CrapCan forum?

Flyinglizard said:
If any of you have seen the cars they are IT cars with lots more development. Mine is about the worst looking tho
Click to expand...

I think the discussion will be more productive if you'd quit asserting things that are not patently true.

I know that a lot of LeChump teams put many man hours in their LeChump cars. But for you to state that those cars are more developed than IT cars isn't absolute. Maybe developed more than some IT cars, but in general they are not as well developed as the front running IT cars, and, to assert that they are equalvalent, well that's insulting to folks here who do spend countless hours developing and refining their IT cars. I know you've raced IT, and maybe you have done so in the last couple of years, but if you haven't you'll find IT development is different than it was in 1995, or even 2003.

You've also made the comments here and there that LeChump cars are as fast as equivalent IT cars. That simply isn't true, at least not where I'm from.

We're friends with one of the top running V6 Mustang teams, Team Grim Reaper, based here in Cary/Raleigh NC where I live. They have finished in the top ten in every race they've entered, and often in the top five. At CMP they'll run 2:00 to 2:05 times, while we'll turn ITS rimes in the 1:47-1:50 range, as much as 15 seconds faster. The lap time disparity is the same at VIR, RRR, and other tracks. So clearly, it least for an average IT and LeChump car, the LeChump car is much slower and so much so that R compound tires will not make of the difference.

I'm with you on that fact that the SCCA needs to attract new and young members. I'm not so young myself, well, maybe young in SCCA terms at 45. But turning the SCCA into LeChump isn't going to do it. Brown board has beat this topic to death, if you haven't done so you should spend some time there reading threads about LeChump. There is some insight from NASA, Chump, Lemons, AutoXers, etc. that you might find useful.
 
Last edited:
Ron, I dont mean to offend anyone, sorry. By more developed I mean more go fast crap. Not a nicer or prettier car.
I have bought 2 ITB cars and 2 oval track cars, and Chumpified them by adding bigger brakes,put them through a extensive failure point reduction plan, removing lots of weight. These cars get faster than a stock ITB car. There seems to be plenty of ITB cars FS for less than 2500$. I paid 1400$ and 1600$- Maybe because the pace is too slow for Chump.

The speed needed to race with Chump is ITR, ITS or ITA cars.( 160 or more HP) for the SE races.
Each area has different cars that win. There are also a lot of ex SM cars. I run my 99 SM , HP Golf or VWTurbo.
The SM lap times @ Sebring were 2:50 for the better drivers. About 8 sec off SM trim for the same cars.(the turbo goes about 39s @ speed, But broke at 41laps @ half throttle).
96 cars and some rain all day.

The VW and the SM dont have the pace here but show better in the PNW , on the twisty tracks, Shannonville, Mosport.
I love Sebring, but it really is 5 drags strips with turns between. Power and brakes are required.

Note that the SM runs for fun only and it gets full rentals. These guys are spending money to have hassle free fun. Thats the part Iwould like to get into the SCCA plan.

There was a very clean V6 Mustang @ Sebring, very slow but pretty. Cant find the team name.


One huge advantage of Chump/lemons is that there is no standing around. Race 14hrs in one day. tough to compete with.
This is a large part of the draw!! If SCCA can get these cars on and off the course in one day we have a chance. If we make them stay around until sun afternoon than no.
I think that SCCA will gain participation when you can practice, qualify, and race a couple of times in the same day. Not just Chumps but all of the classes.
Some ideas to accomplish this may include a total revamp of the practice /qualifying time slots. 60min for small bore closed wheel ,60 min big bore, etc. So that all have enough time to set the tire pressures and get a hot lap in before noon.
 
Mark, the fellow that runs the Grim Reaper Team, and Jeff G were over at the house yesterday and we were making some modifications to my ITS Mustang. After we got done with the work and were in beer mode, we asked him how we could persuade his team and other Lemons teams to come race with the SCCA or NASA.

Mark is actually interested in coming to an SCCA event, but there are significant barriers to that happening which make Lemons (he’s on his fifth Lemons build), DE days, instructing, and running his Boss Mustang on track more attractive. His comments mimicked what was aired on the brown board.

*Lemons is team oriented and the divide by four concept is very attractive for “part time” racers. The team shares all aspects of the cost of racing.

