FV tire discussion

[Hardingfv32]

I am a little concerned with SCCA getting involved with it

SCCA FVS rule is not in any way restricting the Yok users at this time. Why would a FVS Radial be any different. I do not understand your fear.

John Petillo helped me get a set of Hoosier Radials at LRP. If he got to me why can't you get to him to get involved. I can see where it it might be seen as pointless getting any of the Yok competitors involved. Sounds to me they are very entrenched and not seeing any point to change. I can understand their point of view, but just because the Yoks are the current choice does not make them the best choice.

First, I want to question all this negativity about the FVS tire. If it is so bad why has SCCA up for another three years. At a minimum they could have asked Hoosier for a change if the tire 'was in fact' as bad as the some competitors say. There is the issue of the great variability of what driver perceived as good tire characteristics. In other words the driver's opinions are all over the map, oh except for the Yok users.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

Ok, Brian, RE: your post #78

1) If the slicks were more consistent, more drivers(meaning not so much experience like me) could extract more out of them.

Street radials are a dumb down FV tire choice. Yes, bias slicks are harder to reach and stay at the max grip point. There are a lot of competitors that like that feature.

2) I know what the thread wear standard represents, what I want you to show is how the testing is done to achieve the required test data. What kind of test equipment' etc. I am certain that the manufactures do not all use the same test procedures. Who is verifying the test results? The manufactures clearly state that their results only have 'relevance' with their product line.

3) Northeast testing: You are comparing slicks to radials.

4) What is the requirement for a SCCA level Yok rule? You want to be able to run Major events, etc.? Why should
Yoks be the only radials allowed at Majors events? Isn't the point of everyone on the same tire kind of lost when you start running against slicks? What is the logic about restricting the use of other 195/50 radials in this arrangement?


Brian

[Matt Clark]

SCCA FVS rule is not in any way restricting the Yok users at this time. Why would a FVS Radial be any different. I do not understand your fear.

Because it dilutes the radial movement. And anything done thru the club will be a mess. There is no arguing out of that, and you are intentionally playing dumb to say that.

If he got to me why can't you get to him to get involved.

I do not trust the ones who wanted nothing to do with radials & now suddenly are making efforts for something without even asking us for input or help. It is NOT on us to beg to be involved when we are the ones who started & grew it in the first place. Several people actively worked AGAINST radials, but once the writing was on the wall... they went off on their own & came up with some off the wall idea of what the tire should be.
People had their chance for years to run radials but wouldn't, and now that we figured it out, they want to steer things where they feel it should go. Hands off. We are not going to let this turn into another disc brake (and manifold) debacle, where we figured out solid affordable solutions, then the club beats us to the punch in a rush, and cause another needless giant cost item.

I can see where it it might be seen as pointless getting any of the Yok competitors involved. Sounds to me they are very entrenched and not seeing any point to change. I can understand their point of view, but just because the Yoks are the current choice does not make them the best choice.

You have zero clue WTF you are talking about. You were at a track for TWO radial weekends (counting the birthday party).
Very few of the Cup tire people are "entrenched". The sentiment is about not screwing up what we have spend more than a decade getting right. The older Falkens did an ok job growing things, but once we went to the Yokohamas & people tried them... things really exploded across multiple groups.
We have done a lot of testing over the years, just because it was not you or some of the NE guys that did it, we might actually know what we are doing. We put a lot of thought into things & had a lot of discussion amongst many people to arrive at the conclusions & decisions we did. You have zero knowledge of what our plans are/were, and what has been discussed about making things even better for the future.


YOU do not personally drive. You do not know how they feel now, and you will not know what any new offerings will feel like.
I could not care less what your input is on tires at this point. I am tired of the pontification vs. the 60+ actual racers feedback.

[DannyPip]

Street radials are a dumb down FV tire choice.

2) I know what the thread wear standard represents, what I want you to show is how the testing is done to achieve the required test data. What kind of test equipment' etc. I am certain that the manufactures do not all use the same test procedures. Who is verifying the test results? The manufactures clearly state that their results only have 'relevance' with their product line.

3) Northeast testing: You are comparing slicks to radials.

4) What is the requirement for a SCCA level Yok rule? You want to be able to run Major events, etc.? Why should
Yoks be the only radials allowed at Majors events? Isn't the point of everyone on the same tire kind of lost when you start running against slicks? What is the logic about restricting the use of other 195/50 radials in this arrangement?


