Poll: FF SPEC TIRE

[reidhazelton]

Vote for the tire you want as the spec tire in SCCA FF Majors competition.

[Steve Bamford]

Vote for the tire you want as the spec tire in SCCA FF Majors competition.

Thanks for posting this Reid. Should be interesting to see the results a day or two from now.

[stonebridge20]

Reid, you should have made it a public poll and not had the voters ID hidden. Too many people with an opinion and not involved in the class will skew the results.

FYI: I didn't and will not vote in this poll since my days of FF in SCCA are done.

[reidhazelton]

Reid, you should have made it a public poll and not had the voters ID hidden. Too many people with an opinion and not involved in the class will skew the results.

FYI: I didn't and will not vote in this poll since my days of FF in SCCA are done.

Opps. Didn't know that was an option. I thought they were all anonymous. Any how, people could always go in under the guise of "I would come if..."

[DaveW]

I'm interested in the results, but also not voting since I'm not running FF.

[Swift17]

If this was covered elsewhere (sorry) but what does this mean ............

"R60 6" current front with current cantilever rears (essentially current CF Tires)
or
"R60 6" all around (skinny rears)

and

"R60 7" new fronts with current cantilever rears (essentially current rear CF Tires)
or
"R60 7" all around (new skinny fronts and rears)

[Art Smith]

why were existing Avon treaded tires excluded?

what is the objective of the poll? I thought John LaRue was on the right track attempting to identify selection criteria (aka: objectively verifiable requirements). popularity polls don't address requirements and that in my view is a problem.................. decisions made in the absence of requirements are never wrong AND seldom right.

Art
artesmith@earthlink.net

[reidhazelton]

why were existing Avon treaded tires excluded?

what is the objective of the poll? I thought John LaRue was on the right track attempting to identify selection criteria (aka: objectively verifiable requirements). popularity polls don't address requirements and that in my view is a problem.................. decisions made in the absence of requirements are never wrong AND seldom right.

Art
artesmith@earthlink.net

Avons were not mentioned and are expensive. No one seemed interested in them.

The choices the above because they exist. Look at the lack of consensus. We can't even agree on how have a simple pole, so I don't see how we will ever agree on a mythical tire. It will be 2050 by the time that happens. These tires exist, are real, and can be bought right now. If we want anything to happen, as I see it, these are the choices if we want anything done before we are all dead. If we went on "what we want on a tire" it would NEVER happen. We want a tire that is fast as a slick, never drops off, is cheap, readily available, great at track support and so on. The perfect tire will never exist and trying to debate what we want, knowing full well it won't be possible, is a waste of time. All of these long drawn out threads are proof of that. We either pick a tire, or we don't and keep on the same path we are.

PS. I missed your question. The point is to see what people want from a group of tires we can have now (2015), or in the near future (2016). Putting other options in place that extends it 3, 4, 50 years down the road is pointless. Besides, this isn't set in stone. It the spec tire for 2015 sucks, we change it. Simple. What do we want to start on as a spec tire?

[reidhazelton]

If this was covered elsewhere (sorry) but what does this mean ............

"R60 6" current front with current cantilever rears (essentially current CF Tires)
or
"R60 6" all around (skinny rears)

and

"R60 7" new fronts with current cantilever rears (essentially current rear CF Tires)
or
"R60 7" all around (new skinny fronts and rears)

Thanks for the clarification EJ. Yes, that 6 and 7 would relate to the fronts only. I assume a spec tire would also spec size and location (no skinny rears )

[DaveW]

...I regret ever trying to get this to move forward, that has been a true waste of time.

Why? I think this could be a very good thing for FF. Even if it doesn't cause a spec FF tire to happen immediately, it is still good information.

[reidhazelton]

Why? I think this could be a very good thing for FF. Even if it doesn't cause a spec FF tire to happen immediately, it is still good information.

That's what I thought, but it seems other feel differently.

I think it would be a good thing as well, but only if it actually happens. We have been on the "what do we want in a mythical tire" path for 5 years now. Time to step up and make a choice, or keep going down that path for a continued length of time.

[bobmelvin]

Avons were not mentioned and are expensive. No one seemed interested in them.

The choices the above because they exist. Look at the lack of consensus. ****, we can't even agree on how have a simple stupid pole, do you even think we are going to gain consensus adding as many variables as asking to have a tire built for us? It will be 2050 by the time that happens. These tires exist, are real, and can be bought right now. if we want anything to happen, as I see it, these are the choices if we want anything done before we are all dead. If we went on "what we want on a tire" it would NEVER happen. We want a tire that is fast as a slick, never drops off, is cheap, readily available, great at track support and so on. The perfect tire will never exist and trying to debate what we want, knowing full well it won't be possible, is a waste of time. All of these long drawn out threads are proof of that. We either pick a tire, or we don't and keep on the same path we are.