*No licensing requirements, medicals, and what not.

*Lots of seat time with long race formats. 1.5 hour race, about the longest in normal SCCA weekends, is only mildly interesting. They like the required strategy component of long races that involve pit stops and indeed that facet allows them to do well, so much so in fact that despite having a “B” class car they have been bumped to “A” due to team performance.

*Lemons is a destination for a lot of these racers. They don’t see NASA or SCCA as something to aspire to or as a more prestigious organization. In fact, some see the SCCA and NASA as organizations to avoid, or “how not to do it”.

My impression of discussions with Mark, and the take away from the Brown board, is that not very many LeChump racers are interested in making the move to the SCCA or even participating in an SCCA weekend. Without long format races, which simply won’t fit into an SCCA weekend with the myriad of classes and how we structure race weekends, then little can be done to attract the few LeChump racers who even want to try an SCCA weekend.
 
A lot.

I've seen results with 100-150 cars. Assuming 3-4 per car, thats three hundred to six hundred drivers at some events.
 
600 drivers, or team members at large events. We know racers come from all over to race, particularly with the enduro race format. So how many National LeChump racers do we think there are in America?

I would estimate the number is under 4000. And out of that 4000, how many of them have the time, resources, and motivation to "become a team of one" and race in the SCCA? My guess is that that fraction is less than 5%, putting it as less than 200 LeChump racers interested in SCCA activity. Two hundred racers joining the SCCA would be a wonderful thing, but as previously mentioned, the SCCA isn't offering what these folks crave.
 
Greg Amy said:
I've learned two things on racing car forums:

- Do not disparage any kind of "crap can" racing, regardless of whether it's intended to be funny or serious, and

- Do not disparage any Apple product, regardless of whether it's intended to be funny or serious.

Either situation can expect responses in intensity similar to disparaging Muhammad, Buddha, and/or Jesus (the bearded one, not the one in swaddling clothes).

Just sayin'.

- GA
Click to expand...

As a crapcan driving Apple guy, you sir have crossed the line! <slap slap with glove>.... actually I do run lemons too and am an Apple guy, but just because you don't like em' doesn't mean they got it all wrong (irony for me is my results are way better in IT than in lemons!).... we can all learn from each other.. I think for most folks here, we are all throwing out ideas to help improve the product... when people stop talking about it, you know you are in trouble!
 
Last edited:
I could be wrong but some of the reluctance for this board to embrace the crapcan concept is that by it's nature it will lure drivers and cars from IT. And in order to grow the crapcan concept there is a feeling that some people are actively recruiting current IT drivers. So why this board which is devoted to IT would be interested in hosting an area to a category that will hurt it and will be virtually peppered with comments designed to hurt the category?

IT is not SCCA. We may be short sighted and worried only about our own category. But if you put up a mirror you'll see that you're calling the pot black. You want to grow crapcan and if IT takes a hit for it, then that's the way it has to be right? So don't be surprised if people are not terribly friendly to your idea of cutting out our liver to build your Frankenstein.
 
jumbojimbo said:
I could be wrong but some of the reluctance for this board to embrace the crapcan concept is that by it's nature it will lure drivers and cars from IT.
Click to expand...
Man, that really hit home, cutting right to the bone...NOT!!!

Maybe the real reason is because CrapCan drivers are cheap f***ks (except for the toter homes) and don't want to spend the money (except for BMWs), while trying to leverage the reputation of Improved Touring to lift their standing within the "real" racing community?

(See what I did there, levering poor logic against poor logic?)

Noting from post #4:

Greg Amy said:
...none of us online have rights to create forums/threads anyway.
Click to expand...
However, search a few posts from today: if some of the CrapCan drivers want to pony up and put there money where their mouths are - and I'm not talking $5 in total from everyone as a collective - we can possibly gain control over this forum. At that point I'm sure we would keep that "donation" in mind to give that thought significant consideration.

Otherwise, the Internet's a pretty big place, and I'm sure Danica would LOVE some of your money to allow you to create your own forum...hey, just pointing out...

