Tires - Again

[John LaRue]

As a member of the CRB and having followed this we will certainly be looking for input from those active SCCA FF/CF racers as well as those who own cars - make certain you reference your involvement with the class. Also, I would like to see something specific rather than just a general "we want a spec tire that lasts forever" proposal. Set out which tire(s) and size(s). Can I run fronts on all four corners? What about rain tires? What about running rains (if they aren't specified) in the dry or on a drying track? Is there going to be a limit on tires per event? If so and there is a problem with one of the tires can it be replaced? Are there restrictions on what would warrant an allowed replacement? i.e if cords are showing due to wear or flat spots or does it have to be a defect? Can I shave tires or treat the tires? If not, how can these items be checked for compliance? I am sure there are more issues to consider.

You need to dot all of the i's and cross all of the t's before blowing this into the CRB if you want it to be taken seriously.

Keep in mind that if this becomes the rule you will be at the mercy of the selected tire manufacturer(s) to provide a proper quantity and quality of tire. (I believe SRF had a major problem with defective tires about 10 years ago.) Once the ship leaves the dock it takes awhile to return so if there are issues it could have a big negative impact on the class. Think this through; it is not necessarily the perfect solution but it is an approach worth consideration.

Regards,

John

[Matt King]

Once the ship leaves the dock it takes awhile to return

Literally! Several years ago I was running in a class with spec Toyo RA1s and Toyo had supply issues. None were available in our size in the US (the ship was supposedly en route but weeks away) so the sanctioning body (NASA) and Toyo had to agree on an emergency plan that involved other brands and a different Toyo tire (R888s).

[Steve Bamford]

John,

There seems to be much more support for a spec tire now based on the comments here on Apexspeed then I have seen in the past.

I did write to the CRB asking for a 6 tire limit per event starting from qualifying. If a tire is destroyed then have tech declare it as faulty & be allowed to add another or be denied & you have 6 total to use.

As for tires, let the competitors run 4 small tires if they so choose as long as it is the spec tire decided upon by the SCCA.

It seems some people want a treaded tire however some are totally against it so I proposed the R60 which is already successful run in CFF. We could test other manufacture tires with a similar hard compound & determine what is best for the community.

You are right, we need to cover many things when looking at a spec tire but isn't it up to is to get the CRB to listen to racers & then the CRB/ BOD to work together to come up with a plan for what feels like the majority of us are asking for?

[John LaRue]

Steve - I do not disagree that it appears that there is more support for this than in the past. I do think that people hear spec tire and think it will have a major impact upon their tire budgets...there are lots of things to consider before jumping off that cliff.

FYI the BOD does not usually work on putting rules together.

Yes, the CRB could put this together and the float a proposed rule for commentary based uon the letters which have supposedly been sent in, but given the nature of the request it would be best if the competitors set forth a proper proposal and that there be a consensus when the letter(s) arrive. You are asking for it so tell us what you want.

John

[Max Power]

Seems pretty clear to me. YMMV...

[Tom Valet]

Steve - I do not disagree that it appears that there is more support for this than in the past. I do think that people hear spec tire and think it will have a major impact upon their tire budgets...there are lots of things to consider before jumping off that cliff.

FYI the BOD does not usually work on putting rules together.

Yes, the CRB could put this together and the float a proposed rule for commentary based uon the letters which have supposedly been sent in, but given the nature of the request it would be best if the competitors set forth a proper proposal and that there be a consensus when the letter(s) arrive. You are asking for it so tell us what you want.

John

John, appreciate your guidance.

Assuming there is sufficient input from competitors to warrant it, could the CRB set up a committee to study this issue, talk with competitors, and put out recommendations for the membership to comment and vote on?

I am concerned that the CRB will get a mixed message if everyone writes in asking for something slightly different, ie DoT tire, no cantilever, all four the same size, radial tire, etc., when in fact a lot of those people would support the general concept of a spec tire in some form.

[aerobach]

From John Merriman:

A little ancient history for you young-ons! In 1982 or 1983 Buddy Pugliese created his own racing organization in the Northeast- linked with EMRA - and he called it CLUB FORD - now it's the FRCCA. Club Ford rules were similar to the British Pre-'78 - older chassis, no updates and - the prime point in Buddy's mind - HARD TIRES!!

