2013 Rules Consideration--Bump of +13 Point Tire Category

[BlkGt3]

SCCA used to be a popular series. Guess what killed it....

 

Duh. Rules stability.

 

Peter

[Varkwso]

I do agree the higher classes are the ones that benefit more from the tire down sizing.

 

Like I said before. Maybe just limit the amount you can down size. No more than 20mm or eliminate it all together. Force everyone to run their base tire size. Funny thing is, I can't run my base tire size Hoosier anymore because it is the cheater tire. I only have 18" wheels. I would have to run a different tire manufacturer that offers a 255 in an 18" wheel or just upsize. I could also buy all new 17" wheels and mount 255's to those, but I will have to shell out money. I can sell my sets of 18's and buy 17's or find someone to trade. You know. PITA though. Either way, I would still be down for it because I would just run 275's like I am anyway. Even if I wasn't it would suck, but I think it would be a rule change for the better.

 

Just make the changes fair and not too pricy for the masses or people will go elsewhere.

 

I think the consequence is higher in TTA and B since you are bumped into unlimited $$ hp to wt class.. The benefit for down size is equal in all classes.

 

NARRA starts at 8.7 to 1 so it targets "GT cars". SCCA is still working through their TT system.

 

Killing cones is cheaper but the rules their give you a headache also.

 

Lots of us ran 295 in stock heavy c5zs. It works.

[D_Eclipse9916]

Running smaller tires on cars tends to force setups like Brian Bowers, a 3000lb+ pig running 245s with 350+whp. That tends to EAT tires more than his base class tire size would, but its faster. Unfortunately youve FORCED him into that setup because it IS faster to get points back and "skate the edge and eat tires".

Hey now... my car is a svelt 2800lbs without me in it! That's pretty good for a Corvette still using stock body panels (no race carbon etc.) And how do you know it's going to eat tires? I think these 245s will last better than the 255s because they're not stretched as much and have more sidewall... but we'll have to wait a few more weeks to find out.

 

 

Hey now, what force is being put on the tires, gotta include your ass too

 

A tire is also a large heat mass, you reduce more, the tire tends to overheat more given same compound. Its like sticking your corvette with tiny 10" brakes. It will work perfectly fine, the 1st, and MAYBE the second stop, but after that they just cant keep up. Same with a tire, your much more likely to "burn up" a set of tires much faster and start chunking them and seeing all sorts of strange wear.

 

Funny that you "cant" do stock brakes, but your willing to do a 245 tire I hope no one takes everyone's rules suggestion as "against" anyone. I am just wondering why we give points back for tires, when we dont for weight, it just adds another level of complication.

 

That said, for a TTer, its a no-brainer to do the A6 over R6, only 3 points more. I would rather see the street tires go back to 0 for all street tires, why punish street tires even more with that +2? +16 doesnt sound too bad for A6s

 

And Brian, this is for 2013, who cares about Nationals in 2013, itll be out West in some far away made up land (kidding...or am I?)

[Cobra4B]

2013 NATS needs to be at VIR

 

I'm willing to do 245 tires because if it works I win them. Brake pads... I have to pay for those. The 20mm pads for the Wilwoods are nearly 2x as thick as the OEM pads and they're cheaper. Plus, the SL6R doesn't taper pads like the stick slide-rail calipers do.

 

I understand that a tire is a heat sink etc. We'll just have to see what happens in a few weeks.

[awdracer]

2013 NATS needs to be at VIR

 

I'Brake pads... I have to pay for those. I understand that a tire is a heat sink etc. We'll just have to see what happens in a few weeks.

 

Hawk doesn't have anything for you? I pay $10 for my Hawk brake pads for my Wilwood setup with a $50 Hawk contingency.

[brkntrxn]

For whatever may be decided for 2013, please have it settled before December of 2012.

[Cobra4B]

Hawk doesn't have anything for you? I pay $10 for my Hawk brake pads for my Wilwood setup with a $50 Hawk contingency.

