Your Thoughts on Mandating 200+TW "Street Tires" in Improved Touring?

[Greg Amy]

...and, go.

[Rabbit07]

...and, go.


Piss Off!

[240zdave]

I am open to the idea.

[Greg Amy]

Piss Off!
What if Hoosier offered a 200TW tire...?

[SLUF]

Even though I'm double dipping often from ITA to STU or even FP in my POS-325e, I'd think favorably on the proposal. That would "commonize" my tire selection for some other organizations as well.

[dickita15]

I think that it may be high time to put IT on street tires. There are other classes such as STL and Limited Prep Production, and Touring that offer much of what Improved Touring used to.

Solo has done the hard work here and my understanding is their rule set works. I am told they have 3 competitive tires. There is a provision to exclude a tire if it is a ringer.


By going to street tires it would be a dramatic cost savings money that could be invested in entry fees.


The IT7 guys I race with run 100tw Nittos and we are getting 5 – 6 weekends. I can only imagine 200tw would add more weekends. We also found that since going to harder tires brakes and bearings and such are lasting longer as well.


SCCA has too many classes that are very similar. Street Tires would differentiate IT.

[Rabbit07]

What if Hoosier offered a 200TW tire...?

I road race because I like going around corners fast. As fast as possible, that's a step backwards using 200 TW tires. If I liked driving fast on street tires I could do that on my way to work with a street car.

:dead_horse::dead_horse:

[Greg Amy]

I road race because I like going around corners fast.

You drive a Miata.

[jwasilko]

I think that it may be high time to put IT on street tires. There are other classes such as STL and Limited Prep Production, and Touring that offer much of what Improved Touring used to.

Solo has done the hard work here and my understanding is their rule set works. I am told they have 3 competitive tires. There is a provision to exclude a tire if it is a ringer.


By going to street tires it would be a dramatic cost savings money that could be invested in entry fees.


The IT7 guys I race with run 100tw Nittos and we are getting 5 – 6 weekends. I can only imagine 200tw would add more weekends. We also found that since going to harder tires brakes and bearings and such are lasting longer as well.


SCCA has too many classes that are very similar. Street Tires would differentiate IT.

It's an idea with merit, though the lack of a good rain tire seemed to be an issue as we saw by the loss of two IT7 cars in the rain at Palmer.

Do 100-200TW race group and keep us away from the spec pinatas and maybe....

[Greg Amy]

It's an idea with merit, though the lack of a good rain tire seemed to be an issue as we saw by the loss of two IT7 cars in the rain at Palmer.
Those had nothing to do with rubber compound. Those were due to being cheap and not swapping to tires that had tread.

[Rabbit07]

:eclipsee_steering:
You drive a Miata.:eclipsee_steering:

[dickita15]

I road race because I like going around corners fast. As fast as possible, that's a step backwards using 200 TW tires.

Chris, that's great, looking at your signature line you would still have 3 other categories to race in on DOTs. Plus a forth that i do not know what it is. why not have some differentiation between categories.

[dickita15]

It's an idea with merit, though the lack of a good rain tire seemed to be an issue as we saw by the loss of two IT7 cars in the rain at Palmer.

Do 100-200TW race group and keep us away from the spec pinatas and maybe....
Good point in that we would need to have a rain strategy. at Palmer i had rain tires in the trailer but honestly in the 3 year i had raced Palmer I had never seen that much water on the track.
that event also makes me happy i had a defroster and heater core. the two cars that crashed both had visibility problems and could not see the standing water.

[Rabbit07]

Chris, that's great, looking at your signature line you would still have 3 other categories to race in on DOTs. Plus a forth that i do not know what it is. why not have some differentiation between categories.

Someone on the CRB or BOD thought it was a great idea to dump SS and replace it with Touring 4 and Bspec. Not sure we are further a head at this point.

I understand the differentiation of classes part. You could get me to the middle on that. The idea that this will save $ is ridiculous. We got here due to tire wars to compete in a DOT class. All you'd be doing is hitting the reset button and it would start all over again. No thanks

[jwasilko]

Those had nothing to do with rubber compound. Those were due to being cheap and not swapping to tires that had tread.

new NT01 don't have much tread. RA1 would be a good rain.

[Greg Amy]

new NT01 don't have much tread. RA1 would be a good rain.
Also note that many of them don't have functional wipers, let along window defrosters.

[Ron Earp]

200TW needs to happen in IT. But it could take a long time for the powers that be to do anything new with a class they don't care about.

Soooooo, we should just do it on our own. Scrote Cup can move to 200TW and I suspect take a decent chuck of the active racers in the SE with it. Besides that area, and the NE, there ain't a lot of IT racers anyhow.

[Conover]

200TW needs to happen in IT. But it could take a long time for the powers that be to do anything new with a class they don't care about.

Soooooo, we should just do it on our own. Scrote Cup can move to 200TW and I suspect take a decent chuck of the active racers in the SE with it. Besides that area, and the NE, there ain't a lot of IT racers anyhow.


I'm down!

[ITA_Rx3]

I am all for street tires.

I want more people to race without going to ITS.

With fprod only being cams away from the current miata, i was wondering why i was racing 2-3 cars in ita vs 2-3 cars in fp with contingency.

Would there be any way to get some street tire mfgs to offer cntingency for regional races?

[jumbojimbo]

Someone on the CRB or BOD thought it was a great idea to dump SS and replace it with Touring 4 and Bspec. Not sure we are further a head at this point.

I understand the differentiation of classes part. You could get me to the middle on that. The idea that this will save $ is ridiculous. We got here due to tire wars to compete in a DOT class. All you'd be doing is hitting the reset button and it would start all over again. No thanks

You think going to 200 tires will start a DOT tire war in IT? Now that is funny.

[Greg Amy]

There are two primary reasons I see 200TW tires being useful to Improved Touring:

1) Category Distinction and Differentiation. What differentiates IT from other categories? Prep isn't massively different than LP Prod, and Touring is inching - leaping - its presence away from its Showroom Stock roots. IT tires are no different than Touring or Super Touring. IT doesn't have wings and splitters are limited. IT does not go to the org's biggest event of the year.

If asked to explain why run Improved Touring instead of any other class, what's your answer?

200TW tires would clearly differentiate the category in a significant way, something that is not done by any other category.

2) Attraction from other groups. There is a large and growing population of racers out there in series and with orgs that do not allow tires with a TW lower than 200. Limiting the class to 200 makes it attractive to them. Those orgs do that specifically for costs purposes. No one can legitimately argue that a $250 10-cycle tire can ever cost less, long- or short-term, than a $120 more-than-10-cycle tire. And while outliers can never be eliminated (really, you're going to shave your tires so low that they'll only last 2 sessions?) they can safely be ignored. Because outliers are not for whom we make decisions.

Improved Touring needs to make positive changes that will differentiate it from the existing crowd and make itself attractive to those not interested in chasing the Runoffs-of-the-Year. And this would be a really easy and cost-effective way to do it, one that would be quite easy to revert if it didn't work out.

And, really, 3) because those that actually want to spend the big money on consistently replacing fast tires probably don't really give a crap about Improved Touring anyway...

Food for thought.

[JeffGio]

Absolutely, all thumbs up on 200 tires!

My HoHo sets have almost doubled in the last 18 months, just one of several SCCA dissatisfiers.

IT certainly needs some revamping. 200TW tires, wheel sizes opened up to mate with 200TW tires, which won't typically tolerate narrow wheels as well as hoosiers do.

Brakes and ABS is another area for discussion. Modern cars all have +17" wheels with full size, race competent ABS systems. It seems to me a reasonable approach for older non-abs cars is to allow brake upgrades. Something like any single piece rotor with any 4 piston caliper, so long as it fits inside a 17" wheel, for the front. Upgrade to disk for the rear, if drum.

[JeffGio]

What if Hoosier offered a 200TW tire...?

Maybe, hear it's in the works, but worry it'll be too good when shaved to nothing, and of course they will be overly proud of their tire.

[kgobey]

While I can appreciate the desire to both distinguish IT from the rest of the SCCA's classes as a "beginner" and a "regional only/low budget" class I don't think racing on non-race compound tires is actually the smart thing to do.

I realize that non-race tires are cheaper, and I realize that non-race tires are almost as good as race tires are in some cases, I do think that running tires that are not specifically designed to be raced will not have any measurable effect on either participation or cost of racing.

My rationale is this:

A: CrapCan/Lechump racing is successful because of 3 basic aspects we can never achieve with IT:
------------------1. simple rules with an absurdly low entry cost.
------------------2. a crazy amount of track-time for the dollar.
------------------3. Teamwork and group-cost sharing that both enable an aspect of racing that binds groups of friends as well as distributing the cost-load across 3 to 6 members.

B. Street/non-race tires tend to display other issues that DOT-R compound tires are engineered to avoid
------------------1. Chunking of the tread blocks
------------------2. Severe rolling of the tire and sidewall/edge degradation

Note that just because we know that "Extreme Performance Summer Tires" are good for racing Lechump/Crapcan doesn't mean we'd see everyone come out on these Extreme performance tires.

C. Size. A quick check of the Tire Rack list I see nothing smaller than 14" and of the 14's and 15's on offer, I see one size, a narrow selection that many of us would have to make changes to the cars - relatively expensive changes to accommodate.

As an example. My car is an ITS car. I can fit 225/45 and 225/50 Hoosier R7's on that car because I bought a wheel that has an offset that makes them work with rolled fenders. I have a specific set of springs that I use with Hoosiers that overpower the grip for the R888's I run on track days and I have quite a bit more camber than I would otherwise need. I have invested a lot of money into getting this right, and time. You're asking me to do this again for the RE71R or BFG Rival S1.5. I'm not looking forward to that. But maybe that's something we can dismiss as realized cost. But it's still painful to think about doing this again.

To me the answer of controlling the cost of tires and still distinguishing IT as the "beginner" and a "regional only/low budget" class, would be to seek out a supplier who'd be able to step up and supply long lasting, "race-engineered" tires with a regional level contingency. Toyo RA1's, RR's R88R's, Maxxis Victra RC-1, even someone hungry like https://www.natiresusa.com/ might be willing to jump into the DOT race tire market if we proposed that 5000 IT racers would all switch to their tires with the understanding that they'd step up and supply us. Maybe even Hoosier would create an "IT" tire that we would all use if we reached out with the idea and the threat of us all dropping them for a spec tire.

Another point of Lechump/Crapcan racers. They desperately want somewhere to test and improve their cars that are not tied up in the endurance series. A lot of these guys want to race in the SCCA/NASA and MCSCC where I race. Giving them an IT class of their own would be far more attractive than asking them to step up and build ITC, B, A or S cars... ITJunk/ITLemon would be a much more successful idea IMO, and let them know they are supposed to follow their series' rules to be compliant and let them self-police. If it becomes a "thing" then we can break out their classes into sub categories.

