FC tire survey e-mail

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Bamford

Actually not sure what the effects will be other then less cross over from FRP racers to race in FC at SCCA events. I see this as worse for the class overall rather then having an open tire. Maybe it’s just me thinking this way but a serious FRP racer/prep team will be less likely to want to put on different tires & race SCCA events. I’m not saying they won’t do it, just that they will for sure think twice about it.

---

Well, it makes for having to make choices - which, in the scheme of having a spec tire - is bad.

So, Wright agreed to the Bias by 'accepting it' and changing compounds. I wonder how much pressure was received from FRP drivers?

Is this a back and forth? So, is SCCA now going to say FRP races run on non-scca-spec tires don't count?

We're getting some push-back out west too with some saying the 60 compound is just too hard.

We can all agree on one thing, the bias 60 was generally not expected.

I personally wanted the radial tire for the reasons I mentioned several times.

I did NOT want the spec tires to be bias for SCCA FC but radial for F2KCS. I agree that it will probably somewhat diminish the possible positive effects (increased class participation) of having a spec tire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Bamford

Actually not sure what the effects will be other then less cross over from FRP racers to race in FC at SCCA events. I see this as WORSE for the class overall rather then having an open tire. Maybe it’s just me thinking this way but a serious FRP racer/prep team will be less likely to want to put on different tires & race SCCA events. I’m not saying they won’t do it, just that they will for sure think twice about it.

---

IMO, I don't think it will affect the serious FRP F2K racers/teams much, because most or all of them have the knowledge and ability to effectively switch to the bias tire. What I think it WILL affect is crossovers in the other direction, since it's the drivers with older cars and less ability to tune for the radial that will be reluctant to do it.

It's the same argument and lower cost that likely swayed the club to choose the bias tire.

I'll say my piece and shut up.

I'm on the Ad Hoc committee for the FC

I am completely in favor of a spec tire for FC

The survey of active FC drivers was majority in favor of a radial tire.

I have to do what's best for my Series

A bias tire is not in the best interest of my series- This series has been on radial tires for 15 years and for any number of very good reasons. I made this known to the committee.

I received major pushback from some of my teams and stood to loose a significant number of entries if I went to bias tires.

I put in place FC Classic two years ago where someone can run older cars and the bias tire in our series for a reduced entry. I have had exactly 2 entries in two years. Ergo, there is little or no crossover from Club.

Contrary to everybody's opinion, its not very hard to run an older car on radials- Don't listen to me (WHAT DO I KNOW)- ask some very knowledgeable people who have been doing it for years like David Clubine.

Let me repeat...I've been spec'ing radial tires in my series FOR 15 YEARS; why should I go to what I believe is an inferior tire?

Hoosier has re-upped their support of the Series with the radial tire for 2021, without which I would be playing golf instead of running a series.

Am I a little put out by the CRB's decision? You bet I am. Is it the correct decision? Not in my opinion. Have I left been left in an untenable situation-you bet I've been.

This was just a bad choice. Let the chips fall where they may. I made my decision. And BTW, I have complete agreement and support of my Series management in this decision.

rant over.

Thanks Bob for hearing your side of things.

As you mentioned there is little Club drivers trying out FRP events as you have had 2 entries in 2 years. There are however, or were, drivers who would run FRP & Club events. Many would go on to compete at Runoffs as well. Anyone serious about racing will now be spending more money to test with both tires for set up. Sure it can be done, but not only does it take dollars, it also takes time. Both are hard to come by these days.

I guess the common sense folks didn’t lobby for a radial as common sense would have been to choose that based on a number of reasons you listed above, survey is probably best reason. Alas common sense turns out not to be common.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Bamford

Thanks Bob for hearing your side of things.

As you mentioned there is little Club drivers trying out FRP events as you have had 2 entries in 2 years. There are however, or were, drivers who would run FRP & Club events. Many would go on to compete at Runoffs as well. Anyone serious about racing will now be spending more money to test with both tires for set up. Sure it can be done, but not only does it take dollars, it also takes time. Both are hard to come by these days.

