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

[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]

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?

Submitting today. I’ll let ya know.

[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]

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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.