While I understand the need to re-brand IT, I don't think starting here is actually the right idea. This has the potential of undermining the interest of a lot of the current IT community. Let's start with a spec tire.

[Knestis]

A spec tire will be problematic in a multi-mark category because the size availability issue is even greater than if you have a number of manufacturers from which to choose.

Look - at the end of the day, you're opposed to the idea of 200TW tires because the status quo works for you. There's nothing wrong with that but sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The good news for you is that SCCA rules-making has traditionally been pretty responsive to minority needs - if you've got the ear of the powers-that-be. When I go looking at current IT grids, I see pretty much NOBODY who argued that "National status will kill IT." Individual entrants come and go, and turnover in the club - in racing - is astronomical. The Club won't make a decision based on any kind of strategic plan, and a few connected people can pretty much kill any proposed change, so you're probably safe.

K

[Greg Amy]

While I can appreciate the desire to both distinguish IT from the rest of the SCCA's classes as a "beginner" and a "regional only/low budget" class I don't think racing on non-race compound tires is actually the smart thing to do.
Don't be misled by the moniker "street tires"; these are race compound tires. Nobody buys these things to go on their street cars, they'd only last 15,000 miles.

They're just not as soft as The Purple Crack.

These things are leagues above what we were racing on 15 years ago (Hoosier R3S03; I still have a pair of 2-cycle ones that have been kept inside in a bag away from electricity, you want 'em? ;) )

[kgobey]

I think Kirk thinks I'm a dick. No, I'm not, I promise, I'm just expressing an opposing opinion. And Greg, I've run these modern tires too, and they are great. But I just don't think it's the right choice for IT, again, not being a dick, I just don't accept them as the right choice for IT. I still think a Spec tire is a better idea - take it from a guy who ran in NASA's SpecE30 series.

It's not a bias or throw in the towel thing, or a moody "ef you" thing either. I want to stay current and I want to learn how to drive on modern racing gear/equipment. And maybe it's time that I get off the pot and step up to Nationals, I mean, I've been running SOLO2, HPDE, Wheel to wheel and instructing for 24 years, I've certainly earned the right to pursue that, I just wish the SCCA had a national place ti run my 325 that wouldn't cost me $20,000 more to be competitive.

[gran racing]

race competent ABS systems. It seems to me a reasonable approach for older non-abs cars is to allow brake upgrades. Something like any single piece rotor with any 4 piston caliper, so long as it fits inside a 17" wheel, for the front. Upgrade to disk for the rear, if drum.

Oh boy. I better get a credit card with a much higher limit.

FWIW, on my previous ITB car there would have been some benefit to have fit it with rear drum brakes based on some pretty credible testing using a very similar platform (Prelude / Accord). :)

[Greg Amy]

I think Kirk thinks I'm a dick.
Kirk doesn't think you're a dick. Kirk just disagrees with your logical discussion.

And toward that point...you "want to stay current and I want to learn how to drive on modern racing gear/equipment."

In Improved Touring.

;)

[kgobey]

And toward that point...you "want to stay current and I want to learn how to drive on modern racing gear/equipment."

In Improved Touring.

;)

Hahaha I know! I know! and in a 1986 325is - a car I used to lust for when I was 17!!!

[JeffYoung]

I'm on the ITAC still and in favor of this. 200TW and probably max 8" wheels, any diameter.


I think it will initially be a huge boon to IT. The problem, as always, is competition and popularity. If this works like we think it might, damn right there will be a "who makes the fastests 200TW" war. If IT participation levels don't go up, then it will just mean cheaper tires for those who stay. Regardless, either rway, it helps IT, either with more numbers, or cheaper running costs.

[Conover]

I'm on the ITAC still and in favor of this. 200TW and probably max 8" wheels, any diameter.


I think it will initially be a huge boon to IT. The problem, as always, is competition and popularity. If this works like we think it might, damn right there will be a "who makes the fastests 200TW" war. If IT participation levels don't go up, then it will just mean cheaper tires for those who stay. Regardless, either rway, it helps IT, either with more numbers, or cheaper running costs.

Sign me up! :-)

[Greg Amy]

As noted elsewhere...



Just make it part of the scrotum cup 2019 rules, must be on skreet tars.


Seems like a lot of kids have the affinity for the Purple Crack and would oppose the change.


So let them continue to run the Purple Crack, and let anyone on 200TW tires drop a class, see if anyone dies.

[JeffGio]

I think Kirk thinks I'm a dick. No, I'm not, I promise, I'm just expressing an opposing opinion. And Greg, I've run these modern tires too, and they are great. But I just don't think it's the right choice for IT, again, not being a dick, I just don't accept them as the right choice for IT. I still think a Spec tire is a better idea - take it from a guy who ran in NASA's SpecE30 series.


Glad MCSCC is still kickin it, I've go a couple circa y2k loooong race silo plaques around here somewhere!

A spec tire would be great, but probably can only work for spec classes, where all run the same size. Running Toyo's in SM back in the day was indeed a great thing!

We run 255s on the chump stang on 17x9 wheels. The IT cars are on R7 245s, of course on 15x7 wheels. I suspect we'd not be happy with any options for 200TW on narrow wheels, but such is life.

Another 200TW benefit would be using the same tire for the wet. We'd have to relearn some stuff, but I'm game for a scrote cup trial season.

[Aged racer]

I am also on the ITAC. GREAT to see this much interest and discussion on this topic. So, where are the CRB letters? The more input officially "in the system" the better!

Go here: https://www.crbscca.com

[JeffGio]

Nope, done beating my head against that wall.

[gran racing]

If this works like we think it might, damn right there will be a "who makes the fastests 200TW" war.

Select a spec manufacturer(s).

[Ron Earp]

Nope, done beating my head against that wall.

Now now, you just can't quit.

Off topic, I do think about just doing endurance racing only. More bang for the buck overall, less equipment around.

[Knestis]

I think Kirk thinks I'm a dick. ...

NOT AT ALL. I think you're advocating for your position, looking at the question through the lens of an individual competitor. That's your role as a member.

Problem is, policy making - rules, in this case - has to look at broader interests of an organization that's made up of hundreds of potentially conflicting member interests.

K

[Knestis]

I'm on the ITAC still and in favor of this. 200TW and probably max 8" wheels, any diameter.


I think it will initially be a huge boon to IT. The problem, as always, is competition and popularity. If this works like we think it might, damn right there will be a "who makes the fastests 200TW" war. If IT participation levels don't go up, then it will just mean cheaper tires for those who stay. Regardless, either rway, it helps IT, either with more numbers, or cheaper running costs.

I had an interesting experienced this past week, shopping for summer tires for my Fit. I saved one set of ex-Pablo Kosei K1s. Now that I'm moving to somewhere closer to civilization (less crappy roads), and partially in memory of our blue buddy, I thought I'd just get something that approximates the same diameter of the OE 16" alloys on (drum roll please) 14" wheels.

Wow. When the tire shop guys got done laughing about the old guy's weird idea, we learned that a couple of the most popular sized tires from when was buying Yokohamas (et al.) for racing are getting close to being NLA. (EDIT - at all. Not looking for DOT race tires.)

Realization? It might be time to completely set free wheel size restrictions in IT. I *think* it was you who proposed a "must fit in this size box" rule instead...? Regardless, that would be a sensible rule change parallel to a shift to ****** *****.

K

[240zdave]

What about weight penalties for cars on Hoosiers / weight breaks for cars on 200TW? That might satisfy the "I don't want to give up my HoHo's" crowd.

[gran racing]

I would think determining how much weight would be challenging. And I already began thinking about which tracks I'd sacrifice the weight for better cornering and vice versa.

[kgobey]

NOT AT ALL. I think you're advocating for your position, looking at the question through the lens of an individual competitor. That's your role as a member.

Problem is, policy making - rules, in this case - has to look at broader interests of an organization that's made up of hundreds of potentially conflicting member interests.

K

Understandable. I really think there is room in IT for a Spec tire, Hoosier is just one of many. Mandating a 100-130 TW tire, I think if I am correct that's where the Maxxis and R888r play. IMO changing to that sort of TW rating would allow us as a group maintain the "race" aspect of the tires and maintain the fun factor. I really think modern extreme performance tires offer a great bang for the buck, I don't see them actually adding a cost benefit over existing DOT R Compound choices that are already marketed and sold differently to Hoosiers.

Can I try to bring LeChump back into this?

I know for a fact LeChump guys want to race with us. I say we include them explicitly. Call out a "Low Cost, Low Bureaucracy IT" series that basically allows them to race in LeChump trim and LeChump tires with us and get them to pump up our fields.

The IT format is still good, it's still interesting. But with PT and GTS and SE30 and 944 and Honda Challenge and LeChump, we have to open our doors to a new world that has grown up and stands tall right where we used to stand. Low Bureaucracy and zero snobbery is the goal for these racers.

[seckerich]

I like the idea of testing the waters with an IT tire that is cheaper and lasts longer. I would have to see the facts on true cost of any change and what support we would get. There is a lot of value in having tire vendors at the track and in the Southeast that means Hoosier dealers. It is my understanding they will have something to offer soon that may fit the bill. Willing to wait and see what that option is. I learned a long time ago to dance with the one that brought you. Would not like a spec tire, but want our current vendors to have an option.

[kgobey]

This is what I meant by mandating 100TW + tires. There are viable and inexpensive solutions for us that are not 200TW. In fact the Maxxis 100TW option as far as we have been able to tell is a really great race tire, does not heat cycle out and a set now 2 years old is only getting replaced because the cords are showing!!!

HOOSIER RADIAL WET H2O Wet Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
TOYO PROXES RR Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HOOSIER R7 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HOOSIER A7 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HANKOOK VENTUS Z214 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HANKOOK VENTUS Z214 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
BFGOODRICH G-FORCE R1 S Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 B A

TOYO PROXES RA1 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 100 AA A
TOYO PROXES R888R Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 100 AA A
Nitto NT01
UTQG: 100
Maxxis Victra RC-1 DOT-approved R compound
UTQG: 100 A A

Maxxis Victra VR-1 Extreme Summer tire
UTQG 200 AA A
TOYO PROXES R1R Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A
NEXEN N FERA SUR4G Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 A A
KUMHO ECSTA V720 Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A
HANKOOK VENTUS R-S4 Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A
BFGOODRICH G-FORCE RIVAL S 1.5 Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A

[georgethefierce]

Can I try to bring LeChump back into this?

I know for a fact LeChump guys want to race with us. I say we include them explicitly. Call out a "Low Cost, Low Bureaucracy IT" series that basically allows them to race in LeChump trim and LeChump tires with us and get them to pump up our fields.

