Well stated. Thanks.
I completely disagree.
The team challenge is a long sprint race, not what I would considder true endurance racing. A real endurance race empasizes preparation and teamwork. The longer the race the bigger the difference between a team that has put in the necessary work and those that just happen to have one or two fast riders. Once you have to do multple pit-stops for refueling, at least one tire change and have to deal with 3-4 different riders (different weights, set-up prefernces, etc.) it is a completley different game than what CCS does in Team (and Solo) Challenge.
FWIW, in 2010 I was the captian for a team (the "Loose Nuts") that ran the entire CMRA Endurance series down in Texas. I felt that the longer races really demonstrated the difference between the teams that were prepared, organized and, well, had endurance vs. the rest. The longer the races, the more it showed - particularly when absolute temparatures were 98+ degrees and humidity was running in the 90 percentages (or where we had drastically changing conditions (heavy rain + then drying track over the following 4 hours of races).
The last few races of he season, we began to consider the 4 hour races as "short" and we would only take 2 riders to these events no matter how hot the weather was forecast.
I spent a ton of money flying from Chicago to Texas, renting cars & hotels to make that season happen. I was lucky enough to have 2 very committed and dedicated team-mates who stuck with it through the entire season and made it fun even though we wer by no means the fastest guys out on the track. It was unbelievably hard physically, financially and emotionally (particularly on my family who stayed at home while I was flying off to race with my friends) - but - it was also such a incredible experience that I would love to do again (just give me the right team and opportunity).
It really was a bit crazy - we were a 3 person team that had never done an endurance season before (2 of us were seeing some of the tracks for the first time ever when we arrived to race); we were riding a 5 year old SS spec R6 with no fancy dump-can or quick-change equipment and we managed to finish 5th in their C Superbike class (out of 27 teams) and 11th overall (of 80 teams that entered the series). We endured, we kept the bike running and we had fun! I was (and am still) so proud of my team!
After a full season of real "endurance" racing, I just have difficulty calling the Team/Solo Challenge an endurance race.
As a plug - those guys in Texas put on one heck of an endurance series and while attendance is down due to the economy it is still pretty darn good. I think only one of the endurance races didn't have at least 25 bikes on the grid at the start - the popular tracks (particularly Texas World Speedway) there seemed to be endurance grids of well over 40 bikes.
Is it hard - YES. Is it more expensive then spring racing - NO (as long as you split the costs in a fair way and don't crash it should be cheaper on a lap-by lap comparison). Does it tear up equipment - sometimes (really only if you crash - otherwise I found it was just slightly more maintenance than sprint racing). Is endurance racing worth it - YES!
But, back to the question. I don't think it is reasonable, or responsible, to suggest CCS to try to add to its already over-packed schedule. However, if there was some re-adjusting of the schedule to group the existing classes better (or heck, just a reduction in # of classes) and it provided for an open window for a real endurance series, I would probably think about giving it a try.
George