Cal Club Autocross Forums

I figured I'd start a new thread, since we'd gone so OT on the other thread. At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I'm going to ask one more question. I'm not trying to be a pain in the butt, I'm just trying to understand where all the venom comes from. To all the folks who responded that there shouldn't be a national SK class or classes, or anyone else that wants to join in the fun:

Why do you care? What mortal injury do people fear if there's a national street tire class(es)? What is the danger? This discussion has provoked more than the normal amount of...spiritedness, so why do people get so worked up when this subject is brought up. I sort of feel like I've questioned some sort of sacred truth here, like why we sing the national anthem or help little old ladies across the street. I'm just trying to figure out what other emotional/institutional undercurrents might be at work here.

lower participation in the actual "Stock" classes, just like we see locally. Issues with Indexing individual classes properly and having the competitors agree with it. Basically reorganizing the whole deal and opening up more classes.

Kurt,

Where ever you go, you'll find people interested in Stock becoming ST based. You''ll also find more just as vehemently against it. The argument has been around as long as I've been playing ('97), and I'm sure ever since Race rubber was allowed onto Stock class cars (when ever that was). At some point after ST classes came around, it changed to either Stock or a new set of Stock w/ ST argument.

I've heard both sides, agree and disagree with parts of arguments on both sides. The most common, but in my opinion weakest, is that Regions can create any local class they want (dosen't address competing nationally). Best argument against I've heard is it would thin classes to much splitting Stock in two (I can see this point).

Personally I'm on the side of the fence of Stock being ST based. I've resigned that it will never happen, and moved to STS.

Sounds to me really like killing off slicks in stock classes would solve a lot of issues. That's really the primary concern from the sound of what everyone is saying. Stock class otherwise runs fine but the expense of it is what deterrs most people from running it. just an observation...If cost is the deciding factor then why not pull back slicks for a year and see what happens? Not indefinitely, but for one year see how the classes shape up and go from there?

Sounds to me really like killing off slicks in stock classes would solve a lot of issues. That's really the primary concern from the sound of what everyone is saying. Stock class otherwise runs fine but the expense of it is what deterrs most people from running it.

If you change stock classes over to street tires, you have to change all the stock classes. And what is a "street tire"? Part of the issue originally was that the wear rating on the side of a tire is meaningless. A tire that says it has a 220 wear rating could actually be softer than one that says 140. There was/is no universal standard that the tire manufacturers use to come up with the wear rating number. So to find the softest/trick tire requires a large budget for testing various sets of tires. The tread pattern and tire construction also affect tire performance, especially on camber challenged cars. Also, with the larger sizes and specialty brands, the tires can be more expensive than the "slicks".

You also have enertia in the rules making system. Once the rules were changed to allow "slicks", there is reluctance to turn everything upside down to change back, expecially with the large installed base of people running "slicks" that you have now. So basically, unless there is a large grass roots uprising, the rules won't be changed back.

Similar thread on the SCCA message board: http://www.sccabb.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8733&TPN=1

The tread wear issue is a big part of it. Hard to believe that the Toyo R1R is really a 140 wear. A few years ago Toyo changed the wear rating on the RA1 from I believe 60 to 100. They had made NO change to the compound but decided that since the tire wore so well that it could be a 100. It's pretty arbitrary and it's up to the manufacturer to come up with a number.

Perhaps part of the problem is that companies like Hoosier are big sponsors of the SCCA? But they're a pretty small company. One of the majors could become a bigger sponsor if they wanted to push their tires (with contingencies plus SCCA sponsorship) if Stock went ST.

it's pretty easy to see where the dividing line is. cheap car owners want cheap tires (oh and they want to win on the cheap tires), expensive car owners want expensive tires. most CS/DS/ES/GS/HS people have no idea how not fun driving a SS/AS/BS car is on street tires.

the question I have is what do you do with all of your old, barely used street tires. I will ALWAYS show up to a national event with brand new tires. So WTF am I going to do with 5 sets (or more) of street tires a year?

I think we had 6 sets last year and didn't run nationals and didn't run the last three months. I have a fresh set left over and fairly fresh rain set left from that. But if we had run all year, we would have gone through 6 sets with at least 3 drivers. That's a 2000lbs car with all the camber it wants. At least the little tires are a lot cheaper.

