Been watching these threads over the past few months but have shied away from offering my opinion (imagine that). I loved CMC and only went to AI as I liked the development aspect, what I knew I’d miss was big fields and close racing. Anyway here it is:

1: allowing cars to turn up looking like battered dogshit does nothing to attract new folks and everything to deter them. Wrap costs about half a set of tires and is fairly easy to do, I know a girl who’d be happy to show you. Some time needs to be spent here making sure one or two cars aren’t negatively effecting growth in the group.

2: Tires
A: races are won in the shop and lost on the track. There’s a few that are complaining about tires being the woe of their racing aspirations but not spending much time learning how to make their car handle better such that whenever they hit the track they have their best foot forward. The guys up front are spending (loads) of time doing this and frankly thinking simply dropping on a fresh set of RRs fixes everything is pretty naive. On the flip side if you are interested I’d be glad to help in this area, as would most of the fast folks of CMC.

B: randomly changing tires, forsaking contingencies, with no solid data outside forum rants is simply shifting the problem and akin to kicking a can down the road. The deal NASA has with TOYO benifits CMC, why on earth would the group want to find a reason to lose that? Present solid data to NASA and TOYO to improve the tire and do more of point A

3: we all need to do more on social media to promote both classes. Daniel has been doing a great job at this lately. Remember, most of us joined because of the year end videos, yet we do nothing to compel folks that are good at pulling that together to want to spend dozens of hours doing it. We need to actively discuss how we intend to grow both groups through these areas.

These are the key issues from my perspective. And go