Brian

1) "Dumb down" I think what you really mean is dumbed down as the phrase goes. But that's according to who, you? Have you turned a lap on Yokos, or any radial on a Vee? We all know the answer to that is NO. I can hear a couple NEFV guys whispering in your ear when you speak about stuff that you have ZERO experience with. Be careful who you listen to. They have no experience either, just like you.

2) Why should I show or prove anything to you with respect to UTQG? Prove to me that they don't use the same procedures. And again, you've got nothing.

You're not my teacher, and I'm certainly not your student. I've nothing to prove to you.

3) No, I'm not.

4) We want a nationally recognized regional class for FVR/FVCC on Yokos. We've ZERO interest in Majors or Runoffs.

Dude, we have the ENTIRE east coast on board.

I think it's pathetic that you've called street radials "dumb down" when they are every bit as fast as spec. slicks . Kinda funny if you ask me. Now who is "entrenched"???

[Hardingfv32]

Because it dilutes the radial movement.

1) Wow, sounds like a cult.

How do the slick users know you got it right? Is it a radial movement or in fact a Yok movement?

How do we know that the Yok users are not entrenched because they do not want to invest in another brand of tires. Why should the slick users be the ones to make the investment?

JUST OPINION: I would say the Hoosier Radial is constructed similar to say a FF radial. The sidewalls are as stiff as the FVS tire, which is extremely stiff to the point of almost impossible to mount. This tire is nothing like a DOT track tire. Has 50% more thread which is going to increase longevity. There is a good chance that this tire will retain some of grip peakiness of the bias slick. Most the slick runners want this trait.

2) Now back to the original point of this thread: Adding Yoks to the formal SCCA rule as an option. Why would you do this if SCCA always gets it wrong?

I though the point was to get more participation at the Major level. So why is it proposed to be a Yok only for radials rule?

I do not see how any of this is going to make sense to the CRB.

Brian

[Matt Clark]

1) Wow, sounds like a cult.

lololololololol
Yes, we are a cult simply because we don't want to deal with 10 different radial tires & want to be equal to the rest of the cars we race.

How do the slick users know you got it right? Is it a radial movement or in fact a Yok movement?

They know we have got it -right enough- because several have tried them already & liked them. They can out-corner slicks, last 10x longer competitively, and can be run wet or dry. That cost savings aspect alone is massive.
Again, just because YOU have not tried them or had ANY experience with them, does not mean they are wrong.
Lets face it, we could pick tires that also cure cancer, and you would whine & complain & be miserable on here.

How do we know that the Yok users are not entrenched because they do not want to invest in another brand of tires. Why should the slick users be the ones to make the investment?

Again, very few are hardcore anti-Hoosier. No one is against other brands in general.
You are again spewing stupidity based in your total lack of knowledge of the situation.

JUST OPINION: I would say the Hoosier Radial is constructed similar to say a FF radial. The sidewalls are as stiff as the FVS tire, which is extremely stiff to the point of almost impossible to mount. This tire is nothing like a DOT track tire. Has 50% more thread which is going to increase longevity. There is a good chance that this tire will retain some of grip peakiness of the bias slick. Most the slick runners want this trait.

YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT ANY OF THESE TIRES FEEL LIKE TO START WITH BECAUSE YOU DO NOT DRIVE ON ANY TIRE TO START WITH.
Aside from the fact of who are you to say that "most of the slick runners want this trait", getting away from that is literally part of the appeal. I do not care who thinks otherwise, FV is -not- supposed to be a FF feel. We are the beginner & budget class. We are the only FV class in the world on slicks. Even half of the F1600 cars in the world are on radials.

2) Now back to the original point of this thread: Adding Yoks to the formal SCCA rule as an option. Why would you do this if SCCA always gets it wrong?

I though the point was to get more participation at the Major level. So why is it proposed to be a Yok only for radials rule?

I do not see how any of this is going to make sense to the CRB.

