Regional Event #6 images posted

[aviography]

Regional Event #6 images (http://www.pbase.com/klin/tac2005)

I did get carried away a bit, far more images than I would typically take, but it was a very exciting corner that I was at, and two words came to mind:

CONE CARNAGE :)

Ken

[thekid]

is andrew two wheeling in this picture?
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097314

[aviography]

is andrew two wheeling in this picture?
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097314

Possible, it's hard to tell.

But Pete (at least I think it was Pete) is two wheeling in Civic two wheeling (http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096922), I'll enhance the image a bit tonight and repost it, it's pretty impressive!

Ken

[Pete@Marcor]

Possible, it's hard to tell.

But Pete (at least I think it was Pete) is two wheeling in Civic two wheeling (http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096922), I'll enhance the image a bit tonight and repost it, it's pretty impressive!

Ken

Wow. Can anyone say that 710s don't have enough grip? Now, I just have to work on the spacer issue. :-(

[haniforama]

RobT did say the car looked like it was up on two wheels...

Woohoo!

[opal]

Never, NEVER again will I say, "see, do it like this!"

Exhibit A (http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097316)

(I know 710s are cherished like they enable walking on water, but dammit, if they get too hot, kiss that corner you thought you had right goodbye.)

[miataboi]

Never, NEVER again will I say, "see, do it like this!"

Exhibit A (http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097316)

(I know 710s are cherished like they enable walking on water, but dammit, if they get too hot, kiss that corner you thought you had right goodbye.)


Bah!

Just call it a "late apex" and leave it at that.

Although it IS kind of ironic seeing "Car Control School" on the vehicle that just demolished the cones!
:D

See the pic where I stood the cone back up on it's point!
It actually stayed on it's end...and within the chalk-box... and I didn't get the 2-set penalty until my next time around when I was so close to it... that the gush of air knocked it over!
:eek:

:mad: turbulence!!!!!!

[Marsh]

Ok, NOW I see why everyone freaks out over Pete, Hanifs and my body roll. Apperently it was pretty frightening to watch at Waterford too. I can't wait to see those pics now.

[miataboi]

Bah!


See the pic where I stood the cone back up on it's point!
It actually stayed on it's end...and within the chalk-box... and I didn't get the 2-set penalty until my next time around when I was so close to it... that the gush of air knocked it over!
:eek:

:mad: turbulence!!!!!!

Here it is....

http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097127

[JAYh]

http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097221

The brake pedal is NOT a toggle switch.
The brake pedal is NOT a toggle switch.
The brake pedal is NOT a toggle switch.
The brake pedal is NOT a toggle switch.
The brake pedal is NOT a toggle switch.
The brake pedal is NOT... aw, to hell with it. :p

Great pics Ken! As always. Thanks!

- J

[Greg F]

[can of worms]So Andrew has to wear a fire suit because his car, which has a cage and almost no fuel on board during a run, can tip over, but a stock car can run massively sticky R-comps thereby giving it a MUCH greater chance of flipping over, yet the driver can wear shorts if they want? :confused: [/can of worms]

[J.C.]

[can of worms]So Andrew has to wear a fire suit because his car, which has a cage and almost no fuel on board during a run, can tip over, but a stock car can run massively sticky R-comps thereby giving it a MUCH greater chance of flipping over, yet the driver can wear shorts if they want? :confused: [/can of worms]


That is correct, but only in Ontario. The firesuit is not needed down in the USA or anywhere else. Not sure when or why this came about but rules are rules so we bought it. :( I must say it did attract a few stares when he suited up down in Detroit. He needs to get a little canadian flag to put on if he is going to keep using it south of the border.



P.S. Thanks goes out to Ivano for the canadian flag he put on the car :)

[Marsh]

[can of worms]So Andrew has to wear a fire suit because his car, which has a cage and almost no fuel on board during a run, can tip over, but a stock car can run massively sticky R-comps thereby giving it a MUCH greater chance of flipping over, yet the driver can wear shorts if they want? :confused: [/can of worms]

Actually the less fuel in the tank the more dangerous it is.

The rule is from when R's weren't that sticky. Now there are only one or two slicks that are better for solo-2.

[miataboi]

Actually the less fuel in the tank the more dangerous it is.

The rule is from when R's weren't that sticky. Now there are only one or two slicks that are better for solo-2.


His tank is a TINY fuel cell...

I think it's just about the safest fuel holder in solo 2...