The IT format is still good, it's still interesting. But with PT and GTS and SE30 and 944 and Honda Challenge and LeChump, we have to open our doors to a new world that has grown up and stands tall right where we used to stand. Low Bureaucracy and zero snobbery is the goal for these racers.

we do this is the Northeast with a regional ITEZ class....but they can run hoo hoos there if they so wish IIRC.

[georgethefierce]

This is what I meant by mandating 100TW + tires. There are viable and inexpensive solutions for us that are not 200TW. In fact the Maxxis 100TW option as far as we have been able to tell is a really great race tire, does not heat cycle out and a set now 2 years old is only getting replaced because the cords are showing!!!

HOOSIER RADIAL WET H2O Wet Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
TOYO PROXES RR Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HOOSIER R7 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HOOSIER A7 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HANKOOK VENTUS Z214 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
HANKOOK VENTUS Z214 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 C A
BFGOODRICH G-FORCE R1 S Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 40 B A

TOYO PROXES RA1 Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 100 AA A
TOYO PROXES R888R Racetrack & Autocross Only
UTQG: 100 AA A
Maxxis Victra RC-1 DOT-approved R compound
UTQG: 100 A A

Maxxis Victra VR-1 Extreme Summer tire
UTQG 200 AA A
TOYO PROXES R1R Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A
NEXEN N FERA SUR4G Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 A A
KUMHO ECSTA V720 Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A
HANKOOK VENTUS R-S4 Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A
BFGOODRICH G-FORCE RIVAL S 1.5 Extreme Performance Summer
UTQG: 200 AA A

IT7 runs the Nitto NT01 which is a 100TW R...you can add that to your list.

[raffaelli]

There are two primary reasons I see 200TW tires being useful to Improved Touring:

1) Category Distinction and Differentiation. What differentiates IT from other categories? Prep isn't massively different than LP Prod, and Touring is inching - leaping - its presence away from its Showroom Stock roots. IT tires are no different than Touring or Super Touring. IT doesn't have wings and splitters are limited. IT does not go to the org's biggest event of the year.

If asked to explain why run Improved Touring instead of any other class, what's your answer?

200TW tires would clearly differentiate the category in a significant way, something that is not done by any other category.

2) Attraction from other groups. There is a large and growing population of racers out there in series and with orgs that do not allow tires with a TW lower than 200. Limiting the class to 200 makes it attractive to them. Those orgs do that specifically for costs purposes. No one can legitimately argue that a $250 10-cycle tire can ever cost less, long- or short-term, than a $120 more-than-10-cycle tire. And while outliers can never be eliminated (really, you're going to shave your tires so low that they'll only last 2 sessions?) they can safely be ignored. Because outliers are not for whom we make decisions.

Improved Touring needs to make positive changes that will differentiate it from the existing crowd and make itself attractive to those not interested in chasing the Runoffs-of-the-Year. And this would be a really easy and cost-effective way to do it, one that would be quite easy to revert if it didn't work out.

And, really, 3) because those that actually want to spend the big money on consistently replacing fast tires probably don't really give a crap about Improved Touring anyway...

Food for thought.

I was thinking no on this idea until Greg's post. I'd like to try it.

(even though it may make double dipping difficult)

[downingracing]

The crossover argument doesn’t hold water. Cars from other series (Le/Chump) aren’t prepped to IT rules. So for them to run in an IT class, they require modification to even be legal. And many of them have taken the cars well past the point of being ‘returned’ to IT legal. Cars that successfully make it to legal, will (probably) be closer to stock/legal than built/legal. Tires won’t make them competitive. Having an IT(ez) class for cars from these series to run in seems like the best option to promote crossover. No changes required (or veery minimum) and they all compete on 200tw tires. Competitive with ‘like’ cars and can try SCCA.

Requiring 200tw tires will limit crossover within SCCA (that is already happening). Spec Miatas will need multiple sets of rims with different tires to run both ITA and SM. Other IT cars will need the same to double dip with STL, STU, and Prod.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time running ITA. When I was winning or at the front of the pack (minus Mosers and Ruck), I ran hankooks. Guys chasing me were on Hoosiers. Tires are important, but there’s much more to being competitive than tires.

I’d ask: What’s the problem we’re trying to solve?

If it’s how to get crossover from other series, we need to look at license requirements (having run some Chump, you don’t want most of those folks participating without at least a little formal training). Then look at car classifications and determine the best path requiring the least modification for these cars.

If it’s controlling costs in IT classes, as many have said, you can’t keep people who want to spend money from spending it. Limit one area and they will spend in other areas. Good to look at options to control cost, but this tire mandate could actually increase costs for those crossing from class to class.

If it’s something else, I’d like to know what it is. It feels like we’re trying to justify a solution without firmly identifying the problem.

[JeffGio]

It'd be great if a single spec tire manufacture could be selected, 100TW included. Doubt it could cover everyone's tire needs, but the potential of a spec pricing package might exist.

I too hear many friends who are primarily lemons guys say they'd like to give SCCA/NASA a try. The rub is that lemons doesn't do car leveling. While there are a small number of teams focused on, and capable of winning, most are there to simply circulate around and party. This is of course great, but doesn't really prepare one for sprint racing, speaking generally. These cars could have very different lap time potential and wouldn't necessarily have a good race amongst themselves.

They could be allowed in under the bracket enduro rule set, and have their own class, with A/B/C sub-classes. Maybe a hybrid Bracket event could include sprint races, with one or two groups. Qualify and sprint races first, followed by a break then a 4 hour enduro. They would qualify and have a standard rolling sprint start.

Is the Bracket enduro experiment working out at all currently?

[dickita15]

Is the Bracket enduro experiment working out at all currently?

National has cut back on it's support of the Bracket Enduro program. I think Central Florida and Chicago Regions are still doing some. the underlying CRE rule set is still viable and a number of regions are doing those but that is more about have a way to race with easier license standards.

this conversation is more about car prep.

[Conover]

Anyone writing letters yet? I'm curious about verbiage. I have to admit that I can see the significance of some of the drawbacks of going to 200tw, mainly the hindrance to people crossing into IT.

I would love to be able to buy 6 tires a year and have them still be halfway decent in October. Either way I'm budgeting for 6 tires a year, it's just weather or not I have anything worth a shit to bolt onto the front of my car in October. lol

[Greg Amy]

From the July 2018 Fastrack Prelim Minutes (https://www.scca.com/pages/cars-and-rules):



IT General
1. #24710 (Club Racing Board) 200 Treadwear Tires
The CRB is considering requiring Tires with a minimum treadwear rating of 200 for all IT cars. Please provide your feedback through crbscca.com.

And...go.


https://www.crbscca.com/

[XelderX]

From the July 2018 Fastrack Prelim Minutes (https://www.scca.com/pages/cars-and-rules):



And...go.


https://www.crbscca.com/

Letter sent.

[Eagle7]

How would this affect an IT car running in STL under the IT prep rules???

[Conover]

How would this affect an IT car running in STL under the IT prep rules???

You'd get your ass kicked even worse.

I'm a little tired of some of the naysaying on the brown board that is coming from people who are not even going to be running IT with SCCA ever. If you have no interest in ever running IT go find some other pot to stir up, I'm sure some autocrossers are bitching about something somewhere, go muddy their water.

I did some shopping, and for me, 245/45R17 the 200TW offerings save me a minimum of $400 per set, which is basically an extra entry fee.

That is significant enough to get my attention for sure.

open up wheel diameter rules to allow everyone to find a tire and wheel combo that works for them
Limit maximum wheel width per class.
Limit maximum tire cross section per class.
reserve the right to create a tire exclusion list if a tire does not meet the spirit of the rule.
Set a Date for another round of member input on the subject after one full season of the rules implementation. Or is that just asking for a barrel of monkeys?

[dickita15]

How would this affect an IT car running in STL under the IT prep rules???

actually the tire rule for IT cars running in ST or Prod can be anything we want it to be.

[highwayracer]

actually the tire rule for IT cars running in ST or Prod can be anything we want it to be.

Absolutely correct. Presently, SM can run STL and the GCR says "Must completely conform to SMCS specifications, except spec tire not required."

[Tom Donnelly]

From the July 2018 Fastrack Prelim Minutes (https://www.scca.com/pages/cars-and-rules):



And...go.


https://www.crbscca.com/

Letter sent.

[Knestis]

You'd get your ass kicked even worse.

I'm a little tired of some of the naysaying on the brown board that is coming from people who are not even going to be running IT with SCCA ever. If you have no interest in ever running IT go find some other pot to stir up, I'm sure some autocrossers are bitching about something somewhere, go muddy their water.

I did some shopping, and for me, 245/45R17 the 200TW offerings save me a minimum of $400 per set, which is basically an extra entry fee.

That is significant enough to get my attention for sure.

open up wheel diameter rules to allow everyone to find a tire and wheel combo that works for them
Limit maximum wheel width per class.
Limit maximum tire cross section per class.
reserve the right to create a tire exclusion list if a tire does not meet the spirit of the rule.
Set a Date for another round of member input on the subject after one full season of the rules implementation. Or is that just asking for a barrel of monkeys?

Most of this...

...but make it even simpler by just defining a max section width. Easy to check compliance, limits what matters. Done.

K

[Conover]

Hi Cameron,Thank you for submitting a request/input to the Club Racing Board. The details of your request can be found below.
Letter ID Number: #24752
Title: Tires with a minimum treadwear rating of 200 for all IT cars.
Class: IT General
Request: 2018 is my first season in Improved Touring with my own car. Yes, I just built a new build for IT. My car is a 2008 VW Rabbit 5cyl 2.5L in ITS. My first exposure to SCCA was through my involvement with an ITB car, 1996 VW Golf 2.0L, from about 2003 to 2010. I have always had a fond appreciation of Improved Touring since then and always wanted to race in IT. I chose ITS because in my division ITS is pretty strong, fairly large fields.

I have no experience driving on 200TW tires, so I find myself anxious about this proposal, however, I do see the potential benefit. I have been told that these new extreme performance 200TW tires are very good, that they are more consistent over more heat cycles than what I currently run, Hoosier R7 225/45R17. And I see that a set of these tires is at minimum about $400 less expensive than the Hoosiers that I am currently buying. And that these tires are slightly slower, maybe 2 seconds over a 3 mile course, due to a lower grip level.

If these assertions are true, and keeping in mind the savings, I would be able to potentially spend more money on entry fees and less on tires, which would be a very welcome change. Track time is expensive and precious, I am certain that my savings would go toward more event weekends or more races in the same weekend.

I also think that IT could benefit from carving out a place for itself, a distinction from the myriad of classifications, as an affordable place to race against multiple makes where one can build and enter the type of car they prefer. As opposed to the plethora of affordable entry level spec classes. Some of us do not wish to race a spec car. I got my license in an SM and my first two seasons were in SM, I appreciate the class, but I really prefer to have some fun building a car that I like.