I don't believe any of the top ST tires are available in Z06 sizes

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I think we had 6 sets last year and didn't run nationals and didn't run the last three months. I have a fresh set left over and fairly fresh rain set left from that. But if we had run all year, we would have gone through 6 sets with at least 3 drivers. That's a 2000lbs car with all the camber it wants. At least the little tires are a lot cheaper.

damn, I think we used 7 sets of tires on the evo with 5 drivers.

Marshall Grice wrote: So WTF am I going to do with 5 sets (or more) of street tires a year?

You sell them to me, for a very good price.

Marshall Grice wrote:

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I think we had 6 sets last year and didn't run nationals and didn't run the last three months. I have a fresh set left over and fairly fresh rain set left from that. But if we had run all year, we would have gone through 6 sets with at least 3 drivers. That's a 2000lbs car with all the camber it wants. At least the little tires are a lot cheaper.

damn, I think we used 7 sets of tires on the evo with 5 drivers.

Those 50 lap weekends at El Toro with a bad setup took a quick toll on tires.

Marshall Grice wrote:it's pretty easy to see where the dividing line is. cheap car owners want cheap tires (oh and they want to win on the cheap tires), expensive car owners want expensive tires. most CS/DS/ES/GS/HS people have no idea how not fun driving a SS/AS/BS car is on street tires.

the question I have is what do you do with all of your old, barely used street tires. I will ALWAYS show up to a national event with brand new tires. So WTF am I going to do with 5 sets (or more) of street tires a year?

FS also---I tried running SK1 4 years ago with my 305 hp mustang cobra----not fun.. The great idea of running SK1 locally and saving new R-comps for NT and Prosolo lasted about 63 sec. or one run.

Don

Don Salyers wrote:
FS also---I tried running SK1 4 years ago with my 305 hp mustang cobra----not fun.. The great idea of running SK1 locally and saving new R-comps for NT and Prosolo lasted about 63 sec. or one run.

Don

yeah, i did one event on street tires with the supra, whan an mess. Slapped skinnish undersized r-comps on it and man that car got fun.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:

Marshall Grice wrote:

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I think we had 6 sets last year and didn't run nationals and didn't run the last three months. I have a fresh set left over and fairly fresh rain set left from that. But if we had run all year, we would have gone through 6 sets with at least 3 drivers. That's a 2000lbs car with all the camber it wants. At least the little tires are a lot cheaper.

damn, I think we used 7 sets of tires on the evo with 5 drivers.

Those 50 lap weekends at El Toro with a bad setup took a quick toll on tires.

I went through TWO sets of RE-11's last year. Also spent the year testing and tuning to get them to work optimal. This year I am on Toyo R1Rs and trying to make them last just as long.

Here's what Arnold had to say about it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL1lfSzgcAw

Marshall Grice wrote:it's pretty easy to see where the dividing line is. cheap car owners want cheap tires (oh and they want to win on the cheap tires), expensive car owners want expensive tires. most CS/DS/ES/GS/HS people have no idea how not fun driving a SS/AS/BS car is on street tires.

DING DING DING DING

I don't think I have heard anyone else break it down this way. But I'm willing to bet that if one found out what classes those on each side of the argument were on, it would statistically as least break down this way. Additionally when ever you look at a new rounds of re classing it's those more expensive SS/AS/BS cars making the changes, and those below them who get the biggest shuffling, to accommodate them.

The $$$$$ of your car does speak volumes to how the rules adjust to accommodate change in Stock. If you can afford the $$$$$ (5 dollar sign) hotel, car rental, vacation, restaurant etc., you get some say, and many listen to your wishes. If you can only afford the $ or $$ price range, you get what the operators of the service allow you to have. Though were all pay equal membership, and $$$$$ of car definitely does not determine the amount of volunteerism input, the rules still bend to accommodate those $$$$$ cars (and their owners).

It may not be fair, but it's life.

Marshall Grice wrote:the question I have is what do you do with all of your old, barely used street tires. I will ALWAYS show up to a national event with brand new tires. So WTF am I going to do with 5 sets (or more) of street tires a year?