The point of John & the guys pushing this to be an alternate SCCA standard, is so they can run the same tires anywhere they go & not worry about people trying to use his classification as a testbed for whatever tire they decide to bolt on that weekend. If you want to test a different radial, go run as Formula Special & leave the guys who want competitive affordable racing alone.
We don't want SCCA to decide to "take over" the radial tire rule & suddenly come out with a special-build Hoosier (because we know that is exactly what would happen, since they have done these).
What I see as the best solution, is a classification of FVC added to the GCR, which allows the Cup tire standard to run at all events... similar to what some vintage groups do with FV1, FV2, etc. as a sub-class that still gets scored overall. That also means that FVC gets a Runoffs Champion. I would be willing to bet that radial tires at the Runoffs would see 2-3x more cars than slicks the first year. Unfortunately, as a side effect, I can also see that possibly ruining Challenge Cup & DriverZ Cup when a chunk of those cars then run the Runoffs... however our own radial National Championship event will be much cheaper & hopefully grows in recognition level fast.
If the CRB doesn't get it, and does / did not reach out to someone like the person who runs Challenge Cup before making any decision... then they probably shouldn't be on the CRB.



Either way.... I am done here.
You have no idea about this topic, yet still are wanting to take the stance that no one else other than you is smart enough or thought things thru.
Get in a car & drive it yourself so you know first hand, or shut up about it.

[ajpastore]

As much as I don't want to, I'm going to give my 2cents about this tire thing. Mostly because I worry about the longevity of the class and not just my own wallet.

First, I personally don't care what tire we use. I have run the Yoko in a test session and it was fine. I could happily race on it.

The SCCA has provided FV a place to race at any given racetrack across the entire US for many decades now. They've helped to provide and enforce the rulebook, and for the most part, left us alone to make or break our own future. It takes a bunch of people, extremely dedicated to what we do, on a national scale, to make this work. I'm sure the Challenge Cup, NEFV and Driverz Cup pioneers can attest to the huge amount of work. Those groups work diligently to keep things going for their regional groups and keep people happy. But they also have years and years of valuable experience, connections and a true love of the class. They are not part timers and never have been. We, Formula Vee, are still here because of people like them but most importantly, because of the SCCA.

We can be bitter about some of the decisions the SCCA let through but generally, they have always been eager to have our entries and willing to work with us. If we abandon them, then we are forced to rely on the fine people like the CC series and Driverz Cup organizers to find a place to race. If they then decide to give it up at some point, (we all dream of giving it up sometimes) we run the risk of not having someone else step up and organize us as needed. As a result, Formula Vee could die in a flash.
Since Hoosier has a large interest in everything SCCA, it is only normal for them to see the numbers dwindle in our group and the split of radial to slick camps become more than just a regional to Majors split, and want in on the action. Of course they don't want to lose that business. That's what sponsorship is.

The talk of "follow the money", and greedy, high performance tire manufactures trying to take advantage of us is in my opinion, uninformed and short sighted. If Hoosier is willing to try and offer us a radial tire that can meet all our wishes, including wet weather performance, that means SCCA could still get their cut, Hoosier can make the tire the international FV tire and we will still have place to race on every road course in the country on any given weekend. That is what the SCCA and Hoosier together bring to us, and I feel we should try to work with them. Especially when the fractured numbers we have now are creating a national pissing fest for all the world to see.

Matt C. to your question about why doesn't Hoosier or the SCCA entertain the Challenge Cup experience and knowledge, is likely because you've already shunned the SCCA and run with a different organization. You've already found the tire you want to use and organizations to run with. So the SCCA has lost you. But they would love to have you back I'm sure, and this Hoosier deal is a potential path to that.

Again, personally I don't care what tire we use because it really doesn't matter. But I don't want the class to die because we alienate the only organizations that have ensured we have a place to race, across the country, for the last 50 years.

[Matt Clark]

Matt C. to your question about why doesn't Hoosier or the SCCA entertain the Challenge Cup experience and knowledge, is likely because you've already shunned the SCCA and run with a different organization. You've already found the tire you want to use and organizations to run with. So the SCCA has lost you. But they would love to have you back I'm sure, and this Hoosier deal is a potential path to that.

Again, personally I don't care what tire we use because it really doesn't matter. But I don't want the class to die because we alienate the only organizations that have ensured we have a place to race, across the country, for the last 50 years.

That is a fair opinion. However, I do think it is slightly off on a couple points.
And everything said below is my position, not that of the Challenge Cup boss(es).

We did not shun SCCA. You are talking about the reaction like it is the original action.... We self-organized & started on all SCCA weekends. It grew from there. We still run some SCCA weekends. We all (Challenge Cup, formula cars in general & a couple other classes overall) have been burnt several times by SCCA now, on a couple different things.
It is the actions of SCCA pushing people away, despite racers wanting to stay within SCCA.

