2 x 15/ 20 min races on one day


Andy

A view from the Deep South

Andy thanks for you very detailed posting, I do hope that it is taken into account at the drivers meeting. It was the sort of measured response that I was hoping the table would provoke, and although I am not in charge I would request that all responses are well mannered and without provocative language like Andy’s posting is.
On saying that Andy there are always flip sides to every discussion?


1) I believe that the double header format was used because it’s cheaper, you cut your travel costs (and time) in half by having two races a weekend.

2) I admit I do come from the camp that prefers single class racing as you know where you are and can make genuine attempts to improve yourself to get higher up the grid. Just to bolting on an extra 70 bhp seems too easy to me?

3) In my view Proto was started too quickly without realising how many people would actually race (or not race as the case) and without sufficient controls in place, so in hindsight it should have been thought through with more preparation.

4) There was only one race (Oulton) where K’s had six entries, well it was really 7 entries at the beginning as he dropped out of the second race. The facts are there to see that K’s averaged 13 actual cars on the track. Most organising clubs I expect would accept that in the present circumstances? I can remember seeing races put on for 4 cars at some meetings this year?

5) The Zetex engine is already covered by the Proto class, Onno has a 2 ltr Zetex engine and has entered some races as a Proto.

6) I would not recommend or support with my one vote to create another class if Proto survives then I think we need to take a fresh look at what power is permissible.

7) Your last point (on race timings) looks interesting, there could be some variations, one comes to mind is to have a combined qualification but separate races. In HSCC they have 12min qualifying that releases some time to the races?

At the cost of being shot down in flames at the drivers meeting, I am disappointed at the take-up of Proto, to average (for any reason) under 4 cars a race is not sustainable, if the Proto owners/drivers want a class then to put it bluntly they need to vote with their entries so they cannot be ignored.

One last thing does come to mind Andy, if you want cheap(er) motorsport why choose Proto? Cup cars are so cheap to run it would seem to me to be the natural choice?

So I hope “The Protos” don’t take offence to what I have said, I am not malicious but more disappointed. I would like to see it a success but I have to say that at the present numbers it does not look viable to me.

AndyL

Hi Andy,

Thanks for reading and commenting. If I may respond,

As I'm arguing for 2 races in one day then I think thats actually cheaper as there is no need for more overnight stays and, in my case, its certainly more family friendly. Time is often as important a commodity as the money, and also has to be "spent" wisely! My ideal would be a 15 min practice and 2 x 20 min races in one day. Finishing positions of race 1 form the grid for race 2, or the second fastest times in practice?

The Zetec engine is covered by the Proto Class but I believe the Scandanavian examples are are about 165 Bhp (?) and I doubt anyone would want to race in a class where they are 30% down. Zetec engines are dirt cheap to buy and very robust, but getting them up to 250 Bhp is probably a bit expensive. Maybe a class that encourages the use of engines in a more "standard" state of tune, but allows choice, would pay dividends? Thats why I suggested engine rules basically the same as those in Monoposto. They have been through this pain and their Mono 200 Classic regs allow in Vauxhall, Toyota, Zetec etc etc engines, all delivering about 180-190 Bhp in dry sumped but standard cam trim. Just a thought.

I chose the Vauxhall engined route (and therefore Proto) because it was way cheaper for me than to go Cup - the rolling chassis I bought already had a Vauxhall exhaust and manifold, and I had access to a very cheap Vauxhall Lotus engine (cheaper than a K-Series, I think) and engine management (from a Monoposto Vauxhall Lotus, about 185 bhp) which should be robust and very cheap to run. I have previously raced a Vauxhall Lotus (slowly) and the engine in that state of tune hardly ever needs refreshing in 4 seasons! I accepted the difference in power because the formula is new to me and I want to learn the cars without frightening myself too much!

Im sure that the decision to introduce Proto was probably taken after very much thought and no one expected that only 4 cars would come out regularly. Im not sure why it hasnt taken off but I do think its wrong to either ban the Proto cars that the Register itself introduced/ encouraged or get the Proto drivers to spend money to convert their cars. Even if the decision is taken to change things then the register has a moral responsibility to give plenty of warning of the change - at least one year, I would suggest, so no changes should be made until the 2017 season. I also think that if the register does decide to change Proto significantly it has a responsibility to find somewhere else for its members to race, preferably as class in their own right, whether thats in OSS or the BARC or Radical Owners Club equivalents.

I feel slightly uncomfortable about posting all of this, as I recognise that I'm very much the new boy, and one that wants to race a Clubmans car, but hasnt done yet, and can probably only do so 4-6 days a year. Hopefully the existing and recent Proto drivers will voice their views and everyone will work out how to get more cars on the grid (as an aside, does anyone know how many Proto cars there actually are in existence?).

Cheers

Andy

There are lots of cars out there that are eligible. About 10 that have raced in the last few years.