From Me (F500 General Discussion Page):

From the FRCCA

American Racer Front 20.0” / 6.0” 13S 133 Compound

American Racer Rear 22.5 / 7.5 13S 133 Compound.

These are the spec tires used by the FRCCA for their Spec formula classes.
The tires have been available for many years. They seem to equalize outboard vs. inboard suspensions so "newer" cars don't have an instant advantage. The compound lasts most of the season (and they run 10-12 races per year).
I believe American Racer is the brand name for the old McCreary Tire Co.

From Andy Graham:

Yes the FRCCA has been running the AMERICAN RACER tires now for a number of years
and have found them to be a very durable tire for club racing, typically lasting an entire
season of 12 to 14 races while still retaining good grip throughout

At a cost of less than $600 a set it was a no brainer in our opinion and as the previous
post says it brings older cars more in line with the newer cars creating an even playing field
which means closer racing ( just the way we like it )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------____--------------

Just food for thought. -John Bachmann

[mblanc]

THIS WOULD PASS - keep it simple


SCCA GCR 9.1.XX TIRES - FORMULA FORD ONLY

a-Tires may be any size,

b-Radials not allowed.

c-Tires must be manufactured by HOOSIER Tire, and be the SPEC R60 compound (except as in xx-d below), and clearly labeled from the factory as such. Tires with illegible compound markings not allowed.

stolen (and edited) from FM .....13.d page 378
d-A complete set of four (4) rain or wet track tires may be used at the
competitor’s discretion for any session or race. Tires must be marked by manufacturer as WET or RAIN use, and may be of any brand & size. No slicks with factory machine or hand grooves. Rain tires may be in new or used condition.

[Ian Lenhart]

Here's an idea, what about an official SCCA tire testing day and get several cars/drivers involved and write an article for SportsCar and give us something to read.
Driver 1: top national driver with top flight car that does not have any existing tire contracts
Driver 2: mid-pack national driver with "decent" equipment that has a very limited budget.
Driver 3: seasoned veteran running a well prepped CFF
Driver 4: "the rookie" maybe an experience driver from another class.
Driver 5: "the Canadian" the Toyo expert with a car setup to run the radials.
Driver 6: "the PRO" someone like Newgarden that has British FF experience.

Test maybe an R35, R60, Toyo up to twenty heat cycles.
You can probably do it with only a few sets of tires (per compound/brand) if wheels match up per multiple cars. Start with the r35's on drivers 1 and 2, r60's on 3 and 4, and Toyos on drivers 5 and 6 to get a baseline.

[marshall9]

Seems pretty clear to me. YMMV...

[Steve Bamford]

THIS WOULD PASS - keep it simple


SCCA GCR 9.1.XX TIRES - FORMULA FORD ONLY

a-Tires may be any size,

b-Radials not allowed.

c-Tires must be manufactured by HOOSIER Tire, and be the SPEC R60 compound (except as in xx-d below), and clearly labeled from the factory as such. Tires with illegible compound markings not allowed.

stolen (and edited) from FM .....13.d page 378
d-A complete set of four (4) rain or wet track tires may be used at the
competitor’s discretion for any session or race. Tires must be marked by manufacturer as WET or RAIN use, and may be of any brand & size. No slicks with factory machine or hand grooves. Rain tires may be in new or used condition.

This would be the easiest way to go get a spec tire put in place. Least path of resistance isn't always the best but if the outcome is a spec tire in FF then why not?

[John LaRue]

Assuming there is sufficient input from competitors to warrant it, could the CRB set up a committee to study this issue, talk with competitors, and put out recommendations for the membership to comment and vote on?

I am concerned that the CRB will get a mixed message if everyone writes in asking for something slightly different, ie DoT tire, no cantilever, all four the same size, radial tire, etc., when in fact a lot of those people would support the general concept of a spec tire in some form.

Your letters are routed to the appropriate advisory committee, in this case the FSRAC. I am sure they will address them in an upcoming meeting. Keep in mind that the more work they have to do on this the less likely it will be to see anything in 2015. In fact, given where we are on the calendar I am not sure as though it could get through in time to be approved by the BOD for 2015. As we say, time is of the essence. I also agree that a mixed bag of requests will likely result in this being DOA.

John

[Tom Valet]

This would be the easiest way to go get a spec tire put in place. Least path of resistance isn't always the best but if the outcome is a spec tire in FF then why not?