Now his carb setup.... and fuel line.... that's different than an EFI motor... but hey...

And slicks are still far superior... but yeah... R's have made some major progress in the last 5 yrs+ alone!

[tanney]

That is correct, but only in Ontario. The firesuit is not needed down in the USA or anywhere else. Not sure when or why this came about but rules are rules so we bought it.

It is something that has been in every Ontario Solo 2 rule book since I have been involved in the sport and it was added to the Ontario modified CAC rule book again.

Better to error on the side of safety...........

[J.C.]

Better to error on the side of safety...........

the only problem is when you err on the side of small and its a little tight in the crotch :eek: glad I am not wearing it :)

[andrew1984]

my fuel cell is made of thick alumanim...

carbs... what carbs.... ? what motor!?!?!?

oh noo!! ive said TOO MUCH! :eek:

[andrew1984]

slicks arent the holy grail. they are great, but the 710s for what they are - are better.

[7plymaple]

Those are some sweet pics! Some real classic moments captured. I especially liked the Green Golf locking them up on page 24. And on page 33 theres one of Josh in mid cone crunch while lifting a rear wheel.

[max attack]

So are you going to go with the 1.8T Andrew?,it would be cool to have you in with me next year.You'll have way more power than I but thats alway's a good excuse anyways!. :)

[Greg F]

The rule is from when R's weren't that sticky. Now there are only one or two slicks that are better for solo-2.

[I'm gonna get flamed for this, I know it!] So, now that Rs are "that sticky," should they only be allowed where suspension upgrades have been done, or should drivers of cars with Rs, no suspension upgrades, and demonstrated possibility of roll over, be mandated to wear fire suits? [/I'm gonna get flamed for this, I know it!]

[Tony Kloosterma]

no flames Greg I think it s valid. I said before and proposed last year to ban r's in stock.....

Tony

[haniforama]

[I'm gonna get flamed for this, I know it!] So, now that Rs are "that sticky," should they only be allowed where suspension upgrades have been done, or should drivers of cars with Rs, no suspension upgrades, and demonstrated possibility of roll over, be mandated to wear fire suits? [/I'm gonna get flamed for this, I know it!]

Fresh bushings, ball joints and Koni's do wonders for cornering grip on a "stock" Civic ;)

What would you define as "upgraded"?

[JoeT]

no flames Greg I think it s valid. I said before and proposed last year to ban r's in stock.....

Tony

My sentiments exactly, I mentioned this at the beginning of the season.

[miataboi]

no flames Greg I think it s valid. I said before and proposed last year to ban r's in stock.....

Tony

A stock Miata, Corvette, S2000, Type R... pretty sure these guys would be pizzed.... and there is virtually ZERO rollover danger.

Besides.... when a FWD car is up on 3 wheels.... it's totally safe.... it's only going to plow from there... and if it's up on 2 wheels.... with our level of driving skill... it's still VERY catchable / controllable... Course design is WAY more of a safety concern...

I think it's impressive what some "stock" cars on R's can do.

But IF this is going to change... PLEASE let us know ASAP.

[Greg F]

Some cars have demonstrated a possibility of roll over in those pics. A stock 'vette wouldn't likely show this possibility, whereas a stock Focus would very likely, and to my knowledge a Focus has already rolled over in SCCA competition.

Upgrading the suspension as per the rules can help--sway bars, shocks, springs, etc.--but if the car still shows that this is not enough, then maybe special safety measures ought to be investigated by the drivers, and the sanctioning bodies. Marshalls should also pay special attention to these cars when they're on the track.

Just like certain vehicles are already banned, maybe only some classes should be allowed to run Rs in stock form.

[miataboi]

Some cars have demonstrated a possibility of roll over in those pics. A stock 'vette wouldn't likely show this possibility, whereas a stock Focus would very likely, and to my knowledge a Focus has already rolled over in SCCA competition.

Upgrading the suspension as per the rules can help--sway bars, shocks, springs, etc.--but if the car still shows that this is not enough, then maybe special safety measures ought to be investigated by the drivers, and the sanctioning bodies. Marshalls should also pay special attention to these cars when they're on the track.

Just like certain vehicles are already banned, maybe only some classes should be allowed to run Rs in stock form.

