ST bonus or ST classes?

[Pete@Marcor]

I am just going to gauge interest here, as it would seem that a number of competitors are interested in having a provision for Street Tires to be given a break in time at a Regional Solo 2.

Our options are as follows:

i) We give approximately a 2% time break to vehicles competing on street tires. Street tires will be identified as a tire that has a treadwear of 140 or greater. During an event, there will be 2 sets of classes, and they will appear as S-AS, R-AS, S-BS, R-BS... etc, meaning Street Tire-A Stock, and RCompound-A Stock, etc... Then, at the end of the day, the Street tire and R-compound classes will be combined together for awards and trophies. The reason for this is that the software can only apply a factor to a class, not to individual competitors, so to get the bonus for a Street tire, we will have to post it as a different class.

ii) We use the SCCA ST classes pretty much as is. I am not a big fan of this option, as it requires the inclusion in a rule book that would be nice to have in competitors hands already. Also, my fear is that because of the prep involved, we will eventually end up with a large portion of competitors in those few classes.

I feel that to use the SCCA ST classes, we would need to move totally to the SCCA rules, and this is not open for discussion to be used for the 2007 Ontario Regional series.

Thoughts, please?

[13inches]

I'm all for #1 as long as 2% is considered a fair number..which I think it is.

Can the software easily combine classes at the end of the day?

[JoeT]

I'm all for street as well #1

But the real issue is Keeping stock cars "Stock", if it means doing that by doing option 1, then I'm all for that too.

[Travis]

I think the root of the problem is that there are no true stock classes. People focus on on R-compounds, but this is simply one of the several options available to a "stock" competitor (albeit by far the most effective option).

Regarding option 1:
Even if you organizers solve the issue on r-compounds, you'll still have to worry about the rest of the prep point options.

With a street tire stock class, personally I'd just slap on a rear sway, wider wheels, shaved Azenis 615s, adjustable dampers and voila... same problem as we had before - Factory stock car drivers complaining about competing against "Stock" legal cars with $3k worth of performance parts.

You either have to create a true factory stock class (or appropriate time break), or change people's perceptions & expectations that Stock class is for unmodified vehicles.

Regarding option 2:
My perception of the SCCA ST classes are to allow people with common street car modifications (intake, exhaust, etc) a place to compete on equal footing.
Since the root of the issue seems to be R-comps vs street tires, I'm not sure we have a significant number of people in this same boat since this would result in the same problems I mentioned on option 1.

[finboy]

either is a good idea

i don't think any series lost drivers because of adding a class

but i do think you would LOOSE people if you take away a class

[finboy]

...Regarding option 1:
Even if you organizers solve the issue on r-compounds, you'll still have to worry about the rest of the prep point options.

With a street tire stock class, personally I'd just slap on a rear sway, wider wheels, shaved Azenis 615s, adjustable dampers and voila... same problem as we had before - Factory stock car drivers complaining about competing against "Stock" legal cars with $3k worth of performance parts.....

the street tire issue is not a 100% solution.. but it will solve 90% of the pain

that part about maximizing shaving etc.. will only apply to the true hardcore who want to win at all expenses

[MastaDeeMon]

Option #1 is my choice. What we don't need is more classes, and I've run the SCCA STS class in the US and I didn't agree with it one bit.

2% seems fair, but it will be interesting how this plays out and if an advantage can be found, will people jump on it(or the person that finds it first).

Out of curiosity, how many people ran street tires last year?

[Pete@Marcor]

I think the root of the problem is that there are no true stock classes. People focus on on R-compounds, but this is simply one of the several options available to a "stock" competitor (albeit by far the most effective option).

Regarding option 1:
Even if you organizers solve the issue on r-compounds, you'll still have to worry about the rest of the prep point options.

With a street tire stock class, personally I'd just slap on a rear sway, wider wheels, shaved Azenis 615s, adjustable dampers and voila... same problem as we had before - Factory stock car drivers complaining about competing against "Stock" legal cars with $3k worth of performance parts.

You either have to create a true factory stock class (or appropriate time break), or change people's perceptions & expectations that Stock class is for unmodified vehicles.

Regarding option 2:
My perception of the SCCA ST classes are to allow people with common street car modifications (intake, exhaust, etc) a place to compete on equal footing.
Since the root of the issue seems to be R-comps vs street tires, I'm not sure we have a significant number of people in this same boat since this would result in the same problems I mentioned on option 1.

I don't want to drift too far from my original request, but I would like to comment that part of the prep schedule and level of prep we have at the moment is that it has come down from years previous, a lot of the authorized mods in Stock are allowed in the US, and another is cost.

Showrook Stock road racing used to be pretty popular, but it was by no means cheap. I have read on here of an example where a FACTORY original shock absorber would cost a competitor $750.00 per corner. I do not want to be the person to tell that person that they have to buy OE shocks when theirs wear out, to keep costs down in a series.

Yes, tires are a big expense per year. If we get an appropriate tire bonus, that eliminates that as a cause of concern. Some cars have cheap aftermarket shocks available to them. Some do not. Since it is a common mod, we simply allow all cars to change them. But, how much speed do you think that is achieved from shocks? .2 seconds? .4 seconds? .6 seconds? Probably closer to .2-.4 seconds.

Also, brakes are another example. Have you priced out factory original rotors for a 350Z with Brembos?

It is not a requirement to spend a lot of money to win in Solo. You probably will have to use more brain power, but you can spend your dollars wisely. My whole car could be duplicated for $3500-4000 range, including all of the prep, and the tires that I used.

Some cars have funny OE wheel sizes. If you do not want to run the OE wheel, or buy the car used, it costs a lot to go out and buy an aftermarket wheel in the OE size.

I can give you tons of examples, but I really cannot see Stock class cars being STOCK in the foreseeable future. Where would one stop when the rules were getting written to keep factory equipment?

Regarding your comments on what the the SCCA ST classes are, the mods are all the same, but you still end up with the situation where if you do not have the right car, you are pretty much out of luck. Except for this year, in STS, if you did not have a 1989 Civic Si, you did not win.

[max attack]

Not that I'm in favor completely or opposed to a street tire bonus but 2% is short by about 5 or 6% of the real difference.That comparison that grm did(right after the season ended that I won BSS on azenis:( )showed that an azenis would be about 8% slower than the top flight R(hoosier,victoracer).
The new gen of azenis are maybe a touch better then the 1st but the 710 and new hoosier are far better now.

One thing that worked out well is that I bought the azenis at cost for 100 bucks a tire,ran the season and then sold them for $300 slightly used-only ran the few regional events on them so they were nearly new.Not bad to run a series,win the class and only cost $100 for tires.

[tanney]

It is not a requirement to spend a lot of money to win in Solo.I won B1 in 2001 in an $1800 '89 CRX Si with used BFG R1s that I paid $300 for rims and tires..... and took 5th Overall! It CAN be done on a budget.

[finboy]

the point being.. all people want is a chance to be competitve

if you win your class.. that should be just a bonus!!

[Tashko]

If you use this test as an indication http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/images/samples/august_100_115_tiretest.pdf

4% should do the trick based on V710 vs. RT-615

I vote for option #1 if it's closer to 4%...do I hear 3..going once..going twice...

edit:

How is the 2% applied?

[soloZ]

If you were to run in a street tire class would you have to use the stock size tires? or would you be able to use the two points for a different size rim and tire.