Re Marc's proposal to get behind the R60 as the spec tire, I also agree there would be a lot of support and that this would be the simplest path. But it is a compromise in many ways, so I agree with Steve, it is good but not ideal. A few points to consider:

1. It would be ideal if we could have the same tire for for F1600 and SCCA Majors/Regionals.

2. We need to have some price commitment re the cost of whatever tires is adopted.

3. It would be good to have Hoosier's input re what type of tire they would like to produce were they to be given a contract for all SCCA race classes, ie Pro, Majors, Regionals (and maybe CF as well??). Perhaps they have ideas that would help keep the costs down while not compromising performance.

4. If we get positive feedback on the above points, then maybe we also talk about eliminating the cantilever.

I have some feelers out to see if we can get feedback on these points that can be shared with the membership at this time.

[Ian Lenhart]

Can someone post the Canadian Toyo FF1600 tire
Rule so people can copy and paste it into a letter.

Finally found it. Rules don't mention tire shaving.
TIRES
Toyo Proxes tires shall be used.
Tire sizes shall be
a) Front tire size: 185/60 R13
b) Rear tire size: 205/60 R13
Additional hand cutting or grooving is not permitted.
Rain tires are not permitted.

Add: shaving of tire not permitted.

[ric baribeault]

John, amazing thread compilation. You have too much time on your hands. RCCA was conceptualized in 1979. The first licenses were issued in 1980 and the first races ran that year in conjunction with EMRA events. We tried several tire manufacturers before settling on M&H. I once got almost 2 seasons out of a set. And was running up front. This thread is beat to death. It's way over thought. You don't need SCCA or a tire manufacturers permission to show up on R60's. Very few people are capable of winning. What difference does it make if you finish in 2nd, 3rd, or 4th by a second or 10? The only difference is spending hundreds versus thousands. All my racing career I've found I'm always racing against the same guys no matter who shows up. If you agree within that group of guys to run a spec tire the field is still level.

[Daryl DeArman]

To any of the folks who race under a "no tire shaving" rule, how do the officials possibly enforce that?

[TimH]

All my racing career I've found I'm always racing against the same guys no matter who shows up. If you agree within that group of guys to run a spec tire the field is still level.

[Steve Bamford]

I'm always racing against the same guys no matter who shows up. If you agree within that group of guys to run a spec tire the field is still level.[/QUOTE]

Ric,

Since last year I was fortunate enough to run closer to the pointy end of the grid & to do so I had to spend significant dollars on tires alone as my front running competitors were as well. Running on older tires it was not possible to stay near the front guys.

If we were all on the same tire, which was harder, the same drivers would likely still be at the front of the pack yet everyone would be saving a significant amount of $'s that could be put towards possibly more race events.

How is that not win/win for the competitors & the SCCA as well?

[Tom Valet]

This thread is beat to death. It's way over thought. You don't need SCCA or a tire manufacturers permission to show up on R60's. Very few people are capable of winning. What difference does it make if you finish in 2nd, 3rd, or 4th by a second or 10? The only difference is spending hundreds versus thousands. All my racing career I've found I'm always racing against the same guys no matter who shows up. If you agree within that group of guys to run a spec tire the field is still level.

Ric, nobody can argue with your racing philosophy, which is great and has served you well.

However, it still doesnt serve as justification for $1,100 a set tires.

I will ask again, what benefit is the current open tire rule bringing to the class? None

As far as this thread being dead, I dont think so. For the first time that I can remember there seems to be general agreement in favor of taking action. The question is, how can we make that happen? That's what we should be discussing now.

[swiftdrivr]

Why no interest in the AVON that is used in England, Australia, NZ, and was developed specifically for FF?

[Tom Valet]

Why no interest in the AVON that is used in England, Australia, NZ, and was developed specifically for FF?

Jim, the Avons are not cheap, and there is the issue of availability, distribution and support if a spec tire is adopted for the entire country.

Personally, I really think the best thing for the class and the most likely to gain wide support is to push for a spec Hoosier tire similar to that used in other SCCA classes that would hopefully also be the spec Pro tire, at a cost closer to the R60 than the current Pro tire. This would be win-win-win for everyone: the Pro Series, Hoosier, and the FF racers, which would benefit the class as a whole.

