if we want supers to survive

[grt74]

i think its time to take a real look at supers as a whole
1000 to win events weekly are just not the answer
some think crates are, but im not a big fan of them because in most areas there is just too much cheating going on, i hate to say it but the truth is the truth(and the cheated up cars are getting almost as fast as the supers) and why would anyone move up, theres nothing to win

i really believe we can revive supers but its going to take a 2000 to win weekly deal, which in turn i think can be done, and have a 75-100 entry for the car(most guys running supers won't have an issue with this) i have been talking to several guys that run supers and they have said "ya we would run weekly for that"

the definition of insane is to do the same thing and expect different results,i really don't know what the answer is but if someone doesn't step up in the next year or two, i see supers as a thing of the past, with no weekly guys its going to fade quickly, i think we are starting to see this trend

SOMEONE PLEASE STEP UP,ITS RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU,ive been looking at tracks for sale but they are just wanting way too much to make it work (and why would i do all the work for someone else to benefit,they have been wanting me to do this), and everyone I've talked to has loved the idea, i think if it was said this winter that a track was going to do this and stick to there guns, i would think by the start of summer, you would have 20 plus cars for a weekly deal

there are just to many guys like me that do great for a living but just cant travel around every weekend do to there job demands, and for what these things cost today,1000 to win is just a kick in the noodle

i currently race, so i don't think its a good idea to race and own a track, but the old way of thinking "i own a track and they'll just show up" is gone, someone is going to have to step up and make it entertainment again

just thinking out loud, maybe that was dangerous

[TheJet-09]

It's been made public that two racers in my area are done after this year (Bull and Dehm), and I spoke to another this past Saturday who suspected he may be done after this year, and I, myself, am probably not too far behind. Cost is undoubtedly the biggest factor, and that horse has been beat to death, which leaves me thinking we need to look in other areas.

Rules are meant to keep cost down and level the playing field (so to speak), but we all know they can actually drive cost up (your point about Crates and the cheating going on). Not arguing with you (because I certainly appreciate you starting the thread on a topic that can't, and shouldn't, go away), but I don't think paying more to win is the answer. Paying more to win but not fattening the back of the purse isn't going to help car counts.

I consider Fairbury to be the toughest local track around (I'm sure there are others, but for my area), and Unzicker has won 5 in a row I believe...? An incredible feat! But how would paying him (or the winner) more increase car counts? Most "realistic" racers aren't looking at what a race pays to win in deciding if they are going. They are looking at what it pays to start, entry fees, driving distance, etc.

I consider most every weekly track to have three groups of racers in any one division: The top 3-5 who have a legitimate shot at winning any given night, the next group of 5-7 or so, who are consistently top ten cars, but need something special to happen if they are to win, and then the back markers/field fillers, or whatever you call guys like me, who are just glad to get to race and consider a top ten finish a success. Paying more to win is only going to excite and entice those top 3-5 I mentioned, who are gonna be there anyway.

To keep car counts up you need to keep the back markers interested...seriously. I have argued this before and will continue to as long as I care to speak up, but STRAIGHT UP STARTS HAVE KILLED WEEKLY RACING. I've been back into this game for 4+ years now, and haven't won so much as a heat race. I don't have a wide bore motor, or a brand new XR1 so Rocket can tell me how to set my car up, and I don't have $5K in my shocks. But I guarantee I am a much better racer than I was 15 years ago, and have far better equipment, yet I used to win 4 or 5 heat races a year back then. Not now!

I don't care if I'm racing Grandma to the check out line at the grocery store. I want to win! We all do! Even just a heat win keeps you fired up, and hence...interested. I told myself no more moral victories for me, because that's all I could count on. But without even them, it'll get old real soon and I too will be done.

@GRT74, I know you guys are hurting for cars down by you and it saddens me. I've only been to Clarksville once, but I had a blast and greatly enjoyed the place. If it weren't 8 hours away I'd be there far more often. I'm fearful though, that at this rate, I won't even have the option at some point.

I don't have "the" answer, but that's my answer. Let's get it figured out before it's too late...