Finally, I think if we are to choose this path, wheel rules should be opened up so that everyone can find a tire that will suit them. I would suggest to eliminate wheel diameter and width restrictions and only specify a maximum tire section width per class. 205 for C and B, 225 for A, and 245 for S. Something like this would be appropriate and regulates what actually matters, which is the contact patch. These tires are not all made in the same sizes available in the DOT-R's, so opening up wheel diameters would allow people to find a size that works for them.

Thank you for requesting member input regarding Improved Touring, whatever happens, I hope it is for the best for the category as a whole.
Cameron Conover

[tom91ita]

I'm opposed.

Those running small tires are toast, e.g., 13". I can understand the appeal for those running +16" but to state open up the wheels/tires rules is meaningless if there are no real tires in your size.

I don't think this will bring in new drivers. The LeChump model is not easily transferred.

[XelderX]

I'm opposed.

Those running small tires are toast, e.g., 13". I can understand the appeal for those running +16" but to state open up the wheels/tires rules is meaningless if there are no real tires in your size.

I don't think this will bring in new drivers. The LeChump model is not easily transferred.

If I can attend more races with a reduced tire budget then I affectively become a new driver at all those events I wasn't previously going to. So far my car has been to VIR, my home track, and Barber on a whim. If my costs are less and I can travel more all those other tracks get to welcome me as a new driver.

[boxedfox]

I'm in favor of mandating spec tyre or a longer-lasting tyre. We have an ITA CRX that is sitting at a friend's garage because none of us want to buy Hoosiers for it. If we could run it somewhat competitively with tyres that last a little longer or have a lower retail price, it would be out there running in IT with a driver who wouldn't be racing otherwise.

[lateapex911]

Interesting thoughts.

Good points for making the switch and overall I think they carry the day, except...

The biggest negative is what to do about the smaller diameter guys? Allowing bigger wheels MIGHT help, but it kills their gearing. SO, they need to buy a different final drive. Kills the cost saving benefit. Well, in the short term at least. But, the bigger issue is that some of them can't find the gear they would need. I don't know how many guys are in that boat, I suspect it's a pretty small percentage. I don't know of a workaround.

To those who -cough- Chris, -cough- like going faster around corners, ask youself...is racing in slippery conditions (rain, damp, etc) less fun?? TO me it was a bigger challenge and one that I found to be a HUGE opportunity. The guys who are one dimensional thinkers, they'd be toast. Adapting to changing conditions, figuring out how to go fast with less stick, that's fun. Now I hear you "But it won't be changing, it will always be the same, just slower", true, but....I don't see the delta between the Hoosiers and the better 100tw tires to be that huge. We're talking a second or so on a minute long course like Lime Rock.

To my eye, it's a good concept that needs to have some technicalities worked out.

**** Oh...Spec tire?? In a category with 300+ spec lines (car models)....yea....aint gonna happen. ;) Nor is getting a manufacturer to 'sponsor a program". LOL

Also, ANY change will have winners, and losers, and sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

[lateapex911]

I'm in favor of mandating spec tyre or a longer-lasting tyre. We have an ITA CRX that is sitting at a friend's garage because none of us want to buy Hoosiers for it. If we could run it somewhat competitively with tyres that last a little longer or have a lower retail price, it would be out there running in IT with a driver who wouldn't be racing otherwise.

Really? I suggest that if you get a set of good Nittos or similar, you'd have a car that could "Run somewhat competitively". OR, scrap together a second set of wheels and get a set of Hoosiers, then as they get old, get another set. Now, you have a fast set and a not so fast set...prize the fast set and use them as needed, and use the old set for practice, etc. Used wisely tires can go a long way.

But, big picture, I don't see saving $400 -800 as THE factor thats keeping the car off the track....but, I could be wrong ;).

[Greg Amy]

The biggest negative is what to do about the smaller diameter guys? Allowing bigger wheels MIGHT help, but it kills their gearing.
Let's just put this to bed right now: they're irrelevant to the discussion. Sorry, ITC guys, but your class is dead. More dead than even B-Spec.

That one region somewhere in Minnesota that has half a dozen ITC still running can write in the event supps that ITC cars can run whatever tire they want. It's really that easy.

So STOP IT, Jake. Never, ever, EVER make regulations based on how it will affect one person or one sub set. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. The question should not be "but what about these guys?" The question should be "what is best for everyone in aggregrate, as a whole, all around the country?"

Never make regulations centered around one exception. Ever.

[boxedfox]

But, big picture, I don't see saving $400 -800 as THE factor thats keeping the car off the track....but, I could be wrong ;).

Sometimes it's more about the perception more than numbers that matter. It'd cost a lot more than that to run the car for a season but the idea of being able to get the car running competitively on long-lasting fresh rubber would be enough to convince one of my friends to run it.

[tom91ita]

Tracking Number: #24744 (I think... I seem to never be able to copy/paste from word so added an attachment....)

*************** Following is my letter**"***

Background / Disclosure: I have an ITB CRX Si and an ITA CRX Si. The ITA car typically uses 205/50-15 SM7’s on 15x7 rims. The ITB car uses 225/45-13 R7’s on 13x6 rims. The ITA car will likely not be significantly impacted all things being equal. That is, the tire size is close enough to available ****** *****. The ITB car will be majorly impacted since the final drive will be really goofed up. An ITB CRX needs both small tires for gearing. The car currently has a 4.93 Houseman FD (typically considered to have been the best for this car). I have another STL CRX Si that I campaigned the last couple of years specifically to compete at the Mid-Ohio and Indy Runoffs. My 2018 plans were 3-4 ITA races. I have done a fair number of autocrosses on ****** ***** as well as LeMons races on ****** *****. I understand their performance and relative cost. I have the following questions and concerns.

What is the goal of limiting IT to ****** *****?

How will SCCA measure success?

What will SCCA do if the goal is not achieved?

I am not in favor of this proposal because I do not believe it will achieve its apparent goal (attract the street tire racers from LeMons or Chump nor increase participation by reducing costs). My level of participation is driven just as much by family obligations and work requirements. It is not just the tire budget.

I do not think it will attract those currently racing on ****** *****. The Bracket Enduro concept should have achieved that.

I do not think the comparison to ****** ***** and autocross participation is a valid comparison. Many autocrossers extol the virtues of ****** ***** because it lets them drive to the event with the tires on the car. I know that when I was autocrossing on ****** *****, I did the same thing. However, even if I put ****** ***** on my IT cars, the days of those cars being driven to an event are long past (circa 1992)….

My biggest fear is that the goal will not be achieved and the current actual SCCA members that race IT will be even more disenfranchised.

******** Conclusion of letter******

Heck, we can’t even control costs by using SFI belts for five years anymore.

[lateapex911]

Let's just put this to bed right now: they're irrelevant to the discussion. Sorry, ITC guys, but your class is dead. More dead than even B-Spec.

That one region somewhere in Minnesota that has half a dozen ITC still running can write in the event supps that ITC cars can run whatever tire they want. It's really that easy.

So STOP IT, Jake. Never, ever, EVER make regulations based on how it will affect one person or one sub set. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. The question should not be "but what about these guys?" The question should be "what is best for everyone in aggregrate, as a whole, all around the country?"

Never make regulations centered around one exception. Ever.

And thats why I ended my post with "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".....

[jwasilko]

I'm curious how many of your regions place IT cars in with SM? In the Northeast, we're always grouped with SM and SM2.

I'm concerned that running a slower tire will put me right in the middle of the kill-zone of SM, rather than being able to stay ahead of most of the SM-related carnage.

I have an ITA Miata because I don't want to race in SM. I'm not happy that we have to share race groups with SM, but at least now I can stay ahead of them.

My tire savings may be eaten up by body panel purchases.

Thoughts?

[XelderX]

I'm curious how many of your regions place IT cars in with SM? In the Northeast, we're always grouped with SM and SM2.

I'm concerned that running a slower tire will put me right in the middle of the kill-zone of SM, rather than being able to stay ahead of most of the SM-related carnage.

I have an ITA Miata because I don't want to race in SM. I'm not happy that we have to share race groups with SM, but at least now I can stay ahead of them.

My tire savings may be eaten up by body panel purchases.

Thoughts?

In the Southeast we have enough cars to be in our own group usually. That being said....Spec Miata has been behaving pretty good around here.

[downingracing]

I'm in favor of mandating spec tyre or a longer-lasting tyre. We have an ITA CRX that is sitting at a friend's garage because none of us want to buy Hoosiers for it. If we could run it somewhat competitively with tyres that last a little longer or have a lower retail price, it would be out there running in IT with a driver who wouldn't be racing otherwise.

Too many variables to know if your CRX can be somewhat competitive: Engine build, tune, LSD, FD, Suspension, rims/tires, competition in your region (at that race), and the biggest piece - driver ability. Tires are one piece of the equation. Used Hoosier SM7 take offs with ~4 heat cycles on them sell for $265-325 shipped per set. I just purchased two sets for my ITA car. I was getting 12-16 heat cycles out of the Hankooks I ran in 2012 (my last year in ITA). Of course they would fall off towards the end, but they still worked great for qualifying where you could put down a flyer and then cool the tires off...

If winning is the goal, a 10/10ths build with a good driver will beat most of the cars competing in IT regardless of what tires everyone runs. Once you're competing against a stack of 10/10ths builds, new Hoosiers can be the difference.

[jjjanos]

200TW tires would clearly differentiate the category in a significant way, something that is not done by any other category.


And this matters why?




2) Attraction from other groups. There is a large and growing population of racers out there in series and with orgs that do not allow tires with a TW lower than 200. Limiting the class to 200 makes it attractive to them. Those orgs do that specifically for costs purposes. No one can legitimately argue that a $250 10-cycle tire can ever cost less, long- or short-term, than a $120 more-than-10-cycle tire. And while outliers can never be eliminated (really, you're going to shave your tires so low that they'll only last 2 sessions?) they can safely be ignored. Because outliers are not for whom we make decisions.

My apologies. I thought you were making a serious proposal. The tell was when you said racers won’t waste money to gain an advantage and we don’t create rules for outliers.

That is why we do not have the full range of blingy shocks that come with even a time-zone adjustment.
That’s why we do not have fuel testing because nobody is going to spend $75/gallons to win a race.
That is why we never worry about someone cheating because nobody would want to win that way.

ChumpAER guys are not skipping SCCA because of purple crack. They skip us because our rules are immense and restrictive. They can also turn any POS dog into a better car by doing loads of modifications to make it competitive in a new bracket.

Not going to shave tires? Pull the other leg! That is the one with bells on it; you will get to her the ding.

Showroom stock guys, back in the day, shaved their tires like it was a first date. Look around the paddock — the drivers may have changed, but they are just as stupid about gaining an unfair advantage as the old bona-fide SS drivers.