[re Andy L's posting]

Organising Clubs will not support entire grids consistently at 13 or worse. It does not fit the economic viability model of any of the main clubs including BARC and for that matter HSCC. In fact [for grids] to be viable they need in excess of the MSA dictated minimum of 16-18 to retain Championship status. I would expect that a number of series/championships will be either amalgamated or lost very soon. With that need (now as well in times of challenged economy) for the protection of clubmans in mind, the grids were amalgamated and by doing so we preserved our Championship - and frankly nothing has changed so far as that need is concerned.

Hindsight always creates saints. The point behind Proto was to create and allow a literally prototype class with considerable freedoms for the engineers among us to develop cars and not be 'a slave' to the one-make principle and obligations to have only nominated suppliers undertake engine work. It is a mistake to think that by having a single highly restricted class the numbers automatically increase or even remain static; the issue can be how many are lost through absence of development challenge or on other grounds. Therefore the class will always be 'viable' as long as there is a single entry.

It defies logic to 'kill' any class because of low entries when we do not have overcapacity grids anyway; on that mantra B and A sport also get 'killed'. I think we should enable people to race and variety is a good thing. After all, through the intellect, innovation and energy and expenditure of others we may find a consensus on a future specification that appeals to many or even all, rather than seeing the past (20 years) as the future ...

If as we close our 50th year we remember how we started and grew, it may be helpful to recall that it was not as a single chassis/engine class structure.

Andy, no offence at all.

The way i look at it? Get a grid of 25 sports1600 cars together all the events and go your own way. Until then don't fool the people who helped you true the crisis.

Proto expensive? No way!

Onno, I take no offence, my posting was to bring out actual figures prior to the drivers meeting so that when we discussed it we were discussing around agreed figures rather than hearsay. It was a reaction to Pete's discussion document because I felt that if this was not discussed ahead of time then we would have to all book into the hotel for the weekend with the length of time that this meeting would have taken with no prior discussion.

Unfortunately Marcus has sent an email to the Register for circulation so it has taken away the idea of an open forum discussion.

The requirement for 25 Cup cars is somewhat overstated?

I also don't see this as fooling around, Pete came up with some serious issues that need discussing and decisions voted on, the idea is that we have a democracy and everybody has their own ideas and we all try and share them, then the majority vote wins? You should not shoot the messenger!

Proto BTW will always be more expensive than Cup, ask Sunroof how many times he has had to rebuild his engine, more power= more wear and tear, you can't argue with physics.

Onno, do I see your car for sale?

Regards Andy

P.S. Just so that you all understand I am just a driver/owner not a committee member, however I do have views, I would like to discuss them, we make a vote then get on with life.

Mmm

Andy (L):

"...I felt that if this was not discussed ahead of time then we would have to all book into the hotel for the weekend with the length of time that this meeting would have taken with no prior discussion.

Unfortunately Marcus has sent an email to the Register for circulation so it has taken away the idea of an open forum discussion...."

Above from you appears rather contradictory Andy. One document (that you clearly seem to agree with) should be discussed ahead of time but another in response or if you prefer in support of Proto should not even have been circulated? Mmm.


In addition, I don't agree with you regarding cost (of Proto); you refer to Sunroof, however the fact is that you can get a 1.9L K series race spec short motor (block and contents) for €1595 self assembly of €2200 assembled. At today's exchange rates that is £1690 assembled. Assembled, a 2.0L race motor is €4400 (£3,385) sans head. Some people want to be able to work on own engines as well as the rest of the car. The above figures require an exchange motor of any description (i.e. 1.4,1.6 or 1.8) to be sent in order to commence the process. One of those can be acquired on e bay for £very little.

In many respects it is very arguable that a hare has been set running that should have been kept in its box at least for another year.

The discussion document which was circulated with the agenda was written by me on behalf of the committee to put forward a number of the issues and opinions that had been discussed by the committee and which members had expressed to us.
In no way could it be regarded as any one person's view - indeed it's obvious that it contains too many options and different views for that.
It is intended to get us all thinking ahead of the Drivers Meeting and to put forward constructive views. We will not all agree of course but I think it's important that we do it constructively and without any personal conflict.
Looking forward to seeing everyone on Sunday.

I don't know how much a Cup engine costs to buy and run but the Vauxhall Lotus/ Supersport spec XE engine I put in my car cost me £1500 ready to install. My experience of these engines in Monoposto is that it shouldn't need rebuilding for about another 4 years!!!

Andy,

Whilst you're right in principle about 'the more power, the more wear and tear', the engine issues I've experienced have not been down to the increased power. One was a crank bearing failure as a result of either me pushing my luck by not getting an unknown quantity rebuilt over the winter, or maybe by not having a 'gold' oil pump (so called, because that's obviously what they're made of to cost that much). The other was due to my engine having an unnatural appetite not just for fuel and air, but also nuts, bolts and other circuit debris.

Several gearbox issues on the Elite sequential may well have been down to the additional power, despite their specs saying it would not be. But as we all now know; in standard form, it's made of chocolate. Even when it's been beefed up it still needs regular inspection. Perhaps, with hindsight, the decision to only permit the cheapest option was not the right one.


