F2KCS Hoosier Tire Test
In the interest of keeping an open channel of information to all F2000 Championship Series competitors Bruce Foss (Hoosier Tire) has generously offered an open invitation to all F2000 competitors to spectate at the Hoosier 2011 pro tire test.
The test will be next Wednesday and Thursday, January 19th and 20th at Roebling Road. Folks will be free to observe and ask questions of the engineers and test drivers as long as they stay out of the way of the process.
test
Mike,
Thank you for the information. Who will be doing the testing and in what cars? Also, if you know, will the publish the information as to what worked/did not work, etc...? I would also be very curious as to where the new tires come in on weight.
John
Originally Posted by Purple Frog
Think they'll do the same for F1600?
"The winner ain't the one with the fastest car, it's the one who refuses to lose." - Dale Earnhardt Sr.
F1600 is using the R45 Club tire, so there's no real reason for a specific test, and there was a defacto test at the ARRC last fall. The F2000 radial tire for 2011 is new, both compound and construction.
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
Great! I'm looking forward to it!
Dave Weitzenhof
Too bad they decided on the narrower rear. Now the F2000 tires will only be 3/4" wider than the F1600 tires, front and rear. I always thought FC cars looked undertired before, now they are going to look even worse, especially in comparison to FB and USF2000 cars.
And, of course, it will penalize those teams that have figured out how to make the wacky Van Diemen suspension work with the wider rears, but I guess the idea is to "dumb down" setup and close up the fields.
Kudos to Hoosier for developing a stiffer sidewall, which should make the cars a lot easier to drive, especially for those used to bias tires.
It will be interesting to see which teams figure out the new tires first. Probably those which can do the most testing in March!
Nathan
Last edited by nulrich; 01.25.11 at 4:10 PM. Reason: typo
Form follows function.
While it may look cool to the unknowing, having tires that look like they came off mid-70s F1 cars just are not efficient on 150 hp cars.
A few years ago the new Sthor F1000 car came out looking all wizzy and cool. Then they held a little race at Road Atlanta, and the streamlined conversion cars walked the dog. Form follows function.
On a side note: I was looking up the RRR lap record for FC. It seems to be held by one Mr. Cole Morgan in "the" DB6 in March of 2009. 1:06.6
Last week Cole and Tonis were rotating at 1:06.1
I'm not saying the pro tire will be competitive with the club bias tire, but it may be getting closer.
That day was the highlight of my racing career.
I'd love to hear about the difference between the bias tire and this one... cost/ performance/ lifespan.
If it's about the same $$ (or a little more) but the performance holds for more heat cycles (so my overall cost is less), I'm in!
Sean O'Connell
1996 RF96 FC
1996 RF96 FB
2004 Mygale SJ04 Zetec
A few thoughts about the new F2K tires
A few of my thoughts about the description and probable performance of the selected tires:
1. Smaller and stiffer tires should be able to use the (marginally on the hard side for a radial) 35A compound better, and as a result, we will all be faster. IMO, the previous tires (especially the rear) were too large and soft for the loads we put on them. And...
2. For the same reasons, the pick-up problem will be reduced, since it will be easier to scrub the tires clean. And...
3. Since the tires are stiffer in the sidewalls, I also predict that they will be useful for a few more heat cycles than the previous tires. Why? Because lower sidewall stiffness means the footprint gets exercised less, similar to what happens when you back off spring rates, roll stiffness, tire pressure, or damping. A stiffer sidewall and smaller footprint means the tires will be better able to develop tread heat even after the tread has cured a bit or has worn down, or both. This, at least in my case, affected the rear tires more than the front. Thus they should be usable longer at near-peak performance.
#3 should especially benefit financially challenged competitors, such as me.
So, to me, this sounds great!
Last edited by DaveW; 01.25.11 at 7:24 PM.