I guess the common sense folks didn’t lobby for a radial as common sense would have been to choose that based on a number of reasons you listed above, survey is probably best reason. Alas common sense turns out not to be common.

---

This is going to end bad. Totally agree with bob Not too loose his customers. Over this I like Avon’s. But open tires in scca let’s all cars go to runoffs. Pacific f2000 was on radials. Now. Scca has lost Customers for spec tire how does this help the class?? And what are we going to run in January? I talked to Hoosier. No tires will be available. This was not thought thru good.

Was there ever a post with the results of the poll? Searched and I can't find it.

I believe I asked this before, but received no answer, Who is on the Ad-hoc committee?

Interesting. I believe that a spec tire concept is needed and good. I believe the poll and SCCA political process did its job ..... which is unusual for me to say. The consensus appears to be that the SCCA hierarchy just made a poor choice in the tire they selected.

What could have been a win-win is now much more 50-50 on whether it will have a positive effect, or just maintain the status quo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Wright

I'll say my piece and shut up.

I'm on the Ad Hoc committee for the FC

I am completely in favor of a spec tire for FC

The survey of active FC drivers was majority in favor of a radial tire...

......................................

...Am I a little put out by the CRB's decision? You bet I am. Is it the correct decision? Not in my opinion. Have I left been left in an untenable situation - you bet I've been.

This was just a bad choice. Let the chips fall where they may. I made my decision. And BTW, I have complete agreement and support of my Series management in this decision.

rant over.

---

I totally agree with you, Bob. As I've said many times, I thought the SCCA should have picked the radial for the spec tire, In the long run, IMO, the radial tire would have been the proper choice and would have resulted in all FC/F2000 competitors being on the same tires.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

The FRP staff intends to rotate the F2000 compound back to the R60 during the year after competitors get

---

So, FRP is going to use the 60 (assume FE/60A) compound - then all the 'uproar' is bias v radial.

Since SCCA obviously said "the bias 60A is good for FE - it must be good for FC", I posted a thread in FE asking how they like the tire since they've run it 2 years.

Ask your FE friends for feedback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerBudgetRacing

So, FRP is going to use the 60 (assume FE/60A) compound - then all the 'uproar' is bias v radial.

Since SCCA obviously said "the bias 60A is good for FE - it must be good for FC", I posted a thread in FE asking how they like the tire since they've run it 2 years.

Ask your FE friends for feedback.

---

Yes my issue is bias vs radial & ability to cross over easily from SCCA to F2000 Pacific & FRP. That’s where I think the process missed the mark as I do believe in a spec tire but it really needs to be used by all above listed organizations. I simply assumed that would have been part of this process. I shouldn’t have assumed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerBudgetRacing

So, FRP is going to use the 60 (assume FE/60A) compound - then all the 'uproar' is bias v radial.

Since SCCA obviously said "the bias 60A is good for FE - it must be good for FC", I posted a thread in FE asking how they like the tire since they've run it 2 years...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Wright

... For a number of years we had the R60A compound in FRP. In 2020 we changed to the R35B, which is clearly faster, a bit stickier, and easier to drive. My personal opinion (and that of a number of FRP competitors) is the R60A is a better choice for a number of reasons, but a little harder to go fast with. It certainly lasts longer...

---

We ran the 60A compound radial on the FRP F2000's, as Bob said above, for a long time. The only complaint I had about that compound is that you had to run a lot of laps in qualifying to get the fastest time since they are slow to warm up. Other than that, they were pretty good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Bamford

Yes my issue is bias vs radial & ability to cross over easily from SCCA to F2000 Pacific & FRP. That’s where I think the process missed the mark as I do believe in a spec tire but it really needs to be used by all above listed organizations & I simply assumed that would have been part of this process. I shouldn’t have assumed.

