[troyer500]

Some interesting reading here for sure. Cost containment in pavement racing is definitley the key to it's survival in my mind. Bannning private testing at USAC sanctioned tracks would be a huge step in that direction. The amount of tires it takes to run on pavement vs. dirt automatically makes it more expensive. Not sure if there's a way around that, would limiting the teams on the number of tires they can use per race help? Kevin Miller has gone on record in the past stating that he has no interest in taking any kind of steps to reduce the costs associated with USAC racing. Not exactly forward thinking in these economically challenging times. I see a lot of room for improvement in USAC as a whole. Money is the bottom line, racers need more of it and USAC needs to do a better job of finding it. The two areas they need to focus on in order to achieve that is 1. Promotion and 2. Marketing. Promotion to fill the stands and Marketing to generate sponsors. On the Promotion side USAC races shouldn't just be races, they need to be events. Think outside the box on this but do something to reach out to people who have never been to a race let alone a USAC race. Autograph sessions, fireworks, driver intros, give people a show! On the Marketing side if your filling the seats you'll give sponsors a reason to look at sponsoring USAC racing as a viable means of marketing there products and selling them to consumers. Again be creative and think outside the box. Lucas Oil is a great example of a company that uses Motorsports Marketing through there involvement with a number of sanctioning bodies as an excellent vehicle to reach consumers and sell products. Plus they have there own TV production company! A company like Lucas would be a perfect fit with USAC. USAC seems like it's loaded with plenty of Chiefs but maybe not enough Indians. Surely with the staff they have in place they could make some positive changes in house without the need for "Town Hall Meetings" to generate ideas for the direction it needs to head. I'll climb off the soapbox now...

[Kirk Robbins]

The original post asked what ideas we have to make USAC racing more successful with a focus on the pavement sprint cars side. I am one of many IOW lurker that reads every post but does not offer much input but this subject I believe I may have something to offer.

Our family race team has run USAC Ford Focus for three years and in the last four year ran USAC and local Indiana dirt sprint car races. We have been a member of USAC for all of those years. In the USAC sprint car series we have only been able to run the dirt races. We do not run the whole schedule but run as many that we can make and be competitive in. Our race team is financed with our family disposable income, any winnings and with a little financial help from other individuals.

In the Focus series we were able to run dirt and pavement with the same chassis and a lot parts to change it over from dirt to pavement and back to dirt. To date I still believe that this was some of the most economical racing that our team has ever done and that we where competitive in each week.

If we decided to run a pavement sprint car and wanted to be competitive we would need to purchase another frame, motor, wheels and all of the other hardware to build another car just to run seven USAC pavement races with no local races in our area. This would be compared to the fifteen plus USAC dirt races along with all of the other local dirt races that we could run every weekend in Indiana.

If our team was to run a pavement sprint car we would need some or all of the following:
•A sponsor to help defray the cost (what will the sponsor get for his investment)
•Lower cost of the equipment (same frame & motor)
•Lower operating cost (less cost in tires, fuel, travel, etc.)
•More races (more usage of the equipment that we have invested in)
•Increased purses (help with the cost of the investment and operating)
•Win the lottery (fix all of my problems or just start them)

In no way am I asking for any of this. I am just making a statement if our team was to attempt to go pavement sprint car racing this is what would have to happen.

Now if USAC can take time and analyze the situation, develop and implement a plan then maybe in the future our team can go pavement sprint car racing.

In the end the people that are associated with our race team are a bunch of racing addicts that will do about anything to compete in this world of race that we all enjoy.

Kirk Robbins

[nonwingnit]

Originally Posted by Charles Nungester But was this LBurg or its fans fault? The MSCS deal was rescheduled. Im just saying, Work together. If USAC can help Powri on some weekends, Powri should help USAC. Put Davey Ray, Altig, Loyett and their stars against Boat, Levi, Hines, Coons and the other stars AS MANY TIMES AS POSSIBLE in both sanctions and the fans benifit and grow and so do the purses. If Sprint week didn't morph into a 40+ car show, would it be as popular as it is today? It took many years to get the fan support it recieves today. It wasn't always this way.