Dave Weitzenhof
Nathan,
Most of the faster FB run a narrower rear at least down here. Big Tire, Big Wing, Big Body looks good not fast. As per Frogs post about the initial FB ARRC Stohr, Cole won the turns and the Piper(FC) walked away. But I also am not sure about the FF small tire all around for only RA not sure it is worth the sacrifice in the corners. Back to FC we have consistently run smaller fronts on "The Swift" only because the Goodyear tire had a better profile at that size and as every one knows SWIFTS DON'T PUSH UNLESS IT'S THE DRIVER
Last edited by jim morgan; 01.25.11 at 9:20 PM.
The current tires, based on data I've collected, suspension tuning we've done, and lap time simulation, are quite well matched to the parameters (weight, power, downforce, etc) of a modern F2000 car. I don't believe the current F/R tire relationship bears any resemblance to a 1970s era F1 car, as I think the enclosed photos will show clearly.Form follows function.
While it may look cool to the unknowing, having tires that look like they came off mid-70s F1 cars just are not efficient on 150 hp cars.
I'm not going to apologize for wanting these cars to "look cool," especially since appearance is incredibly important to attracting customers and entrants. In this case, the wider rear is also faster....as you say, form does follow function (although sometimes not in aerodynamics).
The Van Diemen has an inherent understeer caused by a very dated suspension design (not well matched to radials at all, amongst other problems), exacerbated by lack of torsional rigidity and some other issues. It is possible to mitigate those problems, but it's not easy. Going to a narrower rear tire will simply mask those deficiencies.
I completely agree that the sidewalls were too soft on the current tires, especially on the rear, and I'm glad Hoosier has addressed that problem. However, the total tread area on the current tires is appropriate for the loads seen by an F2000 car, even in the 35A compound, especially as overall downforce levels increase. Reducing the tread area will increase the wear rate and decrease overall grip on a well-balanced car. Trying to fix an inherently poorly balanced car by reducing rear tire size is just a Band-Aid (on top of a couple of others already present).
Nathan
Last edited by nulrich; 01.06.15 at 4:16 PM.
Nathan, I agree with most of what you said, but my car was, and always can be adjusted to be, well balanced. I never have had a front tire wear problem. However, the problem I sometimes did have was getting heat into the rear tires due to the soft sidewalls and relatively large size. This problem will be somewhat alleviated with the stiffer, smaller tire.
The best racing setup, usually, is to dial out as much downforce as practical, while maintaining balance and lap times. With the relatively hard 35A compound, the smaller rear tire will make this easier to do, IMO.
Dave Weitzenhof
The top teams never had any problems setting up their cars to effectively use the current rear tires, although the soft sidewall was always an issue. Stiffening the sidewall while maintaining the current size would have been the fastest solution. And looked good.
If you can increase downforce (without increasing drag), then the larger contact area is desirable. That's my main objection to the smaller rear tire, since modern cars are going to produce more downforce than the older cars.
Nathan
E comes after C
Is it true that the FE cars were faster than FC in years past and just as fast as F2000 at the test??
Stiiiirrrrrriiinngg the Pot..........
is it true the FE has apx 20 more hp then a FC ? as you said stirring the pot...or would I have to mention the pathetic car count in the FE pro series to reallly be stirring the pot ?
Looking forward to running an improved tire in 2011, and could care less what it looks like. Its black, round, and has a specific job to do and winning an car show isnt one of them.
Thanks to Cole and Tonis for their work.
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
Runoffs 1 Gold 3 Silver 3 bronze, 8 Divisional , 6 Regional Champs , 3x Drivers of the year awards
I was thinking the same thing. A car that wins looks great.
Sean O'Connell
1996 RF96 FC
1996 RF96 FB
2004 Mygale SJ04 Zetec
The wider tire (current width) is faster on a car that is properly set up. The fact that it looks better is just a bonus.
Why take the risk associated with such a drastic change in front/rear contact patch distribution? At the very least it will require lots of testing and development ($$$$$), but the consequences could be severe in the worst case. And most of the cars in the paddock don't have enough ballast to move around to compensate for the change in front/rear balance.