[ric baribeault]

I'm all for a spec tire. I always prefer a slick and plan to put R60's on my VD. Instead of individual letters to SCCA and/or Hoosier, perhaps a petition would carry more weight. Steve, I certainly understand the need to tire up as soon as a competitor chooses to do so. While I'm not doing any open wheel right now, I am karting a lot. We have 6-7 guys down here that are capable of winning in my class. 6 of us agree to use one set for 2 races. One guy doesn't, so we all put on new rubber every weekend. But generally that only applies to a few because only a few have all the tools necessary to win. Those 6 or 7 guys can still beat the rest of the field on used tires

[Josh Pitt]

choose your spec tire carefully.
I ran spec Miata and spec 944. in both classes spec tires were changed and it ended up being as expensive as running soft slicks on the car.
toyo 888 on the 944 was fast for 2 sessions, then dropped off a lot.
the sm ra1 tire was very good. then they changed it to the hoosier and now its a set for qualifying, and another new set to race on. that ended the fun for me as this just got really expensive to run a friggin Miata.

the American racers that people seem to like also had a drop off from the first few sessions that made it where if one guy went for a new set , and I didn't, that competitor would leave me in his dust. I even with those hard tires I felt that I should always have a new set mounted and ready to go so that I could respond to someone elses choice of new tires. I did that one weekend and then said "F" that. I have MY budget, and that's where/who I will race.


the only time this did not happen on a spec tire was running the street sumitomos on the ff. they lasted an eternity(entire season), and never got faster or slower throughout their life.
they were a lot of fun to drive on as well. the only bad thing, and this was really bad , IMO, was that when running in a mixed group, as we always did, other cars with grip(slicks) didn't expect us to move around on the track the way we did, and it made for a (really)bad combo.


pick you spec tire carefully; it can make things worse if you don't know what you are getting.
a $1600 tire budget for 1 weekend to race a spec Miata competitively is just dumb, and I have no idea who other than hoosier likes this.
amazing is that (someone in) SCCA made this change/choice happen......................................
limiting # of tires per weekend would be a big deal, and do a lot of good for many racers both current and future. I would never buy a SM given the current tire situation; keep the class appealing financially if you want to keep it viable

[mike g.]

1. It would be ideal if we could have the same tire for for F1600 and SCCA Majors/Regionals.

Completely disagree. Regionals/Majors are amateur racing and F1600 is pro racing. If they want to run and pay for gumballs that is fine, but the R45 F1600 tire is not what we want as a spec tire, and I dont think they want an R60 compound for their drivers.

[Steve Bamford]

Completely disagree. Regionals/Majors are amateur racing and F1600 is pro racing. If they want to run and pay for gumballs that is fine, but the R45 F1600 tire is not what we want as a spec tire, and I dont think they want an R60 compound for their drivers.

Being a F1600 competitor I would like to have a R60. This would help lower our tire expense which is pretty high. Other teams have mentioned this as well.

[swiftdrivr]

Two points:
1] I like EJ's idea of a tire like the R45 but with the R60 durability and cost, but Why would Hoosier decide to spend money to make a cheaper tire that last longer [they get less $$$$] They are not currently under any threat of losing their market

2] Avon built a tire specifically for FF, used in multiple countries with great FF programs, that [I believe] Last a lot longer than our tires do. Nobody has to build a new tire, or make a compromise DOT tire work, if AVON were a spec tire for the CF and FF class in SCCA, cost would come down, support could be built into the deal [and would come naturally] and availability would not be an issue. Even if cost didn't drop per tire, if they last twice as long, cost go down 50% for us. Rain tires would also no longer be needed. [I've never driven on the AVONs, but Jenson Button, Mark Weber, Schumacher and a few others have.]

[ric baribeault]

Jim, I can offer a different pov to point 1. providing tires can be like flipping houses. what's better over the course of a year....flipping one big house at a profit of $100,000 or flipping 5 smaller ones at a profit $30,000 each? Plus, Hoosier for example, since I prefer their tire, would decrease their cost and increase their profit margin by only having to produce one tire. the point being a lot more guys would race and they'd sell more tires.

[swiftdrivr]

Ric, I hope we can convince Hoosier of that. I like EJ's "R60 compound on a R45 mold" idea a lot. Minimal setup changes, same look, probably more fun to drive, more competition, etc. The lower sustained G's would be somewhat a bummer, but as I and my machine age, it might be "kinder to the equipment."

[Dave Harmison]

As somone who has spent almost his entire racing career on the Hoosier R60 in Club Ford, it is a good tire and durable. Having just spent $499 for a PAIR of Hoosier front rain tires I say ouch!