Improved Touring needs to make positive changes that will differentiate it from the existing crowd and make itself attractive to those not interested in chasing the Runoffs-of-the-Year. And this would be a really easy and cost-effective way to do it, one that would be quite easy to revert if it didn't work out.

You mean that I will need to spend a boatload of money on new wheels, a new final drive and suspension setup and reserve the right to say “Psych!” Thanks!

I appreciate the effort to do something for a category that probably received a death blow from Topeka siphoning away our entrants, but be realistic about how stupid drivers are when it comes to an advantage.

[jjjanos]

A spec tire will be problematic in a multi-mark category because the size availability issue is even greater than if you have a number of manufacturers from which to choose.

Look - at the end of the day, you're opposed to the idea of 200TW tires because the status quo works for you. There's nothing wrong with that but sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The good news for you is that SCCA rules-making has traditionally been pretty responsive to minority needs - if you've got the ear of the powers-that-be. When I go looking at current IT grids, I see pretty much NOBODY who argued that "National status will kill IT." Individual entrants come and go, and turnover in the club - in racing - is astronomical. The Club won't make a decision based on any kind of strategic plan, and a few connected people can pretty much kill any proposed change, so you're probably safe.

K

The status quo works for pretty much everyone NOW. We essentially have a spec tire — purple crack.

What they want is a significant change that, for some, will is an illusion. They WILL shave their tires to nada, negating most of the advantage of the cheaper tire. I say this is a certainty because they could use the tires, purple crack they already have but do not. They go buy new purple crack. Why? Because someone else bought purple crack and they cannot allow a mine-shaft gap! The same bloody thing will happen with shaving the life away if we go to 200TW.

[jjjanos]

The crossover argument doesn’t hold water. Cars from other series (Le/Chump) aren’t prepped to IT rules. So for them to run in an IT class, they require modification to even be legal. And many of them have taken the cars well past the point of being ‘returned’ to IT legal. Cars that successfully make it to legal, will (probably) be closer to stock/legal than built/legal. Tires won’t make them competitive. Having an IT(ez) class for cars from these series to run in seems like the best option to promote crossover. No changes required (or veery minimum) and they all compete on 200tw tires. Competitive with ‘like’ cars and can try SCCA.

Requiring 200tw tires will limit crossover within SCCA (that is already happening). Spec Miatas will need multiple sets of rims with different tires to run both ITA and SM. Other IT cars will need the same to double dip with STL, STU, and Prod.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time running ITA. When I was winning or at the front of the pack (minus Mosers and Ruck), I ran hankooks. Guys chasing me were on Hoosiers. Tires are important, but there’s much more to being competitive than tires.

I’d ask: What’s the problem we’re trying to solve?

If it’s how to get crossover from other series, we need to look at license requirements (having run some Chump, you don’t want most of those folks participating without at least a little formal training). Then look at car classifications and determine the best path requiring the least modification for these cars.

If it’s controlling costs in IT classes, as many have said, you can’t keep people who want to spend money from spending it. Limit one area and they will spend in other areas. Good to look at options to control cost, but this tire mandate could actually increase costs for those crossing from class to class.

If it’s something else, I’d like to know what it is. It feels like we’re trying to justify a solution without firmly identifying the problem.

Amen! Hallelujah! Exactly.

[jjjanos]

Cost savings? Where? You have just suggested opening up wheel sizes. I and and a bunch of the smaller tire guys will need to buy new final drives or new cars.
we will shave the hell out of these tires negating the per unit savings.
we won’t attract many, if any at all, cars from the other groups.

And as icing on the cake, you have completely upset the competitive balance in ITB and probably ITA. Lower torque, better handling cars will be screwed because the fatter, higher torque cars probably won’t be hurt as much. Think I’m wrong about that? We’ll have ya done any thinking about it at all?

needs of the many over the needs of the few? Sounds more like the needs of ITS drivers over the rest of the category.

Before you make a change of this magnitude, I suggest you create a 200TW region class and see how many of your predictions, particularly cross-overs happen. Not bracket, but ITR200, ITS200, ITA200.

[jjjanos]

Oh, has anyone actually researched what 200TW means?

We have no idea what the true TW of purple crack might be. Manufacturers are allowed to put LOWER ratings on their tires. For competition tires, manufacturers under rate their tires because we are stupid and equate lower rating with stickier and faster tires.

I would also like confirmation whether consumer reports and other places are correct when they assert that the rating of two identical compound tires is proportional to their original tread depth. Because if those statements are true, the only thing this accomplishes will be purple crack that you can shave to get the old purple crack.

[Greg Amy]

Jeff, what's your letter number?

[XelderX]

I'm just going to go ahead and tell everyone....

I will laugh out loud and in your face if you show up on shaved 200tw tires. Not to shame you into hopefully spending less money so we can all be more "equal", but simply because you are dumb and wasted a bunch of money.

If you've generated a negative opinion of "street tires" based off of data from a decade ago you need to do some research. What a lot of you aren't realizing is that some of us have already went through this transition once with the autocross Stock/Street change. We have experience on a personal level and data on a club level. Most of the negatives I'm hearing come from people with none of the former and a refusal to see the latter.

[jjjanos]

Jeff, what's your letter number?
Submitting today. I’ll let ya know.

[jjjanos]

I'm just going to go ahead and tell everyone....

I will laugh out loud and in your face if you show up on shaved 200tw tires. Not to shame you into hopefully spending less money so we can all be more "equal", but simply because you are dumb and wasted a bunch of money.

If you've generated a negative opinion of "street tires" based off of data from a decade ago you need to do some research. What a lot of you aren't realizing is that some of us have already went through this transition once with the autocross Stock/Street change. We have experience on a personal level and data on a club level. Most of the negatives I'm hearing come from people with none of the former and a refusal to see the latter.

Data? I love data! Please post the actual data that includes the following -- temperature, number of heat cycles on the tire, number of laps run on the tire, tire brand and type and lap times for the session.

Because what I see are stories, not data.

Here's a story. We bought and scrubbed 10 tires for the VIR 13-Hour. Scrubbed them in and set them aside. We practiced/qualified and ran about 50% of the race on the first four. Changed to the next 4. First set of tires had 3 heat cycles. Second set had 2 heat cycles. Last 2 tires had 1 heat cycle. Next time we did a typical race weekend, we used those tires and they performed pretty much like you would expect tires with a couple of heat cycles to perform. The 4 tires that ran the equivalent of 7 sprint weekends (7-hours on track) were like 2 weekend tires.

That's not data. It's a story. It's true, but still a story.

[jjjanos]

Jeff, what's your letter number?

Tracking #24834

I am writing regarding the proposal to require a 200TW tire in IT. I am opposed at this time as I believe the asserted benefits do not exist or do not exceed the cost of such a proposal.

1. For many cars, there is no 200TW tire available in the size they currently use. For these drivers to compete in their current cars, they will need to invest in new wheels at a minimum. The change in tire size will impact the effectiveness of their gearing and will require the purchase, if available, a different final drive gear. Finally, this change may necessitate changing suspension setups and tuning and require the purchase of new shocks and springs. These expenditures will significantly reduce or eliminate the proposed savings. Furthermore, some drivers will simply leave IT and make the switch to other categories; going counter to the suggestion that the tire rule will increase IT participation.


2. A 200TW rule will upset the competitive balance in the category, particularly among the classes with smaller engine displacement. The change will benefit higher torque cars with a wider powerband and harm those cars that rely more on momentum. The classification “process” (The PROCESS) would need to be recalibrated and we face the prospect of another IT Great Realignment and the subsequent appropriate weight wars. I acknowledge that the IT rules do not guaranty competitiveness, but it is one thing when a driver selects a car that isn’t competitive and a different thing when a significant rule change of dubious value does it.

3. This rule likely will impact the number of cross-over entries between IT and other categories (double dippers). Under the current rules, double dippers only need one set of wheels and tires. For example, an ITA CRX can double-dip in FP and, while not running at the front of the field, will find FP cars to race. Similar, many Spec Miata cars double dip in ITA. It is my belief that a 200TW rule will stop this double dipping – a significant source of revenue to the Regions.

4. It is doubtful that the rule will cause a significant number of cars running with 200TW rules to enter SCCA events. Many of these cars are no longer IT legal. The format between a sprint race and a multi-driver endurance race is different. These other sanctioning bodies have flexible classing rules that do more to ensure a car is somewhat competitive in a class, but SCCA is extremely inflexible in this regard.

5. What these drivers hope to accomplish – a smaller tire budget – is something they already could accomplish. They choose to run the most expensive tire that lasts the fewest weekends because it offers the greatest competitive advantage. These drivers could reduce their tire budget by purchasing less expensive tires initially or not replacing their tires as often. Few tires are discarded because they are unusable; they are discarded because they are less competitive.

6. I am not an expert in the testing of tires, but based on information from consumer reports and other tire websites, it appears that tire manufacturers may give their products a lower rating then the tested rating and that they do so, particularly, for competition and performance tires. This is a marketing ploy because racers are gullible – they assume a lower TW rating equates to more grip. Consequently, the 40TW rating on Hoosier R7s (purple crack) may be inaccurate and purple crack could be a much higher rated tire. I want to emphasis that I could not confirm this assertion.

7. I am not an expert in the testing of tires, but based on information from consumer reports and other tire websites, it appears that between two tires utilizing identical compounds, the TW rating is proportional to the amount of tread. That is to say, a purple crack tire with twice the tread of the current purple crack is eligible to receive twice the treadwear rating. If this is true, then given that SCCA competitors are the major consumer of purple crack, it is very likely that Hoosier will create a 200TW tire even more expensive than purple crack and lasting approximately as long.

8. This is a significant change to the category that may have major negative impacts on it. Caution demands that, before making this SCCA-wide change, it be implemented at the region or division level to demonstrate that the claim that it will attract new drivers is true. For this to be a true test, this regional/divisional class must be identical to the IT category rules except for mandating a 200TW tire or greater. I.e. IT200 where every car competing in IT200 would be legal to compete in the corresponding Improved Category.

If the claimed cost savings and influx of competitors is demonstrated through a regional/division class, I am likely to change my opinion. Without such a demonstration, I am firmly opposed.

[raffaelli]

After running recently with some very fast ITR and ITS cars in my session, I have a hard time believing that any of the faster IT classes would be willing to give up sticky tires.

[gran racing]

The Blethens primarily run street tires on their RX-8s and have done well for themselves. ;)

[kgobey]

I've thought long and hard about this... Still hate it.

[lateapex911]

Oh, has anyone actually researched what 200TW means?

We have no idea what the true TW of purple crack might be. Manufacturers are allowed to put LOWER ratings on their tires. For competition tires, manufacturers under rate their tires because we are stupid and equate lower rating with stickier and faster tires.