On certain cars... with sticky R's... that are too tall... and too narrow of a track.... with the WRONG steering inputs.... sure... it can get onto 2 wheels... and if something dumb happens... it COULD go over (more likely to cause the participant financial hardship than anything else... honestly)

But some of these guys can run a further-out offset wheel... with a shorter tire... and the problem dissapears - and the car goes faster!

Ever think that swaybar or even shock settings cause the wheel to hang up in the air... it's no more dangerous if there was a little more droop on that corner, really... just what happens on off-camber / downhill sections with too much weight up front and less-than-optimal shock settings...

I'd not lose sleep over it.
I could flip a poorly setup SS or even SP car... for that matter. For enough $$$... I'd do it too! :D :D :D (but not at a CASC sanctioned event, of course!)

[aviography]

Certainly didn't think my images were going to be digressing into discussions of possible roll-over on R-compound tires.

And please bear with me for not familiar with the current rules, since it's been over 10 years since I last competed in Solo 2 regionals.

But hasn't it been discussed in recent past that a manufacturer can simply take away the R designation of a competition tire to call it a "high-performance" tire that just happened to have tremondus grip? Who is going to class which tires are, and are not allowed in the stock class? This won't be impossible, but will sure cause more rules to be addeded to the rule book.

Ken

[miataboi]

In the SCCA... I've personally witnessed a stock rabbit on falken street tires... roll the thing... with an odd course layout... with the WRONG inputs...

so R's or not.... what's it matter.


Good point Ken.

[Greg F]

So why not just abandon the requirement to run a fire suit when running slicks? Apparently modern Rs are as good as slicks. Does anyone really think Andrew's car is going to roll over? Does anyone think a stock Civic (or Forester) on Rs can roll over? Why is there that focus on safety with a car that's been modified for the specific purpose of going fast in autox, while there is an apparent lack of safety concern for cars that were designed solely as commuter vehicles? The SCCA doesn't see a need for the fire suit, according to J.C., so just maybe the rule is outdated.

[Marsh]

I find it funny that I said not 3 weeks ago that I was getting concerned and wondered how long it would be before someone rolled a car on 710s in HS. I was laughed at until these photos were published.

[haniforama]

I think it would take an external force such as smacking a curb to actually get a car to flip over on R's at which point it really doesn't matter what tire the car is running on. Not once has Pete's cer felt even remotely close to "tippy".

[JoeT]

I think it would take an external force such as smacking a curb to actually get a car to flip over on R's at which point it really doesn't matter what tire the car is running on. Not once has Pete's cer felt even remotely close to "tippy".

When Alain and I were standing at a marshalling station at PMG, there were no curbs. It was just a stock car with stock suspension and big fat R compounds that made it do a pirouette. This was even before the V710's came out.

No curbs required, just a case of TLLT and snap oversteer.

[tanney]

So why not just abandon the requirement to run a fire suit when running slicks? Apparently modern Rs are as good as slicks. Does anyone really think Andrew's car is going to roll over? Does anyone think a stock Civic (or Forester) on Rs can roll over? Why is there that focus on safety with a car that's been modified for the specific purpose of going fast in autox, while there is an apparent lack of safety concern for cars that were designed solely as commuter vehicles? The SCCA doesn't see a need for the fire suit, according to J.C., so just maybe the rule is outdated.
This is an item that should be brought up at the workshop in November (Date and venue to be determined).

Although I am not aware of it, I am sure there is good reasoning as to why this has been included in the Ontario rule book for so long. Maybe just a case of former Solo 2 Directors thinking the same thing, "it's been there forever, there must be a specific reason". I will look into it and see if I can determine why exactly it has been carried over....

[Pete@Marcor]

So why not just abandon the requirement to run a fire suit when running slicks?

When a vehicle is competing with slicks on, it must run Mod. What kind of vehicle is more likely to have a fire? A STOCK class car, that has had all of its systems checked by both the government and the car manufacturer, or a MOD class car, which, in theory, could have a 6 year old plumb the fuel lines, and mount the fuel cell?

I am not making any reference to the level of prep to any car, as obviously Andrew's VW is very well prepared and clean, but because of the liberal allowances in our rule system, an owner/competitor could create his own fire hazard, especially in MOD. I am pretty sure that is the reason we require fire suits while running slicks.

Since we are trying to be proactive in our safety regulations, why would we try to relax them, for a class that is guaranteed to have heavily modified cars in it? Even if there is not another reason for it, is this not a good enough one?