Why should they work together? Isn't competition what drives business to improve and do better? I understand you're thinking it will help drivers and such but won't one of them end up riding the others coat tails? Like powri.... Competition is what makes things good...gives people a choice makes businesses work harder. Sounds kind of like that only having hoosier to pick from with tires.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Bill Gardner]

Printable version of this thread... https://www.indianaopenwheel.com/pri...ad.php?t=19183

[n8dc]

Originally Posted by Checker'd Past wings........hell no!!!!!!!!!!!

ha ha well your entitled to your opinion but remember somethings sell and some dont ...
50mcrewguy i at the zoo when cameron kicked every ones ass and i was at winchester also..

[Beer Goggles]

Originally Posted by Bill Gardner Printable version of this thread... https://www.indianaopenwheel.com/pri...ad.php?t=19183

This must be the High-Tech version of ; "For a transcript of this program send one dollar to Merkle Press."

[Charles Nungester]

Originally Posted by Jerry Shaw That's a bit of revisionist history, there Tony. Most of the people that were highly upset that day, didn't get that way because of the cancellation. They were infuriated and left mad because of the way you took the microphone and turned on the drivers and race teams that were leaving. I think most knowledgeable fans had a certain degree of skepticism when they drove in and saw a road grader, with grass growing up through the cab, sitting outside of turns 1 and 2. And while driving all the way over there and not getting to see a race does kind of suck, a cancellation for safety reasons (whether you/I/anybody agree with that assessment or not) is one of those things that trumps your desire, as a race fan, to see a race that day. On D.O.'s show early in the week after this, USAC publicly accepted responsibility for their part in this and has moved on. You'll do yourself a huge favor when you can do the same. Maybe you can even win back some of the race fans you lost that day. But that's just my opinion. Jerry

I thought this was over?????? Tony didn't make me mad, His statements only came after dozens of haulers were lined up leaving while fans were still comming in. Not that I excuse them THE FANS WERE TOLD NOTHING.
That matters totally resolved with me both by USAC and Tony. It may have hurt Tonys image. Can't blame you if you feel that way. I don't blame the drivers either. JUST A BAD SITUATION for all. Tony gave money back and held a race. All he could do in his situation other than keep his cool.

---------- Post added at 09:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:23 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Vukie Where did I say that it was Lawrenceburg Speedway or the fan's fault? I didn't. This is what you wrote "but Saturday was diluted. Both Powri and Badger and MSCS (Yeah its sprints but some are midget drivers too) Schedualled directly against it." I pointed out that Powri had races on that weekend in 2008 [and partly in 2007 also], so USAC schedule races against them. So who's to blame for "Schedualled directly against it"? USAC or Powri? The races and the tracks were hundred's miles apart and in different time zones. So what you telling me is that if USAC has midget somewhere, Powri and Badger shouldn't have a race of their own that night? Try and tell that to the members of those two clubs. Badger has had races at Angell Park on Sunday nights for decades and when USAC had the IMW race at Kokomo that night, weren't they going against Badger?

I tried to say that in not so many words. Its ok for ARDC and Powri to schedual against each other. Im just hoping that in the future the organizations can work together to both grow involvment and fan base. The Chili bowl has no competition. Its become a event (EVENT being high priced with a good payout for front runners) I believe there is room for several EVENTS over years time. Midget week being one, Gold Cup being another, Could be a good Novemeber week out in Cali as well.

Chuck

[pgray]

This thread began as a Kevin Miller spin-off of "the Duke's" thread entitled " Pavement Sprints and Midgets ".
Miller stepped in to " give you guys the facts " ( re: post #1 , sentence #1 ) and who would have thought you'd still be debating all of this 150-plus posts later ?

We're approaching 53 hours of posting in this thread and USAC probably hasn't seen anything yet that they didn't already know , care to fix , or know how to fix as the " fixes " all come with great difficulty and a variety of hurdles to overcome , that frankly , won't be overcome. In some things the damage has long been done with much of it irreversible.

The Duke is an easy target with spelling , grammar , punctuation , stuck cap-locks and all the rest. None of this should be the focus.
Duke is passionate in his beliefs and rightfully so. His knowledge of the sport comes from real life experiences that far exceeds that of any twenty-year-old fan.
It is just ridiculous to think otherwise. He competed in an era that we all appreciate and remember as being superior in any number of ways as compared to the product today.

