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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.