I would also like confirmation whether consumer reports and other places are correct when they assert that the rating of two identical compound tires is proportional to their original tread depth. Because if those statements are true, the only thing this accomplishes will be purple crack that you can shave to get the old purple crack.

Jeff, have you researched, or had experience with the tires being discussed?
I suspect YOU will be the only guy shaving them. ;)
And while you assert everyone is buying hoosiers like water, some are not. it takes a program, but you can manage to make a set last and be fast....for a long time.
True, many guys have the $ and prefer not to twist their brains managing a tire program.

J

[lateapex911]

Tracking #24834




8. This is a significant change to the category that may have major negative impacts on it. Caution demands that, before making this SCCA-wide change, it be implemented at the region or division level to demonstrate that the claim that it will attract new drivers is true. For this to be a true test, this regional/divisional class must be identical to the IT category rules except for mandating a 200TW tire or greater. I.e. IT200 where every car competing in IT200 would be legal to compete in the corresponding Improved Category.

If the claimed cost savings and influx of competitors is demonstrated through a regional/division class, I am likely to change my opinion. Without such a demonstration, I am firmly opposed.

Interesting. In the NER region, the IT7 guys decided to go this direction. It required new wheels, because as you point out, all tires aren't made in all sizes. So, a few guys bought in...basically the entire group of IT7 guys (except me*). At the time, every race would see about 3 cars. maybe 4. Now? There are almost 10 current IT-7 competitors, and about 7 or 8 are in any given race. All that have voiced their opinion (A couple are on this board) say they like the racing better. Less work managing a tire program, and less money expended per race. AND, most of all, they fell the change has attracted new blood to the class, and ....therefore.....they now have better racing.

Now, I know this won't impress you, lol....
...any NER IT-7 guys, feel free to set me straight if I have mis characterized teh situation.

* I chose not to convert. Most of the group concentrated on NHMS and maybe a couple other tracks. I, on the other hand, went to NHMS maybe every other year or, at most, once a year. I went to Lime Rock, Watkins Glen, Summit, NJMP, VIR, Atlanta, Mid Ohio, etc looking for new experiences, competition and track records. So I wasn't a good fit. But, I was the exception.

[gran racing]

I believe the IT-7 attraction just begins at the street tires though. It seems like the group has fairly basic cars and are not taking the prep to the limits. Meaning they have modest build costs, not constantly trying to out prep the cars and seeking expensive HP gains. Assuming they continue to keep you out of the class (your car was on the other spectrum) and are able to keep that mentality as new people enter...that's the attraction at least in my perspective. We'll see how long they can keep those cars going and sourcing parts though.

[XelderX]

Just as a data point....my friend has compiled entry data for the Solo National Championships the last few years.

Registration just opened for the event yesterday. More people have registered for Street class in the first 14 hours than did total for street class in 2014.

[jjjanos]

Jeff, have you researched, or had experience with the tires being discussed?

There is no Goldilocks tire for my car. The idea has surface merit. Someone needs to test the water to see if the promised benefits are real.


I suspect YOU will be the only guy shaving them. ;)

I've been associated with this club since 1973 -- if there is an unfair advantage to be had, drivers always will seek to find it. It's simply the nature of the beast. I've seen IT guys using the super-expensive fuel at VIR. For what they spent in fuel, they could do a track day and actually go faster.

[RX555]

I wrote my letter a few days ago opposing this. I had to guess the reason for this proposal as still don't see it stated what problem this is trying so solve. Others such as Matt Downing have stated it well already, so I'll keep this short. I just don't see why you need a rule for this. If you want to run those tires, run them, but don't make it a rule.

[XelderX]

I wrote my letter a few days ago opposing this. I had to guess the reason for this proposal as still don't see it stated what problem this is trying so solve. Others such as Matt Downing have stated it well already, so I'll keep this short. I just don't see why you need a rule for this. If you want to run those tires, run them, but don't make it a rule.

If that actually worked the SCCA wouldn't need so many classes. In fact why have different classes within IT. Let's just have ITR and everything goes there.

We break it down to other classes because we want to run other cars, but keep some level of competitiveness. That helps participation. We care about being competitive. If we didn't, why would we spend so much time building to a ruleset when we could just do whatever we wanted and run untimed track days?

We race SCCA because it's the best place for competition. We want to spend less money on tires so we can run more races.

[XelderX]

I've been associated with this club since 1973 -- if there is an unfair advantage to be had, drivers always will seek to find it. It's simply the nature of the beast. I've seen IT guys using the super-expensive fuel at VIR. For what they spent in fuel, they could do a track day and actually go faster.

I use the slightly more expensive fuel at VIR (93 octane or whatever the lowest is). Mostly because it's convenient. I know exactly how many gallons I want and the pump counts it out for me. I don't own enough fuel jugs to get through a weekend and the cost of having to drive the tow vehicle around to get more fuel pretty much offsets the cost of track fuel. Of course that will all change when I finally get my ECU installed and tuned.

[downingracing]

If that actually worked the SCCA wouldn't need so many classes. In fact why have different classes within IT. Let's just have ITR and everything goes there.

We break it down to other classes because we want to run other cars, but keep some level of competitiveness. That helps participation. We care about being competitive. If we didn't, why would we spend so much time building to a ruleset when we could just do whatever we wanted and run untimed track days?

We race SCCA because it's the best place for competition. We want to spend less money on tires so we can run more races.

id be fine with one IT class if that what was already built. Cars would be classed with modifications to equalize the cars (best they can like current IT classes) and we would have all selected the car with modifications we liked to race. This would do nothing to control costs.

We have a set of IT classes to try and limit the modifications and provide a cheap place for races to play. Some cars are classes better than others, some cars have superior aftermarket support, and some are being raced for the love of the marquee.

Wanting to force the class to street tires in an effort to save money so more races can be run won’t work. The rules creep has already started with talk of changing the tire size rule to accommodate all classes on street tires. Any savings on street tires will be spent on new rims (2-3 sets min per racer) and could (and will) take years to recoup. And the rule actually requires an outlay of additional money at the start to get going. The exact opposite effect of what’s proposed. Pissing off the existing racers at the hope of attracting new ones is a bad idea. Even once that initial expense is offset, what have we accomplished? People who were running mid pack are still running mid pack but supposedly saving a few hundred dollars a year on race rubber?

I'd propose a new (old) class (yes - another class!) called Showroom Stock. True showroom stock as it was back in the beginning. Completely stock vehicles with ONLY a cage, race seat, belts, window net, fire system, and any paint job/number you want. Stock tires, brakes, bushings, shocks, drivetrain... Mandate a common street tire for the class and go. :)

[XelderX]

2-3 sets minimum? Dude, I've had one set of rims for my car in the 3 years I've raced it and those rims cost me $600...half the cost of a set of Hoosiers. Buying 15" rims isn't an issue when you can basically get a free set every time you buy a set of street tires over what Hoosiers cost.

[downingracing]

Two sets of rims with race tires mounted and a set of rain tires. (Three sets minimum) You'll burn any cost savings having a tire or two mounted at the track, so at least two additional rims are a necessity (to me) for race rubber.

I bought two sets of gently used sm7 tires for $530 shipped that can last a complete season.

[XelderX]

Two sets of rims with race tires mounted and a set of rain tires. (Three sets minimum) You'll burn any cost savings having a tire or two mounted at the track, so at least two additional rims are a necessity (to me) for race rubber.

I bought two sets of gently used sm7 tires for $530 shipped that can last a complete season.

I borrowed a pair of rims to do some testing with, but I only have 4 rims for the car. I can't run enough races to have a shot at a season championship so if there is a good chance of rain I don't race. It's way cheaper and there is just too much of a risk for extra damage making a mistake on a wet track. I don't race if I don't have enough tire left to get through the weekend.

I started out on used SM7s, then a season of used R7s. This year was my first year where I purchased brand new R7s. I run a 225 front tire so SM takeoffs don't do me much good on that half of the car.

Listen, I get it. You don't want to run street tires, but you need to look at the big picture. The trends have already started to play out. I came from Solo Street Prepared category. It's basically the autocross equivalent of IT. It's a Rcomp class. My car used to be a nationally competitive autocross car. It's transition to IT was very easy as most of the car didn't have to be changed. I still use the same suspension and drivetrain. Street Prepared autocross is dying. When I started out in F Street Prepared the first year at Nationals there were over 30 entries. Last year there was half that many. It's been on a steady decline. All the Street Prepared classes (production cars on R-comp classes...sound familiar?) have been dying. Despite that steady decline Solo Nationals has been setting attendance records every year. So where are the extra entries going? Racing slick classes aren't really seeing substantial growth. The answer is classes using street tires...by a huge amount.

So we can all sit here and debate about the costs of this or the reasons for that. What we all have to realize is that the current IT philosophy is no longer appealing. You can watch it's Solo sister slowly withering to nothing. Something has to change and the powers that be are looking for something. If street tires aren't the answer then it doesn't really matter anyway. The IT philosophy is no longer appealing in a meaningful way.

If IT dies off then most of us have few choices for racing within the SCCA without it getting more expensive...either in car purchase price or running costs. Those who can will, but for most of us we will have to find alternatives and sadly it probably won't be in SCCA sprint racing.

[downingracing]

I borrowed a pair of rims to do some testing with, but I only have 4 rims for the car. I can't run enough races to have a shot at a season championship so if there is a good chance of rain I don't race. It's way cheaper and there is just too much of a risk for extra damage making a mistake on a wet track. I don't race if I don't have enough tire left to get through the weekend.

I started out on used SM7s, then a season of used R7s. This year was my first year where I purchased brand new R7s. I run a 225 front tire so SM takeoffs don't do me much good on that half of the car.

Listen, I get it. You don't want to run street tires, but you need to look at the big picture. The trends have already started to play out. I came from Solo Street Prepared category. It's basically the autocross equivalent of IT. It's a Rcomp class. My car used to be a nationally competitive autocross car. It's transition to IT was very easy as most of the car didn't have to be changed. I still use the same suspension and drivetrain. Street Prepared autocross is dying. When I started out in F Street Prepared the first year at Nationals there were over 30 entries. Last year there was half that many. It's been on a steady decline. All the Street Prepared classes (production cars on R-comp classes...sound familiar?) have been dying. Despite that steady decline Solo Nationals has been setting attendance records every year. So where are the extra entries going? Racing slick classes aren't really seeing substantial growth. The answer is classes using street tires...by a huge amount.

So we can all sit here and debate about the costs of this or the reasons for that. What we all have to realize is that the current IT philosophy is no longer appealing. You can watch it's Solo sister slowly withering to nothing. Something has to change and the powers that be are looking for something. If street tires aren't the answer then it doesn't really matter anyway. The IT philosophy is no longer appealing in a meaningful way.
If IT dies off then most of us have few choices for racing within the SCCA without it getting more expensive...either in car purchase price or running costs. Those who can will, but for most of us we will have to find alternatives and sadly it probably won't be in SCCA sprint racing.