---

It would seem that having Hoosier supply a spec R60 compound available in both bias and radial versions would be a win win for all. Why wouldn't that work?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hdsporty1988

It would seem that having Hoosier supply a spec R60 compound available in both bias and radial versions would be a win win for all. Why wouldn't that work?

---

It would/will work if SCCA allows you to use Bias or Radial same compound from Hoosier. It’s not a perfect solution but workable at least in my mind. That would solve my complaint about cross over from one subset of FC/F2000 racing to another. Let me guess now I need to write a letter?

The RCFFS runs their two classes with FF on FF 60A spec tires, and their CF on the 60A bias. Having done a handful of those events and watched a bunch, you really cannot tell who is running what. It certainly does not seem "broken".

With the 60A compound on the FF spec radials, cars are up to speed in 3 laps, and best after 5 or 6. We start races on stickers, so any talk that the 60A compound is not a viable compound, is poorly informed.

So would it be possible for a compromise for everyone involved that SCCA allows use of a Hoosier bias ply or radial of the same compound? I am asking the competitors as well as CRB or anyone who is part of the process/decision making. Was this option even discussed?

Hoosier has already committed to making both tires from what I read in this thread so that stumbling block is out of the way.

Having this option would seem to make everyone some what happy & take away almost all excuses. I personally never thought both would be an option but since Hoosier is willing to make them then why would the Club be against this proposal?

Steve, my initial response to that would be no, choose one or the other. Hard to imagine one won't be better than the other and I really don't want to have to figure that out.

My question, would Bob be Ok allowing both in his series?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Bamford

So would it be possible for a compromise for everyone involved that SCCA allows use of a Hoosier bias ply or radial of the same compound? I am asking the competitors as well as CRB or anyone who is part of the process/decision making. Was this option even discussed?

Hoosier has already committed to making both tires from what I read in this thread so that stumbling block is out of the way.

Having this option would seem to make everyone some what happy & take away almost all excuses. I personally never thought both would be an option but since Hoosier is willing to make them then why would the Club be against this proposal?

---

IMO, the flaw in that thinking is that if you are really serious about maximizing your performance, you're back to a tire choice and having to test each one at the track in question to see which is best. That puts you back to the tire of the week syndrome that we are trying to eliminate. Of course, the difference is likely to be much less than the Avon v Hoosier difference, for instance, but I think that issue should make this a non-starter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

IMO, the flaw in that thinking is that if you are really serious about maximizing your performance, you're back to a tire choice and having to test each one at the track in question to see which is best. That puts you back to the tire of the week syndrome that we are trying to eliminate. Of course, the difference is likely to be much less than the Avon v Hoosier difference, for instance, but I think that issue should make this a non-starter.

---

I realize it isn’t the ideal situation but it sure as heck solves most of the issues. You are down to 2 options, a cheaper bias ply or a slightly higher priced radial. You’ve taken away the excuse of people who don’t wish to adjust their set up for cross over between FRP & the Pacific Series if they stay on radials & can run SCCA events. As to tire of the week, after week 2 the choice will be made as only 2 options not the infinite number there were before a spec so I still see this as a win.

With Bob’s statement on his series running radials & some his teams pushing him this way as well this is the best compromise I could come up with myself. I think it has the best chance of keeping cars in SCCA rather then removing some, never mind adding more.

I’m foolishly trying to make the best out this & perhaps I am wrong in thinking this could possibly appease the majority rather then the minority.

Steve,

What you suggest is certainly better than it was before, but it is then no longer a spec tire rule, which is what most folks who responded to that survey wanted. I don't know how to make this situation perfect, either, so that's just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

IMO, the flaw in that thinking is that if you are really serious about maximizing your performance, you're back to a tire choice and having to test each one at the track in question to see which is best. That puts you back to the tire of the week syndrome that we are trying to eliminate. Of course, the difference is likely to be much less than the Avon v Hoosier difference, for instance, but I think that issue should make this a non-starter.