[Cardirt0]

It's been made public that two racers in my area are done after this year (Bull and Dehm), and I spoke to another this past Saturday who suspected he may be done after this year, and I, myself, am probably not too far behind. Cost is undoubtedly the biggest factor, and that horse has been beat to death, which leaves me thinking we need to look in other areas.

Rules are meant to keep cost down and level the playing field (so to speak), but we all know they can actually drive cost up (your point about Crates and the cheating going on). Not arguing with you (because I certainly appreciate you starting the thread on a topic that can't, and shouldn't, go away), but I don't think paying more to win is the answer. Paying more to win but not fattening the back of the purse isn't going to help car counts.

I consider Fairbury to be the toughest local track around (I'm sure there are others, but for my area), and Unzicker has won 5 in a row I believe...? How would paying him (or the winner) more increase car counts? Most "realistic" racers aren't looking at what a race pays to win in deciding if they are going. They are looking at what is pays to start, entry fees, driving distance, etc.

I consider most every weekly track to have three groups of racers in any one division: The top 3-5 who have a legitimate shot at winning any given night, the next group of 5-7 or so, who are consistently top ten cars, but need something special to happen if they are to win, and then the back markers/field fillers, or whatever you call guys like me, who are just glad to get to race and consider a top ten finish a success. Paying more to win is only going to excite and entice those top 3-5 I mentioned, who are gonna be there anyway.

To keep car counts up you need to keep the back markers interested...seriously. I have argued this before and will continue to as long as I care to speak up, but STRAIGHT UP STARTS HAVE KILLED WEEKLY RACING. I've been back into this game for 4+ years now, and haven't won so much as a heat race. I don't have a wide bore motor, or a brand new XR1 so Rocket can tell me how to set my car up, and I don't have $5K in my shocks. But I guarantee I am a much better racer than I was 15 years ago, and have far better equipment, yet I used to win 4 or 5 heat races a year back then. Not now!

I don't care if I'm racing Grandma to the check out line at the grocery store. I want to win! We all do! Even just a heat win keeps you fired up, and hence...interested. I told myself no more moral victories for me, because that's all I could count on. But without even them, it'll get old real soon and I too will be done.

@GRT74, I know you guys are hurting for cars down by you and it saddens me. I've only been to Clarksville once, but I had a blast and greatly enjoyed the place. If it weren't 8 hours away I'd be there far more often. I'm fearful though, that at this rate, I won't even have the option at some point.

I don't have "the" answer, but that's my answer. Let's get it figured out before it's too late...

Jet The bad thing is LOVE for the Sport just ant enough no more..You drive cause you love too, but Just dont have the money to win...Most kids to day just want to set at home and play on there phones...They have Friends they have never meet... Its just going to go a way How fast is now the ?...

[Forward Bite]

Most tracks are unable to support a super late model class. Promoters don't get enough fans to support a SLM class. It is too late to save SLM as a weekly class of racing.

[Illtsate32]

You are right about the so called stars..I would just call them average racers with a sh*t ton of money...show up with a stacker trailer and freightliner while you have an open trailer and a pickup truck...local tracks need a shock rule that will help for starters...

[3 wide]

Well your right grt74 if your going to run supers you have got to pay at least 2 thousand a week if you can't do this you are in trouble because people were I live don't come if you don't run supers.

[grt74]

Well your right grt74 if your going to run supers you have got to pay at least 2 thousand a week if you can't do this you are in trouble because people were I live don't come if you don't run supers.

i think that is whats happening to the fans and the crowds, in crates the engine just doesn't out power the chassis, but the one thing I've always loved about the crates, they buy a brand new engine and what do they do, send it off to get it tweaked on
supers the engines does out power the chassis, and i think thats what the people like about it,it can create some wild racing,

[fastford]

our counts have fell off at TST also , but as far as the money goes , they came up with a good idea several years ago , there was a lot of controversy about pay out, the few that won every week wanted more money up front , the low budget "field fillers" , and they are important to , wanted more money toward the rear , so the track said , we are going to pay X amount of money to the late model class and you guys vote or what ever to figure out the scale , they did and every one was happy. of coarse that was 15 yrs ago and that set amount has not increased , lol , but i thought this was a good way to set pay outs.