I hate Hawk brake pads... ruined a $3000 set of CCWs back in the day. Never again.

[PushinTheLimit]

I'll throw my opinion in on this, but I'm not a TT'er, this would be more of a PT opinion...

 

It seems to me that its getting harder to prep for TT and PT and optimize for the best setup. It almost takes two different setups to really do well at this point with how much development that has occured over the past 2-3 years. What works well in TT (to podium) may not work or burns up lots of money in tires/brakes etc.

 

I've been considering switching from ST2 to run PTA this with my C5Z. I only have a few things that puts me in ST2 and I'm alot closer to PTA. But I've already got 3 sets of wheels that I really like and was going to budget some 275 A6's as that was the only way I could make my points work. That's running stock shocks, stock brakes, stock springs, T1 swaybars and a aftermarket diff. Anything higher than that for the A6 point wise puts me running the R6 or selling wheels to fit a smaller A6 on. The latter I'm not interested in doing. I need to spend more of my money on seat time once I get my car back together and which direction to go in.

 

The one good thing is that ST seems to be fairly consistent in their ruleset even with it being very wide open. It'll take me a while to get close to max prep for ST2, but I may just hold out for that and run next year.

 

Also, just some food for thought... I personally would like to see a cage in all the TT cars. I know the cars that run TTR/U/S/A run fast enough to warrant that and really I think it would be a good idea across the board. I doubt that will ever happen would would probably cut into the entries for TT, but it would be safer for all.

 

Edit: Maybe not mandate a cage for TT cars, but at least a good harness, harness bar and head/neck restraint. Just something better than the OEM 3-point belts in most cars.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Guest

[kbrew8991]

I'd like to see a bit higher level of safety equip in all TT cars (maybe not cage), but that's another thread. Besides, not all tracks are created equal. It's really hard to crash a car into something at most TX tracks for instance. Road Atl, not so much heh!

 

In the end on the safety equip front right now the "personal responsiblity" concept does seem to be working. I don't see anyone in a fast car in my region that doesn't have mild to moderate upgrades, and even in the slower class cars they seem to be taking safety seriosuly. So we may not even need to write a rule at all, just put peer pressure on the couple hold-outs to reconsider their approach

[Varkwso]

I'll throw my opinion in on this, but I'm not a TT'er, this would be more of a PT opinion...

 

It seems to me that its getting harder to prep for TT and PT and optimize for the best setup. It almost takes two different setups to really do well at this point with how much development that has occured over the past 2-3 years. What works well in TT (to podium) may not work or burns up lots of money in tires/brakes etc.

 

I've been considering switching from ST2 to run PTA this with my C5Z. I only have a few things that puts me in ST2 and I'm alot closer to PTA. But I've already got 3 sets of wheels that I really like and was going to budget some 275 A6's as that was the only way I could make my points work. That's running stock shocks, stock brakes, stock springs, T1 swaybars and a aftermarket diff. Anything higher than that for the A6 point wise puts me running the R6 or selling wheels to fit a smaller A6 on. The latter I'm not interested in doing. I need to spend more of my money on seat time once I get my car back together and which direction to go in.

 

The one good thing is that ST seems to be fairly consistent in their ruleset even with it being very wide open. It'll take me a while to get close to max prep for ST2, but I may just hold out for that and run next year.

 

Also, just some food for thought... I personally would like to see a cage in all the TT cars. I know the cars that run TTR/U/S/A run fast enough to warrant that and really I think it would be a good idea across the board. I doubt that will ever happen would would probably cut into the entries for TT, but it would be safer for all.

 

Safer for all is to stay on the couch. I hit harder then you in about the same place in a 15000 mile 2004 Z06. I walked away fine. It was a beautiful car pre impact.

 

If you want a cage in TT run SCCA.

 

It is a choice. My Hans, harness bar and good seat in one 99 FRC versus the caged 99 C5 race car also in my yard are really about equal in TT space.