Anyone who follows this sport can easily see problems that they would fix if they could. The problems and fixes will vary as everything is perception. The problems are well documented here in great detail.
Again , I would say " does anyone really believe that USAC has learned anything that they didn't already know ? ". I don't think so ... and because all of this has been going on for so long they probably don't see a cure either !

Pavement racing , both Sprint and Midget is in trouble , and probably won't exist in any substantial form five years from now.
And this brings us back to " the Duke " and his expressions of the past ... I do understand , Duke.
It is far more satisfying to take a look back when what's up ahead appears so void of anything we recognize.
The Duke knows that it didn't have to be this way ...:34;

Rob,

One chassis on dirt and pavement is the biggest thing needed to save combination dirt and pavement series'. Now, there are plenty more dirt midgets and sprint cars in this world then there are pavement cars so I would write the rules to benefit the dirt cars.

How do you police one chassis on dirt and pavement? You actually write a rule book and enforce it. Merely saying this cannot be policed is an excuse not a reason. The Legend Car series' were successful at this, but they went to the extreme with their rules and created a monopoly for certain parts suppliers, so I would not go that far. Plus their cars are junk and their tires are harder then any tire on the planet so the racing is terrible on dirt.

What is the engine plate to rear axle on the typical dirt sprint car or midget? I'll bet this doesn't vary more than 2" from manufacturer to manufacturer on dirt. So, allow 2" to move but thats it. Set a wheelbase limit that isn't 10" from shortest to longest and you have that problem solved. For the midgets I would recommend a low of 71" and a high of 73". This doesn't hurt anyone because all the "big" teams already have dirt cars. Yes, some guys who have strictly pavement cars will have to buy new cars, but it is a small price to pay now to survive in the future. Set the rules so the engine must be on the centerline of the chassis. In the midgets maybe, and this is a big maybe, require the engine sit straight up and down. This is easily done with a motor plate. That isn't much of an investment at all. Also, as I said in my previous post make the same offset rule on dirt and pavement so the same rear axle can be run on both surfaces. Also, one important thing would be a seat height rule so nobody is lowering the driver from dirt to pavement. Also, requiring six pin hubs on the front since they are needed on the high speed pavement tracks is necessary. No "special" car will be needed. All current dirt cars would be legal.

This is just a start. Over the years small changes will be needed to gradually perfect this. As things come up to challenge the intent of going to a one car on pavement and dirt philosophy, USAC will need to step up to the plate and make rules. This will be necessary even if it has to be made mid-season. As I have stated before USAC is the worst sanctioning body in the world when it comes to enforcing their own rules. Just look at their midget engine rules and you can see this. The Esslinger XT isn't even legal per their rule book but it is allowed to run. (ie "418, B. 3. Four cylinder in line, aluminum block and head,” Pinto” engine. Alteration of the basic design of the head or block is prohibited."). How many cam towers does the "basic design" have in it? I'll bet it isn't as many as the newest Esslinger head. Also, does the "basic design" have the headers coming out of the left side of the head?? This is not an attack on those who have purchased Esslinger engines but merely to show that USAC does a poor job of enforcing rules or changing them when it is necessary.

As far as tires go Hoosier is not the evil empire like most on here want to make them out to be. However, I do not like monopolies and allowing tire manufacturers to submit two tires that durometer at or above a certain point each year is more than reasonable. Then write the rule to state that X and Y Hoosier and X and Y American Racer for instance are legal for 2010. Monopoly is over with and people have choice again. As you have said heat cycles are the problem so on pavement make a one set rule. These get stamped when you go out for the first "sanctioned" practice session and thats what you run all night. The only exception might be the left rear so you can change stagger. As for the local guys stepping up and buying tires, in some cases don't guys do that now? I think the UMARA midget guys used to or do have to buy Hoosiers to run with USAC.

USAC is going to have to be the one to make these changes especially in the midget division. All the other midget clubs just follow whatever USAC does so they need to step up and take the reigns to save it. When it comes to sprint cars USAC is not king and we all know that. However, I am sure that when it comes to dirt cars they are not that different manufacturer to manufacturer on the engine plate to rear axle measurements.