I regret ever trying to get this to move forward, that has been a true waste of time.

Hey, Reid, leaders/scouts always take arrows in the back. Why should it be any different with racers?

Thanks for taking the initiative and the shots. Thanks to Steve too for his well intentioned mature approach. Funny, you have the epitome of the Club Racer in Reid and conversely, in Steve you have the consummate pro/amateur. Working together to find a consensus for one reason and one reason only; to fill our fields. Our common goal, no?

Thanks guys.

Bob

[reidhazelton]

Hey, Reid, leaders/scouts always take arrows in the back. Why should it be any different with racers?

Thanks for taking the initiative and the shots. Thanks to Steve too for his well intentioned mature approach. Funny, you have the epitome of the Club Racer in Reid and conversely, in Steve you have the consummate pro/amateur. Working together to find a consensus for one reason and one reason only; to fill our fields. Our common goal, no?

Thanks guys.

Bob

Well said.

Hats off to Steve as well. As I have told him, I always appreciate he seems to make his choices on what is best for the whole, and not what is best for himself. Not bad for a Canadian...

[racerdad2]

We need a benevolent dictator. Never thought I'd ever say that

[Steve Bamford]

Well said.

Hats off to Steve as well. As I have told him, I always appreciate he seems to make his choices on what is best for the whole, and not what is best for himself. Not bad for a Canadian...

Na, I simply just make a lot of noise on the keyboard as to what I believe makes sense. Right or wrong.

I know you don't like to get shots taken at you Reid but that happens when you voice your ideas, good or bad.

Back to the poll...so far NO ONE has said stay with the open tire rule. That in itself should be the biggest thing that comes out of this thread that the SCCA should pay attention to. Sounds like they are taking the right steps to gather info from FF drivers from last years majors from what I have heard that people were asked to email their opinions.

Gather info is great but we need a leader or group of leaders inside the SCCA to actually step out on a limb & make an actual decision on deciding upon a tire choice. Whatever the choice it will be accepted by some, complained about by others. It is not an easy decision to make but we need a true leader or group of leaders to make that call for the greater good of FF racing. I am hopeful it may actually happen for 2016.

[Brian C in Az]

Back to the poll...so far NO ONE has said stay with the open tire rule. That in itself should be the biggest thing that comes out of this thread that the SCCA should pay attention to. Sounds like they are taking the right steps to gather info from FF drivers from last years majors from what I have heard that people were asked to email their opinions.

Gather info is great but we need a leader or group of leaders inside the SCCA to actually step out on a limb & make an actual decision on deciding upon a tire choice.

WRD and SEComposites are taking the right step, starting their own series on the Toyo Tires.
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65467

The response to their open invitation was excellent, over 20 cars and drivers signed up in a matter of a few weeks.

[Garey Guzman]

We can't even agree on how have a simple pole....

poll

(sorry, I can't help myself!)

While I agree with Art that the final decision should be based on objectively verifiable requirements, a poll is valid data point, especially when it's aimed at the target audience. (I still haven't received my SCCA survey)

[Jnovak]

If you want big fields in FF like we had 20 - 30 years ago then the ONLY answer is to reduce the costs to compete. As I see it the only big hitter at this moment is tires. Your goal must be to MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

I suggest that you put together an FF tire ad hoc committee consisting of about 7 competitors in FF. Make certain that the people on the committee are committed to the class and have the best interests of the class in mind.

Someone in the FF community must step up to the plate and volunteer to start the committee. Make certain that you do this with the blessing of the FSRAC and the CRB. This can work. Someone needs to step up and start the tire rolling.

IT IS UP TO YOU SO STOP TALKING AND DO.

[problemchild]

Finally, someone voted for the status quo.

The only two real numbers that matter. 48 for spec tires ..... 1 against.

[Raceworks]

Opps. Didn't know that was an option. I thought they were all anonymous. Any how, people could always go in under the guise of "I would come if..."

Hey, you did better than me. I wanted to post a poll months ago & couldn't figure how to do it.

[DanW]

We need a benevolent dictator. Never thought I'd ever say that

Bernie the Troll may be available...

Or not..
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2014/1...ns-board-seat/

[racerdad2]

DanW. .. interesting & informative read, including some of the comments.

[M.Sauce]

What is best for the class is what is best for most competitors. Tire costs ,run costs entry fees and travel are what make it cost 2k plus a weekend to race competitively at a minimum. If the tires last longer it will decrease costs but it is unlikely that 30 car fields are the product of tire costs. If we found a tire that would wear to 12-16 heat cycles that would be great but neither of your spec tire classes ie SRF or SM have that. The costs of the tires is important but not if they don't last 10 heat cycles. I think the Hoosier R6 tire that is made for the SRF would be the tire. 185 fronts 205 rear. The Toyo too me is not a good choice because of availability and lack of service at the track. I started in FF when we had 30 car fields because there were fewer class options of cars with the same speed versus cost. Now there too many choices amongst a certain number of competitors interested in open wheeled cars.

[Steve Bamford]

What is best for the class is what is best for most competitors. Tire costs ,run costs entry fees and travel are what make it cost 2k plus a weekend to race competitively at a minimum. If the tires last longer it will decrease costs but it is unlikely that 30 car fields are the product of tire costs. If we found a tire that would wear to 12-16 heat cycles that would be great but neither of your spec tire classes ie SRF or SM have that. The costs of the tires is important but not if they don't last 10 heat cycles. I think the Hoosier R6 tire that is made for the SRF would be the tire. 185 fronts 205 rear. The Toyo too me is not a good choice because of availability and lack of service at the track. I started in FF when we had 30 car fields because there were fewer class options of cars with the same speed versus cost. Now there too many choices amongst a certain number of competitors interested in open wheeled cars.

Mike on the Toyo, there doesn't seem to be any lack of availability, if competitors were running them in SCCA then there would be distributors that could help. We have never had issues getting service at the track by tire guys so should not be an issue either.

Hoosier could & would build a similar style tire if the membership or SCCA is only set on using Hoosier, which it seems that is a sticking point for some.

[DaveW]

Even if a spec tire does not last as long or cost as little as competitors would like, it still eliminates the "tire of the week" issue. It also allow use of old tires for practice or testing without the worry of having to optimize tire choices before you can even start to sort the car.

Uncertainty is one of the main causes of inaction, and eliminating tire confusion is a big step in the right direction.

[Brian C in Az]

What is best for the class is what is best for most competitors. Tire costs ,run costs entry fees and travel are what make it cost 2k plus a weekend to race competitively at a minimum. If the tires last longer it will decrease costs but it is unlikely that 30 car fields are the product of tire costs.

Then why do we have 20 plus cars every event and more than 45 signed up for 2015? Only because racing here is affordable thanks to the spec tire rule.

The Toyo to me is not a good choice because of availability and lack of service at the track. I started in FF when we had 30 car fields because there were fewer class options of cars with the same speed versus cost. Now there too many choices amongst a certain number of competitors interested in open wheeled cars.

We have no problem buying the tires. They are available online, at Discount Tire, other tire retail shops, and at the track. If anyone has had a delay recently, it is due to year end inventory levels being low for tax reasons and likely to the recent interest in the tires thanks to WRD and SEComposites starting their own treaded tire and Kent engine only FF race. I have never waited more than 2 weeks to get a set of tires.
Toyo is commited for at least 5 years to providing this tire in our size. What track side service do you require? Can not the current service person mount and balance the Toyo tires?

[M.Sauce]

I am a tire dealer I have tried to get Toyo's for NASA. In Texas they are not available and the TOYO distributor has no interest in stocking them. A tire for it to be good for all competitors should be available at the track with support. I personally don't care what tire is picked as the Spec Tire I just want there to be some support for it at the track.
I actually enjoyed driving my car on radial DOT tires when I raced in Canada. You will find that the drivers who have the best shocks and best chassis will not have an advantage over the guy with a decent older FF. A Dot tire can be an equalizer.

[Matt King]

Trackside tire support is a huge deal when you run in a class where people regularly run 1 or 2 sets of tires per weekend. Trackside tire support is not such a big deal when you run a tire that can last 2 or 3 weekends or more.

[racerdad2]

Seems the Toyos are relatively inexpensive. Bring your own spares and no matter what tire you are running, tip the trackside tire guys as much as you can afford. It's no small effort showing up for race weekends.

[problemchild]

I can understand people's concerns about trackside service. It has not proven to be a problem for us as we carry a second set that combine as wet weather and spares. If one gets too worn, or damaged, it just gets removed, and one from the second set gets moved into the rotation. We worry about a replacement on Monday. While it is still 8 wheels, it sure beats the 12 (atleast 10) you need with slicks, rains, and spares. Being non-cantilever, you can get almost anybody to do the mounting.

Just to correct some erroneous info I provided yesterday, the Ontario and Quebec racers have now been using Toyos for 3 seasons. I said 2 seasons.

[problemchild]

Finally, someone voted for the status quo.

The only two real numbers that matter. 48 for spec tires ..... 1 against.

The gap (by ratio) is closing. 84-2

[steve zemke]

Are the Toyo's bias ply or radial construction?

[Tom Valet]

Are the Toyo's bias ply or radial construction?

They are radials Steve.

[Michael Rand]

Having waded through this thread I need to come clean, I am one of the 2 against spec tire, rather I believe Steve Lathrop has it right, ANY DOT tire, bias or radial but treaded.
Let the barking about costs of testing this and that tire begin and how the playing field would get all unleveled....
Come on folk, the playing field is and has been so unlevel already as to essentially make that argument irrelevant.
This is racing, not special olympics racing where everyone gets awarded for participating.
By the way, I donate regularly and healthily to local special Olympics so flame away if you please.
The cream will always rise to the top, be it tires, chassis , drivers and teams.
That is how it should be and how it always has been.
Those with excess cash will test all the options and pick what they think is best and everyone else in a short period of time will follow along.
Or do as they have done in Arizona and Canada and band together and make your own areas tire rules but this shortsighted plea for an SCCA wide spec tire for FF is beyond my small brains ability to get behind.
Few seasons ago I lobbied the NARRC committee here in the Northeast and got the Dunlop treaded tire accepted into NARRC Club Ford. After two seasons of trying to get my fellow CF competitors to follow along I gave it up as a waste of my time.
I loved the tire, Steve Roux loved the tire, anyone who drove on them loved them, but in the end there were not enough of us to swing the balance.
In my recall the major discrepancy between the Dunlop and a Hoosier R60 was in the braking zone but man was that a fun tire, made you feel like Steve Kinser, all sideways and flapping elbows.
Look at the good size fields in Arizona and Canada as well as numerous Vintage/Historic FF groups and you'll hopefully see the attraction.
Expensive on initial purchase, yes, but pro-rated against the number of legitimately competitive heat cycles cheap in the long run.
I'm done, Rand out......

[reidhazelton]

Totally agree Mike. I had thought of saying something to that effect, but I had one problem area. What happens when a tire mfg takes a DOT mold, and squeezes R25 compound into it? The A7/R7 are not really road tires, but race tires with DOT approval and a few grooves in them.

[SEComposites]

The playing field my well be uneven so why not remove a variable? There is some evidence to suggest that the Toyo tire might even narrow the gap to the latest cars with whizzy dampers. Formula Ford is an entry level formula and in club racing it makes no sense at all not to have spec long life tires, preferably treaded. As noted by others everyone else in the world manages it!

[Swift17]

Several SCCA rival organizations/Vintage-Historic are going to expand their "age-of-car" qualifications for Formula Ford and the poll group wanted slicks, designed for the then current suspension for USA and requested the designated and should and believed will be the R60 Hoosiers .........

[Tom Valet]

Totally agree Mike. I had thought of saying something to that effect, but I had one problem area. What happens when a tire mfg takes a DOT mold, and squeezes R25 compound into it? The A7/R7 are not really road tires, but race tires with DOT approval and a few grooves in them.

And thats exactly the problem with Mike's proposal. An "open" DoT tire rule does nothing to keep costs down. You will simply wind up with $1,000 DoT tires that last two sessions.

And Mike, your whole post seems contradictory, unless I am not reading you correctly. You lobbied for a local tire rule to get everyone on the Dunlops, but you cant understand why everyone is pushing for an SCCA spec tire? Likely the reasons are the same: expensive sticky tires that last two sessions add nothing to FF racing, they only drain our wallets.

[Michael Rand]

Tom,
Not sure I was contradictory in getting the Dunlops accepted for NARRC CF then saying an open DOT tire, but I can see how that would appear and be taken.
I agree super soft DOT radials would blow the concept apart.
As a practicing attorney is there any kind of document that any tire manufacturer wishing in, in the appearance of an accepted list, which certainly again blows the open DOT concept, I get that, but could or would or maybe should a signed agreement from the players A, mean anything really and B, be enforceable where they agree to NOT make small batches of out of the bounds "legal" DOT tires...
Sorry, I know instantly how ridiculous that reads, must be the holiday season making me all mary popppins happy.......
Have an above average season Tom, and all else on this thread......

[Michael Rand]

Tom, one other clarification, I never lobbied for the treaded Dunlop to be the spec NARRC CF tire, only that it be allowed and added to the existing Hoosier R60 and the then available Goodyear 600.....maybe a small point, just wanted to state it for the record.