---

I guess if someone is willing to rent the track in advance. Otherwise the SCCA rule regarding only using one set of declared tires will prevent that. Other series could adopt the same rule. Isn't this about increasing car counts by controlling costs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hdsporty1988

I guess if someone is willing to rent the track in advance. Otherwise the SCCA rule regarding only using one set of declared tires will prevent that. Other series could adopt the same rule. Isn't this about increasing car counts by controlling costs?

---

Renting the track in advance (Runoffs test days, etc.) is exactly what really serious competitors will do. That adds a lot of time and expense to the effort, and will, IMO, deter some drivers from attending because, as before, they will feel that they are at a disadvantage.

At least both tires are Hoosiers, so the people that would feel guilty about changing suppliers won't have that issue.

Steve and others,
In regards to offering both radials and bias ply tires as the spec tire, I am on the Ad hoc committee and I pushed for exactly what you are asking for several times and was simply told no. I still do not know why. I thought it was a reasonable solution.
I am sorry I couldn't make it happen.
Skip Weld

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

Renting the track in advance (Runoffs test days, etc.) is exactly what really serious competitors will do. That adds a lot of time and expense to the effort, and will, IMO, deter some drivers from attending because, as before, they will feel that they are at a disadvantage.

At least both tires are Hoosiers, so the people that would feel guilty about changing suppliers won't have that issue.

---

Pacific has a rule against testing at the event track a week before for this reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skip Weld

Steve and others,
In regards to offering both radials and bias ply tires as the spec tire, I am on the Ad hoc committee and I pushed for exactly what you are asking for several times and was simply told no. I still do not know why. I thought it was a reasonable solution.
I am sorry I couldn't make it happen.
Skip Weld

---

Thanks for trying ! What is 'funny' is the FRP radial is about the same price as the new bias spec. So ya can't say it's a cost issue.
Hmm.. :heli:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerBudgetRacing

Pacific has a rule against testing at the event track a week before for this reason.



Thanks for trying ! What is 'funny' is the FRP radial is about the same price as the new bias spec. So ya can't say it's a cost issue.
Hmm.. :heli:

---

I may be wrong but I thought the low price on the radials was only for the FRP competitors. Perhaps someone reading this knows the answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skip Weld

Steve and others,
In regards to offering both radials and bias ply tires as the spec tire, I am on the Ad hoc committee and I pushed for exactly what you are asking for several times and was simply told no. I still do not know why. I thought it was a reasonable solution.
I am sorry I couldn't make it happen.
Skip Weld

---

Skip,

Thank you for trying. It does suck when when you aren’t given more info as to why & are part of the committee involved. I’m sure those who made this choice did so, in their minds, trying to make the best decision possible. I’m not against anyone who has to make these decisions, it just seems that sometimes there are other options to please more then less while still achieving the desired goal on this topic. If Hoosier said no we only will make this tire as an option then I would understand but they aren’t, so what gives?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

Steve,

What you suggest is certainly better than it was before, but it is then no longer a spec tire rule, which is what most folks who responded to that survey wanted. I don't know how to make this situation perfect, either, so that's just my opinion.

---

So how does this end? It’s a good Hollywood movie scca wants money for spec tire and now nobody wants to play I luv it. So this is going to bring out older cars that are parked ? I race in 3 weeks and what tire to use ? Lol. And where do us fc cars that don’t play ball race in scca. Fx??

Having a spec compound with only 2 constructions available from a single supplier, can still be considered a spec tire (or spec tires). Imsa and other SportsCar racing series do that all the time. It is still a massive improvement from an open tire rule that allows variables like tires that cost 25% more and are optimal for only 2 sessions. While competitors can make their choice and accept any performance difference as a convenience factor, having 2 defined choices totally eliminates any kind of more expensive, lighter, faster, limited availability options that could exist today, or be introduced tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tahoe z

So how does this end? It’s a good Hollywood movie scca wants money for spec tire and now nobody wants to play I luv it. So this is going to bring out older cars that are parked ? I race in 3 weeks and what tire to use ? Lol. And where do us fc cars that don’t play ball race in scca. Fx??