Originally Posted by Racerrob I have been sitting on the sidelines on this one waiting to see where this would go. If I am not mistaken, the proposals to save USAC, the car owners and the entire sprint car way of life boils down to: One chassis for pavement and dirt, limit tires/wheel width to make horsepower a non-issue, have a tire company invent a super tire that never wears out and never slows down, increase purses so that racers can afford to race, race closer to home so that travel expenses can be reduced and get TV coverage to make everything better. Now I hate to be the wet blanket here but there are always unintended consequences to these proposals and if it were really easy to implement them don’t you think they would have made the move by now? Let’s talk one chassis for pavement and dirt; How do you police that? I saw on an earlier post that there would be a limit as to the engine set back, offset and wheelbase. What happens when a local (which we rely on heavily at the dirt tracks) wants to run USAC. Do they have to buy a special car that conforms to USAC specs? Do we all run dirt chassis on pavement? What dirt wheelbase/engine set back? Do locals that have a slightly different car get to run? Same for the tire/wheel rule; Do you think local racers on a limited budget will step up and buy new wheels and a spec tires to run just the USAC shows? If you could get the WoO, All-Stars, MSCS and whatever other sanctions together and agree to limit the RR this would work. Without it this is a pipe dream. The reason USAC went to 410 was because it became the standard for sprint cars by the WoO and local tracks. USAC made the switch so that more cars could run with them not as the leader of a larger CID movement. Now on to the tires. Yes they are a MAJOR expense for both large and small teams. I have begged for a one set limit for over 1 year and it has gone nowhere. We run 2 sets typically for each racing night because every time the tire undergoes a heat cycle (run on the track) it slows down a little. Not wears out, but slows down. Therefore if my car is going to have a shot at winning I have to bolt on new tires each time my competition does. If we all have only one set then there is no competitive disadvantage. Before we hear from Don Moore, hard tires are not the answer either because they slow down just as much if not more. They also lack grip which means the cars will slide more in the corners. The reason there is not more passing on pavement is generally the grove is narrow and the drivers (well most anyway) don’t want to slide into another car while attempting to pass. Most of them have learned that open wheel to wheel contact is not good for their health or the car’s longevity especially on pavement. I know that Hoosier contributes to the point fund for each tire sold. It is here that USAC can be of the biggest help to the participant by negotiating hard with ALL the tire manufacturers to obtain the best price and most money for the point fund. There should be full open disclosure of each bid to the competitors and the contract should be rebid each winter. I don’t care which brand wins the bid if everyone has to run the same tire. Now I have been very outspoken in the past when a promoter makes a killing on a USAC race via the back gate. I also know that promoters don’t always pack the stands and they have expenses as well. Too many promoters fail to promote nowadays. I would like to see a return to the days of a percentage of the gate against a guaranteed minimum purse Part of the sanction fee paid to USAC would be set aside for track specific marketing. Additionally the promoters would be required to spend a certain amount advertising the USAC race in the local media. USAC could leverage a revamped marketing department to helping the promoter with advertising copy and media buys. This would make USAC, the participants AND the promoter partners in putting on a quality product and producing a profit for ALL. As far as racing closer to home/on more weekends, I am all for that. I burn EVERY vacation day, personal day and sick day that I get at the bank to attend all the races on the USAC schedule. My wife is very upset that I have not gone on vacation with her and the kids in 4 years. Most of our past vacations centered around a race somewhere that I left for two days early or stayed after for a couple of days. But realize that when you limit the series to a local base you also limit your ability to attract national sponsors for the teams, the events and the all important television. In conclusion, I think we all recognize there is a problem. But beware of some of the “easy” fixes proposed because they may create more problems than they solve. Most of you probably remember the push to put starters on midgets since that would make the series more fan and TV friendly. Sounded like a good idea and it had a noble purpose but it almost killed the series. We don’t need to go down that path again. The opinions expressed in this post are my own and do not necessarially reflect the opinions of my team or sponsors. Rob Hoffman

[SteveE]

Well said pgray^^