:happy204:

- GA
 
Uh, I'm on the IT side explaining why we are not terribly excited to invite crapcan to come steal our cars and drivers and generally bad mouth us. Maybe in trying to be politically correct I was not clear? edit: or maybe I came in the middle of an existing rant?
 
You know, the data is out there, estimates of 150 cars per event are cough cough overblown.

Feb 9 road atlanta 14 hours 68 cars
Mar 16-17 Hallet 37 cars times 2 races
Mar 30 VIR 10 hours (2 drivers) 64 cars
Mar 31 Laguna Seca 8 hour 30 cars
Apr 12-14 Glen 5+7.5+7.5 90 and 84, (no clue why not 3 sets of results)
Apr 13-14 Portland 7+7 42 and 44 cars
April 20-21 Buttonwillow 24 29 cars
Apr 20-21 Road America 7+7 69+69 cars
Apr 27-28 Pueblo unknown 22+23+24+22+23 cars or something like that
May 26 Daytona 14 123 cars
Jun 8-9 Gingerman 7+7 39+39 cars

Someone else will have to take it further, I think I made my point. 120 car fields with 5 drivers per car are not the norm.
 
Just got home from the Chump races at AMP. Maybe 25-40% of the racers were AMP members. 2 Of my drivers are, along with garage rights.
The money is way above SCCA levels . MY driver pool is very well funded.
South west pilot. Lawyer. Tire warehouse owner. Honda engineer. USF teacher. Software engineer. Dentist.
Many young Mech engineers.
WE cant get these guys?
We just dont want to get aggressive and move our product to match the current market.
These guys have no interest in SCCA and IT racing. We need to figure out why not. They hold our future.

.
IMHO SCCA can do a few things to help IT and the low level of cash spent,. move to cheaper tires.
Tires!! 25hrs on 4 tires . I need 2 new , as AMP grinds the right side off pretty well.
I changed one tire that got flattened. for 14 hrs over 2 days.
Pit stops , add fuel, check oil, eyeball the pads.

One day events. split the groups like solo does, so that the track time to tow- time and sit around time is better balanced .

We spend all day on the pit wall at the Chump races.

My team voted to buy a faster car. 1987 Nissan 300Z,


I have conceded that here will not fly/help anything, or attract any new blood . Just bitchin.
I have plenty to do, just hope that SCCA can make it. Not as we have come to know it though. It will have to make some big swings to survive . The PDX trend is strong all over the US. Finally we are on that wagon. Notice that many of those are single day play, and doing very well. .
 
Ha ha. I don't know what it is but something about your manner just rubs me the wrong way. I can't read about your nancy-boy lawyers, doctors and tailors without wanting to...well, never mind, that's not the important part.

So the parts I agree with are
1. Casual drivers who don't want to own a race car/truck/trailer and aren't really interested in hard-core tooth-and-nail sprint racing are a potentionally lucrative market for SCCA.
2. Tires cost money
3. Costs are bad
4. IT racing is winding down in the long term and being replaced by SM/SRF

The parts I don't agree with:
1. It is necessary for the survival of SCCA to change it's RR business to eliminate some/most/all of the existing offerings and include a CC style product.
2. That CC style racing is a growing segment with better long term prospects than sprint racing.
3. That every driver either wants to sit in a car for 4 hours a weekend and/or needs to be deprogrammed to learn this is what he wants.
4. IT tires are so expensive they will be the death of not only IT but all other SCCA classes past present and future.

Yes, it would be great if SCCA could in addition to it's current offerings, also run a series of CC style long distance races. The question is, how to get there. And is it possible to get there? If it's not possible to get there, then talking about it is really not that constructive.

There are two choices, SCCA can either try to include CC cars in it's existing weekends or run separate weekends. I don't see where we have the resources (workers, track dates, etc) to run stand alone weekends. To run on the same weekend, Option 1 is a CC sprint class, which seems to have little appeal to the CC people who as you laboriously point out need 4 hours per driver per weekend to get their $ worth. Or option 2 is to run an enduro length race at the end of the day, say 3-4 hours. I like this idea, workers are an issue, but a solvable one. the downside is we only have Sat available.

Now that I think about it, that's the idea that could work. Take a race at an undersubscribed track like Nelson, limit the sprint races to just the classes that bring cars, limit to 4 run groups. run those groups and get them out of the way by 2pm Saturday. then run a 4 or 6 hour CC race. Sunday the sprint cars get a little more track time, done by 3pm.