[Kromulous]

Ruhlman talked about this at length not to long ago on the board and no one wants to listen.

Take away the traction ! and not thru tires.

Cut the spoilers down, raise the front valances up off the ground.

Easy things to tech, make a clearance gauge for the front end, no go type deal, has to clear etc etc.

You do those things, and the cars loose overall grip and you don't need 939 HP, that's a actual HP number from a real SLM engine a guy owns. Anyway, you wont need that much power and it will make it easy to over power the track. Which most weekly racers are just throttle stompers.

It will be easier for a smaller engines to live and compete. They will still have advantage in the mud but you cant have it all.

[Highwayman]

i think its time to take a real look at supers as a whole
1000 to win events weekly are just not the answer
some think crates are, but im not a big fan of them because in most areas there is just too much cheating going on, i hate to say it but the truth is the truth(and the cheated up cars are getting almost as fast as the supers) and why would anyone move up, theres nothing to win

i really believe we can revive supers but its going to take a 2000 to win weekly deal, which in turn i think can be done, and have a 75-100 entry for the car(most guys running supers won't have an issue with this) i have been talking to several guys that run supers and they have said "ya we would run weekly for that"

the definition of insane is to do the same thing and expect different results,i really don't know what the answer is but if someone doesn't step up in the next year or two, i see supers as a thing of the past, with no weekly guys its going to fade quickly, i think we are starting to see this trend

SOMEONE PLEASE STEP UP,ITS RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU,ive been looking at tracks for sale but they are just wanting way too much to make it work (and why would i do all the work for someone else to benefit,they have been wanting me to do this), and everyone I've talked to has loved the idea, i think if it was said this winter that a track was going to do this and stick to there guns, i would think by the start of summer, you would have 20 plus cars for a weekly deal

there are just to many guys like me that do great for a living but just cant travel around every weekend do to there job demands, and for what these things cost today,1000 to win is just a kick in the noodle

i currently race, so i don't think its a good idea to race and own a track, but the old way of thinking "i own a track and they'll just show up" is gone, someone is going to have to step up and make it entertainment again

just thinking out loud, maybe that was dangerous

I live in GA on the SC border, I only know of 1 track in both states combined that still has weekly Supers, Dixie Speedway. Laurens Speedway had them until about 2 years ago, but new promoter dumped Supers in favor of crates. On the subject of Crates, personally I hate them, boring to watch as paint drying and lately this 602 class is even worse. Crates were suppose to be this inexpensive, blue collar average guy class, but Mr Fastrak and some others didn't approach it the way they sold it. Instead of keeping it low key and inexpensive they came outta the gate with big purses, big sponsors and purposely went after and raped, pillaged, plundered and killed what remained of weekly Supers. They said they wanted to get guys back racing who quit and could no longer afford super, but instead went about luring super/limited racers to, "double dip" so they could in turn use their name recognition to further promote their movement. Super had its issues 12 years ago, but make no mistake "Crate" put the pillow over granny's face.

As to cost issues in super, there really is only one of significance, the engines. I'm not in favor of limiting rules that intend to put everyone in the same power box, that is crates and you can see where that has gone. I'm more in favor of rules that make big $$$ horsepower unneeded or unusable. You have to go back a ways to see the progression, the evolution that took place and made all this possible. Prior to 1998 there was a lot of suspension diversity because traction was hard to come by and people where trying different things to promote corner speed. Then at the end of 98' Skip Arp/Joe Garrison moved the shock/spring behind the axle and stumbled into a way to initiate traction for acceleration, called "On The Hook". This setup provides instant traction, but was erratic, hard to control and hard on suspension pieces. From then until now its been a steady bit by bit evolution to attempt to control the side effects of this and maintain the positives and where we've ended up is with what I call a, "Pseudo-Wedge". Basically you prop the left rear of the car up on 2 solid rods, collapse the right front down onto a nearly solid bump/spring combo, limit the movement of the LF/RR/LR with cables and tune the axle alignment with bar angles in the RR. There is more to it, but that's the basics and you end up with a mostly rigid car with the LR corner stuck up in the air and the nose skimming the track(if you did it right). All these machinations get you to a point of mimicking an actual wedge late model from the early 80's, high downforce and mucho traction. Back in the 80's, same as now engine costs were driving people out of super late model. What the wise people back then realized was the best course wasn't to throw on a bunch of engine rules that usually end up further escalating costs, the solution was the elimination of traction. Without traction, big $$$ horsepower becomes useless and becomes self policing in a Libertarian kind of way as opposed to the Liberal way which is more and more engine rules(like Napcar).