Years ago when I bought my car the previous owner ran it at Wateford Hills in the Formula Ford Radial class. They ran BFG Comp T/A's and from talking to Mark Davison, who ran in that class, it was fun and competitive. I believe thay had a tread depth rule to limit shaving.

An honest-to-God, buy it from Tire Rack, treaded radial might also negate having rain tires or at least intermediates.

I don't know what is available in the market in appropriate sizes as most people have never seen a rim as small as 13x5.5. I don't know where a Toyo, Dunlop or Avon stacks up for durability, etc.

Two cents deposited.

[swiftdrivr]

TOYOs last forever or last 1 session longer than Hoosiers, depending on which post you read. The one thing I can tell you is they are massively heavier than what we are used to, and I would guess they would require different springs, as they are unlikely to have the same compliance as Hoosier's slicks.
Anybody got a source at Hoosier? I'd love to know their thoughts on a "R60 on a 45" tire?
As I and others transition to a fixed income [hopefully before I transition to a fixed core temperature], the cost of tires becomes a bigger part of my decision making.

[Tom Valet]

Completely disagree. Regionals/Majors are amateur racing and F1600 is pro racing. If they want to run and pay for gumballs that is fine, but the R45 F1600 tire is not what we want as a spec tire, and I dont think they want an R60 compound for their drivers.

Mike, two points:

1. Having the same tire for Pro and Majors/regionals makes it easier for guys to enter races in either series. That can only help the class as a whole and help increase car counts.

2. There is genuine interest in a harder tire for Pro racing by many teams, as Steve has already mentioned.

[Tom Valet]

TOYOs last forever or last 1 session longer than Hoosiers, depending on which post you read. The one thing I can tell you is they are massively heavier than what we are used to, and I would guess they would require different springs, as they are unlikely to have the same compliance as Hoosier's slicks.
Anybody got a source at Hoosier? I'd love to know their thoughts on a "R60 on a 45" tire?
As I and others transition to a fixed income [hopefully before I transition to a fixed core temperature], the cost of tires becomes a bigger part of my decision making.

Jim, I spoke with Bruce Foss of Hoosier yesterday. He is very interested in the idea of a spec tire for FF and shared many ideas with me about what he thinks should be done for the class should we want a spec Hoosier tire. All he needs is the green light from SCCA and competitors that we really want a spec tire.

Just to address some points raised here, the R60 rear and R45 rear are from the same mold. The interior construction is different. The fronts are slightly different, with the R60 being slightly narrower, and uses a different mold. YThe cost savings comes primarily from the materials used to make the two tires.

If we want, Hoosier will make an all new tire for FF, without a cantilever, rears wider than fronts, bias ply, similar performance and durability to the R60, cost closer to R60 if they get a contract for a spec tire. Or, if we want, they will make R60s as a spec tire, in its present form.

[John Merriman]

Todt speaks:

[Rick Kean]

Sent a link to Jim's reply #180 above; requested input on nationwide availability, cost, performance falloff.

Avon ACB10 specs here

If/when I hear back, will relay

Rick Kean

[Max Power]

I'm a prime example of someone who could benefit greatly from the Toyo. I have a great car sitting in the garage, but have very limited time/money/energy to spend racing. A family, work, an old house that needs attention, other hobbies/interests, the list (excuses, perhaps) goes on... a poster child of the club racer. 2-3 race weekends a year is all I will ever really do, and frankly, it's all I want to do. Some years more, some less. I love it, but it's not my only thing. I admire those who can do it on a much bigger scale.

I'm willing to accept that, given this, I will probably not run at the front of the pack without making significant sacrifices in the aforementioned list. Yet, I'm committed to FF. It also doesn't mean I don't want to be competitive and have some good close racing, and work my way up the field.

Cost aside, all of the benefits of the Toyo from a convenience standpoint are HUGE to me. I look at the Canadian series in awe and can't for the life of me figure out why we wouldn't just do that. It's a proven program. And let the Pro Series be a "pro series".

Time to break the log-jam of this debate, call up Toyo (or Tire Rack!) and make the R888 the spec tire next year, with or without a rule change from SCCA. Will it make everyone happy? Of course not, nothing will. Worth a little bit of pain? Absolutely. It certainly won't make things worse.

Next topic: the Open Trailer Series!