IT is not dying off. If there is one thing the SCCA is good at, it's keeping classes around for ever! :)

I still find the IT philosophy appealing. We (SCCA) need to do a better job of marketing what we're selling and getting people involved. From what I see - many people run other clubs because they want to run what they have built to their liking and they can do that. They get their ass kicked (because building to the rules will beat building what you like every time), but they get to play with their car and have fun. Some are even competitive until someone comes along and builds to the rule set. Other people do the LeChump thing because of the perception that it's cheaper. (It's not -been there/done that) The potential track time is big. But on any given weekend, there are only a handful of teams who can win and everyone else is just there to have fun. If you want to race with the top amateur racers in the country, the SCCA is where you come to play.

I don't see the trend you see. I've used street tires running some Chump races and they suck. If anyone is looking to just race and have fun, they can use street tires now and save whatever money they want. Racers will always look for any advantage they can get, so requiring street tires just means more research and development to find the best 200tw tire and setup (suspension/shaving/heat cycles). Everyone keeps saying shaving does nothing - I'd like the hard data showing that. I'm guessing shaving to 1-2/32nds could make a difference in a sprint race. One person shaves tires, everyone has to do it (this is all about making everyone competitive correct?)... Or finding the 'hot' tire for a track/condition.

When everyone has 10/10ths builds, tires can be the last .02 to make a difference. Most people use tires as a crutch for poor driving. Anyone on new R (or A) 7s can pickup a few seconds a lap. I've beat many people on new Hoosiers while I was on used Hankooks. I plan to beat most people running used SM7s this year regardless of what rubber they run. :)

[XelderX]

I'll be at the Solo National Championships in September. If shaving street tires got you any gains someone would be doing it. I've been running them for two years and haven't seen anyone shaving them in that time. People were shaving the old Toyos, but those aren't really used anymore. I'll be there on Bridgestone RE71s with just a few runs on them to scrub them in. I suspect the 700 or so other street tire competitors will be on unshaven tires too.

[downingracing]

I don't know autocross, but I'm guessing the heat and beating tires take are different from road racing. So what works for autocross may not work for road race. If this street tire mandate becomes the rule, it will be some time before anyone shares data on what works (shaving/heat cycles) for each tire brand. Racers dont always share when an advantage is on the table. :)

[XelderX]

I don't know autocross, but I'm guessing the heat and beating tires take are different from road racing. So what works for autocross may not work for road race. If this street tire mandate becomes the rule, it will be some time before anyone shares data on what works (shaving/heat cycles) for each tire brand. Racers dont always share when an advantage is on the table. :)

Overheating the front tires in 60 seconds is pretty common in my Corvette. We compete a lot on concrete which generates more grip. Think ambient to 160* in a minute. I would love to have straights as long as most road courses have to help manage tire temperature. I think the street tires will be the same or easier to make last on road courses.

[XelderX]

Here is one issue that I'm not happy about and it could skew people's data with regards to street tires. If you run street tires on a track with a lot of race tire rubber laid down the track will feel "greasy". The race tire rubber and street tire rubber don't work well together. Basically the street tires will perform better on a green track than one with a lot of race tire laps on it.

[downingracing]

Here is one issue that I'm not happy about and it could skew people's data with regards to street tires. If you run street tires on a track with a lot of race tire rubber laid down the track will feel "greasy". The race tire rubber and street tire rubber don't work well together. Basically the street tires will perform better on a green track than one with a lot of race tire laps on it.

That's a pretty big concern given that every other class running a race weekend will be on at least r-conp if not full slicks.

[bonespec]

Here is one issue that I'm not happy about and it could skew people's data with regards to street tires. If you run street tires on a track with a lot of race tire rubber laid down the track will feel "greasy". The race tire rubber and street tire rubber don't work well together. Basically the street tires will perform better on a green track than one with a lot of race tire laps on it.

Happens at the drag strip as well. "Street tires" or drag radials will pull the rubber up from the starting line leaving bald spots. Had a nice chat (and beers!) with Bill Bader Jr at Norwalk, now Summit Raceway during a Sport Compact event. YEARS ago. Not sure if the newer drag radial compounds, like the street tires SCCA racers now use, play along better. Need a cool Friday night to go check them out :)

[RX555]

If that actually worked the SCCA wouldn't need so many classes. In fact why have different classes within IT. Let's just have ITR and everything goes there.

We break it down to other classes because we want to run other cars, but keep some level of competitiveness. That helps participation. We care about being competitive. If we didn't, why would we spend so much time building to a ruleset when we could just do whatever we wanted and run untimed track days?

We race SCCA because it's the best place for competition. We want to spend less money on tires so we can run more races.

The gentlemen's agreements to run a certain tire in some Regions has worked pretty well. I still don't think 200tw should be a rule.
Having raced IT for about ten years, tire budgets have never been a concern to me. I was never the fastest car and always used my tires longer than I should have. I normally buy one set a year for 4 or so races and use the previous year's set for practice. I think there are quite a few IT racers that also use tires as long as they can. I only recently started buying Hoosiers and that was only because of availability and age of the Toyo/Hankook/Kumho I used to buy.
If a person can't afford a set of R comps once a year or so, not sure club racing is for them.

As an aside, I'll never get the mentality of not racing because it rains. Some real fun can be had and it will make you a better driver.

[XelderX]

The gentlemen's agreements to run a certain tire in some Regions has worked pretty well. I still don't think 200tw should be a rule.
Having raced IT for about ten years, tire budgets have never been a concern to me. I was never the fastest car and always used my tires longer than I should have. I normally buy one set a year for 4 or so races and use the previous year's set for practice. I think there are quite a few IT racers that also use tires as long as they can. I only recently started buying Hoosiers and that was only because of availability and age of the Toyo/Hankook/Kumho I used to buy.
If a person can't afford a set of R comps once a year or so, not sure club racing is for them.

As an aside, I'll never get the mentality of not racing because it rains. Some real fun can be had and it will make you a better driver.

I don't run in the rain because I don't have rain tires. If it was just damp and Rcomps were still the right tire then I would. So far in three years I've only not ran one race on purpose because of rain. All but one car in my entire group made the same choice. Hoosier rain tires are magic, but have very short useable lives. For me it just hasn't been a good financial move to buy them, maybe not even use them if we get lucky, and then throw them away because they age out in a year or two.

To your point about one set of Rcomps a year. I can afford that, but just like you that only gets me a handful of races every season. For me that means I run VIR three times a year and that's pretty much it. I want to race more, but having to ration it out because tires get used up keeps me from doing more races. I went through this exact scenario in Solo Street Prepared. Every year Hoosier prices would creep up. Competitors left and the chances for contingency dried up. I started not going to events to save tires. I'm now in a street tire class where I can afford two sets of tires a year and do four times the number of events. Contingency is a possibility again (Bridgestone took good care of us). We have three times the number of entries as my old Street Prepared class.

As I said before, I would be very interested to try the Hankook DOT-R tires and participate in a gentleman's agreement, but getting everyone to participate (like IT7) at every track in multiple east coast regions seems unlikely.

[dickita15]

my experience is the wheel cost is not significant, when we in IT7 went to 15" Nittos from 13" Hoosiers the cost for 4 wheels and tires was about the same price as a set of Hoosiers.
the way we structured the rules in New England is you can run any tire but you only get year end points on Nittos. That way the new guys can race with the shit they have laying around.

even with my positive experience the main reason i support this is having some differentiation between class. there is so little difference between T, ST, Limited Prep Prod and IT that it just makes sense to me to have classes that offer a different experience.

[Flyinglizard]

I had IT cars when this was first considered , about 6 yrs ago. I now run Prod cars only . I really have no dog , (I miss my Dog)
These are my observations ;

I have been racing on 200 TW tires for 8 yrs. The smaller sizes can get greasy when over driven and asking for repeated turns. Like Roebling road on 205/15 tires. The answer is to use large tires and keep the outer edges cool. The2800# /300WHP , truck runs on 315/17 rears and 255/17 fronts. 10.5 and 9 in wide rims. They last as long as 40 hrs and as short as 14rs. The brand matters less so then the size/loading/track conditions..
Considering that, the optimal tire is large and the wheel larger . 245/40/15 are run on 8 or 9in rims. For a SM style/ weight car.
I have no idea how IT would allow wide wheels. and keep them inside the fenders.

I think the right way for IT to use these would be to have a transition year with some weight adjustment for the Hoes and the 200s. I have run the same cars on both tires and the delta is about 6% weight turns out pretty close. ( at 110HP2200#)
Maybe remove 3% from the 200 cars and add 3% for the Hoes. I think the Hossiers will cover the weight even at 6%. But that can be changed or the 200 can be mandated after a year.

13 option ;https://simpletire.com/federal-p255-35r18-14em8afa-tires?stmodel=ss595&stcategory=uhp&sttype=passenger&gclid=Cj0KCQjwpvzZBRCbARIsACe8vyLdxgG2Mtpfin_hxYl-ySg6vgNdKR_x5-ZcptaS-O7Pg0f50oZeek0aAkEaEALw_wcB

[XelderX]

That's also a very good point I was thinking about yesterday, but didn't get around to posting before I went to sleep. The new crop of 200tw tires don't like to be pinched on narrow wheels. They perform best with proper width rims. I think most people would be fine with the IT allowed rim widths already in the rules since most of us are restricted by the contact patch/fender rule first anyway. My car can fit a lot of tire up front legally, but eventually it's depreciating returns as it's more rotating weight and more drag.

[Flyinglizard]

Letter #24914; For a one year trial period ,Please make 200 TW tires competitive by reducing weight 5% and allowing a wider wheel by 1 in per class .
For 2019 add weight to non 200 TW tires of 5% while keeping the prior 5% discount for 200 TW. This allows current tires to be run out and promotes the 200 tires.

[downingracing]

Weight break won’t work for many cars that can’t currently make min weight. And my ITA car is close to 5% over weight as is, so I won’t get any slower running Hoosiers (since I’m running them now).

[Flyinglizard]

Then please post a letter stating that and maybe weight should simply be added for the transition year.

[downingracing]

Already sent my letter against. Not interested in a transition year. ;)

[jjjanos]

even with my positive experience the main reason i support this is having some differentiation between class. there is so little difference between T, ST, Limited Prep Prod and IT that it just makes sense to me to have classes that offer a different experience.

Then combine T, ST Limited Prep Prod and IT into a single category. Instead of 45 cars spread across 15 classes, you have 45 cars spread over 5.

We can equalize performance by giving mods points. Too many points and you move up a class.