 

Now back to tires. I will take all those obsolete OEM GS wheels off you guys hands.

[Cobra4B]

Forcing someone to have a dedicated race car with a cage would destroy TT. You just took it from "this sporty car I already have" to "Tow vehicle + trailer + race car"....

[PushinTheLimit]

Forcing someone to have a dedicated race car with a cage would destroy TT. You just took it from "this sporty car I already have" to "Tow vehicle + trailer + race car"....

 

I know, and I would expect many to be against this concept. A know that the vette's "crashes well" as Jeff basically said... other cars may not. And I think Nasa does a good job with the safety factor in all aspects... didn't mean for it to sound like I didn't think so. Having a harness + harness bar and a head/neck restraint would be better to say I guess rather than a required cage. Anyways... another discussion, another time.

[vpnwiz]

My thoughts...

 

- The credit for running narrower tires needs to remain, it's all part of picking your car and putting up with the good/bad.

 

- I'd like to see a points formula for running staggered tires sizes, but as it is I think the tire points are confusing for many, and unfortunately that would just make it too complicated.

 

- The BFG's need a penalty... looking at D in TT and PT from Nats this year the previous track records were totally shredded. However, the fastest 1-2 in TT (Hoosiers) and 2 in PT (me, on Hankooks) were all within less than a second of each other, while 1 in PT was on BFG's and more than a half second faster than all of us. That's a lot of change from previous years but I believe the 1-2 fast laps in TT and 2 in PT show year-over consistency of improvement that should be expected, while the 1st finish in PT was an outlier that could use correction... in the form of an extra 3 points.

 

Patrick

[Bnjmn]

My thoughts...

 

 

- The BFG's need a penalty... looking at D in TT and PT from Nats this year the previous track records were totally shredded. However, the fastest 1-2 in TT (Hoosiers) and 2 in PT (me, on Hankooks) were all within less than a second of each other, while 1 in PT was on BFG's and more than a half second faster than all of us. That's a lot of change from previous years but I believe the 1-2 fast laps in TT and 2 in PT show year-over consistency of improvement that should be expected, while the 1st finish in PT was an outlier that could use correction... in the form of an extra 3 points.

 

Patrick

 

The BFG R1s are now +13 tires under the 2012 rules.

[vpnwiz]

The BFG R1s are now +13 tires under the 2012 rules.

Huh, I totally overlooked that. Thanks! Carry on.

[clydesdale]

In the interest of fairness, there should be a comprehensive review of tire size and compound with the intent of providing as much parity between tire choices as the parity provided between different base classes of car. However, if tire sponsorship is the goal of the NASA organization rather than fairness, then the rules should overtly favor the brand, size and compound of the preferred tire for competition. Given that a set of tires now runs from $1100-1600 I would have thought that someone could find a better way to make a $600 set just as competitive. As it stands there is no other competitive tire than Hoosier, when combining speed and contingency prizes. Perhaps we should celebrate that and give the other manufacturers incentive to come up with a better deal?

[zigspeed10]

From my perspective the purpose of changing the rules would be to:

 

1. Make the PT/TT series more affordable to compete in which would encourage the casual track day guy to come in. This is a win for all of us, more competitors, more competition, more contingency prizes, more money in your pocket.

 

2. Make it easier for cars to cross over from PT to TT because like it has been said it takes two different setups to optimise in either one.

 

So how do you make it more affordable? My biggest expense by far is tires. One reason for this is because the current points system encourages the use of skinny A6's that just don't last. Here is my solution, make the A6 a +20 point tire and keep the R6 +10. That gives us a nice even spread of non-DOT slicks at +30 (I've been told they are 2 sec. faster than A6's), then the A6's at +20 (I've been told they are 2 sec. faster than the R6), then the R6 at +10. With these points I would see most people currently on A6's moving to the longer lasting R6's. With the 3 points they would get back maybe they would go to a plus size making them last even longer.