We have found the tire we want to use at the moment, because Hoosier did not offer what we needed. We talked to Hoosier & even looked at Continentals to appease them... but they did not have anything that was remotely viable for our requirements, and flat out have told us they would not make something that does.
I (on my own, not as a CCS leader or anything) have literally begged on Facebook, both publicly in Hoosiers own posts & in a "letter writing campaign" post, for a viable option to be made (the standard TrackAttack in a 195-series that could still be sold to AX & endurance racers). That appears to be darn close to what the Yokohama is now, and while it would need testing, I feel could very quickly be the next Cup Tire spec. Yes, there are some anti-Hoosier hardliners, but if the Hoosier can match the Yokohama feel/performance & we can be confident the quality won't fluctuate (one of the big concerns of the haters), then I think we would probably switch to that anyway. That is one of the huge advantages of basically having a beneficial dictator vs. a club.
This rally tire thing being made & tested isn't remotely going to do what we want.... That tells me they are not really trying to meet our wishes, because again, literally not a single person involved with that (from Hoosier or NEFV) has even made a whisper to the people pushing the radial tire racing to know our wishes. On top of that, the National Hoosier rep -has- directly told CCS people that Hoosier will not be making a tire like we need.

I know they want us back. They have told us so. But they were not very willing (or flat out refused) to make that happen. Just like how they are bleeding entries across the board. They just think everyone should magically come back & deal with all the stuff that made us consider other options in the first place. There are now (barely) more people racing FV in the US on Yokohamas than slicks. That should be the sign to the powers of the direction to work in.
This is almost repeating my above paragraphs, but SCCA or Hoosier not entertaining us or our opinions is the reason we left to start with & going to other groups or tire options. We made some small tweaks that offer a better experience & value. They refused to. We have found a darn good sweetspot, and racers are voting with their wallets. As I said in my last post... I don't want to see this happen whatsoever, but I think that if SCCA allowed the Cup Tire as a sub-class at Majors & the Runoffs, Challenge Cup & DriverZ Cup as they operate now would struggle with field size, and would possibly just go back to organizing everyone to show up on the same weekends (like the Autumn Cup origins were) as opposed to being the entire standalone series we are now.

[grapefarmeral]

As with most things in life it comes down to dollars. We can argue which is better, slicks or radials, but in the grand scheme it doesn’t matter. As long as everyone is on the same tire it’s in theory, a level playing field. Isn’t that what Formula Vee is supposed to be, a level field that showcases driver talent and not wallet size. SCCA is supposed to be a club and according to Websters:

3.

An association of persons for the promotion of some common object, as literature, science, politics, good fellowship, etc.; esp. an association supported by equal assessments or contributions of the members. (I’ll add motorsports) If it were truly a club the elected officers would work to help the classes struggling and not figuring how to boost the bottom line. In practice helping classes increase numbers would in turn boost the bottom line. Challenge Cup / DriverZ Cup and NEFV have forged ahead to fill the void left by SCCA’s inaction and not diluted SCCA participation. Back to money. The following is an excerpt from when the Challenge Cup was running Falkens. It applies today but with slightly higher numbers:

About 2 years ago there was a thread on Apex Speed about tires and manifolds and one prominent Vee driver stated that if you amortize a $1200-1300 manifold over 10 years the cost was minimal. So I decided to figure the difference between US slicks and the Falkens using that same 10 year time frame. There was also talk claiming that National drivers bought new tires every other weekend...go watch a Majors and see how many stickers there are every weekend.. But using the every other weekend for buying slicks and a three year span for radials, as proven by the Canadians, I made the comparison. The best way was to use the Canadian season, as it's finite. Six weekends, one qualifying session and three races. Which means that there are four session per weekend x 6 weekends = 24 on track sessions. Since at that time a Nationals weekend was usually two practice sessions and one race. So 3 sessions divided into 24 = 8 weekends. so that means in ten years you will race 80 weekends and buy 40 sets of slicks. I had just bought a set of slicks around that time and they were $860.. $860 x 40 = $34400. I had also purchased the Falkens around the same time to go to race in Canada; tire cost $350.US delivered to my door. I purposely left out mounting and balancing, as that would tilt the figures even more towards radials. You would buy 4.33 sets of radials in that 10 year time period for a cost of $1515.... That's only a savings of $33,000 in that ten year period

If Hoosier could provide radials equal to the Yokohamas in grip, longevity and cost that would be great. I’d like to see the presentation to Continental officials in charge of new product development. I can see it now….’ You want to build a tire, for about .000035% of our bottom line, with all these qualities so the racers won’t have to buy more tires….'