I mean, if we are going to be arguing about reclassifying cars because low HP cars are going to be killed by torque hogs, we might as well do a full nuclear exchange in terms of debating the finer points of whether an engine swap is the same as running Hoosiers versus TW200. I mean, what could go wrong?

[jjjanos]

Let's be honest.

Those of us who need to maintain momentum and consequently go in deeper and come out harder all the time, don't have a problem with premature use of their rubber. We can make what we're driving hit the apex over and over again without expending our rubber.

The TW200 tire rule is favored by people who are compensating by driving high HP. high torque cars. I get it, you need the dulling sensation of low grade rubber so you can last longer. What you need to do is slow down a bit, don't get so excited and you can make the rubber last longer.

<Ducks>

[Chip42]

I was with you until you said the street tires are supported by high hp cars argument. the handling advantage of a good handling car is magnified on lesser tires, and top speed is higher, too. but I've just driven the things for 4 years, on my IT car, in Hoosier fields. I don't know what I'm talking about.

and, FWIW, I'm largely against the proposal. Not becasue the tires suck, I like them. It's because of the difficulties, real and percieved, and the lack of REAL differentiation of IT or a clear path for those in IT who DO NOT want to continue with 200TW IT to remain competative with minimal added cost or modification. I AM in support of a newer class between Touring and IT specs using 200TWs, as a path for street AX and trackday guys to come in to club racing.

the crapcan series success has a lot more to do with "different than SCCA" than the tires. the tires are part of it, and there's a psychological component there, I'm sure, but they aren't the magic bullet.

what these tires WOULD DO once everything has stabilized around them is reduce the benefit of spending money on tires vs. those who stretch their budgets. anything we can do to reduce the benefit of spending money helps bunch the field up. I loved driving on 200s my package: 205/50R15 Dunlop ZII and ZIIss, 15x6 and 15x7 wheels (2017 rules change) ITB MR2 at 2340-2400 lbs, 400/450 springs, Koni RACE inserts, ST bars, ~105 hp, stock 4.3 final drive. They force you to be smoother, are easier to recover when you over do it, and don't suffer as much from lockups or slides as the DOT-Rs. they were plenty of fun and MADE ME A BETTER DRIVER. I got to my old SM6 times at sebring on them, and when I bolt on R7s now I am a lot faster than I used to be (with room to grow because I'm not used to them). and I never had to worry about heat cycles or weather or not I had tires. do they go off? yes. they slime up in a session (can be cooled) and they eventually hit an age wall (may be improved with storage) where they suddenly just SUCK even though they look fine. I got 3 years, 1/2 of a lemons race, and 2 weekends on a civic wagon at RRR on 2.5 sets (the half set is the one that sat for a long time and gave up on me - but I still ran them for 2 hours in a Lemons race). I saved a BUNCH of money vs. hoosiers.

But even knowing all of that, I think forcing them on the class with no other changes to prep rules, overall club racing strategy, or category philosophy is a bad idea. I'm not against what some people envision here, I'm against the idea that this is a solution. we have problems, 200TW tires may be part of the answer, but I think piecemealing parts of a solution outside of a cohesive strategy can do more harm than good.

[jjjanos]

I was with you until you said the street tires are supported by high hp cars argument. the handling advantage of a good handling car is magnified on lesser tires, and top speed is higher, too. but I've just driven the things for 4 years, on my IT car, in Hoosier fields. I don't know what I'm talking about.

Read the post again. I wasn't talking about tires..... :)

Having spectated at the 24-hour race at VIR (per the boy's request), those who envision cross-overs are smoking crack. If I read the rules correctly, Champcar requires the removal of all glass except the windshield. Anyone motivated enough to pull glass (without breaking it) and then put it back in (without breaking it) and then take it out again (without breaking), won't be put off by Hoosiers. Hell, it probably would be cheaper to buy new purple crack each weekend then it would be to screw around with the glass constantly.

[Chip42]

d'oh

I agree WRT crossover from LeChAmp. sounds good but it's not likely.

[Chip42]

A bunch of you wrote letters in response to the 200TW proposal and should have gotten a note that those letters have been reviewed and sent to the CRB. The ITAC submitted our recomendation to them last night and cleared all of the letters (as No Action Required) along with it.

I'm not going to comment further as there has been no decision by the CRB on the recomendation but once I know the final decision I'll pass it along here.

[Flyinglizard]

Most of you may be over thinking it. .. It's all about cost reduction. Cheaper is better .
You will not get any Chumpers in anything but ITEZ. There is no reason for them to make the car legal in the letter classes.
The Chumpers are way too developed and way faster.

Some crossover, and come backs, could be Vintage. Many ITcars are Vintage legal when run on ***200TW tires*** . Not all tho. :)

IT simply needs a definite difference from the ST/Prod, look and classing. Not another class. The ITAC should step up the calendar and get this done in the next month and not next year or later. as the time frame has been 5 yrs in the past.

Make the change now for ITC and ITB. Max Spec the tire size and increase the rim size.

[jjjanos]

Most of you may be over thinking it. .. It's all about cost reduction. Cheaper is better .

And it has not been established that this proposal is less expensive.


You will not get any Chumpers in anything but ITEZ. There is no reason for them to make the car legal in the letter classes.
The Chumpers are way too developed and way faster.

Which undercuts one of the points used to support the switch.


Some crossover, and come backs, could be Vintage. Many ITcars are Vintage legal when run on ***200TW tires*** . Not all tho. :)

Which is not a point that supports the switch. There are VERY few IT cars that are legal in the two big vintage groups, so no advantage there. And since the vintage guys are 7/10ths racers who scream about getting too close to them when you leave a 4-foot gap between cars while passing them, I don't see car counts increasing from someone who has an unsatisfied, burning desire to come race against 1990's cars that drive close to 10/10ths. Moreover, the same scarcity of eligible cars impacts moving from vintage to IT.



IT simply needs a definite difference from the ST/Prod, look and classing. Not another class. The ITAC should step up the calendar and get this done in the next month and not next year or later. as the time frame has been 5 yrs in the past.


Assertion offered without a single thread of evidence suggesting why.


Make the change now for ITC and ITB. Max Spec the tire size and increase the rim size.

And it's THOSE very classes that are going to be screwed the most by the switch. By all means, start with them.

Be VERY careful for what you ask. You make a bunch of guys buy wheels for a 200TW tire and that change requires a host of other changes to remain competitive, they'll just go whole-hog on it. Remove the glass, swap out the engine and go play with ChampCar where the cost/minute of track time is far, far better than with SCCA.

[kgobey]

Some information I've been able to figure out since this thread started:

1. Not all 200TW tires are made equaly fast or resiliant. There is a huge disparity between tires, we'll end up on one or other of the currently fast tires.
2. Rain competence is not inherent in the 200TW tires group. We will all need to have tires for rain and tires for dry.
3. Not all 200TW tires are compatible with cold weather. As cold weather compatibility is also not guaranteed the wet weather tires will likely be the only choice for cold weather driving.

The 2 or 3 brands that work in the warm and dry do last longer than 40TW tires, and grip to the very end, but after playing with the Hoosier R7's this year, I was able to race the R7's to the cords with proper maintenance (wrapping them, storing them in my basement between races) and got excellent results, 3 more cycles than last year.

[Flyinglizard]

You can buy a set of wheels with mounted tires for the same or maybe less then 1 set of Hoes.

I run R 7s on my HP VW and they go about as fast as the radial slicks- But are a touch shorter and wider. The fall off from new to 4 heats is a little higher with R7 tho. Both will go 8-10 heats or cords.

We get 30hrs on the rears of the Super truck, 315 Nittos. They work fine , some are faster , some like water better,. etc all true.
But, there are choices that play in the same few percent of each other for overall speed.

Stand back and look at the classes from the stands. The tires on that(Prod x) car cost 1200$ per set and they toss them at 4 heats. The tires on that GTL car 1200 per set, etc.
But the tires on that IT car cost 600$ and they play all year until they cord .

Funny how looking at the names on the tire letters, the younger racers want to go fast and spend lots of money while the old coots know that it is about the racing and the cheaper the racing can be the more racers will race.
It's not rocket science ,it's basic marketing .
When the tires cost as much as 50% of the car , you can do better. Many of these ITB cars sell for 2000$

[gran racing]

I absolutely won't disagree that the cost of tires is a big factor in many peoples' budgets. Personally, when the street tire proposal came out I didn't have enough concrete evidence it would truly provide a cost savings. I had multiple very smart people close to racing who are absolutely convinced it would not result in a cost savings with some good points. I tended to think it could, but without really being convinced it was a tough sell at that time given what I knew (or didn't know) as facts. I don't think this is totally dead but more people need to have a better understanding of the street tire facts.

[Greg Amy]

Data point: I bought six Nitto NT-01 tires at the beginning of the year for the historics 914. I've driven three weekends thus far:

- Thompson Historics. One 20-min qualifier and three 20-min races;
- New Jersey Historics. Two 20-min qualifiers, three 20-min races, one 40(?)-min 'bonus' HRG race.
- Lime Rock Historics. One ~1 hour jaunt on backroads to Falls Village green and back to LRP, one 45-minute qualifier, two 20-minute races.

(Session counts are from memory; may be more or less).

The initial four tires are still on the car. They are driving the same as the first time I drove them at Thompson. Plan on driving them at Thompson again in October, not even going to rotate them.

I've rotated them once (cross), before the LRP event, just "because". The other two new tires are still on the tire rack in the trailer, haven't touched the ground except to get rolled into the trailer. I can't tell if they're worn. I've attempted to measure tread "depth" of the old ones compared to the new ones but it's hard to say, since the "depth" on new is actually higher on the old ones due to light debris pickup to/from pit lane/trailer/garage (I was on asphalt all weekend at LRP).

These are 100TW tires.

$860 delivered from Discount Tire for all six (coupon and a rebate card). 205/50-15.

Just a single anecdotal data point.

[dickita15]

I have been running the Nitto 100 TW for 4 or 5 years in IT7. they last 6-8 weekends I bought a set in May form Jegs for $612.00 delivered. the Hoosiers used to fall off a lot on the third weekend. the Nittos are about the same until they cord.
when we switched to Nittos we went from a 13" to 15" wheel. the first set of tires with new wheels was about the same price as a set of Hoosiers.

since changing i have had much lower failure rate on front rotors and wheel bearings. not sure if it just the reduced force or it may help that the 15" wheels provide better cooling.

[Flyinglizard]

Dave, maybe those racers are simply bad at math? Many are. Buy cheaper tires, race all year . You should save enough to race an extra race or two.
The only downside that I can see is that lap records will have to be reset. Alignments may require change. Nothing huge or costly .
Wheel size may change a little if you want to go as fast as the tires will let you, but you have the option , if the rule change is smartly written.