Crap, I came here to tell Mike he's wrong, but actually he's right. We could to do this. I still don't think we NEED to do this, but we could do this.
 
You hit it on the head Jimbo. The big attraction of Chump is the long enduro format. The problem is how to squeeze that into an SCCA weekend. We just ran a 3 hour enduro this weekend at PBIR that was squeezed into the end of the day Saturday, and Florida Region managed to get that in with 6 other run groups. Race was done by 5:30, and they spent an hour cleaning oil off the track right before our race. Cut down to four run groups, and a 6 hour is doable. But if you are chasing entries you have to promote what you are doing, and the SCCA isn't always so great at that. We had all of 24 entries for that 3 hour, and it was all regular SCCA competitors from what I could tell. Maybe a couple FARA guys (a Miami only race club), but no CC drivers. I think the goal would be more than double that.

I know for next year CFR is talking about street tire sub-classes of IT for the enduros, and I'm hoping that attracts some of the Chump group to swell our numbers. The big potential downside is we are just further diluting our field into smaller classes. Our joke this past weekend was "This is what it feels like to win a NASA race." as we only had 2 competitors in our class. Takes a lot of the fun out when your field is that small, and there's a risk to watering down our fields even more. Maybe Mike can talk some of his Chump friends to join us next year and we can get the street tire groups to take off.
 
if you really want to do the endure thing right, you take a cue from the ARRC and run sprints one day, enduro and some "features" the next. you could still fit in a double weekend, too. 15 min p/q for all groups sat AM, run the race 1(or "qual race" if you like that format) and race 2 for the enduro eligible cars sat. run race 2 for wings and other non-enduro cars and some sort of feature race (say 40minutes) sunday AM, followed by a 4-6 hour race. some regions could even squeeze a 1.5-3 hour event in Saturday PM.

parts of the world have church rules for quiet hour(s) sunday, so this wont work there, or the sunday event would have to be shorter. there are ways to keep it attractive. the DRAW has to be that the enduro is attracting cars to offset the total costs, so the double sprint is cheaper than usual. AND there's an enduro that is attractive in its own right. ask drivers who aren't running sunday to help work the long and feature races. remind them of the membership renewal discounts for workers.

this can't be the norm, sure - but for labor day, memorial day, other times when a long sunday is more acceptable and racing is already on the calendar. prove the format and start offering enduro weekends under SCCA sanction on lightly subscribed weekends. if that's what the membership wants then it shouldn't upset people to loose a sprint for an enduro. maybe keep a single sprint for the GTs and wings, too.

as far as I know, I'm the CFR street tire initiative, it's not JUST for endures, it's for sprint races as well, but doesn't water down any race. I took page from the ITNT in that the "series" runs within IT classes that already exist and is transparent to the race organizers. no dilution.
 
Last edited:
Yup Chris, I sort of set it up, but you hit the nail on the head. In order for CC to grow, IT will suffer a loss of entries. And that loss will lower the fun factor and we'll lose even more cars. That's the problem this board has with crapcan racing.

If you take my scenario and run a 6 hour CC style race on Saturday evening, who is going to run? It's either going to be CC people (yes, you are right, how do we publicize to those anonymous people) or it will be IT cars.

Whoops, so now I have to choose between racing my sprint race or racing the 6 hour CC. If even a few cars in my class do this now we're sitting at 7 cars instead of 10. And then a couple of the 7 say "oh, why bother running the sprint if Royal and Bill are running the CC?" now we're down to 5 cars for the sprint race. And now everyone drops except Joe and Carl and we're down to 2.

I know, I know, the argument is that CC will draw new people in. That a couple of Mike's guys will migrate to sprint races . But you can damn well bet they'll be running T3 or SM, not IT. Again, that's the issue people on this board are going to have, a growth in CC is not likely to help IT. It may be selfish, but that's the way it works. If anything, take the CC idea to the SM board, see how they feel about it.
 
I've been a club racer since 1988, almost all with MCSCC with a few SCCA races long ago. I have also become involved with Lemons racing. This past weekend there was a Lemons race at Road America.