---

It's 'run what you brung' until May 1st. So basically through all but 1 majors race. (Buttonwillow new track)
Didn't see any Majors in SFR this year.

0.002 cents
for Avon or Hoosier byply.

Okay, this is really out there. 2 tires options, radial and bias, both R60 compounds. However, you must pick an option at the beginning of the year and you can't switch back and forth. Everybody gets the tire they want or need and it eliminates the testing Dave was talking about. Never mind, it will never sell......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mark defer

Okay, this is really out there. 2 tires options, radial and bias, both R60 compounds. However, you must pick an option at the beginning of the year and you can't switch back and forth. Everybody gets the tire they want or need and it eliminates the testing Dave was talking about. Never mind, it will never sell......

---

I believe it is accurate to say that Hoosier has established that their radial construction is faster than their bias construction, when they have the same compound. That would, in effect, create the radial as the prime, and the bias as the alternate for those convinced their cars would require massive mods to run a 21st century tire.

It may actually be a compromise that would be most inclusive, yet keep the expensive short-life tires out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by problemchild

I believe it is accurate to say that Hoosier has established that their radial construction is faster than their bias construction, when they have the same compound. That would, in effect, create the radial as the prime, and the bias as the alternate for those convinced their cars would require massive mods to run a 21st century tire.

---

Well Dave W seemed to imply that the radial wouldn't necessarily always be the fastest. It might depend on the track and conditions. I'll take Dave's word for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

Steve,

What you suggest is certainly better than it was before, but it is then no longer a spec tire rule, which is what most folks who responded to that survey wanted.

---

When interviewing a number of FC racers at an SCCA event late this past season, those that had voted yes to the Spec tire survey, did so believing that tire would meet their specifications (type, cost, manufacture, compound, etc.). Thus, there was/is going to be an acceptance issue if the tire was not what they had in mind. Some did not want it at all and one even called me two days later to inform me he tried to contact SCCA and to change his vote to No..

Keith,

In retrospect, you are absolutely correct. However, the fact is (was) that whatever was chosen, some folks wouldn't like it.

That's why the survey started with the question of whether the respondents wanted a spec tire at all:
"1. Do you support the idea of SCCA adopting a spec tire for FC?"

The majority wanted "a" spec tire. There was no way, no matter what was chosen, that it could have been everyone's 1st choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mark defer

Well Dave W seemed to imply that the radial wouldn't necessarily always be the fastest. It might depend on the track and conditions. I'll take Dave's word for it.

---

Whether the radial or the bias would be faster on a given track depends, IMO, on the track's character. A track with a lot of sequential opposite-direction medium-speed corners (Grattan comes to mind) might favor a bias tire due to its transition predictability and less abrupt breakaway. OTOH, a track where putting down power, straight-away speed, maximum lateral grip, and braking ability are the most important factors, the radial would likely be faster. So, as I mentioned, the only way you'd know for sure for most tracks and your own car/driver would be to test both.

At tracks like Indy, Road America, or Road Atlanta with long straights and several fairly slow corners, the radial would almost certainly be the choice.

This is hilarious. I left this thread a few weeks ago and haven’t been back until today. Why do I do this to myself?? What a joke.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Did I actually read “2 tires can be considered a spec tire”? Consensus seems most are unhappy? Really???

So really this isn’t about a getting spec tire that is both inexpensive and durable. It’s about making YOUR tire the spec tire. Bob Wright did what he should have done. Protect his series. I don’t blame him one bit. Club racers- stop talking and drive the tire that was selected. If you voted for this, too bad. It wasn’t the tire you wanted? Oh well. It wasn’t the tire I wanted either. I didn’t want any spec tire. If anyone is allowed to whine about the decision it would be the people that didn’t want a spec tire in the first place. It’s over.

This is ridiculous. Want to make 2 tires the spec tire now?? Ok. How about the Avon and Hoosier of yours choice?? Hahaha. So dumb.