[Tashko]

If you were to run in a street tire class would you have to use the stock size tires? or would you be able to use the two points for a different size rim and tire.

...and does this street-tire bonus apply only to STOCK classes or to ALL classes (SS, SP)?

Thanks.

[brujack]

I really hate to keep dragging up the same old point but here we go: What is the purpose of the Regional Series? Answer that and all of your classing questions go away. If you are trying to attract the best competitors to the series--shock of shock, they all run R compounds and adding a street tire class or adjustment does not make any sense. If you are trying to attract new competitors to the sport then you are directly competing with the club series and adding a street tire adjustment or class makes sense. Here is the but on this one--since the Regional series is not financially liable for the success or failure of the series, competing with the clubs who are financially liable is not fair to them. Before anyone jumps all over me and says the Regional Series is financially liable because they have a budget, they are honestly smoking crack. I can say from my clubs perspective that the Regional Series did not pay a cent to host any Regional events that were organized by my club, but took a flat fee to cover the Regional costs. My club and other clubs lost money as a result of running Regional events and were not compensated. I fully expect that if the Regional series were paying and collecting for the last couple of years that they would be running at a loss. Add this up over a few years and the series goes under like any other business.

Not trying to attack anyone directly but the direction of the series. Since Pete is the one in charge now, I would expect a response from him on where he is taking this series and how he is planning on doing it.

Bruce Jackson

[13inches]

edit:

How is the 2% applied?Take 98% of the raw time, then apply the pax factor.

Or take 98% of the pax factor

Same diff.

[miataboi]

Regarding your comments on what the the SCCA ST classes are, the mods are all the same, but you still end up with the situation where if you do not have the right car, you are pretty much out of luck. Except for this year, in STS, if you did not have a 1989 Civic Si, you did not win.

Let's be honest... that's not just the case with STS (altho there are other competitive cars... just that the Si is the cheapest car to build with a proven recipe)....

Mini in H-Stock
Cooper-S in G-stock
Integra in D-Stock?

Same with all of them...


IF there was a ST class... I may run some events...
But it's not REALLY aligned with the rest of our ruleset... but it COULD be a newbie class.. as it does cater to the general tuner off the street....

[Doug Phillips]

2% seems fair. Can you run a slick shaved high end street tire or do they have to be street legal?

I would expect that someone buying less than uber r-compounds would be just as pissed if he was always beat by a street tire as the street tire people are now. The comparison should not be to the uber tires as that would force all r-compound guys down that path.

I also vote no further delay in release of the rulebook. :)

[soloZ]

I would say if you want a street tire class the tires have to be driven to the event on the car and close to full tread at the begining of the season. Also stock tire size from the factory.

[Marsh]

I'm not opposed to option #1. I am opposed to option #2. I believe 2% is a fair number. R's will still be faster, but it allows street tires to be some what competitive at the class level.

BTW this rule will NOT work in cold weather when street tires work almost as well as R's (below 10 deg C).

[miataboi]

some venues will not like streets because of massively increased noise... and they mark the pavement more, often...

just some thoughts... for the good of the sport.

(see: Brampton centre, etc.)

[DareBee]

Ryan B - and all.

I don't think that you can limit tire size and selection to OE in ST classes. Most tuners and newbies wont have a set of stockers for their vehicles and wont go out of their way to spend good money on undersized rubber that looks like crap on their slammed ride.

There is 2% difference between a 710 and A032.
But on the other hand I will not argue the bonus, because IT IS NEEDED and will always be debated.
The only way around the %# is going with classes that don't intermingle; We don't have enough competitors in a lot of classes as is so keep the %age and call it GOOD.

[fritZman]

I'm all over option #1!

To make any potential size issue fair, carry the same rules as R compounds. Stock classes can run any sized street tire they can squeeze on an OEM sized rim, and higher classes can run a larger rim/tire as one would with R compounds (with the same prep points if applicable).

While 2% doesn't completely cover the gap (shaved or not), it makes things closer and a LOT more fun. Are you listening MCO? ;)

PS: The comparison btw Azenis and V710s in GRM was with 2 different cars. Why GRM didn't use one car for all comparison is baffling and frankly somewhat suspicious... :confused:

[Tashko]

...

PS: The comparison btw Azenis and V710s in GRM was with 2 different cars. Why GRM didn't use one car for all comparison is baffling and frankly somewhat suspicious... :confused:

Oh, I didn't catch that. I thought it was all with the Sentra and on the same course. That's what I get for not actually reading the article and only looking at the pictures.:o

I'll stick with R's since they hide my driving mistakes...

[Pete@Marcor]

Mini in H-Stock
Cooper-S in G-stock
Integra in D-Stock?

Same with all of them...


IF there was a ST class... I may run some events...
But it's not REALLY aligned with the rest of our ruleset... but it COULD be a newbie class.. as it does cater to the general tuner off the street....

Hey Jeff, this is actually one of the concerns I have with going to the SCCA rules. It usually happens in Stock, but often it ends up that there is a "car of the year" in a particular class, and 80-85% of the top cars in a class are that one model. The Integra Type R has done very well at staying competitive over the years, and now that the Nationals have gone back to ashpalt, from concrete, it did very well again this past year.

There have been a couple of guys trying the Mazda 3 or new Civic in HS, and had some success. In GS, as soon as the Mini Cooper S came out with an LSD option, pretty much every National level competitor running a Cooper S changed to an LSD equipped car. Last year at the US Nationals, out of 11 trophies in GS, 2 were NON 2005-2006 Cooper S'. One 2003 Cooper S and one Sentra Spec V.

I am very happy at the diversity that we get in Stock classes here in Ontario, and I am concerned about that going away.

Yes, ST classes cater to the tuner crowd, and that is why we thought about it.

[Pete@Marcor]

I would say if you want a street tire class the tires have to be driven to the event on the car and close to full tread at the begining of the season. Also stock tire size from the factory.

This might be a point of contention for some competitors. I cannot possibly condone telling a competitor that we are mandating a lower grip tire, to keep costs in line, but now they have to buy a new set of tires every season.

IF we go with a street tire bonus, I would expect that the direction it would take would be that it will be across the board, and no restrictions on the sizing.

We already "charge" a competitor a prep point for going to a non-stock wheel size. That usually makes a competitor sacrifice the ability to change a sway bar. So, in some cases, a US SCCA Stock car could be faster than ours.

[finboy]

just remember.. this is for REGIONAL type of events..


A LOT of the ideas are perfect for club events to make things interesting


but Pete.. you're planning on things for the region.. which hopefully reflects items that happen outside and around us as well


are the rules and changes going to reflect "national" type of issues OR
just our REGIONAL issues?

[tanney]

are the rules and changes going to reflect "national" type of issues OR
just our REGIONAL issues?Since the Provincial rules are derived from the National rules, what issues are you referring to?

[MazdaMatt]

2% is an excellent rule.

This allows people on streets to be competitive. Though their tires may need more than 2% bonus, it is freeing a prep point that could be put towards something else.

[Logan]

How many "tuners" is the series trying to attract and RETAIN by implementing the 2% rule?

[finboy]

i think the word "tuner" could refer to any newbie with a stock or slightly or modified ride on street tires that actually stays with the sport..

you might get a bunch of first/only try types out.. and that's fine
(they tried it and didn't like it)


its those who are on streets.. and stick around and come back for more


the street tire bonus should be one reason why they don't leave..