As far as a vehicle rolling in a Solo 2, I would exepct it to be pretty hard without everything going extremely wrong, like wrong inputs, or possibly an external force, like a curb. I am pretty sure that IF the front wheel on my car was off the ground, it was more due to shocks, and a rough input. I am pretty sure it was not up for very long, if at all.

I have actually been at a Solo 1 where the driver of a vehicle (Nissan Micra on R-Compounds) had to make a concious decision to turn the wheel to go off, so that he did not roll his car.

I am a little surprised that this discussion about banning R-Compounds in Stock has come up. I think it virtually impossible to roll a car simply from grip. But, if the solo committee and community think that this is an incredibly unsafe situation, then the rulebook should be changed. We should ban R-Compounds in stock.

However, I think that because of the high levels of grip now available to only SS and up competitors, they should be restrained by a 5 point harness, at minimum. Also, because of the lack of mobility now possible, from a harnessed competitor, I think we should ban any harnesses, unless a vehicle is also equipped with rollover protection. I am very concerned about a competitor not being able to move out of the way of a roof that is being crushed by the weight of the vehicle. Rollover protection should be a requirement. Actually, I think we really SHOULD consider this rollover thing, btw. Harness = roll bar.

We can go pretty crazy on rules, and need to consider the actual possibility of an occurance.

[JoeT]

I wasn't going to reply but it's sooo difficult not too.... LOL

Anyways here's the reasoning (personal) on why R's should not be used in stock class with "Stock" suspension.

There's this thing called TLLT, essentially it's the transient force that's applied from one end of the car to the other side while doing a slalom (simplified explanation).

Try to visualize this:
Car is traveling at a good rate of speed, it's making an abrupt right hand turn
Left suspension gets loaded up from the increased mass loads on the springs
Load during that maneuver = Vehicle mass (distributed) x G loads = compression (simplified)

Now the vehicle changes direction, (left turn) and the load transfers to the right side suspension. But this is where TLLT comes in, the compressed springs now have to return the energy that was being stored and it's not just the G forces acting on the right hand suspension anymore, it's the combined force of the cornering "G's" plus the stored energy from the spring, whatever is left over and not being absorbed by the shock.

What compounds these types of scenarios are:
1) Shocks that do not have adequate rebound dampening to dissipate the energy
2) Over sprung vehicles (see point 1)
3) High CG Vehicles
4) Sticky Tires, the stickier the tires, the more important point #1
5) High speed (relative) coupled with point #1

etc. etc. etc.

Major causes of rollovers without intervention from curbes or other items. Looknig for videos to help explain the scenario.

Just my .02 cents.

[thekid]

Anyways here's the reasoning (personal) on why R's should not be used in stock class with "Stock" suspension.


If this is going to be the case, then there should be a stock class where cars that actually have good suspensions start that are allowed R compounds. As Jeff mentioned earlier, cars like the Type R, the Miata, Mazdaspeed Protege, are very level cars, even with R's. Why? We've got great suspensions from the factory. Take my MSP... comes with Tokico HP's (Blues) stock...

For anyone who wants to use the argument that R's are an added expense which shouldn't come in to play in stock class... well... my street tires cost far more than my R's, and for that reason alone its an easy decision to run R's.

[andrew1984]

just for the record... my car is not on two wheels.

[JoeT]

[QUOTE=JoeT]Anyways here's the reasoning (personal) on why R's should not be used in stock class with "Stock" suspension.
[QUOTE]

If this is going to be the case, then there should be a stock class where cars that actually have good suspensions start that are allowed R compounds. As Jeff mentioned earlier, cars like the Type R, the Miata, Mazdaspeed Protege, are very level cars, even with R's. Why? We've got great suspensions from the factory. Take my MSP... comes with Tokico HP's (Blues) stock...

For anyone who wants to use the argument that R's are an added expense which shouldn't come in to play in stock class... well... my street tires cost far more than my R's, and for that reason alone its an easy decision to run R's.

That's what makes it difficult for the committee's to classify vehicles, it's easy to generalize for simplicity sake ( like I did), but reality is, there are many exceptions to the rule.

Agreed, and that's why SCCA has so many classes as well. Good point.

[miataboi]

I wasn't going to reply but it's sooo difficult not too.... LOL

Anyways here's the reasoning (personal) on why R's should not be used in stock class with "Stock" suspension.

There's this thing called TLLT, essentially it's the transient force that's applied from one end of the car to the other side while doing a slalom (simplified explanation).