My fear is that SCCA would mandate a tire that could change compound or price (we would be a captive audience) at the whim of Continental’s corporate office.


My 2 cents

[Hardingfv32]

If Hoosier could provide radials equal to the Yokohamas in grip, longevity and cost that would be great.

How do you measure longevity, over 40,80,etc, heat cycles? What performance measure are you using during this test? Say, lapping at 90% until you cannot do the 90% lap? Are the Yok's going to do the same test to make a valid comparison?

Grip: Track time using the same driver, car, track, and day? What level of heat cycles are the tires at for this test?

Who is going to set the above criteria and run the tests?

I can see why the CRB might not consider grip and longevity when deciding on a new spec tire.

Brian

[DannyPip]

As much as I don't want to, I'm going to give my 2cents about this tire thing. Mostly because I worry about the longevity of the class and not just my own wallet.

First, I personally don't care what tire we use. I have run the Yoko in a test session and it was fine. I could happily race on it.


Again, personally I don't care what tire we use because it really doesn't matter. But I don't want the class to die because we alienate the only organizations that have ensured we have a place to race, across the country, for the last 50 years.

Andy, you and both race with guys that are extremely glad that we have Yokohamas in the Northeast now. More than a few people have made the switch so that they can race MORE each year.

Almost everyone has a finite budget for racing. The guys I've talked to are going to do MORE weekends now that they don't have to spend anywhere near as much on tires. It's exactly what I have been saying from the start.

Believe me, John F and I aren't just thinking about our wallets. We're thinking about the future of the class. We are trying to get MORE entries every weekend. Here, in the Northeast, through SCCA.

More entries is what keeps a class alive. And that is exactly what we'll get. And save money too. And even up the competition.

Danny

[DannyPip]

Who is going to set the above criteria and run the tests?


Brian

Not you.

[BLS]

How do you measure longevity, over 40,80,etc, heat cycles? What performance measure are you using during this test? Say, lapping at 90% until you cannot do the 90% lap? Are the Yok's going to do the same test to make a valid comparison?

Grip: Track time using the same driver, car, track, and day? What level of heat cycles are the tires at for this test?

Who is going to set the above criteria and run the tests?

I can see why the CRB might not consider grip and longevity when deciding on a new spec tire.

Brian

Brian, what would they consider then? Isn't the grip, longevity, and price the basic consideration?

[grapefarmeral]

How do you measure longevity, over 40,80,etc, heat cycles? What performance measure are you using during this test? Say, lapping at 90% until you cannot do the 90% lap? Are the Yok's going to do the same test to make a valid comparison?

Grip: Track time using the same driver, car, track, and day? What level of heat cycles are the tires at for this test?

Who is going to set the above criteria and run the tests?

I can see why the CRB might not consider grip and longevity when deciding on a new spec tire.

Brian

Brian,

Before the Challenge Cup, I bought a set of Falkens and went to Canada because I felt the radials were the way to go. When I was there i used a durometer, which in your mind probably makes me a luddite. I took readings on my new no-cycle tires and went through the paddock and tested tires that were one, two and three seasons old. The new 60 and the lowest 57. So, five percent over three seasons. I realize that's not the scientific answer but share with us a cheaper more efficient way.

When CCS switched to the Azenis radial I contacted the company to see if I could connect with an engineer or get a copy of the performance testing results. After about a week I received an email from customer service that said basically we don't do performance testing on street tires although email did say, and I quote " Those tires are real sticky"

If the CRB is not going to consider grip and longevity they're certainly not going to care about price. My guess, they will do whatever they want

[Hardingfv32]

Brian, what would they consider then? Isn't the grip, longevity, and price the basic consideration?

Tell me how grip and longevity can be tested?

Price is easy... maybe.

Maybe the reason SM and SRF went with Hoosier could provide an answer for you.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

Not you.

Of coarse not silly, I don't drive.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

Brian,

When I was there i used a durometer,

If the CRB is not going to consider grip and longevity they're certainly not going to care about price. My guess, they will do whatever they want

1) Durometer test: We do not know the correlation of hardness to grip. The tire companies not do this kind of testing because it is extremely difficult.