And for 10 years I have run FRP and club events the same year. One on the Hoosier pros and the other on Avons or Hoosier bias plys. It’s not that hard. It feels different. Takes a few laps to get used to it. It’s not a huge, incredibly difficult change - and I’m no Mario Andretti. I have a regular job and don’t do this every weekend and I am able to do it.

I’m sorry, but I am having trouble hearing the cries of everyone who wanted this and now aren’t happy about the decision. Be quiet. Get your cars to the track. I’m too busy actually supporting the class by driving my car at the first SCCA event of the year like we have for 12 years. AND - my rookie son just went 1 second slower than the track record at a place he has never been to, in the third time ever in a race car, on 5 session old Avons. (You know, those expensive tires that supposedly only last 2 sessions). Perhaps it’s more about doing it than talking about it?

Do I need to post that stupid picture of me with all my Hoosier stuff on again??? Get over it. Your wish has been granted.


Rob Allaer
FC #52

PS - no Pintos entered at Homestead and we’re still 20lbs heavier

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rallaer

It’s about making YOUR tire the spec tire. Bob Wright did what he should have done. Protect his series. I don’t blame him one bit. Club racers- stop talking and drive the tire that was selected.

---

I'm on the west coast so the whole FRP thing is not in my wheelhouse. BUT, Wright was on the 'panel' whatever that means. He apparently agreed to 'go with' whatever was selected. He's changing 'his' tire to the same compound but still running a radial.

I see it as giving the finger to SCCA - and something he agreed to. If anyone is 'complaining' about not getting his way, Wright is #1. So of course others, that wanted a radial start thinking, if Wright can have it why not us?

Yeah, we were all shocked too about the bias. But if anyone stirred the pot it was Wright.

And, if you really want this to work, you and other FRP drivers should buy-in to the bias for FRP too. You say he's "protecting his series". If the FRP drivers insist on the SCCA spec it'll happen. But in reality y'all want the radial and this is your excuse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rallaer

And for 10 years I have run FRP and club events the same year. One on the Hoosier pros and the other on Avons or Hoosier bias plys. It’s not that hard. It feels different. Takes a few laps to get used to it. It’s not a huge, incredibly difficult change - and I’m no Mario Andretti. I have a regular job and don’t do this every weekend and I am able to do it.

---

Good perspective. Hopefully this will be even easier with the same compound.

I started a thread in the FE group to ask about the compound and it's been positive.
I think we need to run it for a year and stop making assumptions.

And I'm more Mario Kart than Andretti.

I shouldn't even answer this- and I've been advised not to post at all on these forums.

You are trying to make it sound like its my fault we're not all singing the same song. I run a business and if my customers go elsewhere, I'm out of business. Re-read my post above.

As to the rest of your post, I'm not going to answer any of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerBudgetRacing

I'm on the west coast so the whole FRP thing is not in my wheelhouse. BUT, Wright was on the 'panel' whatever that means. He apparently agreed to 'go with' whatever was selected. He's changing 'his' tire to the same compound but still running a radial.

I see it as giving the finger to SCCA - and something he agreed to. If anyone is 'complaining' about not getting his way, Wright is #1. So of course others, that wanted a radial start thinking, if Wright can have it why not us?

Yeah, we were all shocked too about the bias. But if anyone stirred the pot it was Wright.

And, if you really want this to work, you and other FRP drivers should buy-in to the bias for FRP too. You say he's "protecting his series". If the FRP drivers insist on the SCCA spec it'll happen. But in reality y'all want the radial and this is your excuse....

---

Bob has said most of this, but to summarize...

Bob's decision making was done IN RESPONSE TO, not in spite of, the feelings of drivers and teams that consistently run in the FRP F2K Series. If a majority of those folks had agreed to accept the bias tire he would have also. The decision was NOT giving the finger to SCCA. It was done with a great deal of trepidation and very serious consideration.

FWIW, I told Bob I would be OK with the bias tires even though I have openly favored the radials.