Speed SF’s First Enduro Goes Off Without a Hitch
Endurance racing is the next step for many HPDE drivers who want to try their hand at wheel-to-wheel racing. The long sessions, the greater emphasis on strategy, and the ability to share a car make it easier to find a seat, generally speaking. We recognized that some of our talented HPDE drivers, some of whom already have been racing in other long-distance series, might be willing to take the leap into a new style of enduro if we helped them stick the landing.
So we brought our most experienced drivers together to brainstorm. After several months of revisiting various rulebooks and taking a look at the greater range of driving experience we had among our regulars, we devised a plan for an accommodating, competitive endurance format that would not break the bank. Endurance racing can be very expensive, but it doesn’t have to be.
Our loose rules are meant to be easily understood, keep barriers to entry low, and welcome a wide range of driving talent and vehicle performance. Tire choices, horsepower, and weight are all left open. Tires are open as well, as long as they’ll last a 2.5-hour race. There isn’t a restriction on driver count, either — some brave souls can run solo if they choose to.
The one mandatory pit stop is timed at seven minutes. We want to make sure the teams have plenty of time to safely refuel and remain hydrated. It also evens out the playing field; the high budget teams can’t take advantage of a fast refilling system and the low budget teams behind.
As for the regulations, we allow vehicles that pass the safety standards of NASA, SCCA, Lucky Dog, and other major endurance racing series. The vehicle will need to pass our safety tech inspection.
Drivers are required to hold a race license from another approved organization, though we can make exceptions. For drivers without a racing license, as with LeMons, Lucky Dog, and Chump Car drivers; we require they have experience in wheel-to-wheel racing or advanced open-passing run groups with Speed SF track day events. Essentially, they must have a long-standing record showing they are capable of racing in close proximity to others.
The classing is easy and straightforward. It’s based only on the car’s capabilities and the drivers’ performance during the event.
Whatever the time set in qualifying must be adhered to in the race. Essentially, that time cannot be beaten by an established delta or a penalty will be issued. The first infraction will incur a drive-through penalty; the second, a two-minute hold in the pits; the third, a five-minute hold; and the fourth, disqualification. We can also force the team to change class, depending on how much faster their race pace is. Sandbagging is something we hope to avoid.
Last weekend, we put these plans to the test at Thunderhill Raceway Park.After collecting the qualifying lap times from our 21 different cars that day, we established the parameters that would determine which team would run in which class.
Class A: 1:55 - 1:59
Class B: 2:00 - 2:05
Class C: 2:06+
The drivers on the cusp then decided whether to push their car to race in the faster class or dial back to race in the slower group — to push for total dominance or take the conservative approach. Strategy (as well as reliability and consistency) is what decides an endurance race, and our drivers were forced to make a choice that morning.
We started our race at 8 AM, the coolest time of the day, as we wanted to reduce the effects of heat on both drivers and vehicles. Many drivers appreciated that.
Class A and overall winner Daniel Rose had competed in many sprint races in NASA before this, but only a few endurance races. He had his worries about running an enduro, since they aren’t always the best organized, but that wasn’t the case here.
“Speed SF has always been a good host for the track day events, and I’m happy I did it because the enduro was really well organized; everyone knew what they needed to do. Sometimes things can get a little hectic with these kinds of races, but everything was well explained to the drivers that morning.
The classes were split just right — the competition at the front was intense and I had to stay sharp since I was running solo. Thankfully, my car ran well the whole race and went without a single hiccup, but I made one mistake — I drove over some oil in T3 and went into the dirt, but nothing major. Still, with how close it was until the end, I had no idea where that mistake put me. We pitted at the right time, I kept consistent with my lap times, I put my head down, and we came out on top. Group A win and first overall!”
“As far as I heard from everyone else in the paddock, everyone was happy with the class sorting,” Rose added.
Coming in second in Class A were Maxwell Lisovsky and Nate Hackman, who put the plan together at the very last minute. “Maxwell called me on his way down from The Ridge. He needed a co-driver. I’d never driven the car before,” Nate said. He wasn’t filled with confidence, but he took the opportunity.
The two met at Thunderhill and crossed their fingers. Max’s TT2-spec E36 wasn’t built to endurance specs, so he had to sort out a few things during qualifying.
Nate, with fifteen minutes to get a feel for a car he’d never driven before, jumped in and put the car on pole with a time of 1:54. With such a strong start, he decided to start the race and battled door-to-door through four consecutive corners over the first lap to take the lead.
“I really didn’t want to blow the motor in the first stint, so I short-shifted the whole time,” Nate admitted — a sensible approach to getting a time attack car to last 2.5 hours. Even leaving the car in fifth gear for half of the lap, he could set consecutive lap times in the 1:55s.
With a healthy lead, Nate made the mistake of beating his qualifying pace in the race — excusable considering his inexperience with the car — and had to serve a five-second penalty. While in the pits, Daniel snuck by and held onto the lead.
Considering the fact Maxwell and Nate had “no real plans, no communication, and no execution,” as the latter put it, their performance deserves a tip of the hat. Turns out the “send it and pray” approach, even with a time attack car, can yield impressive results in a medium-length race.
Abdul Osmani, a regular Lucky Dog endurance racer and the only solo driver on the Class A podium, also challenged Daniel through much of the race. “I found the 2.5 hour-length perfect. In comparison to my experiences with longer enduros, the 2.5-hour format makes logistics and planning simple and cost effective. It’s almost like a really long advanced DE session,” he said.
Joe McGuigan, regular endurance racer and Speed SF Challenge winner, used the enduro to shake down his newly acquired E46 M3 and get an idea of its fuel burn rate. As his co-driver Don signed on for twenty laps tops, Joe felt he’d leave some on the table, run in Class B, and use the track time to identify any possible problems with his new car.
The M3 had pace, though, and Joe beat Speed SF favorites Gary Yeung and Yunni Zhai to the win by a lap. The M3 proved more economical than he’d planned, so he finished his two hour-long stints with a few gallons left in the tank. The fact that he was able to run an endurance race without having to spend more money to buy a high-capacity fuel cell is just another way this medium-length race lowers the barriers to entry; a fully-built endurance car isn’t necessary for a race of this length.
At 10:30 that morning, the checkered flag flew and we could breathe a sigh of relief — our first endurance race was a success. A total of 21 cars entered and 19 finished. Considering the heat that weekend, not to mention the added strain of a medium-length race, that finishing rate speaks highly of our drivers and their level of preparation.
We’re in the middle of planning next year’s season of endurance racing. but waiting on confirmation from our regular tracks before we publish what we hope will be a very busy 2025 calendar. In the meantime, we’ll be using the race data from this event to create better classing rules that will accommodate an even wider range of drivers and vehicles.
Seeing our dedicated drivers take the next step into racing and proving themselves in a new environment makes planning these events worth the extra effort.
Class A Winners:
1st Daniel Rose BMW E46
2nd Maxwell Lisovsky / Nate Hackman BMW E46
3rd Abdul Osmani BMW E46
Class B Winners:
1st Joe McGuigan / Don BMW E46
2nd Gary Yeung / Yunni Zhai Nissan 350z
3rd Nicolas Voordeckers Funduro Speedster
Class C Winners:
1st Michael McColligan Honda Civic
2nd David Vodden Honda Civic
3rd Becky / Niki Arsham Honda Civic