Who's racing C super Sport BBE

c supersport rules are STUPID... whoever thought that it was a good idea to add that as an option needs to rethink their involvement in the sport. The idea is to give teams on 600s a way to compete, right? making them do it on bikes that are in no way setup for endurance racing is not the way to do it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joseph Schmidt

c supersport rules are STUPID... whoever thought that it was a good idea to add that as an option needs to rethink their involvement in the sport. The idea is to give teams on 600s a way to compete, right? making them do it on bikes that are in no way setup for endurance racing is not the way to do it...

---

You are wrong, the idea wasn't to make a new class that would be competitive for the overall. It was to lower the (perhaps perceived) barrier to entry so a group of people could get a street bike, or sprint bike, and endurance it easily (without the added expense of drybreaks or quickchange gear etc) and have a place to be competitive with each other. You can almost think if it as a beginner class for endurance racing.

it's endurance, the whole idea of endurance is to be prepared to endurance race. not having enlarged tanks, quick change axles, dry brakes etc etc completely goes against everything ever known about this type of racing. You can think what you want, and say what you want. I'll stand by my thought that it is simply geared toward trying to get more people due to the dominance of two teams for years on end now and the perceived thought that no-one else can be competitive therefore grids will decrease, etc etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joseph Schmidt

it's endurance, the whole idea of endurance is to be prepared to endurance race. not having enlarged tanks, quick change axles, dry brakes etc etc completely goes against everything ever known about this type of racing. You can think what you want, and say what you want. I'll stand by my thought that it is simply geared toward trying to get more people due to the dominance of two teams for years on end now and the perceived thought that no-one else can be competitive therefore grids will decrease, etc etc

---

Sorry, I thought your original thought was simply

Quote:

---

c supersport rules are STUPID... whoever thought that it was a good idea to add that as an option needs to rethink their involvement in the sport.

---

You said nothing to articulate

Quote:

---

I'll stand by my thought that it is simply geared toward trying to get more people

---

that thought in your initial post.

My apologies for missing that point. I really have no vested interest in this. I don't race BBE, I don't even ride a big bike at all. I was, however, at the open board meeting where the new class was discussed and your thought about getting more people out is spot on. Is that a bad thing? Getting more people racing? Lowering the (perceived) barrier to entry? Getting people to consider using their sprint bike to endurance on? Or their track day bike? It may work, it may not. It's an attempt to get people, some maybe newer to the sport, to try endurance racing without having to worry about trying to be competitive in the pits.

Honestly, if I had more time to devote to racing, I'd probably try to put together a team to race on my sprint bike. It's a beater '07 600RR with no fancy nothin'. All I've got to make it endurance-ready is a spare set of rims. And it sounds like that's all I'd need to be competitive in the new class.

Adding the class doesn't hurt anybody. Even if it was only added to "give someone else a chance," so what? None of us are going to parlay our CMRA results into a ride at Suzuka. The easy, "fun" classes like the Grom Challenge, Team 60, and now SSCE are very enjoyable for those of us who like to play at being a real racer a few times a year without having to break the bank or take ourselves too seriously.

I don't understand why getting a higher number of entries is a bad thing. I would think that's a good thing for the sport, but what do I know? I'm just a girl.:tongue: <-- I picked this one just because it's pink.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joseph Schmidt

c supersport rules are STUPID... whoever thought that it was a good idea to add that as an option needs to rethink their involvement in the sport. The idea is to give teams on 600s a way to compete, right? allowing them do it on bikes that are in no way setup for endurance racing is not the way to do it...

---

You're in luck .... participation is optional.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joseph Schmidt

c supersport rules are STUPID...

---

Thanks for the input.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joseph Schmidt

whoever thought that it was a good idea to add that as an option needs to rethink their involvement in the sport.

---

I do every day.

Don't you listen to him, Walter!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Etheredge

You're in luck .... participation is optional.

---

Given the number of "enter just one more race and that will help the club blah blah blah..." Posts we've all seen recently, posts like that don't help the reputation club officials including yourself already have. The God complex is obviously real...

Obviously having more bikes is good, I didn't mean it that way, however, having a class that is by design built to never compete, well now that is STUPID. In a 6-8 hour race, stock tank R6 is going to have what 2-4 more fuel stops? Tires stops will be of same frequency, just much much slower... Still can't touch the bike during fueling so while you're using your VP can to painfully slowly fill your stock tank, just watch the actual endurance prepped bikes put LAPS at a time on your team at each pit stop. Bike for bike on the track the SS 600 versus SB 600 bikes won't have a performance gap to speak of, we've all seen that, but in the pits it will be ridiculous.

At cresson and Hallet a front/rear change with fuel will cost you 2 laps minumum per attempt.