[Pete@Marcor]

but Pete.. you're planning on things for the region.. which hopefully reflects items that happen outside and around us as well


The rule that we are talking about right now, regarding an accommodation for street tires, will be for the Ontario Regional series.

are the rules and changes going to reflect "national" type of issues OR
just our REGIONAL issues?

I do not understand when you ask this. The accommodation for street tires is something that has been raised by an Ontario Region competitor that felt that street tire competitors were getting shafted. To try to appease the non-serious competitors, and to discuss the possibility that there are some competitors that want to use their street tires for competition, we are discussing a way of making the Ontario Regional series more friendly to street tire competitors.

What the National rules do is only loosely related to what we as a Region do for our Regional series. We base our rule book on the National one.

[soloZ]

Ryan B - and all.

I don't think that you can limit tire size and selection to OE in ST classes. Most tuners and newbies wont have a set of stockers for their vehicles and wont go out of their way to spend good money on undersized rubber that looks like crap on their slammed ride.

There is 2% difference between a 710 and A032.
But on the other hand I will not argue the bonus, because IT IS NEEDED and will always be debated.
The only way around the %# is going with classes that don't intermingle; We don't have enough competitors in a lot of classes as is so keep the %age and call it GOOD.

ok fare enough, then the street tire bonus should only be awarded to full tread or unshaven tires and no use of any chemical grip helper

[Pete@Marcor]

ok fare enough, then the street tire bonus should only be awarded to full tread or unshaven tires and no use of any chemical grip helper

We cannot create rules that have no possible means of being policed.

[soloZ]

We cannot create rules that have no possible means of being policed.

Wouldn't shaven street tires be easy to see? Also how many street tire classes would you make? Most people that do anything related to being "tuners" normally do modifications to enjoy their cars more like engine swaps.

[Pete@Marcor]

Wouldn't shaven street tires be easy to see? Also how many street tire classes would you make? Most people that do anything related to being "tuners" normally do modifications to enjoy their cars more like engine swaps.

I have been in the wheel and tire industry for years. I cannot tell if a tire has been shaved, after the first few times it has bveen used. So, a used tire with a lot of rubber worn off looks like a shaved tire, too.

[brute66]

Some form of street-tire scenario would be welcome to those of us increasingly strapped for time to devote to our hobby. However, just want to confirm the following:

- Option #1 - under this scenario, would we still have the same # of prep points in each respective class, but merely be scored in a 'street' class which would mirror the same root class those with R's are on? IE. In a stock class, the two prep points could be used for a different size rim, plus a sway bar, for example?

- Option # 2 - The US STS/STX classes - don't these enable springs, strut braces, camber plates, etc.? If memory serves, judging from the US experience, this is not a cheap proposition if one's to be competitive.

Could Option #1 be run as a 'demonstration' class in 07, with knowledge gained to help all concerned decide if the true US-Based ST rules should be used for 08?

Regardless of the outcome, this is a useful debate.

[thekid]

If option #1 were implemented, wouldn't giving the 2% street tire bonus mean, that having to take a prep point for using R compounds would no longer be needed?

[Marsh]

If option #1 were implemented, wouldn't giving the 2% street tire bonus mean, that having to take a prep point for using R compounds would no longer be needed?

Excellent point, and I agree.

[soloZ]

Hey I like that idea, then I would only need a point for different size wheels

[Pete@Marcor]

Some form of street-tire scenario would be welcome to those of us increasingly strapped for time to devote to our hobby. However, just want to confirm the following:

- Option #1 - under this scenario, would we still have the same # of prep points in each respective class, but merely be scored in a 'street' class which would mirror the same root class those with R's are on? IE. In a stock class, the two prep points could be used for a different size rim, plus a sway bar, for example?

This is a possibility, but I would want to think about whether or not Stock was allowed to continue to have 2 prep points available to it, or only one. The goal here is not to increase the prep in stock, but to allow street tires to more competitive.

- Option # 2 - The US STS/STX classes - don't these enable springs, strut braces, camber plates, etc.? If memory serves, judging from the US experience, this is not a cheap proposition if one's to be competitive.

Could Option #1 be run as a 'demonstration' class in 07, with knowledge gained to help all concerned decide if the true US-Based ST rules should be used for 08?

Regardless of the outcome, this is a useful debate.

The main reason (in my humble opinion) that ST in the US (STS, STX, STU) has become so popular, is not because of the tires, but because the classes are a little different than the US' regular classes. It allows a competitor to put coilovers and a header on, but not have to go to the full blown US SP. Their ST classes are similar to what our SS class is.

And again, I don't think that any aspect of this street tire discussion is related to cost. It will allow a casual competitor more freedom to compete, and feel that they are getting closer, and possibly the somewhat serious compmetitor the ability to run a real high end tire and not have to change tires, but I still think that the hardcore competitor will still win. They are simply more prepared to do what it takes to win.

[DareBee]

And again, I don't think that any aspect of this street tire discussion is related to cost. It will allow a casual competitor more freedom to compete, and feel that they are getting closer, and possibly the somewhat serious compmetitor the ability to run a real high end tire and not have to change tires, but I still think that the hardcore competitor will still win. They are simply more prepared to do what it takes to win.


Pete

I AGREE 100% WITH THIS REASONING.

Some of people who are more casual can show up under the mind set that they have 2% to make them more competitive (percieved or real doesn't matter because THEY are happy). Not have to spend an hour changing tires or have the means to haul tires in the first place.
It just makes things nice.
The guy who will spend the money to max out every detail will still win if he knows how to drive.

[finboy]

but Pete.. you're planning on things for the region.. which hopefully reflects items that happen outside and around us as well

The rule that we are talking about right now, regarding an accommodation for street tires, will be for the Ontario Regional series.




are the rules and changes going to reflect "national" type of issues OR just our REGIONAL issues?



I do not understand when you ask this. The accommodation for street tires is something that has been raised by an Ontario Region competitor that felt that street tire competitors were getting shafted. To try to appease the non-serious competitors, and to discuss the possibility that there are some competitors that want to use their street tires for competition, we are discussing a way of making the Ontario Regional series more friendly to street tire competitors.



i mentioned earlier that I agree…. The idea of providing something to the street tire drivers is a good thing (both ideas, are better than what the Canadian rules have regarding street tires and what's been adopted in our Ontario Region)

I've discussed this with a few people.. And the sugestion for adding street tire classes are for the following reasons:

-you won't loose drivers by adding classes (no crybaby effect, people will be placed in a class that should provide closer competion)
-timing/logistics.. adding classes is easier to managage vs. trying to figure out who's running streets, then swaps to R's during any given day
-adding street tire classes.. The region might actually see more people flock to street tires (save their Rcompund money and put it towards other things for their daily driver)
-adopt/modifiy the current SCCA structure for the street tires
-easier transition to go SCCA classing in the future if that's the direction




What the National rules do is only loosely related to what we as a Region do for our Regional series. We base our rule book on the National one.


I'm just saying.. If you look at the current mission statement and see what actually happens with our rules, its more like Ontario makes up their rules.. Then
Looks at the National rules second… For an ONTARIO SERIES shouldn't the rules reflect more about whats around us??

Let the Clubs do all the other things..

St. Lac I think uses a closer SCCA class structure so does our brothers on the Quebec side why is that??






Current Mission Statement
To build Solo II into a North American Class competitive skills event, keeping the unique Ontario/Canadian focus in mind.


Is the mission statement working?