Unfortunately today too many lil niche companies have sprung up to take advantage of the "Psesudo-Wedge" phenomena and they lobby the powers that be to keep letting people run the cars the way they do. They'll say they are more exciting, more drivable, faster and they are, but thats what makes this phenomena so bad. To keep racing interesting and not dominated by those of the greatest means the cars need to be difficult to drive and inconsistent. To me the best course is one I've shared before, you kill the aero-traction and hinder the mechanical traction.

First you change the nose height to a maximum height of say 6 inches all the way across.
Second, No Bump stops.
Third, no more MD3 style noses, go back to a more blunt HAT/STARS era nose w/o lips.
Etc...

There is more you can do, but the idea is to make it where you can't hike up or push the nose down so far. This will have the effect of unhooking the cars and decrease the need for big $$$ HP. if you can't use it, why buy it? My 2 cents after 31 years in the game. Peace.

[weatherman85]

Sadly I think SLM racing as a weekly division is pretty much dead. I think, as others have said, one big problem is that there are just TOO many different LM classes. I've Seen Supers, Limiteds, 525 Crates, 604 Crates, 602 Crates, Lighting Late Models. I took a first time friend to a local track that runs 6 total classes. My friend couldn't tell the difference between 5 of the classes without me basically having to pull up the track's rule book and explain the difference. He was having a hard time understanding why the cars were being split up. Hard to get new people in the stands with this mindset.

All these different LM classes make it easy for those mid-pack and back markers to just drop down a class or two and try their luck there.

[old17ford]

Back 40-45 years ago 5 dollar for pits and 2.50 stands paid 500 .00 to win no entry fee . Now 30 for pits 15 for stands for 1000 to win. A good flager told me one time most racers look at 1st place money and 10th place money and if 10th place is good they will come . That was for a reg sat nite show .

[ptown]

Sadly I think SLM racing as a weekly division is pretty much dead.

Sadly this is true, they're leaving regular Saturday night shows at an alarming rate and they're not coming back.

[Pennsboro23]

Crate racing is bad for super lates.

[ptown]

Crate racing is bad for super lates.

Crates are the poison pill.

[Pennsboro23]

Crates are the poison pill.

At my local track, once they started crate racing, the super late model car counts have dwindled each year. Even a couple of the competitive super late model drivers there have stepped down to run crates.

[Cardirt0]

Crates were just the thing for some that wanted a reason to stop racing the Supers....They are just one of the nails..Add car Cost, add Payout, add Gas cost, Then Lost a lot of drivers from Age the last 6 or so years...And now not enuff new drivers.. Kids to day are just Do nothing or they find something new to do every year...To much Fad $hit now...
Well If Plant X is real it will Not matter...

[Crashmagnet]

At least we are talking about it. I was on here screaming it 7 or 8 years ago and got laughed at. Step one it the sport admitting it has a problem. These problems are man made, therefore, they can be solved by man.

[Highwayman]

Crate racing is bad for super lates.

You got that right, crates put the pillow over granny's face. They sold it as low cost get guys back racing but it only scavenged Super & Limited. Is it me or is 602 the most boring class of all?
Boo-Wah-Wah-Wah! Break, Turn, Repeat.

[Cardirt0]

At least we are talking about it. I was on here screaming it 7 or 8 years ago and got laughed at. Step one it the sport admitting it has a problem. These problems are man made, therefore, they can be solved by man.

But the ones that run it dont want to change it so it will DIE.