Yes a race at RA in November! There were over 70 cars registered. I was helping out 3 different teams while there. One had a cascade of problems that limited they laps to about 1/2 of the winning total, another had a spin and then was hit putting them out, and the last team, the one I worked the most with won their class.

Of all things this car was a Ford Festiva with an swapped in Ford/Mazda 1.8L BP engine. The race after 14 hours of racing came done to the last 30 minutes of the race.Our fastest driver against their fastest driver. The other car in contention was a Chevy Camero with a V8! They had to do a splash an go but we were less then a lap down. They got back out with our car just behind them. Our driver passed at turn 5 and was able to hold the lead for the final 25 minutes by doing the fastest laps of the race for the car as the other driver was doing that as well. The final margin was 10 seconds! There was an even closer finish for first overall. Read about it here: http://blog.caranddriver.com/lemons-wisconsin-winners-bmw-beats-acura-by-two-seconds/


The point of all this is this, Lemons or Crap Can racing is racing. Some club racers I've talked to just don't get it but I do and I do plan on building a car myself in the future rather then work with what others have started just because I like the build process as much as the racing!
 
.. If youlook at my rule set . ITand Prod cars are allowed as is.
No changes are needed to run the enduros. Just all must run on 180 or higher TW tires. SCCA does not need to lose the IT cars, to gain Crap Cans. Many IT cars have already been turned into CC. Most new CC are purpose built 6cyl E 30, V6 Nissans(My new car) or 1.6 and 1.8 Miatas / We have many ex SM 1.6 cars running CC, due to the 99s ruining that Class. They go elsewhere.
There were 8-10 Miata at AMP , 42 cars total( limited with waiting list)
RE the noted car counts often have track limits. Waiting list @ daytona and Sebring and many of the West races.

IF SCCA can offer 6 hr races , I can bring some drivers.
Some issues are; these drivers have many laps but not SCCA Licensed, Invoking the SCCA CRX deal along with the 6 hr races can open that can of worms and gain some interest.

Advertising ; SCCA has none. I would call the enduros the "Street Tire Wars" or something along that line.
The hopeful schedule has to be posted on the SCCA main website well in advance and in Pubs like "Grassroots" mag. Where they have the "Crap Can Racing" section.

Perfect world; some ads welcoming CC drivers to try SCCA endurance races.
A couple or 3 classes .
IT and Prod cars welcome on 180 tires. in the same classes .
One day 6hr events. We dont care about qualifying.
Did I mention ads?? In smart places.
Expand the CRX to include these races.

PS. we ran with a 92DB limit and it was really nice. and may help keep track time options more open.
I am going to add that to my rule set.
Yes. I know that Iam wasting my time here.
later, MM
 
Chip42 said:
as far as I know, I'm the CFR street tire initiative, it's not JUST for endures, it's for sprint races as well, but doesn't water down any race. I took page from the ITNT in that the "series" runs within IT classes that already exist and is transparent to the race organizers. no dilution.
Click to expand...

Chip, I wasn't trying to sound disparaging with my comments, and I realize from our previous discussion in other threads on the upcoming street tire sub-classes that we will be a race within a race. That said there still will be a dilution aspect to this IF we don't attract other cars. We might still be eligible for placement within our class, but those who choose the street tires are very much not racing the other cars within their class on really good race rubber. We tried it this past weekend with a new set of BFG Rivals, and while we really liked the tires, they give up way too much time in the corners to the purple crack to allow you to race head to head(plus be prepared for your competitors to crack jokes about imminent rain when you show up on treaded tires). Instead of having one larger group of cars out there racing in each class we are going to have two separate groups. Of course most teams that choose the street tires probably would have been towards the back of their respective classes anyways, but I'm just saying it definitely changes the class dynamics as a whole. I think what will make this cause "work" is if we can attract enough new cars and racers with the idea. It's definitely cheaper. Guys this past weekend were using two sets of Hoosiers for one 3 hour race, and we could have gone at least 3 times as long as we did on the Rivals. BTW, I appreciate the effort you are putting in to make a go of this. We will be at Sebring for the Turkey Trot, and we are going to run the Rivals in some sessions, and Hoosiers in others and see exactly how they compare in terms of lap times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top