Ian

Ian , thanks, unfortunately more power and RPM through the same mechanics mean higher forces therefore higher wear and risk of failure.

Most car manufacturers realise this and dial down their engines for warranty reasons.

I'm afraid you will never ever convince me that more power gives even the same reliability. Looking at Proto I haven't done the sums but I suspect that they have exhibited a higher failure rate than Cup? They also will need more frequent rebuilds. Nice if you can afford it?

See you Sunday :0)

My understanding of the Honda VTEC engines is that they are standard - designed to give circa 240 Bhp for (probably) 200k miles in an S2000.

My Vauxhall engine is standard, apart from the dry sump and carbs rather than injection. As I have said before, my experience is that they dont need rebuilds (touch wood) from one season to the next. But I do accept that mine is a 185 (Ish) bhp engine and would need more frequent tlc if it was built to give 240 bhp. Its a cheap engine to buy and run with lots of parts, inc tuning parts for those that desire (and complete engines) available. Ditto for Zetec and Toyota 3S-GE

Andy the Honda engine is physically large, expensive to install (with the dry sump and all ancillaries)and too powerful if Proto is restricted to say 190/200bhp. You also get hot kneecaps as the exhaust comes out of the RHS of the engine.

The Vauxhall engine is old and heavy but OK for providing cheap power, I would not want to base a growing race series on it though?

Fair enough, but give people the choice, depending on their budget. Not sure how old the XE design is compared to the K Series, but the latter is hardly a spring chicken?

There is already a successful one engine class. Nothing wrong with having a class that allows some different solutions, even more modern solutions, and eventually a consensus on what's "best" will probably emerge.

However, I do think it's pointless to define engine rules by power output as that requires that everyone is tested on the same dyno at the same time. Regs need to be developed that are easy to physically police/ inspect and yet give similar performance. As an example I have pointed out that the Monoposto 2000 Classic have been developed to achieve this aim; they give freedom of choice and yet have power of about 185-195 bhp, the limit for Proto that some are discussing, so it is possible.

Andy I think we are both thinking the same here:-

One of the items I wanted to bring up in AOB is to maybe start looking for a new engine to replace the K, I actually have mooted this in previous driver meetings but I think due to the "survival course" put onto us by not only the banking sector but also our competition it rightly hasn't been discussed seriously yet.

There are cheap ways of restricting power across several makes of engine.

Now perhaps folk who think I should stay with clubmans can see why my car is for sale we have the blind leading the blind clubmans is losing it's roots and becoming a rich man's formula catering for the rich the fun has gone the paddock has lost it's sparkle, not surprising really when drivers are being run by proffesional teams in what is supposed to be an amateurs championship it is always the same with all clubs when people start paying money to have experts assist them the fun is gone I went to Thruxton to watch the MGOC racing the day after Oulton ,the racing was closer the atmosphere in the paddock greater and not an artic to be seen and by the way and perhaps the most important point of this post ,there were a mixture of different cars racing in different classes in the same race ........Why?because they all know to maintain a good grid they need each other so for the lords sake clubmans take a leaf out of their book and stop the backstabbing and squabbling.

Martin, don't confuse open discussion and democracy with backstabbing and squabbling. This is healthy and I doubt you'll find a better bunch of racers anywhere.

Professional teams, artics...? Really? Clubmans is amateurs and owner drivers as far as I can see. Look at our champion - Alex has engineered his own car and driven it with extreme skill.

Martin; not sure what you are talking about? With all Clubmans racers and the people around i have a very good relation. Always friendly and welcoming in the paddock, money or no money, "works" teams have always been there from year 1

Yes we do not all agree on wich class is best for eachother and Clubmans but that has nothing to do with the fact that we all love Clubmans!

Quite right Onno - well said.
Exactly why so many of us have been in Clubmans for decades.

Pete

If you have not seen arctics in the paddock with people being paid to run drivers ie professionalls(paid for services provided) you must be more blinkered than I thought you were and as for Alex great guy great engineer great driver but if that great he should be looking to do better for himself than club racing he should be seeking to push his talent much further and I am sure he has the ability to do so. Let's not forget I watch both races at Oulton it was like watching paint dry just cars going by quickly often with in excess of a hundred metres between them at least apart from the front few sorry mate but things have to change it has become boring I can and I will speak my mind as others should

Onno

With respect mate if it is as great as you say you would have made the effort to be at more meetings, before you answer I know you have had other commitments and understand the cost of coming over but life is about choices and clearly your other racing must have been better fun !! I agree with what you have said about clubmans but in the past it was better we need to get back to that I am not the only one that feels that things are not the same but perhaps I am the only one who is prepared to speak up it needs change we are in a changing world and it is my fear that some in clubmans lack change capability if certain people want one class fine let's have one class but with an engine to suit all maybe ford maybe Suzuki people have to many passions about what they favour so let's all change and have a fresh start but it does need to be affordable and reliable no good having 200 horses sat in the garage at most meetings !!