[Travis]

Here's a suggestion:

Allow 3 pips for stock classes, with R-compounds costing 2 instead of 1.
This wouldn't make any change for R-compound competitors. If this still isn't enough, how about 4 pips for stock classes, with R-compounds costing 3.

[finboy]

Here's a suggestion:

Allow 3 pips for stock classes, with R-compounds costing 2 instead of 1.
This wouldn't make any change for R-compound competitors. If this still isn't enough, how about 4 pips for stock classes, with R-compounds costing 3.


suggestion 2..

use SCCA rules for Stock classes.. our rules are close already, git rid of the wheel/tire combo in our rules .. then the pax would be more fair

[rubber and wheel (used wheels that is) prices are usually cheaper
in stock sizes]

IF Canada goes to SCCA classes in the future.. you'll have a head start then tooo

[thekid]

[rubber and wheel (used wheels that is) prices are usually cheaper
in stock sizes]


Maybe on older cars, but not on newer cars that are coming with 17"/18"/19" wheels...

The only reason I ran 15's is because they're cheaper than running 17's. I don't run a wider tire than stock either.

[finboy]

true dat Brian!!

remove cost out of the factor (yes cost means a ton i can appreciate that factor)

but....would you run in a street tire class then?

[thekid]

^ Cost would be a big factor though... I'd probably still run R's, only because the R's are cheaper than the street tires and stand up to the abuse better. (vs. Prematurely killing my street tires which often only last me one season to start with).

If you were to implement a rule like this you'd have to give at least one years notice though because alot of people would be stuck without spare rims in the right size.... and lots of people would be left with a bunch of rims that were useless too them.

[finboy]

PS: The comparison btw Azenis and V710s in GRM was with 2 different cars. Why GRM didn't use one car for all comparison is baffling and frankly somewhat suspicious... :confused:

this one??

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/images/samples/august_100_115_tiretest.pdf

[finboy]

If you were to implement a rule like this you'd have to give at least one years notice though because alot of people would be stuck without spare rims in the right size.... and lots of people would be left with a bunch of rims that were useless too them.

yup.. i guess the organizers would have to look at what the state is in ontario, and nationally.. and across the border

and determine what direction the region wants to go in the future

some change is welcomed.. sometimes its hard to swallow..





do the same.... stays the same........

[Maddog]

I think someone asked this earlier but was never answered; Would the street tire bonus apply to other classes like SS & SP? If so, then I just saved a bunch of money not buying Rs this year. :D I think I can stretch my KDWs another year.

[finboy]

option one

i think the results would be something like

http://www.wpg-autox.org/results.php?id=66

[tanney]

I think someone asked this earlier but was never answered; Would the street tire bonus apply to other classes like SS & SP? If so, then I just saved a bunch of money not buying Rs this year. :D I think I can stretch my KDWs another year.Yes

[searle]

more classes means less folks running in existing classes, so overall it just isnt viable.

Going back to the 2% bonus at least gives someone a chance without forcing them to buy tires *AND* wheels, *AND* having to transport them to an event.

the 2% bonus was not perfect, but was an easy compromise to allow non-race tires/wheels to compete.

And, ask Ben Wong. Whenever I ran street tires and took a 2% bonus, I placed almost exactly the same relative to him and other Camaro drivers. it was *awfully* close (for reasonable good sgtreet tires, like the KDs with 240 rating).

[MazdaMatt]

two thoughts:


Is running streets really any cheaper? I MANGLED my street tires last year and my R's barely saw any wear. Considering i bought used R's on rims for 600 bucks and i bought 4 streets that got mangled for 500 bucks... cost just doesn't look like an issue to me.


Also, 2% is perfect, but a shaved tire is not a street tire. If you runs streets, you are checked for STREET LEGAL tread. Seems easy enough, that gets my vote.

[searle]

It is possible someone might compete all year on street tires with the bonus (Neil used to, with his teal camaro FZ tires).

Mostly it lets someone come out a few times a year and compete on a relatively level field.

Also, it lets folks with a Miata/etc drive to non-local events and compete without having to buy a trailer or drag someone alone in a transport car (imagine asking your wife to drive a load of tires to Picton and then sit around all day so that you could compete).

It is all about giving folks, especially with a stock car and/or smaller/sports car, the opportunity to come and be relatively competitive. Once they get hooked, they may well chose to arrange for competition wheels/tires/transport but that becomes their choice.

[Slowpoke]

I don't think 2% accurately reflects the difference between Uber-R's and street rubber. That's 0.8 seconds on a 40 second course. It's a start that I would agree to in order to get this implemented this year, but I think we will find that the number should be higher: at least 3%.

Wearbars may not be adequate... i.e.: There must be 2/32" tread across the tire, with no extreme wear on the outside block. Shave 'em if you want to, but you risk needing a second set.

I am seriously considering running streets this year to leave my sets of competition wheels shod with Rain Ubers and Dry Ubers for SoloSprint. Arrive and drive is sounding awfully tempting with a full series of SoloSprint and driving schools planned.

[searle]

Keep in mind that the bonus needs to reflect the minimum difference, i.e. between a very good max-performance street tire and a typical competition R tire. Significant testing was done (nearly 10 years ago) which showed that 2% was a pretty good number. Both street and competition tires have improved since then, but the relative difference is probably still quite similar.

Hence 2% does not guarantee that any regular street tire car will now be competative, it just allows someone with top performance streets to come out and be "in-the-ballpark" (and not totally dominated by competition tires).
- i.e. same as lower-performance competition tires are "in-the-ballpark" with uber-comps but not totally equal.

I personally think the 2% allowance should be in the CASC (Solo-2) rules as guidance to clubs since it is *much* more applicable at "arrive-and-drive" club events than for a serious competitor running regional championship series
- that was always its purpose (to encourace "arrive-and-drive")
- serious championship drivers will still run uber-comps to get every last little bit of advantage
- running many regular events on good (expensive) street tires will ruin them (same as it wears/ruins comp tires) and max-performance streets are more expensive to replace

Hence, the 2% is great to encourage club events "arrive-and-drive"
- but is not a panacea for championship series drivers

i.e., it achieves exactly what it was intended for, and no more. :D

Note that I think the 2% allowance is very applicable to Solo-2 (where it was developed and used), but questionable for Solo-1 (where a single at-the-limit weekend will likely ruin a good set of max-performance street tires).
- i.e. newbees can "arrive-and-drive" (nowhere near the limit) at a one or two Solo-1 events, but they wont be competitive - it is a learning experience.
- If they want to compete (at the limit) they really need the competition tires and they dont want to quickly ruin very expensive max-performance street tires (and should not be encourage to do so).

Just my $.02 ....

[Pete@Marcor]

two thoughts:


Is running streets really any cheaper? I MANGLED my street tires last year and my R's barely saw any wear. Considering i bought used R's on rims for 600 bucks and i bought 4 streets that got mangled for 500 bucks... cost just doesn't look like an issue to me.


Also, 2% is perfect, but a shaved tire is not a street tire. If you runs streets, you are checked for STREET LEGAL tread. Seems easy enough, that gets my vote.

The point is not that street tires may or may not be cheaper, as I actually contend that running street tires is MORE expensive. A number of people in our community seem to think that not having to buy a second set of tires will allow them to be more competitive, and a 2% time allowance would allow those competitors who wish to buy only one set of tires, and not change tires at an event be a little closer to the regular competitors.