In contrast, stiffening the sidewalls on the current tire has almost no risk. And keeping the compound the same makes a lot of sense as well.
Nathan
From the F2K web site test report:
---------------------------------------------------------
"After testing the six combinations the result that emerged was the best combination turned out to be a front tire with a stiffer sidewall, an 8” rear tire with a stiffer sidewall, and both front and rear using the 2010 compound (R35A).
New compounds were tried, hoping to maybe find one less susceptible to adverse “pick-up”, provide good wear, and have a good feel. In the end, the new compounds were judged to not feel as good to the drivers as the existing compound, and the lap charts showed the newer compounds as slower, with no improvement in “pick-up” characteristics. That’s why you test.
A later phase of the test was to run long continuous runs with the best combination of the test. These runs were sessions of 22 to 33 laps at speed. In the past most teams experienced the front tires wearing faster than the rears. In these long session tests using the new tire, it exhibited a much better front to rear wear ratio. Even with the use of 8” rears, the rears still wore slightly less than the fronts."
--------------------------------------------------
Seems to me that this says it all. And, if I remember Roebling correctly, it is not a track that is easy on tires. I have always liked a bit of oversteer. And, even though I could achieve predictable oversteer on last year's tires, it lasted only until the tires heat-cycled to the point the rears would not heat up the next time out.
Now, whether the large tires with a stiffer sidewall would have been better, as Nathan contends, I would think that would have been one of the variations tested. And, if it was, why wasn't it better or faster in this test?
Dave Weitzenhof
Hoosier has already been down this road with the bias plys. They offer a 8" or a 9" rear. Wanna guess which tire is fastest ? the 8" on every car I have put them on across 4 different manufacturers and multiple VD models. Avon has the same setup. And as Dave pointed out the test results still show the front tire is the limiting factor as tested. Since they were testing tires and not chassis setups there is a possibility that can be dialed out.
The big thing I am waiting on is the tire weight.
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
I really do not care to get into this argument, I've been on Apex for a while and I have an idea where this is going. Here is some insight into the test.
Tonis and I went out on the 2008-2010 spec tire to get our baseline setup. We ran close to 3 sets of the "control" tire, until we both were confident that the car was balanced and we were happy.
We then ran through the newly developed tires that Bruce and the engineers at Hoosier had developed. Once the cars were set on the "control" tires, the cars were not adjusted. We did 7 lap runs on all the sets, and decided on what we (Tonis, myself, and the Engineers) thought were the best sets to continue with. We then started our long run testing. We ran the set's all the way around, then we mixed and matched what we thought were the best fronts and the best rears. All of the new sets were at least .5 faster than the "control" tire with the exact same setup.
I think everyone will be happy with the final decision. The car was fast, the times over the long run were very consistent. I was also extremely impressed with how much fun the car is to drive. These new tires are balanced, and also have a feel somewhere in between a radial and a bias ply tire. I personally think you get the best of both worlds with this tire. I would also like to say it was a great pleasure working with Bruce, Hoosier Tires, Tonis, Gib, and Kris.
It would be nice to see actual data and setup information on the cars that were tested. If the cars were set up by an engineer experienced with club tires, of course the narrower rear would work better. Also, from what Cole says the setup wasn't changed for the various tires tried, which is exactly what I suspected (and makes the test pretty much useless).
The performance of bias ply tires has no relevance to the radials.
The front running teams from last year did not experience excessive front tire wear, and achieved good balance with the current front/rear tread area distribution, even on a Van Diemen. The stiffer sidewall is likely already going to move the wear rate towards the rear, and going to a narrower rear as well is a risky decision.
Good to hear the cars are more predictable and more fun to drive with the stiffer sidewall.
Although I wish the final decision had been different, I do appreciate the work that Cole, Tonis, K-Hill and the folks at Hoosier did. We can make our cars work with any of the tires, it will just require a lot more testing with a completely new rear tire size.