2) It is not the CRB's fault that they are not provided with better data for making tire decisions.

Brian

[FVRacer21]

Way back in 1996, when Bob Green was trying to get 1600 engines legal (did not happen) and radial tires allowed, (we created Club Vee in the NE), Dan Grace, a very respected FV driver of many years, told me it would split the class. At that time slicks lasted 4 session on National cars, but the secondary market was so strong for takeoffs, that when I tried to push the radials (based on my many years with Skip Barber Racing School and radials) the answer was “why should I buy new wheels and tires, when I get takeoffs for free”. How do you fight free?

I ran in the Club Vee class and won on radials. At the time, EMRA and the Canadians were running on a steel 13 inch wheel with 185/60-R13 and 205/60-R13. In the NE SCCA, the class lasted 2 years and then was dissolved due to lack of interest. People wanted slicks. We still had 25+ cars per race at Regionals and the Runoffs attracted 45 plus cars. The rest of the country was healthy. Note - FV did not decline in the 2009-2011 time frame due to tires - the recession had a lot to do with that. FF declined also - hence the Honda engine.

For the people just starting on Yokohamas, I refer you to Monty Python's, “Holy Grail” and the Castle in the swamp sketch. FV went through 13 inch, 14 inch and now 15 inch and probably a dozen different tires to get to this point. The Yokohamas are the culmination of all the hard work and testing that came before and they are an exceptional tire. But so were the Bridgestone slicks we had in 1990. So were the Hoosier VROCs of the mid 1990s - slick tires that would go for 25 heat cycles. Bill Noble won a National on them. Why did they fail? The drivers of that time wanted to go faster and have an advantage - not to save money.

Dan was right about the split, but he had the timing wrong. We have a split in FV and it is between the Majors drivers who want to go fast and the regional drivers who race socially and need to save money in this time of climbing entry and travel expenses. Someone at Hoosier must have seen this, and looking forward, stuck their neck out; as it would have been an easier business decision to ignore us. Remember, Hoosier is not the family business it used to be, but a subsidiary of Continental. I can assure you - every penny is watched.

We had two cars at Lime Rock on the Hoosier prototype. The Lime Rock Albatross crapped on Jeff Adams again and he did not get a chance to run much. John Petillo did run all sessions with the tire. Go to SCCA results for more info - note a draft at Lime Rock can be worth a second or more. The aforementioned Justin (my son) did run on the Yokohamas (wish he did not get separated from Jeff F. ) and we just bought another set of wheels so we can test the Hoosiers - maybe as soon as next week. After we have done some back to back - they will be available for others to test - just like people were kind enough to lend Yokos to us.

As Matt and John F have said, if Hoosier cannot come up with a tire that overall (price, performance (wet and dry), feel and availability) is as good as the Yokohama, it will be a impossible sell to the community. I understand there will be some Majors drivers at the CC/Driverz Cup Runoffs. These are the people you have to convince, When the tire survey comes out, fill it out honestly; and if it is biased or misleading, I will be the first to complain.

People on the outside see the fighting and name calling - this hurts all of us. Lets just chill out and go racing!

ChrisZ

PS - Good luck to the drivers going over to Ireland to race - We want a complete report!

[Hardingfv32]

....So I decided to figure the difference between US slicks and the Falkens using that same 10 year time frame. There was also talk claiming that National drivers bought new tires every other weekend...go watch a Majors and see how many stickers there are every weekend.. But using the every other weekend for buying slicks and a three year span for radials, as proven by the Canadians, I made the comparison. The best way was to use the Canadian season, as it's finite. Six weekends, one qualifying session and three races. Which means that there are four session per weekend x 6 weekends = 24 on track sessions. Since at that time a Nationals weekend was usually two practice sessions and one race. So 3 sessions divided into 24 = 8 weekends. so that means in ten years you will race 80 weekends and buy 40 sets of slicks....

Your premiss here is completely absurd!

The average SCCA competitor race 4 events per year. Average FV competitor maybe 3 and the regional level FV at about two.

The average regional competitor can get 3, maybe 4 events on a set of FVS. so say 1.5 sets per year. May I assume the radial ages out at three years? That is 4.5 set of slicks to one set of radials over three years A good savings with radials, but certainly not the big numbers you are projecting. It also explains why most slick users are not that disturbed by tire costs.

Brian