Try to visualize this:
Car is traveling at a good rate of speed, it's making an abrupt right hand turn
Left suspension gets loaded up from the increased mass loads on the springs
Load during that maneuver = Vehicle mass (distributed) x G loads = compression (simplified)

Now the vehicle changes direction, (left turn) and the load transfers to the right side suspension. But this is where TLLT comes in, the compressed springs now have to return the energy that was being stored and it's not just the G forces acting on the right hand suspension anymore, it's the combined force of the cornering "G's" plus the stored energy from the spring, whatever is left over and not being absorbed by the shock.

What compounds these types of scenarios are:
1) Shocks that do not have adequate rebound dampening to dissipate the energy
2) Over sprung vehicles (see point 1)
3) High CG Vehicles
4) Sticky Tires, the stickier the tires, the more important point #1
5) High speed (relative) coupled with point #1

etc. etc. etc.

Major causes of rollovers without intervention from curbes or other items. Looknig for videos to help explain the scenario.

Just my .02 cents.

Perfect.

Seeing as dampers are "free" in every class.... this is a moot point.
Thanks for clarifying Joe.
Non-issue.
:p

And in a slalom, you do NOT see the peak / sustained G-Forces that you do in a constant-radius corner... Just a fact...


But... in slalom sections... decent damping is important... and they are free... besides... you'd have to drive pretty poorly to get a car to flip in a slalom... unless the car was jacked up... moderate springs and NO dampers...

This is NOT what we see in Solo 2 anyhow.

And for constant radius turns... there is AMPLE warning if you were to START to lift... and we all know in this sport how to drive (turn into it) so I don't see the issue.

NOW...

IF we took cowboy / gung-ho (no relation to Trung Do) rookies who've never done this before... put them into old Golfs and Aerios with R-Compounds and no struts.... you are right... it might then be the time to address the issue... .until then... I just don't see it, personally.
:rolleyes:

[JoeT]

And in a slalom, you do NOT see the peak / sustained G-Forces that you do in a constant-radius corner... Just a fact...


That was not the point, most rollovers in Solo2 in both SCCA and Canada have occured in slaloms. If you read it again, it's the TLLT which kills, not the sustained g-forces of constant radius turns.


This is NOT what we see in Solo 2 anyhow.
:rolleyes:

Tell the guy at PMG 2 years ago, and the VW 3 weeks ago... Tell them it's not a Solo2.

Yes, we see it in Solo2, all the incidents were the cause of TLLT and grippy tires.

Hope this helps.

[miataboi]

That was not the point, most rollovers in Solo2 in both SCCA and Canada have occured in slaloms. If you read it again, it's the TLLT which kills, not the sustained g-forces of constant radius turns.



Tell the guy at PMG 2 years ago, and the VW 3 weeks ago... Tell them it's not a Solo2.

Yes, we see it in Solo2, all the incidents were the cause of TLLT and grippy tires.

Hope this helps.

Very dramatic Joe.
I understand what you and your fancy acronyms are getting at... I understand it...

Dampers are free... and apart from R's.. are the next best performance upgrade avail. Use them.

How 'bout saying that cars with OE or worn dampers... need to have their CG mathematically determined and then we need to also eliminate all slaloms from autoslalom.

I've seen crappy drivers do dumb things before... we as organizers have the right to turn away cars that have a propensity to flip = SEE MINIVANS.

These pics by Ken are AWESOME... but he will attest that they are BUT a very precise moment in time. He got them at their most "dramatic"... and the drivers themselves weren't ever worried and at all times felt that the car was in 100% CONTROL.
Are we being dramatic because the pictures evoke emotion?

I sent that link of Pete to a friend because it was a GREAT shot... but he was NEVER in any danger. His car has no sways... and tight struts... that's normal... I guarantee that 0.1 sec later it was back on the ground... and that 0.3 sec later... all 4 were.

Cars like stock echos with no struts... and WIDE, tall tires could turn... sure... why not... I think we could address this at a car-specific level WHEN it became an issue. That is in our rulebook presently.

I don't think it is an issue currently... but thanks to Ken for some GREAT shots!!!

Hey Joe... I've got a TLA for you... and you KNOW what it is!!! ;) :D :p

[Pete@Marcor]

If this is going to be the case, then there should be a stock class where cars that actually have good suspensions start that are allowed R compounds. As Jeff mentioned earlier, cars like the Type R, the Miata, Mazdaspeed Protege, are very level cars, even with R's. Why? We've got great suspensions from the factory. Take my MSP... comes with Tokico HP's (Blues) stock...