Nathan
It must not have taken a lot of frekin' work. They unloaded the cars from the Homestead national with club bias setups, screwed in the radial setup from last year, and within a few seven lap sessions were rotating with radials at under the existing lap record (that record had been set on bias tires).
Of course... they did have Gibby turning the wrenches.
I use the term "work" very loosely when it applies to drivers. I'm sure everyone else worked hard, though.
Nathan
P.S. Which "radial setup?" I know of at least three very different setups used successfully on Van Diemens in the F2000 pro series. And a few not so successful. I admit to being thoroughly confused the first time I looked at wheel rates and damper pot data on a Van Diemen, and wondering how the car made it around the first corner!
Things that make you go hmmmm.
Does anyone get the sense that Nathan doesn't like the VD car?
Last edited by Jtovo; 01.27.11 at 12:33 AM.
If I built a new car I think I would wait until that car crossed the stripe, in a race of some consequence, ahead of the VDs before I got too carried away with bashing the design.
Aaron
That sure doesn't seem like "bashing," especially in the context of other threads on ApexSpeed! Nothing I said is news to anyone familiar with a Van Diemen. You should hear the mechanics talk about them.
I'm sure the 1999-2000 Van Diemen is a fine car in the context of what was around 12 years ago, and it is certainly the dominant car out there now. But it certainly isn't easy to work on, and the suspension design (especially the rocker design and motion ratios) weren't designed to make life easy for a race engineer! If you spend any time with Ralph Firman, you understand quickly that his primary goal is to make cars as cheaply as possible. The Citation is better designed and a lot safer, and the Piper is better built.
That said, the Van Diemen will be around for a long time to come, and I'll continue to be involved in developing parts for them, as well as working with them at the race track. Some of the new cars may or may not prove faster, we'll just have to see.
Nathan
Are you saying you have to catch VD before you really appreciate it?
None of this matters..........Where the hell is Foschi, he's got to be free by now - how come we haven't heard from him
2007
Wow this has turned towards the dump!
Tim [and everyone else],
Not only has the thread turned a corner it is all a moot point anyway.
The decision has been made.
This thread began with an open invitation to any and all interested parties to attend the tire testing at Roebling Road.
No one did.
These are the tires for at least 2011.
They are the same for everyone.
Personally I believe Bruce, Tonis and Cole when they give the thumbs up for this combination.
This topic is closed for further whimpering and complaining.
In just under 70 days we will all know much more after testing at VIR.
Until that time, it is all conjecture and BS.
Mike:
Just to be clear, I had planned to attend with Glenn Phillips, possibly the most experienced engineer in the F2000CS paddock. We were told we could observe but could have no input or influence on the test. Other experienced teams and drivers also offered their equipment and services.
No data (if any was collected other than lap times) have been offered to support the decision.
From what I've been told, the cars were not set up with anything resembling the approach the most successful teams in the F2000 series have used with Van Diemens, nor were setups adjusted for the various tires tried. Essentially the "test" proves nothing, and the decision is arbitrary.
Using terms like "whimpering" and "complaining" and "BS" to describe engineering observations based on solid data and experience shows how well you accept constructive criticism, I guess.
The decision to make such a drastic change to tire size will help teams with the time, money and the ability to test in March and hurt everyone else. Hopefully problems won't emerge at VIR, at which point it will be too late.
Nathan
My outlook on the new tire situation
Not to dispute anyone or anything, but I am looking forward, with my highly adjustable and responsive Citation, to the new tires. Although I had no trouble adjusting the car to achieve a pretty good balance with last year's tires, I could not consistently achieve my desired handling characteristics: neutral under trailing throttle and braking, and slight oversteer on acceleration. With the new tires, I am convinced that I now can. And, I also think that I can get there quickly, w/o any extra testing.
Dave Weitzenhof
I don't quite understand that consequence. If Team A had 50% more money to spend on testing than Team B before this tire change, they will still have 50% more money to do testing with. Just like before, everyone will spend whatever they have (thier finite budget) on whatever they think gives the most bang for the buck. I can't see how this tire thing changes anything (unless they start flying apart). Geez, even the teams that do not test at all should benefit from this. They mount the tires and change nothing and go faster with tires that are expected to last longer.