[Rick Kean]

The www.apexspeed.com racer forum is currently discussing SCCA Formula F tire specifications and the adoption of regulations to require a longer lasting Spec FF tire.

Here is the thread's link: http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63690. Toyo & Sumitomo DOT radials, R60 compound Hoosier Slicks, and Avon ACB10 are in play...

I've requested comments by your US Dealers, but feel that an Avon Motorsport Development Manager should be involved, who has responsibility for possible US adoption of the Avon ACB10 as an SCCA Spec tire.

Your rapid response to this Apexspeed Forum thread would be appreciated.

Thanks

Rick Kean

[mblanc]

I'm a prime example of someone who could benefit greatly from the Toyo. I have a great car sitting in the garage, but have very limited time/money/energy to spend racing. A family, work, an old house that needs attention, other hobbies/interests, the list (excuses, perhaps) goes on... a poster child of the club racer. 2-3 race weekends a year is all I will ever really do, and frankly, it's all I want to do. Some years more, some less. I love it, but it's not my only thing. I admire those who can do it on a much bigger scale.

I'm willing to accept that, given this, I will probably not run at the front of the pack without making significant sacrifices in the aforementioned list. Yet, I'm committed to FF. It also doesn't mean I don't want to be competitive and have some good close racing, and work my way up the field.

Cost aside, all of the benefits of the Toyo from a convenience standpoint are HUGE to me. I look at the Canadian series in awe and can't for the life of me figure out why we wouldn't just do that. It's a proven program..........................

I think all of the above perceived benefits ALSO apply to a real HARD SLICK, ie R60.
In other words, you could make the same statements, promoting the R60.

I would think a mid packer (not meant to be derogatory) would benefit the most from a hard slick. A set of used ones from a 'front runner with too much money' for just about free, would get you through a season or two..........

I agree with you, we "want to be competitive and have some good close racing" we just have to do it ALL on the same tire.

Right now the front X number guys spend absurd amounts, and the mid pack spend too many $, and they're ALWAYS not only a tick off in time, but then further hampered by running soft used tires too many cycles.


Let's not forget, there are already a couple decades of experience of CFF cars running R60's. It was so popular in CentralDiv SCCA, Hoosier used to make a R60 C-D tire, for the CenDiv CFF Championship series. The EastWestChallenge series ran R60 spec compound for 5? years. High cycle count tires, slightly increased slip angles, lower costs, simple rules, good competition.


Max-appreciate the humor on open trailers,........ I do have one....

[TimH]

I think all of the above perceived benefits ALSO apply to a real HARD SLICK, ie R60

Most, not all.

A guy in Chicago can hop up to Canada and run on his Toyos. He also doesn't need another set of wheels and rain tires.

[Max Power]

I think all of the above perceived benefits ALSO apply to a real HARD SLICK, ie R60.
In other words, you could make the same statements, promoting the R60.

Marc, true but the R60 is a notch below the R888 in my ranking for three reasons:
1) What's to stop Hoosier from charging whatever they want for the R60 spec tire? Let's see what they can offer (thanks, Tom Valet)
2) No need for rain tires (also expensive, get burned up quickly if used, or crusty if not used)
3) Consistency across North America (minus Pro Series, which is an issue)

That being said, you wouldn't hear any complaints from me if we landed on the R60, or a version of it.

[Tom Valet]

Guys, re the Toyos, I think we have to be realistic here. It is unlikely that we will get wide support for going straight from an open tire rule to a DoT street tire, given the history of the class and the general attitude about tires to this point. As a first step away from open tires to spec tire rule, it is far more likely that we will get support for a race slick like the R60.

There are other considerations as well. As has been mentioned before, the Toyos are a COMPLETELY different animal from what people are accustomed to racing on. We raced them in June in Montreal and did a test day on them. They are very heavy and completely change the dynamics of the car. Not only do you have to change the set-up of your car, you have to learn to drive it differently.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with having the Toyos as a spec tire. There are many advantages. But in most respects a pure racing tire that has better performance than the Toyo, has the same durability and costs the same, in my opinion, is preferable.

Last point, at least for the foreseeable future, you will never see the F1600 Pro Series using Toyos or any DoT tire. First, Hoosier is their primary sponsor. More than that, for the role that the Pro series plays in the scheme of FF racing in the US, neither the series nor the competitors wants to be on a DoT tire.