P1 and P2 Consolidation
#37159 from Young · No action required · Minutes (2024-11 Fastrack)
Thank you for your email and your support of the P2 class. To answer your question as to the overpowering reason why the
classes must be combined, it comes down to the fact that the effort to maintain two prototype classes with distinct levels of
performance has failed to grow either class. The total number of prototype entries was larger when the P1 & P2 classes
produced similar lap times (2014 - 2018). As rule changes enlarged the performance differential, the total number of entries
declined (2019 to present). This suggests that prototype drivers as a group are attracted by speed potential and efforts to
establish differing performance levels were misguided. Combining in a single class may yield the best long run result for
prototypes.
As to why both the P and P2 classes will continue as Majors classes, the original proposal required P2 drivers to upgrade to P
Show 6 more lines
with P2 being discontinued. The proposal was revised to restore the P2 class so drivers could continue competing in the SCCA
if they feel that the cost of upgrading is too high or they need more time to upgrade.
You are correct that a Runoffs race group can consist of two classes. That in fact was the case at the first Runoffs and has
continued to be the case at various times since. However, the Runoffs has always been intended to showcase competition
among drivers in a common class, which is accomplished with a split start of the two classes. Extending this to three or more
classes is unwieldy, which is why the proposal to run P1, P2, and FA together was rejected.