As you say, we'll see what happens at VIR. Maybe it wont be a disaster.
I don't think it will be a disaster at VIR. I trust Hoosier and the ability of most of the teams in the paddock to adjust their setups to make the new tires work. There is, however, a small but real chance of problems, since it is a dramatic change and we have no idea how the tires will behave over a race weekend.
When you make a major change (to the rules, to the tires, to the engines, etc) the teams with the most resources always benefit the most, and the soonest.
Supplying a dramatically different tire five weeks before the season opener will benefit the teams with resources (and based in the South) the most. I probably shouldn't be arguing against the change, since, like Dave, it will actually help us: we will be testing in March already, and we have the ability to make rapid changes to our suspension geometry and F/R weight distribution. It will hurt the smaller teams with less flexible equipment.
It's too bad, since there is no reason to change the tire size. (In contrast, there is every reason to make the sidewalls stiffer, which has a much smaller risk.)
I'm opposed to making arbitrary decisions based on poor data, but it's not my series.
Nathan
All I would like is to see....is everyone to be civil...... I do understand this is a bit of a HOT button issue .
You know, I've been thinking....
I wish I had never started this thread.
The F2000 Championship Series has, for the last 5 years, tried it's damnest to be racer friendly. In that spirit. we thought, "Hey why not make the tire test open to competitors..." We were thinking it would cut down on all the speculation and grumbling that has plaqued decisions made in past series over the last two decades. Remember, three years ago, we just picked a tire, and announced it, period. (it is easier to be a dictator.)
So we made the test open. Then we even explained the procedure, and the results. We even explained we were not going to try to maximize car setups for each combination that we tested, and just use one setup.
Our goals were to try to find a faster, better balanced, and more enduring tire. We think we accomplished those goals. As a added benefit we think we have a tire with a wider "sweet spot" that will make it easier for all teams to get closer to a good setup.
Now, after reading some posts above, i again am awakened to the old adage, "no good deed goes unpunished."
I hope folks reading some of the above posts don't conclude that the majority of competitors are all up in arms. Based on my PMs over the last 24 hours, the score is 18-0 thanking us for our effort.
Still, i do believe we will be re-evaluating our decision to be 'open'. And, I'm sure the Series management is going to look at me cross-eyed the next time I argue for doing things in the "Sunshine".
WELL....bummer ....on the rethinking.. of being out in the sun
I think transparency in any group is very positive!
I think for an organization to grow, it is mandatory...IMO.....
Well, I, for one, really appreciate the openness displayed by the series on this thread. And, I think that this trend should continue. You really only have one detractor here!...
Now, after reading some posts above, i again am awakened to the old adage, "no good deed goes unpunished."
I hope folks reading some of the above posts don't conclude that the majority of competitors are all up in arms. Based on my PMs over the last 24 hours, the score is 18-0 thanking us for our effort.
Still, i do believe we will be re-evaluating our decision to be 'open'. And, I'm sure the Series management is going to look at me cross-eyed the next time I argue for doing things in the "Sunshine".
I thank all involved for their efforts in selecting the new tires. Although there is ALWAYS more that could have been done, I do not think that the outcome would have been much different, and probably would not have been worth the time and expense. If time and $ are unlimited, then by all means, beat it to death. In this case I think the return on investment was excellent.
As always, my opinion only.
Dave Weitzenhof
The F2000 series is the best, and although I strongly disagree with the decision on tires, that doesn't effect my feeling about the series in the least. I like and respect both Mikes and I'm going to buy them the adult beverage of their choice at VIR, even if the tires start falling off the cars (that's a joke if anyone is uncertain
That doesn't mean I'm going to stop arguing with them when we disagree...but as Mike said, the decision is made, might as well get back to work.
Nathan
or perhaps only really hurt the one guy who designed a car around a 9" radial tire. is this the real problem here ? No one else is bitching.
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