What do you do with the slicks?

Marshall Grice wrote:it's pretty easy to see where the dividing line is. cheap car owners want cheap tires (oh and they want to win on the cheap tires), expensive car owners want expensive tires. most CS/DS/ES/GS/HS people have no idea how not fun driving a SS/AS/BS car is on street tires.

This is the only good argument I've heard so far.

Dan Shaw wrote:Sounds to me really like killing off slicks in stock classes would solve a lot of issues. That's really the primary concern from the sound of what everyone is saying. Stock class otherwise runs fine but the expense of it is what deterrs most people from running it. just an observation...If cost is the deciding factor then why not pull back slicks for a year and see what happens? Not indefinitely, but for one year see how the classes shape up and go from there?

Slicks are not allowed in Stock. Only DOT approved street legal tires.

What was the issue you are trying to solve? Who is everyone?

How do you think stock class tires got to where they are today? Make a set of rules and they will find a way to build a better tire. Take away the current DOT legal Rs and all you will do is push technology back a few years. Expensive tires that your "everyone" cant afford will still be built, and still wont last as long as "everyone" would like. In the mean time you just screwed up the largest segment of the Natl Solo program. No thanks.

BTW, thanks to everyone for their input. Like I said, I'm just trying to understand where the opposition comes from. I think I'm starting to get a good feel for it now.

Craig Naylor wrote:
DING DING DING DING

I don't think I have heard anyone else break it down this way. But I'm willing to bet that if one found out what classes those on each side of the argument were on, it would statistically as least break down this way. Additionally when ever you look at a new rounds of re classing it's those more expensive SS/AS/BS cars making the changes, and those below them who get the biggest shuffling, to accommodate them.

The $$$$$ of your car does speak volumes to how the rules adjust to accommodate change in Stock. If you can afford the $$$$$ (5 dollar sign) hotel, car rental, vacation, restaurant etc., you get some say, and many listen to your wishes. If you can only afford the $ or $$ price range, you get what the operators of the service allow you to have. Though were all pay equal membership, and $$$$$ of car definitely does not determine the amount of volunteerism input, the rules still bend to accommodate those $$$$$ cars (and their owners).

It may not be fair, but it's life.

More like the guys in the $$$$$ classes out number the $$ classes two to one. And perhaps the $$$$$ guys are educated enough to understand how the system works (they actually write a letter and get their opinion heard) while the $$ just bitch on a forum so they are understandably ignored by the rules makers. Its just a theory based on my years on the SEB where I only saw the grand sum total of one letter asking for street tire stock - and this was not asking for a ban on Rs.

Kurt Rahn wrote:BTW, thanks to everyone for their input. Like I said, I'm just trying to understand where the opposition comes from. I think I'm starting to get a good feel for it now.

Want a better feel... Price a set of Miata tires in ST and Rs, then price a set of Z06 tires in ST and R. Don't forget to include the cost of shaving.

The fun part is finding the good tires in the larger sizes. :unimpressed:

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote: In the mean time you just screwed up the largest segment of the Natl Solo program. No thanks.

I agree that you can't just make all stock classes go back to using "street" tires. That's not even a viable consideration. It also doesn't seem feasible to mirror each stock class with a street tire class...too much dilution and added complication. And Marshall's point about higher powered cars not working very well on SK tires is a good one too.

Still, I'm convinced there's a sweet spot here. There are a lot of people being excluded from participation here, and not just locally. I've had a lot of discussions with people all over the country via various message boards, and they're in the same boat. Basically, right now, the entry point is either (a) inexpensive and limited mods with ridiculously expensive tires (stock classes), or (b) inexpensive tires with ridiculously expensive mods (ST). There's got to be a way to bridge that gap and throw a bone to all the people who are not in a financial position to spend like a king who aren't currently being served by the SCCA.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:And perhaps the $$$$$ guys are educated enough to understand how the system works (they actually write a letter and get their opinion heard) while the $$ just bitch on a forum so they are understandably ignored by the rules makers.

This $$ is going to write a letter. That's why I started this thread...to see what I'm arguing against.