We have to make rules that are enforceable. There is no way to tell the 2 tires apart - one that has been shaved down to 3 or 4/32nds of an inch, and then worn to 2, or a tire that has not been shaved, and worn to 2/32nds over its life. The reason to shave a tire is so that it does not get as many heat cycles in it, to get to the 2-4/32nds of an inch which would be optimum for speed.

Our rulebook has specific requirements when it comes to running a tire. Basically when we are talking about a street tire, for the purpose of this discussion, we are talking about a tire that has a treadwear of 140 or greater.

[searle]

Regarding shaved StreetTires, Pete is exactly right (as always).

If a competitor shows up with a safe/legal (govt legal) street tire then it is a street tire. period. If someone buys a very expensive max-performance street tire and shaves it (throwing away lots of money), it will still be about 2% off a good competition tire (plus or minus noise). and you *cannot* reliably tell a shaved/scuffed tire from a worn tire - and it really cannot matter.

Note that any street tire must be a legal (govt legal) street tire. Any event organizer can reject a worn (no tread) street tire as being unsafe and not street-legal, *unlike* a competition tire which almost immediately wears to the point where it is not street-legal but is still a prefectly safe competion tire (basically until it wears down to the beginning of cord).

So, any tire which is safe for the street is a valid street-tire. If someone shaves such a tire, they need to ensure they can still show all event organizers that it remains safe and street-legal (which, like most things, is ultimately an event organizer judgement call, same as any other aspect of being a safe car).

[fritZman]

There's no way running streets is more expensive than Rs. In fact it's the opposite.

Case in point, if there was a 2% bonus at MCO, I'd simply use a new UNSHAVED set of Azenis on my regular street rims and use it for 100% street and Solo2 events. I've done exactly that for years (Kumho MX and Azenis RT 615).

Based on that experience, at worse a Solo2 season (~12 events) would consume an equivalent of 5,000 km of street miles. So over 4-5 seasons, yes, I'd eventually be using up one more set of street tires but it's still FAR cheaper than a second set of rims and soft R compounds (that are consumed every 2 years best case scenario).

This whole shaving street tires talk is ridiculous - especially considering the 2% does not accurately reflect the difference in pace. Why bother with the expense and hassle of shaving streets when the best R compounds are more like 3-4% quicker? :confused:

Regardless, who cares if streets are shaved? How many R compounds are street legal and not at the wear bars?

[Pete@Marcor]

There's no way running streets is more expensive than Rs. In fact it's the opposite.

Case in point, if there was a 2% bonus at MCO, I'd simply use a new UNSHAVED set of Azenis on my regular street rims and use it for 100% street and Solo2 events. I've done exactly that for years (Kumho MX and Azenis RT 615).

Based on that experience, at worse a Solo2 season (~12 events) would consume an equivalent of 5,000 km of street miles. So over 4-5 seasons, yes, I'd eventually be using up one more set of street tires but it's still FAR cheaper than a second set of rims and soft R compounds (that are consumed every 2 years best case scenario).

This whole shaving street tires talk is ridiculous - especially considering the 2% does not accurately reflect the difference in pace. Why bother with the expense and hassle of shaving streets when the best R compounds are more like 3-4% quicker? :confused:

Regardless, who cares if streets are shaved? How many R compounds are street legal and not at the wear bars?

If we were forced to run street tires in stock, or, if the bonus were good enough that street tires ended up being faster than R-Compounds, I would run them. But, it would not be because of cost. I am willing to make those street tires as fast as possible. To do that, I would have to shave them down, and not run them on the street. They would not last me more than one complete season, if I were lucky. High end street tires cost more than R-compounds, but the Azenis are the exception. Every other high performance street tire costs more than I will spend on a Hoosier or a V710. I do not have to prep those tires, and they last me more than a season. The first season for Regionals, and the next season for club events.

By my calculations, that makes a "street tire" more expensive to run. It has a higher initial cost, costs money to prep and will last me the same or less time than an R-Compound.

Wheels are an item that can be turned around and sold for a portion of the initial cost when you are done with them. Or, you can buy used wheels to start with, and possibly sell them for the same money that you have in them.

I fully understand that there is a place for a street tire bonus, or a street tire class. But, please understand that the average Regional competitor is willing to buy an extra set of wheels and tires to compete with. And, Street Tire classes in the US are the same, where guys bring a set of tires with them that simply have a treadwear higher than 140 on them.

[finboy]

going back to the first post...

as much as it plays a factor in the average joe/jill racer


Cost has to be removed from the discussions..

every joe/jill has a different story to tell about what works best for them







if the solo II world truely wanted to keep things "real" in the solo II motorsports world

R-comp tires should be removed from competion all together

-cars would be preped with street used tires only then

[searle]

no, street tires only is not a good answer
- not for a generic series accomodating all cars

1) Good street tires are *very* expensive
- I just got a quote for Michelon PS2s 275.40/R17 for my Camaro, $520cdn:eek: list and still over $400 "special discount" per tire).
-Many of the best are only in *limited* sizes (Potenza 050A Poles dont come in my specific size :mad: , nor in anything below 16").
- Most Comp tires (Kuhmo, Hoosier, etc) come in most sizes and are around 1/2 the price of the best street tires.

2) There is way more choice, and hence performance variance:confused: , amonst the many street tires.

Allowing DOT Comp tires for serious competitors allows a fairly even playing field (and cost), and the 2% bonus for Streets is/was simply a way to provide an alternative for "arrive-and-drive" participants that approached (but did not overshoot) that same playing field.
- not perfect, but better than nothing - and fairly simple

All in all, comp tires are easier and more even (fairer) than trying to cope with the huge variance in street-tire cost+performance+sizes
- at least for a general series for all ranges of cars.

Note: One or more specified *Street Classes*, listing specific cars, and listing specific tires known to be available and of similar performance, is a very different thing from trying to ensure fairness of unbounded ranges of Street Tires (only) unevenly spread over a complete set of generic car classes. I leave that discussion [Street Class(es)] to others ...

So, I suggest keeping the 2 threads/thoughts very separate
- ST bonus is easy, and partially levels the playing field
- ST Class(es) is more a discussion about "yet another class(es)" and whether or not there are enough cars (without diluting the existing classes)

[finboy]

Regarding shaved StreetTires, Pete is exactly right (as always).

If a competitor shows up with a safe/legal (govt legal) street tire then it is a street tire. period. If someone buys a very expensive max-performance street tire and shaves it (throwing away lots of money), it will still be about 2% off a good competition tire (plus or minus noise). and you *cannot* reliably tell a shaved/scuffed tire from a worn tire - and it really cannot matter.

Note that any street tire must be a legal (govt legal) street tire. Any event organizer can reject a worn (no tread) street tire as being unsafe and not street-legal, *unlike* a competition tire which almost immediately wears to the point where it is not street-legal but is still a prefectly safe competion tire (basically until it wears down to the beginning of cord).

So, any tire which is safe for the street is a valid street-tire. If someone shaves such a tire, they need to ensure they can still show all event organizers that it remains safe and street-legal (which, like most things, is ultimately an event organizer judgement call, same as any other aspect of being a safe car).


regardless of the type of tire or if it has been shaved or not.... as long as its manufactured for street purposes and has no tire defects

it should be gud2go

the only thing that should be "measured" is any safety issue involved

eg. cords showing

[finboy]

There's no way running streets is more expensive than Rs. In fact it's the opposite.

