Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 128

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

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Mount Juliet, TN
    Posts
    154

    Default

    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.
    David Plott
    Atlanta Region #289721
    #54 1973 Datsun 240Z
    Mount Juliet, TN

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    newington, ct
    Posts
    4,181

    Default

    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.
    Dave Gran
    Real Roads, Real Car Guys Real World Road Tests
    Go Ahead - Take the Wheel's Free Guide to Racing

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chicagoland, IL
    Posts
    213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Knestis View Post
    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.
    Last edited by kgobey; 05-24-2018 at 09:41 AM.
    Racer of old BMW's.
    MCSCC ITS Class E30 325is
    Racing where IT still exists: http://www.mcscc.org/

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC US
    Posts
    1,626

    Default

    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.
    Steve Eckerich
    ITS 18 Speedsource RX7
    ITR RX8 (under construction)

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chicagoland, IL
    Posts
    213

    Default

    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
    Last edited by kgobey; 05-25-2018 at 09:41 AM. Reason: Added the NITTO NT01
    Racer of old BMW's.
    MCSCC ITS Class E30 325is
    Racing where IT still exists: http://www.mcscc.org/

  6. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kgobey View Post

    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.
    Jason Carroll - NER IT7 #07

  7. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kgobey View Post
    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.
    Jason Carroll - NER IT7 #07

  8. #48
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Lagrangeville, NY
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
    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)
    Chris Raffaelli
    24ITA

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Pickerington, Ohio
    Posts
    760

    Default

    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.
    Matt Downing
    1995 Honda Civic EX Coupe - ITA
    Ohio Valley Region, SCCA

  10. #50
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    22

    Default

    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?
    Jeff Giordano 81 ITS, ChampCar Stangs

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    hampden,ma.usa
    Posts
    3,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffGio View Post
    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.
    dick patullo
    ner scca IT7 Rx7

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    High Point, NC
    Posts
    367

    Default

    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

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,339

    Default

    From the July 2018 Fastrack Prelim Minutes:


    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/
    Not my circus...not my monkeys...

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    High Point, NC
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
    Letter sent.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Wandering the USA
    Posts
    1,341

    Default

    How would this affect an IT car running in STL under the IT prep rules???
    Marty Doane
    ITS RX-7 #13 (sold)
    2016 Winnebago Journey (home)

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    High Point, NC
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eagle7 View Post
    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?

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    hampden,ma.usa
    Posts
    3,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eagle7 View Post
    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.
    dick patullo
    ner scca IT7 Rx7

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dickita15 View Post
    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."

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga
    Posts
    630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
    Letter sent.

  20. #60
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conover View Post
    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

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •