Can we make Team Challenge races 3-4hr races? Instead of 2 hr races? Summit Point would be nice to have 4hr race, CMP 4hr race :)
I didn't think you were racing any more?
Quote from: Gixxerblade on November 12, 2011, 01:10:28 PM
I didn't think you were racing any more?
I had to take care of a few things, buying a house soon.
So we'll be rubbing fairings next year?
Quote from: Gixxerblade on November 13, 2011, 06:55:55 AM
So we'll be rubbing fairings next year?
Sure will, picking up the new bike this week.
Extending the time of the race does nothing except increase cost for racers and the organization. By the end of 2 hours the races have always been well sorted out. No sense tearing up equipment, tires and fuel at that point.
Quote from: Big Deezul on November 14, 2011, 08:27:43 AM
Extending the time of the race does nothing except increase cost for racers and the organization. By the end of 2 hours the races have always been well sorted out. No sense tearing up equipment, tires and fuel at that point.
Well stated. Thanks.
Quote from: Cowboy 6 on November 14, 2011, 09:24:19 AM
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
I wouldn't mind seeing longer team challenge races. There is so much more that comes into play when competing in them. I ran the moto st series a few years ago and when they ran the eight hours at Daytona it was some of the most memorable and fun times in my racing career. Although the size of the grid would make a big difference also. You really wouldn't want to be running an eight hour race with only say 10 bikes entered, and the way the economy is today it would be hard to get a decent sized grid to make it feasable i think. Just from my experience though I try and get people to just at least try it once and the ones that do really say they love it. So if anyone is the slightest bit interested in it I say give it a try at least once.
You sound like you have a lot of passion for endurance racing George. I believe that the Team Challenge wasn't meant to be an endurance race but rather a longer sprint/mini-endurance. I think that even if it were 3 hours that it may attract more dedicated race teams as well as the one-offs.
I think WERA has 6 hour races if you like real long races.
Quote from: apriliaman on November 25, 2011, 07:22:53 PM
I think WERA has 6 hour races if you like real long races.
I prefer to run with CCS
Quote from: Gixxerblade on November 15, 2011, 06:33:35 PMI believe that the Team Challenge wasn't meant to be an endurance race but rather a longer sprint/mini-endurance. I think that even if it were 3 hours that it may attract more dedicated race teams as well as the one-offs.
It used to be a three hour race if the distance wasn't reached...well, at least the original reincarnation of CCS endurance racing back in, what, 2001. Can't remember what that distance was anymore, but it has continued the trend to be shorter and shorter.
The original CCS team challenges were three hours long. I think they were doing those in 1986 and 1987, and then they moved the CCS Team Challenge into the AMA Pro program...with a three hour event.
Down here in FL we don't even run TC except for Daytona. It's tough with the schedule to get all the races in- cutting classes would help, but this is club racing after all, most guys only run in 3 classes max. So cutting them would cost us entries- something none of us can afford if we want to keep racing alive.
I did MotoST a few times, over 4 hours and the costs go up tremendously. Tire changes means quick change gear, impact wrenches, etc. it adds up! If CCS went with longer format TC races, not only would it cause schedule havoc, I would guess it would be a pretty small grid- it just takes too many resources. Endurance racing is great, I just don't see how it would fit in the current scheme of things.
maybe a vote among the teams that do more than 3 team challenges a year, I will vote for longer races
Quote from: rrrrrrrick on December 06, 2011, 10:55:48 AM
maybe a vote among the teams that do more than 3 team challenges a year, I will vote for longer races
With twice the entry cost?
Th
Quote from: majicMARKer on December 06, 2011, 03:24:38 PM
With twice the entry cost?
the cost should go up, still the best doller per lap deal in racing
Could be unless you break or your partner crashes before you ever get on the bike. I tend to be the last rider to get on. But I guess the longer race would allow me more of a chance to ride.
I like the idea of a little longer race.