Case in point, if there was a 2% bonus at MCO, I'd simply use a new UNSHAVED set of Azenis on my regular street rims and use it for 100% street and Solo2 events. I've done exactly that for years (Kumho MX and Azenis RT 615).

Based on that experience, at worse a Solo2 season (~12 events) would consume an equivalent of 5,000 km of street miles. So over 4-5 seasons, yes, I'd eventually be using up one more set of street tires but it's still FAR cheaper than a second set of rims and soft R compounds (that are consumed every 2 years best case scenario).

This whole shaving street tires talk is ridiculous - especially considering the 2% does not accurately reflect the difference in pace. Why bother with the expense and hassle of shaving streets when the best R compounds are more like 3-4% quicker? :confused:

Regardless, who cares if streets are shaved? How many R compounds are street legal and not at the wear bars?

take a new set of Toyo RA1 and a Shaved set of the same tire and size (why I suggest the RA1s is because they are probably the most durable R compund out there) and i'd bet a few bowls of noodles the difference in performance would be superduper minimal

I'd say tire compund plays a far greater role than contact patch for solo II


From my understanding... shaving a tire reduces heat .. mainly for track purposes

[finboy]

no, street tires only is not a good answer
- not for a generic series accomodating all cars

1) Good street tires are *very* expensive
- I just got a quote for Michelon PS2s 275.40/R17 for my Camaro, $520cdn:eek: list and still over $400 "special discount" per tire).
-Many of the best are only in *limited* sizes (Potenza 050A Poles dont come in my specific size :mad: , nor in anything below 16").
- Most Comp tires (Kuhmo, Hoosier, etc) come in most sizes and are around 1/2 the price of the best street tires.

2) There is way more choice, and hence performance variance:confused: , amonst the many street tires.

Allowing DOT Comp tires for serious competitors allows a fairly even playing field (and cost), and the 2% bonus for Streets is/was simply a way to provide an alternative for "arrive-and-drive" participants that approached (but did not overshoot) that same playing field.
- not perfect, but better than nothing - and fairly simple

All in all, comp tires are easier and more even (fairer) than trying to cope with the huge variance in street-tire cost+performance+sizes
- at least for a general series for all ranges of cars.

Note: One or more specified *Street Classes*, listing specific cars, and listing specific tires known to be available and of similar performance, is a very different thing from trying to ensure fairness of unbounded ranges of Street Tires (only) unevenly spread over a complete set of generic car classes. I leave that discussion [Street Class(es)] to others ...

So, I suggest keeping the 2 threads/thoughts very separate
- ST bonus is easy, and partially levels the playing field
- ST Class(es) is more a discussion about "yet another class(es)" and whether or not there are enough cars (without diluting the existing classes)



Barry my comment was not at all serious..

think about it.. for a daily driver..

remove the R factor and cars would be prep'd more for the street vs. diehard competition cars

take a driver with any budget.. in any car that is only capped by the type of tires they can use

the cars would be true dual purpose daily driver/fun car then....


the arguement about cost for good tires isn't true for everyone .. like everything.. SIZE MATTERS

now a days you find group buys on everything.. so cost isn't as big of an issue as it once was


personally... the only reason why I use R tires:

a) because they're available
b) not crazy expensive
c) and like someone said earlier.. driving with R's is like having sex without a condom (i think it was Joe)



BTW... its good to see you're still around Barry!!

[searle]

regardless of the type of tire or if it has been shaved or not.... as long as its manufactured for street purposes and has no tire defects

it should be gud2go

the only thing that should be "measured" is any safety issue involved

eg. cords showing

Not so. The Solo-2 rules state that the tires must have measurable tread (in tread grooves for Streets, in measurement holes for Comps):

Each tire must have measurable tread depth as described in this provision. Measurable tread depth must be obtained at two points on the tread, which are 180 degrees apart around the tire’s circumference, and within the center one-half of the tread surface that normally touches the ground, and; The measurement points must be within tread grooves along a longitudinal or perimeter direction on the tire as typically found on road tires. On slick tires, the measurement points must be along a longitudinal or perimeter direction where measurement holes may be located.

The rules also say no defects (no visible cord, etc).

In the preceeding rules extract, it is the only place in Solo-2 rules where the work "slick" appears, and I believe is interpreted to mean Comp (R) and/or Racing-Slick (for Mod classes) tires since Comp tires specifically have tread measurement holes molded in them. A Street Tire with no measureable Tread Groove remaining was not believed to be safe (even if no cord is showing). Personally, I would like to see "measureable" specifically defined (1/32"? 2/32"?) rather than left to the stewards/organizers discression (or eliminate this entirely and just say no defect and no visible cord?)

As far as I can tell, no one has any concern/limitation regarding shaved Street Tires, other than then must still be "safe" (the same as well worn Street Tires). The same for shaved Comp Tires.

So, if someone wants to buy a set of $500 max-performance Streets, and even shave them ($$$) to minimal depth, they are free to do so. Personally, I would buy a set of ultra-Comps, and would rather have my competitors on 2% bonus full/shaved Streets than on ultra-Comps.
- and I still believe that max-performance Streets plus 2% bonus would not overwhelm ultra-Comps (but the drivers might!!)

[finboy]

Not so. The Solo-2 rules state that the tires must have measurable tread (in tread grooves for Streets, in measurement holes for Comps):

Each tire must have measurable tread depth as described in this provision. Measurable tread depth must be obtained at two points on the tread, which are 180 degrees apart around the tire’s circumference, and within the center one-half of the tread surface that normally touches the ground, and; The measurement points must be within tread grooves along a longitudinal or perimeter direction on the tire as typically found on road tires. On slick tires, the measurement points must be along a longitudinal or perimeter direction where measurement holes may be located.

In the above, it is the only place in Solo-2 rules where the work "slick" appears, and is interpreted to mean Comp (R) and/or Racing-Slick (for Mod classes) tires (since Comp tires specifically have tread measurement holes in them). A Street Tire with no measureable Tread Groove remaining was not believed to be safe (even if no code is showing). Personally, I would like to see "measureable" specifically defined (1/32"? 2/32"?) rather than left to the stewards/organizers discression.

The rules also say no defects (no visible cord, etc).


we needz more stewards then.. :(

[fritZman]

Indeed Michelin/BFG/Bridgestone/Pirelli are super expensive and unfortunately, over the past few years they haven't had the raw performance to back-up that price tag. They simply haven't been as sticky as the MUCH more affordable Asian top street models such as Kumho MX, Falken Azenis, and Hankook Z212.

finboy, in some cases shaving does help performance aside from heat generation. Several tires (MX especially) actually have flared main grooves so as the tire wears, the void area decreases. Also, I've read that the Hankooks actually have a grippier compound closer to the casing (to offset heat cycles I imagine). Shaving can also reduce some tire squirm and improve feedback, although newer high performance tires are coming with 8/32nds right out of the box.

Still, the street tire discussion is for casual competitors and those looking to get the most 'street' education in a controlled environment (that would be me). With a 2% time discount, street tires will NOT provide a competitive advantage under any situation.

FWIW, my times/performance is typically quite consistent from event to event. Having driven both of the best in each class (Azenis and V710), I have personally observed that there is just under a 2 second difference over a 60 second course (roughly 3.3%).

[searle]

Hey Ken, I missed all last year, but am back for 2007.

I believe we actually think quite a bit alike on this topic.

