Tracking #24834Originally Posted by Greg Amy
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.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks