Spec Tire Poll... again.

[Roux]

So what cars will need modifying to be able to run this new tire. Every pre-99 car? Every pre-95 car? I honestly don't know if these tires do need more camber than is available on a large number of chassis. Can someone confirm this? If, and it's a big 'if' this is the case then adopting the new Hoosier tire could be catastrophic for the class. Well the class within the SCCA of course.

Van Diemen Formula Renault uprights. I plan to remove them and machine off a 1/4 inch extension at the top to gain the extra degree. Should be about an hour per upright of work. No biggie. The driveshaft design I came up with for this car is compatible with the small geometry change. There are so many Swifts out there someone will come up with a kit surely. I do not understand why the driveshafts have to change. Surely upper and lower arm changes can add camber while keeping the driveshaft length unchanged???

[TimH]

And for the Swift people complaining about the camber...go crank in as much as you can and run the damn thing if you don't want to spend the money to modify some parts.
This is definitely a more cost effective outcome than doing the $1000 gumballs every weekend.

One-time cost vs. something every weekend? No-brainer decision.

Everyone will go through a new development cycle no matter what is chosen, so the guys with $ and time will again go to the front, but over time will lose some of that advantage.

[Hardingfv32]

Was the SCCA requiring the tire company to pay them to be the spec tire or not?

For sure.... no SCCA spec tire fee or tire contingency.

Brian

[CF56]

.

[Steve Bamford]

I saw no need to buy new tires for the PittRace Majors last weekend. I ran the VIR Majors set of radials for the test day and the four heat cycle old radials from the Mid-Ohio Majors for the event itself. I do not think a new set of tires would have changed lap times. These tires, from my limited experience, are very consistent through multiple heat cycles.

Some will be able to get more heat cycles out of the tires then others as stated above, it really depends on the driver & set up.

I hate to beat a dead horse but we would not & do not need to use new Toyo's every weekend competing at the front. With this tire we would need new tires every weekend.

[Steve Bamford]

I saw no need to buy new tires for the PittRace Majors last weekend. I ran the VIR Majors set of radials for the test day and the four heat cycle old radials from the Mid-Ohio Majors for the event itself. I do not think a new set of tires would have changed lap times. These tires, from my limited experience, are very consistent through multiple heat cycles.

Kevin,

I looked up times from last weekend & it does not show you running race one or race two at Pitts but does show you qualifying. Did the times not get recorded?

Also I know the track changes & this is not meant in a bad way but your qualifying time was 7 seconds off the qualifying times we ran a few weeks before. Your tires might not be as optimum as they could be based on the number of heat cycles you have on them along with lap times.

I only point this out to make sure everyone has accurate info as to the tire.

[SEComposites]

I hate to beat a dead horse but we would not & do not need to use new Toyo's every weekend competing at the front. With this tire we would need new tires every weekend.

I guess some people simply don't mind spending $800 every weekend, or even every other weekend. The difference in a yearly racing budget for a club racer is significant. How many races/heat cycles can you get out of a Toyo running at the front?

[Steve Bamford]

I guess some people simply don't mind spending $800 every weekend, or even every other weekend. The difference in a yearly racing budget for a club racer is significant. How many races/heat cycles can you get out of a Toyo running at the front?

It's been quoted many times before so I am not making this up but at least 3 weekends including a full test of 5 sessions at 30 mins each which we make sure we always took part in. So if you take out the test day you are talking about 6 race weekends & running at the front.

There really is no comparison.

However it really doesn't matter as it isn't one of the SCCA options.

[swiftdrivr]

"Surely upper and lower arm changes can add camber while keeping the driveshaft length unchanged???"

Geometrically, at least for a DB-1, to change the angle without changing the drive shaft length, [IE: keep the center point the same] you have to change both upper and lower arms. Drive shafts are likely cheaper than custom made swift rocker arms.

If this goes through, I'll deal with it, but I think a far smarter option, far better for the class, would be to ask Hoosier to build a R60 on an R45, and delay implementation 1 year / run the current R60 for 1 year, if required. Nobody gets forced out. The idea that we need to get rid of the old cars [like the "old car" that came in second at the runnoffs 2 of the last 3 years] is a fantasy. The new cars are not coming in to replace them. Re-cycled old cars come in [or came in], but it is rare to see a new competitor show up in a new car. I don't know if we can get this option, but maybe that is the question we should have a poll on. We won't get the option if we don't ask for it.

So: ask Hoosier to build an R60 on an R45, and run the current R60 for 1 year, if they can't get it ready for 2016.
That is my suggestion. Anyone else feel the same?

[BWC54]

The idea that we need to get rid of the old cars [like the "old car" that came in second at the runnoffs 2 of the last 3 years] is a fantasy.

That car is a DB6, not a DB1. The DB6 is still a very competitive car in club racing. It differs from the DB1 and Db3 in that the camber is adjusted with shims. Most of the DB6's I've seen have enough shims installed with bias tires that they should be able to get enough camber to run the radials by removing shims. Individual cars might vary and I'd like to hear from DB6 owners about their individual cars.

[Derek Holmes]

I run a DB1 and have thought about the possible changes that I will have to make to the car to run the radial tires. I 100% support running a spec tire. But with possibly having to have new lower suspension arms made, longer drive shafts. The stress that camber curve may have on the hubs and wheel bearings etc. I may have to rethink a few things.

[swiftdrivr]

Wasn't the second place car a 92 Monoshock Van Deimen [2 out of the last 3 years]?

[BWC54]

No offense to you guys but I don't think guys racing 31 year old cars should be driving the tire decision for 2016 because you can't get the optimum camber for them. And I still have a DB1 and Crossle 32F also.

[BWC54]

Wasn't the second place car a 92 Monoshock Van Deimen [2 out of the last 3 years]?

In 2013 yes. In 2012 Reid finished sixth. LC3 finished second in 2012 in an RF00. I thought you were referring to chuck horn's DB6 that finished second last year and is also a early 90's vintage. But to your point there are even fewer RF92's around. Should the few drive the tire choice for the many? At some point we have to move forward.

[S. Frebert]

No offense to you guys but I don't think guys racing 31 year old cars should be driving the tire decision for 2016 because you can't get the optimum camber for them. And I still have a DB1 and Crossle 32F also.

This is the cold hearted truth. Owners with 30 year old cars shouldn't have a say for the spec tire for the "current" season rules.

Bigger problem is we cant back date the cars where the cars would dominate in Club Ford.

So really......its the end. Custom made suspension for my RF-85? Maybe have the correct geometry? No thank you, I cant see changing something that detrimental to the cars performance.

This is a great thing for the newer cars no doubt. The older ones are going to be pushed out by nature though. That's almost a fact IMO.

FRCCA........ Will soon have fields of 30 haha

[Derek Holmes]

No offense taken. I was just stating my thoughts. I am sure that other racers with older cars will have similar issues with the radial tires. I have a few options as I see it.

1) Replace parts on the car so I can get the tires to work correctly. Even though I have allot of good spare suspension.
2) I am a club racer so just run what camber I can and go have fun. Hope nothing breaks due to the added stress of the camber curve.
3) Race with the FRCCA with a tire that will work on my car. Even though the tire is as hard as a brick.
4) Let the car sit in the garage and do nothing with it. It seems as if that happens to allot of race cars.
5) Move to a different class.

I am 100% in favor of a tire rule. Just my concerns for an older car that is probably ready for a museum.

[John LaRue]

I had been asked to respond earlier, but due to my schedule only saw these posts earlier this am. BOD member Todd Butler beat me to the response and did so quite eloquently. The FF community owes Todd and Bruce a hand for the hard work and effort they have put forth on keeping this issue on track. I don't think there is much I can add to the comments that Todd has already made, but I would suggest (as have others) that I would not take the camber figures being tossed around as gospel. Only through testing will you know what is an optimal camber figure for your car, driving style and track on a given day. Hopefully everyone who was pushing so hard for this will see fit to write in to the BOD.

[Tom Valet]

That car is a DB6, not a DB1. The DB6 is still a very competitive car in club racing. It differs from the DB1 and Db3 in that the camber is adjusted with shims. Most of the DB6's I've seen have enough shims installed with bias tires that they should be able to get enough camber to run the radials by removing shims. Individual cars might vary and I'd like to hear from DB6 owners about their individual cars.

We've run radials on our DB-6 including Toyos last year in Canada. You can't get all the camber you need just by removing shims, but there are other changes that can be made that don't involve a lot of drama.

[Jnovak]

Delete

[BWC54]

I had been asked to respond earlier, but due to my schedule only saw these posts earlier this am. BOD member Todd Butler beat me to the response and did so quite eloquently. The FF community owes Todd and Bruce a hand for the hard work and effort they have put forth on keeping this issue on track. I don't think there is much I can add to the comments that Todd has already made, but I would suggest (as have others) that I would not take the camber figures being tossed around as gospel. Only through testing will you know what is an optimal camber figure for your car, driving style and track on a given day. Hopefully everyone who was pushing so hard for this will see fit to write in to the BOD.

John, can you comment on whether post #123 is correct or not? Is SCCA paid anything by the tire company to be the spec tire?

[swiftdrivr]

No offence taken, but my concern is, I haven't seen a new car in my class in 5 years. I've only seen one in 10 years [2 if you count a VD 2006 rebuild]. When we push the "museum pieces" off the stage, who is coming in to replace them? I race with a DB-6, 3 DB-1s, a 92 VD and a 2006 VD, an 84 VD, and an occaisional 90 Euroswift. All but 2 of these cars can't run the radial without over a thousand dollars of modifications. With new competition from F4, who is buying $80,000 FFs to compete in club racing? This tire could do significant damage to the class and the people who actually spend their time and money running FFs in the SCCA. I am an addict, and I'll modify my car and keep on. I don't know that others have the option to do so, or the inclination to invest more money into an older car [and no interest in sinking big bucks into a newer one, whose value may well decline due to F4] If it comes to pass, then we will see, but I think the R60 would be far smarter. Just my opinion.

[Steve Bamford]

No offence taken, but my concern is, I haven't seen a new car in my class in 5 years. I've only seen one in 10 years [2 if you count a VD 2006 rebuild]. When we push the "museum pieces" off the stage, who is coming in to replace them? I race with a DB-6, 3 DB-1s, a 92 VD and a 2006 VD, an 84 VD, and an occaisional 90 Euroswift. All but 2 of these cars can't run the radial without over a thousand dollars of modifications. With new competition from F4, who is buying $80,000 FFs to compete in club racing? This tire could do significant damage to the class and the people who actually spend their time and money running FFs in the SCCA. I am an addict, and I'll modify my car and keep on. I don't know that others have the option to do so, or the inclination to invest more money into an older car [and no interest in sinking big bucks into a newer one, whose value may well decline due to F4] If it comes to pass, then we will see, but I think the R60 would be far smarter. Just my opinion.

Wasn't 75% of the field at the Road Atlanta March Major swifts?

Correct me if I am wrong but wouldn't the majority of the cars running SCCA majors be 10 or more years old minimum? There are some newer cars built in the last 5 years but I believe that is not the majority.

Saying the tire should not be built around the majority of participants doesn't sound correct to me. Maybe I am wrong on my numbers and someone can correct me.

[Jnovak]

SCCA probably gave more weight to their questionaire sent to participants than an Internet poll.

Internet polls carry ZERO meaning for SCCA decisions. The only way to affect the decisions of the club is through the CRB letter system and official questionairs sent to members.

If you want to affect the decision you must be part of the process.

[Todd Butler]

John, can you comment on whether post #123 is correct or not? Is SCCA paid anything by the tire company to be the spec tire?

Actual numbers are not public, because we don't tell one vendor what another paid for competitive reasons. Read 3'rd paragraph in my post #95. Some payment to Topeka is fine. However making it a cash cow, which then reflects on the cost of tires to spec tire competitors, is not fine.

Todd Butler
Area 13 Director

[Tom Valet]

Here are the results of the survey that SCCA conducted:

This started as a ground up request from class competitors in 2012-2013. As result of member action and request,
SCCA polled active FF drivers in 2014. The survey had 60 plus respondents that were actual FF participants can be
summarized as follows:
o 90.4% favor a spec tire
o 69.8% believe service at the track is important
o 80.0% do not object to eliminating the cantilever rear tire
o 78.7% favor a radial tire
o 56.5% favor limiting the number of tires used during an event
o 83% favor adopting a specific size for front and rear
o Out of nine criteria listed contingencies ranked seventh. Durability was first, cost was second.

Please tell me which of these preferences the proposed tire does not meet? The proposed tire is the tire that the membership requested. Nearly 80% of respondents favor a radial tire. But now all we see on this board is people complaining about changes needed to run a radial.

You cant please everyone but we can at least give the membership what it wants. And the way to do that is as Jay says through the process that SCCA follows and not by internet discussions.

[mblanc]

Here are the results of the survey that SCCA conducted:

o 78.7% favor a radial tire

I believe that is not a fairly obtained number. That number must contain all the voters for the Toyo tire, which are far from the Hoosier Radial as could be. So it is disingenuous to say all the toyo votes are construed as in favor a radial construction. In fact, I would think the toyo votes were much more slanted towards the old R60 lower grip direction, than a high grip modern racing radial.

I still believe we could spec the compound. Allow the R60 compound, in both the radial, AND the old construction bias tire. Older cars, could continue on, not disenfranchising them on any level, and the entire group gets the benefit of a hard compound tire.

The point was to get on a level field, with hard compound tires. I can't imagine any body in a current car on radials would have a problem running against an older car on the old construction bias tire, with R60 compound.


That being said, I am FOR the proposal, WITH THE ADDITION of R60 bias.

Didn't classes like SM run two tires as their 'spec' at times. Most everybody chose x, but others could still do 'y'

[Tom Valet]

I believe that is not a fairly obtained number. That number must contain all the votes for the Toyo tire, which is as far from the Hoosier Radial as could be. So it is disingenuous to say all the toyo votes are construed as in favor a radial construction. In fact, I would think the toyo votes were much more slanted towards the old R60 lower grip direction, than a high grip modern racing radial.

Marc, did the poll specifically ask people whether they wanted the Toyo tire? I could be wrong, but I think the poll did not specify "Toyo" tire as a preference, it simply asked for a preference, radial or bias. Certainly in their letters people may have expressed a desire specifically for the Toyo but I dont think that is true of the poll.

[mblanc]

I think the poll did not specify "Toyo" tire as a preference, it simply asked for a preference, radial or bias.

I think that is correct, and that IS my point.

Answering YES to radial, and WANTING a real long lasting low grip street radial,(toyo)
is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT,
than wanting (and inadvertently voting for) a high grip real racing Radial.


Thanks for helping me clarify my point (which I hope that explanation did).

[Tom Valet]

Your point is valid Marc and in fairness I do believe that some people chose radial with the intent of the Toyo being chosen. Others checked off radial because they wanted the Pro radial tire to be chosen. The point is moot though because the clear preference was for a radial tire and not the bias ply R60.

Personally I agree with your suggestion that both the Pro tire and the Club R60 be allowed. But there is no way that can happen for 2016. So the best solution would be to get the spec tire in place and then lobby for the addition of the R60 club tire. And if enough of us write in to support that concept then it could happen quickly since I doubt Hoosier would object.

[Tom Duncan]

While the debate here on Apexspeed about the choice of spec tire rages on I think we're beating a dead horse. Tire choice discussions should go on the back burner and we need to create solid support for the proposal on the front burner. A proposal has been made and National needs a "Yes/No" response, a clear mandate, from a substantial number of people.

I'm not familiar with how the decision making is done at this point. Does National rely on letters/emails coming in as a direct response from the FasTrack bulletin? Do they send out a survey like they did initially? Do we need to drum up support from fellow FF racers who don't read FasTrack? How do we make sure a substantial number of people see the proposal and make their vote known to National?

I do have one question: Is there a contract with Hoosier that dictates a time period commitment? Put another way, is this a year-to-year deal, a 5 year deal or what?

Lets now focus on the big picture, getting a spec tire rule in place, and minimize the details. This is a huge step in the progress and survival of FF in the USA.

Tom Duncan

[swiftdrivr]

I didn't get the survey, and I understand it went only to Majors participants. If so, then it's not really a representative survey. I may be wrong, but I think the majority of FF racers run regional series, not Majors, and were therefore excluded from the survey. These, unfortunately, are the ones most likely to be affected by the use of a high-camber radial. If the "big picture" is getting a spec tire, and the "little details" are losing competitors, I think maybe our priorities are out of balance. That said, I'll still modify, lose a weekend, and in about 3 years I'll start saving money. Others will do their own calculations, and make their own call. Hopefull, most will decide to stay, but that is far from a given. Choosing a spec tire that doesn't work on 30-60% of currently active cars [a guess, based on what I race against] still seems a really, really bad idea.

[John LaRue]

I didn't get the survey, and I understand it went only to Majors participants. If so, then it's not really a representative survey. I may be wrong, but I think the majority of FF racers run regional series, not Majors, and were therefore excluded from the survey. These, unfortunately, are the ones most likely to be affected by the use of a high-camber radial. If the "big picture" is getting a spec tire, and the "little details" are losing competitors, I think maybe our priorities are out of balance. That said, I'll still modify, lose a weekend, and in about 3 years I'll start saving money. Others will do their own calculations, and make their own call. Hopefull, most will decide to stay, but that is far from a given. Choosing a spec tire that doesn't work on 30-60% of currently active cars [a guess, based on what I race against] still seems a really, really bad idea.

Jim, The Regions are free to set their own rules and opt out of the spec tire rule if they so choose.

[Steve Bamford]

Jim, The Regions are free to set their own rules and opt out of the spec tire rule if they so choose.

John,

That really flies against the purpose of a National spec tire now doesn't it?

[marshall9]

RIP SCCA FF.
A lot here have expressed that owners of older cars shouldn't be involved in the decision. I missed in the results the demographics of the cars. I would be for the current rules, if I had a new 90K car and was not wanting properly driven 30 year old cars to be competitive with me.
Carry on gentlemen...

[swiftdrivr]

John,
While there is some relief in that regions can opt out, what if you live on the line? I routinely run VIR in the SARRC/MARRS races. If MARRS goes radial, and SARRC goes bias ply, the "spec tire" advantage gets lost a bit. Not lethal, but not ideal either. If you race where the weekend isn't co-sponsored [fully out of your region], you may need to change your suspension to continue doing that. That, of course, means you aren't going to run those weekends. As I see it, their is no advantage to the radial, and lots of "collateral damage."

[Tom Valet]

This is the last I will say on this subject because it does get really tiring. When I put in the last spec tire proposal in 2010 a select few people on the internet scared everyone into believing that the sky would fall if we went to a spec hard compound tire. The cars would be undriveable. They would be no fun. They would be slow. So when the the CRB asked for feedback, there was silence because people didnt know whether what they were saying was true or not. The next year the Pro series came out with a hard spec tire and proved the naysayers wrong.

Now we have another chance to finally get into place a spec tire that while not perfect goes a long way toward solving a big problem in this class. And once again here come the naysayers.

Some people will have to spend some money to update their 30 year old cars if they want to have a chance to win. Is that really the argument against this spec tire?

Do you think the current situation comes without cost? Not just the cost of buying new $1000 a set tires every weekend. You want to run up front now, you dont even want to know the cost of figuring out which of the many different tire set-ups is best at each track and then the time to engineer your car to drive properly with that set-up. The Runoffs is at Daytona this year. Guess how much money is being spent by those who want to have a chance to win, figuring out what the optimal tire combo is among the many brands, sizes, tire compounds and constructions available. If we had a spec tire, the cost would be ZERO to figure out which tires to run.

[Steve Bamford]

Whether you fully agree with the choice of tire or not I don't see how we could not vote yes for this. Overall it makes racing less expensive then the current open program and puts us all on the same tire which is not a bad tire.

Write your letters and let's get on with it already.

[John Robinson II]

as I stated in my letter: I know I am the minority, but I am against the spec tire. if we are doing this as a cost savings then it is not going to work. The top competitors WILL STILL use a new set every major weekend, which is currently the norm.
The argument about cars needing to be redesigned to make optimum use of the radial is as much BS as is the Honda vs Kent debate. the majority of entrants are not optimizing their current set up or driving to the limit of that set up.

I know that this is pretty much a done deal and we all will have to run radials for the majors. This does not stop the SEdiv from using different tires for the SARRC series or for any other REGIONAL series. Competitors chasing the major championships can still race in the non major races with their radials.

My personal opinion is that this WILL NOT bring more cars out of the garage. Many more reasons as to why people have scaled back their racing weekends. I have participated in other types of racing where hard tires were the norm and the guys that were not winning always had other excuses as to why, except for "well, the other guy won because he is a better driver who spent more time making his pile of sh*t faster."

John Robinson II

PS anyone in the market for a DB6 roller after Sept?

[BWC54]

as I stated in my letter: I know I am the minority, but I am against the spec tire. if we are doing this as a cost savings then it is not going to work. The top competitors WILL STILL use a new set every major weekend

I agree with you that it's not going to cut costs that much. My hope is that it stops the guys that are using 2 sets for a majors weekend because that's more the norm I see. I even see that for double regionals. What tire would you recommend if it was up to you for majors and SARRC.

[swiftdrivr]

I said I wasn't going to continue discussing this, as like John said, it looks like a take-it-or-leave-it option only, and our discussing it doesn't matter. But here I go again. The tire will save money for the teams with the most money. Neither I nor almost anyone I know was buying a new set of tires a weekend, certainly not 2. We are the guys who are in the older cars, running regionals [IE: Most of FF. Majors had 140 competitors last year. I think there are over 3 times that many active FF drivers, unless my memory is wrong . I couldn't find current data.] It is a tire that, according to multiple reports, requires 2.5-3 degrees of camber to get it hot enough to work. Most of the mid pack [like me] need all of our contact patch on the ground, and more. Racing a cold tire on half a contact patch isn't going to be pretty, so yes, cars will need to be modified. I don't think anyone feels that a spec tire isn't good for FF, but I can't see why there is opposition to requesting Hoosier supply a tire that helps the guys running most of the cars, not just the newest cars. As for me, in about 3 years the tire will pay back the modification cost, and if I am still racing, I'll begin to save a little money. That isn't worth losing competitors over. For FF as a class, I am even less convinced that THIS spec tire's positives outweigh it's negatives, as it really mainly helps the people who run Majors and buy new tires every weekend. It seems requesting a better option from Hoosier isn't an unreasonable position. Hoosier may be unwilling to sell us a better tire. They have spent money developing a Pro tire for a series that I hear is on shakey ground, and selling it to SCCA makes sence for them. Not so sure it makes sense for us.