I hate having to drive to an event and then crawl on the ground to install Comps (and later again to take them off).
- If the 2% Street bonus were available (or a Street-Class for my car) I would be *extremely* tempted to have a set of "good" but reasonable Streets (Kumho MX or Falken Azinas?) that I could just keep on and then discard them at the end of the summer.
- This approach is only choice on any days I bring my sons Vette instead (same as others with a miata, etc).

I know a "good" (not "Max") Street plus 2% is not exactly the equal of ultra-Comps, but it would be close enough [3% would be better :-) ] and the convenience for me would totally raise the overall fun factor. Let the absolutely driven competitors use ultra-comps if they chose (most will).
- Seems like a simple but good overall compromise, and something which really encourages beginners and/or part-time competitors (which is even more critical for clubs).

Enough on this topic from me, I'm off onto other things ...

[tanney]

To quote another thread.....

[tanney]

Personally, I would like to see "measureable" specifically defined (1/32"? 2/32"?) rather than left to the stewards/organizers discression (or eliminate this entirely and just say no defect and no visible cord?)

Barry does make a good point with this one...... Pete?!?!?

[finboy]

soooooo

in one breath its a dead subject.. then in another.. there's a good point??


the current solo II director brought this subject up

the solo II 2007 rules/regs aren't posted yet

valid points are made in this thread

two EX Directors are posting replies to the topic









the fat lady hasn't left the building yet..

[Pete@Marcor]

Barry does make a good point with this one...... Pete?!?!?

I am of the opinion that measurable means that it COULD be measured by a measuring device. That means that a tire cannot be totally bald and smooth. There needs to be some sort of tread groove, at 2 points around the circumference of the tire.

[Marsh]

I am of the opinion that measurable means that it COULD be measured by a measuring device. That means that a tire cannot be totally bald and smooth. There needs to be some sort of tread groove, at 2 points around the circumference of the tire.
Define groove and define measuring device. I'm an engineer and if you tell me to measure "something" then "something" WILL get measured. Besides 0 is a perfectly valid measurement of tread depth. One could also claim that a low wear pattern on a tire was a tread if you don't define 'tread' in what's being measured. Frankly "visible" is easier to enforce than "measurable" is.

[Pete@Marcor]

Define groove and define measuring device. I'm an engineer and if you tell me to measure "something" then "something" WILL get measured. Besides 0 is a perfectly valid measurement of tread depth. One could also claim that a low wear pattern on a tire was a tread if you don't define 'tread' in what's being measured. Frankly "visible" is easier to enforce than "measurable" is.

Heh. Fair enough. So, to quote the rulebook, 5.9.G:
"When inspected at a scrutineering inspection:
Each tire must have measurable tread depth as described in this provision. Measurable tread depth must be obtained at two points on the tread, which are 180 degrees apart around the tire's circumference, and within the center one-half of the tread surface that normally touches the ground and;
The measurement points must be within tread grooves along a longitudinal or perimeter direction on the tire as typically found on road tires. On slick tires, the measurement points must be along a longitudinal or perimeter direction where measurement holes may be located. (Tread definition, see Section 7.1.G)
Tires may not be re-grooved or recapped in any way. The Competitor is required to compete on the inspected tires. Failure to do so shall result in refusal of entry or disqualification. Tires may not have cord visible at any time during competition, even if previously approved at scrutineering inspection."

So, a corded tire will always be illegal. If one were to want to compete on tires that were completely bald, they might have a place to stand when they got protested, but I would expect that the intent of the "measurable tread" requirement would mean that there would need to be a groove of some sort.

[searle]

Why not just say "... measuring 1/32" or more ..."

If you cannot find 2 (opposing) spots with at least 1/32" then I suggest you really dont have a measureable tread (and probably zero tread in most other places).

That makes it clear and you dont end up agrueing about "intent" (and wasting time in subsequent protests).
- unless you love chairing official protests in your evenings :eek: (but then dont call me ...)

PS: I think an even easier approach is to simply say (like Solo-1) no visible defects or cord - and let it go at that. Much easier all around.

[Pete@Marcor]

Why not just say "... measuring 1/32" or more ..."

If you cannot find 2 (opposing) spots with at least 1/32" then I suggest you really dont have a measureable tread (and probably zero tread in most other places).

That makes it clear and you dont end up agrueing about "intent" (and wasting time in subsequent protests).
- unless you love chairing official protests in your evenings :eek: (but then dont call me ...)

Well, I did not write this rule book. Some of us go through the rule book and raise questions on items that we think are causing an issue. This rule has not caused an issue before.

And, I would be happy with the 1/32nd rule, but I would expect that a lot of competitors would be unhappy with having their tires rule illegal, as a lot of tires have a lot of life from the 1/32nd to the 0/32nd depth. V710s for example, are molded to 4, and almost instantly go to 2/32nds.

[DT Racer]

It will be my first year in Solo1 in April so from a Newbie point of view...is there any chance of Solo1 adopting the same idea?

[Slowpoke]

It will be my first year in Solo1 in April so from a Newbie point of view...is there any chance of Solo1 adopting the same idea?Not that I'm on the CCC or anything... but I think the words "Snowball", "chance" and "Hell" come into the mix... ;)

Do a school, watch the "For Sale" forums for used R-Comps and wheels, and you'll have more fun than with street tires. The extra heat of five track laps do a lot more damage to street tires than a short AutoX should. (Rookie understeer at every AutoX corner excepted.)

[DT Racer]

Not that I'm on the CCC or anything... but I think the words "Snowball", "chance" and "Hell" come into the mix...

Do a school, watch the "For Sale" forums for used R-Comps and wheels, and you'll have more fun than with street tires. The extra heat of five track laps do a lot more damage to street tires than a short AutoX should. (Rookie understeer at every AutoX corner excepted.)


Thanks, good laugh :) and advice. Unfortunately my car is one point away from the top of T1 as it sits stock. If I run R's I will get bumped to the basement of GT4. I dont think I would be competitive at all. Thought it was best to try Solo1 for ahwile and then see class I want to mod my car for. So, unless I learn otherwize, I'll have to live with streets for at least this year. (actually just bought a used set of R's for lapping days this year..so I got em, just cant Solo on 'em in T1)

[Slowpoke]

Good news: You may be confusing your forums and your rulesets. Wheels and tires are free in SoloSprint as long as they don't extend past your OEM fenders. So it wouldn't affect your T1 classing at all.

Unless *I've* been smoking something...? Other than Montecristo #4's of course.

Look at 6.2.B (Suspension and Running Gear) of the SoloSprint ruleset and you'll find that there's no mention of penalizing R-Comps.

[Leanne]

I am of the opinion that measurable means that it COULD be measured by a measuring device. That means that a tire cannot be totally bald and smooth. There needs to be some sort of tread groove, at 2 points around the circumference of the tire.

Sounds good to me! Get it published. LOL

And maybe we should remind everyone that this is so that people can "run what they brung" and not so that the pros can manipulate the rule set to their advantage and dominate a lower class after running modified classes for their entire racing career.

[Pete@Marcor]

Sounds good to me! Get it published. LOL

And maybe we should remind everyone that this is so that people can "run what they brung" and not so that the pros can manipulate the rule set to their advantage and dominate a lower class after running modified classes for their entire racing career.

It is the rule as it sits. It IS in the rule book now.

I am going to ignore the obvious hint that comments about competitors who read a rule book that everyone has to use, and modify their vehicles in a legal manner.