For anyone who wants to use the argument that R's are an added expense which shouldn't come in to play in stock class... well... my street tires cost far more than my R's, and for that reason alone its an easy decision to run R's.

Unfortunately this is not possible to separate. Would that mean that a vehicle that has replaced the shocks would now be allowed to stay in stock and still use R-Compounds? Unfortunately there are "good" and "bad" stock cars. So, the only way to implement it would be to ban R-Compounds from all stock classes.

If this community can honestly say that there is a chance that a car is gonna go over, then the R-Compound tires should be banned. I think it is a little on the ridiculous, but that is obvioulsy my opinion.

Now, I think that we should seriously consider the fact that a competitor with a 4,5, or 6 point harness cannot get out of the way of a folding roof. I think that if you have a harness, you have to have rollover protection.

[aviography]

These pics by Ken are AWESOME... but he will attest that they are BUT a very precise moment in time. He got them at their most "dramatic"...

Capturing these dramatic images at those precise moments is exactly my goal when I come out to these events.



Are we being dramatic because the pictures evoke emotion?

And it looks like I was successful ! :)

(Man I miss driving those Yoko A-008R 10+ years ago on the street/events for two summers per set, Joe T. remembers that too, right?)

Ken

[Gen1GT]

Gotta love all the cones doing gymnastics at this event. Lets vote for the favorite:

http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096863
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096896
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096941
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096942
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096951
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096968
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096973(poor cones!)
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47096980
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097154
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097155
http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097278

[Methanoxide]

Hands down, this devilish handsome fella wins! :D

http://www.pbase.com/klin/image/47097278

[aviography]

As promised earlier.

No alteration other than crop tight to the area of interest and bring out the details that were previously hidden in the shadow.

Ken

[haniforama]

Nice! :p

[TOYSRUS]

So why not just abandon the requirement to run a fire suit when running slicks? Apparently modern Rs are as good as slicks.

We ran a back to back comparison between the softest Goodyear Slicks available and two year old Kuhmo V700's. Both at the Corel Center and PMG the Kuhmo's were FASTER. On a side note, the slicks were far easier to drive at the limit and the car was much more "catchable" once loose.

just my 2 cents

[Marsh]

BTW Last I looked into the topic Hoosier made the far better autox full slick. The R25 Hoosier compound is ubber-sticky. Goodyear didn't have anything to compare. In formula SAE a few rookie teams run the Goodyears because goodyear makes a softer side wall that is supposed to work better for the lightweight cars, but the softer Hoosier compound is still MUCH faster.

[Stan944]

My monitor is old, and I couldn't tell if two wheels were off or not. Here's the same picture after contrast and brightness modification:

[gatherer]

blah blah blah .. I think when I take vacation I need to also force myself not to read threads like this.

anyways save it for the workshop.

personallyh I have a list about as long as my arm to bring up at the workshop. but I ain't going to bitch about those points and complaints I have on here. I just have a list that I keep on my laptop and as I need too I add too it. I'll review the later in the year and then send it to wes with my comments as to why I think those topics should be brought up.

personally for classification mods to cars (such as R-compounds) I'll leave that up to the national committee to decide on, but thats just my opinion.

anyways I'm off to compete in Winnipeg. you guys are off to compete in Montreal at PMG ... is everyone Abandoning Ontario this weekend?

[Gen1GT]

I don't think that Rs should be banned from the stock classes. I think if anybody ever rolls their vehicle, THEY should be banned from racing. It's that simple.

Jason, the only point of an online messageboard/forum is to allow people to express differing views on any given topic-in this case autosports-freely and subjectively. Everyone can "blah blah blah' all they want...this is the place to do it.

[TOYSRUS]

BTW Last I looked into the topic Hoosier made the far better autox full slick. The R25 Hoosier compound is ubber-sticky. Goodyear didn't have anything to compare. In formula SAE a few rookie teams run the Goodyears because goodyear makes a softer side wall that is supposed to work better for the lightweight cars, but the softer Hoosier compound is still MUCH faster.

NOW you tell me! This would have been good to know BEFORE I bought the Goodyears :)

[Marsh]

NOW you tell me! This would have been good to know BEFORE I bought the Goodyears :)

Well last I looked was in 03, but I think all the SAE teams still use the Hoosier.