This is not intended in ANY way to make a casual competitor into a winner, and since this is competition, there will always be more and less serious competitors in the same arena. If one wants to see serious, go to the SCCA Nationals.

[finboy]

So, a corded tire will always be illegal. If one were to want to compete on tires that were completely bald, they might have a place to stand when they got protested, but I would expect that the intent of the "measurable tread" requirement would mean that there would need to be a groove of some sort.


would people agree that a tire is unsafe for solo II once the cords start showing? or if there are any apparent defects to the tire?

I would guess yes.. since everyone who has used R tires get their moneys worth and use it to the max

in otherwords.. the way that rule is.. a ton of people are open to being protested

regardless if the tire still has a ton of life in it or not.. according to the current rules.. they're illegal

the other rules regarding measuring the fender and tire is pretty grey as well

same thing for "tread surface"


why aren't they more black and white???

[Pete@Marcor]

would people agree that a tire is unsafe for solo II once the cords start showing? or if there are any apparent defects to the tire?

I would guess yes.. since everyone who has used R tires get their moneys worth and use it to the max

in otherwords.. the way that rule is.. a ton of people are open to being protested

regardless if the tire still has a ton of life in it or not.. according to the current rules.. they're illegal

the other rules regarding measuring the fender and tire is pretty grey as well

same thing for "tread surface"


why aren't they more black and white???

Section 5.9.G states that a tire with cord showing is not legal for use. That is all that matters to determine whether or not the tire is legal.

I am not sure how many rule books you have had the opportunity to write, but one needs to open up a can of worms to allow some sort of modification, while still keeping within a proposed limit. Section 8.7.A is rather wordy, but it is pretty explicit about what wheel and tire combination will work.

[13inches]

Speaking of rule books....................


;) :D :o

[finboy]

Section 5.9.G states that a tire with cord showing is not legal for use. That is all that matters to determine whether or not the tire is legal.



i dont' get it then.... if 5.9 states that a tire showing cord is illegal... so why make the wording so complicated.. measure this... tread depth that?

5.9.G:
"When inspected at a scrutineering inspection:
Each tire must have measurable tread depth as described in this provision. Measurable tread depth must be obtained at two points on the tread, which are 180 degrees apart around the tire's circumference, and within the center one-half of the tread surface that normally touches the ground and;
The measurement points must be within tread grooves along a longitudinal or perimeter direction on the tire as typically found on road tires. On slick tires, the measurement points must be along a longitudinal or perimeter direction where measurement holes may be located. (Tread definition, see Section 7.1.G)
Tires may not be re-grooved or recapped in any way. The Competitor is required to compete on the inspected tires. Failure to do so shall result in refusal of entry or disqualification. Tires may not have cord visible at any time during competition, even if previously approved at scrutineering inspection."

So, a corded tire will always be illegal. If one were to want to compete on tires that were completely bald, they might have a place to stand when they got protested, but I would expect that the intent of the "measurable tread" requirement would mean that there would need to be a groove of some sort.




why wouldn't it say "if any signs of defects to the tire eg. sidewall damage, cord(s) exposed" before a competitor starts their run, the equipment is deemed illegal and can not run

why leave the door open for protests? make the rule black and white to avoid the whole process of protests

Like Barry mentioned..
Why not just say "... measuring 1/32" or more ..."

If you cannot find 2 (opposing) spots with at least 1/32" then I suggest you really dont have a measureable tread (and probably zero tread in most other places).

That makes it clear and you dont end up agrueing about "intent" (and wasting time in subsequent protests).
- unless you love chairing official protests in your evenings :eek: (but then dont call me ...)

PS: I think an even easier approach is to simply say (like Solo-1) no visible defects or cord - and let it go at that. Much easier all around.



I am not sure how many rule books you have had the opportunity to write, but one needs to open up a can of worms to allow some sort of modification, while still keeping within a proposed limit. Section 8.7.A is rather wordy, but it is pretty explicit about what wheel and tire combination will work.

like 8.7A regarding tires...

the pumbline thing / tread surface is a bit complex



-edited to add Barry's comment's-

[Marsh]

Heh. Fair enough. So, to quote the rulebook, 5.9.G:
"When inspected at a scrutineering inspection:
Each tire must have measurable tread depth as described in this provision. Measurable tread depth must be obtained at two points on the tread, which are 180 degrees apart around the tire's circumference, and within the center one-half of the tread surface that normally touches the ground and;
The measurement points must be within tread grooves along a longitudinal or perimeter direction on the tire as typically found on road tires. On slick tires, the measurement points must be along a longitudinal or perimeter direction where measurement holes may be located. (Tread definition, see Section 7.1.G)
Tires may not be re-grooved or recapped in any way. The Competitor is required to compete on the inspected tires. Failure to do so shall result in refusal of entry or disqualification. Tires may not have cord visible at any time during competition, even if previously approved at scrutineering inspection."

So, a corded tire will always be illegal. If one were to want to compete on tires that were completely bald, they might have a place to stand when they got protested, but I would expect that the intent of the "measurable tread" requirement would mean that there would need to be a groove of some sort.

A full tread 710 is illegal under that rule. It never came with tread in the center half.

[13inches]

A full tread 710 is illegal under that rule. It never came with tread in the center half.

http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/kumho/ku_ecsta_v710_1000.jpg

Looks legal to me. The inner groove and/or the inner depth point both seem to fall into the "centre-half" range, IMHO

[13inches]

SCCA has very similar wording in their rulebook

[DT Racer]

Ahh...boy I wish you were right. First rule I found was "If its a DOT approved tire, then its a street tire". So at first I thought I was OK to run Toyo RA1's which are DOT.

But wait, theres Rule 2 in there "If it says 'recommended for competition' on the side of the tire it is considered a racing tire". Rule 2 outwieghs rule 1 (or something like that). I had it confirmed by James Mewett of Solo 1 fame that I would get nicked 2 for the tires. Ratsssss. I'll have to be content with burning the streets off. (then maybe get a loan and buy some of those uber tires that seem to be in the gray area :D )

[Leanne]

I am going to ignore the obvious hint that comments about competitors who read a rule book that everyone has to use, and modify their vehicles in a legal manner.

This is not intended in ANY way to make a casual competitor into a winner....

My comment is directed to the discussions regarding street tires being shaved, modified, etc. Not towards drivers that make mechanical modifications in the higher classes.

I don't think any "street tire" racers expect that a rule change or bonus will suddenly make them competitive. However, to go to a race in a somewhat decent car, with a relatively decent skill set only to consistently have your doors blown away by someone racing in stock with big ass slicks is kind of disheartening.

Just hoping to level the playing field in what is supposed to be "stock" so that more people can experience the thrill of competition whilst keeping things relatively simple and inexpensive.

[finboy]

2003 was the year the 2% bounus was removed

-did it make a difference in Regional attendance?

-did it make the difference between competitors closer as in better
or did it have the opposite effect?

[max attack]

2003 was the year the 2% bounus was removed

-did it make a difference in Regional attendance?

-did it make the difference between competitors closer as in better
or did it have the opposite effect?

Off the top of my head there were 176 registered drivers in 2003,we have ALOT less than that now-I'm not sure what the causes are but certainly tires aren't all of it.

[MrHeavyFoot]

Well, there are 2 street tire classes in the CAC rules now. That should help a few people that fit reasonably well within those classes.