 

The next thing is brakes. What if we remove the +2 from brake calipers making them a free mod. This saves money and makes it easier for PT cars to do TT. It saves money because brake pads for aftermarket calipers are much thicker and cheaper then oem shape pads, also I'm starting this year on my third set of OEM calipers because the crappy slide rail calipers spread. And really what kind of lap time improvement is there if any.

 

The feeling I get from reading this thread is most people don't like when people run smaller tires to get points back. We could put a limit on how many points your allowed to get back. Problem solved and this also takes away the encouragement to run skinny short lived tires. The other felling I get is that people really don't want to give up running the A6's. If the points get raised for it they just assume they will have to bump up in class and keep running them. It really is like crack and all you people need an intervention.

[Cobra4B]

From my perspective the purpose of changing the rules would be to:

 

1. Make the PT/TT series more affordable to compete in which would encourage the casual track day guy to come in. This is a win for all of us, more competitors, more competition, more contingency prizes, more money in your pocket.

 

2. Make it easier for cars to cross over from PT to TT because like it has been said it takes two different setups to optimise in either one.

 

So how do you make it more affordable? My biggest expense by far is tires. One reason for this is because the current points system encourages the use of skinny A6's that just don't last. Here is my solution, make the A6 a +20 point tire and keep the R6 +10. That gives us a nice even spread of non-DOT slicks at +30 (I've been told they are 2 sec. faster than A6's), then the A6's at +20 (I've been told they are 2 sec. faster than the R6), then the R6 at +10. With these points I would see most people currently on A6's moving to the longer lasting R6's. With the 3 points they would get back maybe they would go to a plus size making them last even longer.

 

The next thing is brakes. What if we remove the +2 from brake calipers making them a free mod. This saves money and makes it easier for PT cars to do TT. It saves money because brake pads for aftermarket calipers are much thicker and cheaper then oem shape pads, also I'm starting this year on my third set of OEM calipers because the crappy slide rail calipers spread. And really what kind of lap time improvement is there if any.

 

The feeling I get from reading this thread is most people don't like when people run smaller tires to get points back. We could put a limit on how many points your allowed to get back. Problem solved and this also takes away the encouragement to run skinny short lived tires. The other felling I get is that people really don't want to give up running the A6's. If the points get raised for it they just assume they will have to bump up in class and keep running them. It really is like crack and all you people need an intervention.

1. This is racing not charity. You make one aspect cheaper someone will find a way to spend their money elsewhere.

 

2. R6s don't last longer. They heat cycle to garbage long before they cord vs. A6s that work pretty well until they're corded.

 

3. I do agree on making calipers a free mod. It would make bouncing between TT and PT easier. My Wilwoods don't make me any faster than stock calipers (especially in a "one fast lap" TT scenario), they're just better suited for race use.

[Bnjmn]

I agree with either a hard limit on getting points back on smaller tire sizes (for example, you can only get 7 points from downsizing) or curtailing down from the current allowances.

 

Depending on how you spend them, I would guess that in real life, after install, testing, etc, a point ends up costing (on average) around $800-$1k.

 

I don't understand the push to R6s. They are, IMO, not a good tire for TT'ing. They physically last longer, but they lose speed very quickly. A's, in my experience, are fast even after they cord.

Because of the short useful life of R6s (for TT), everyone will still be using stickers if the rules punish As. This is false $ savings.

 

And I agree with the above about brakes - for TT - the important part is already free (pads), braking is next limited by tires; allowing calipers as a free mod allows cost savings over a season in brake pads and less compromise for PT/TT.

[Varkwso]

+16 makes * cars impossible to compete in class with anywhere close to base width. If you take away no point back for under it keeps car on the rubber width for class. If that is the intent it lets Evo, Sti and BMW M3 run A6 (base class TTB) and C5Z on a lesser tire in TTA/PTA.

 

You will make the TTB BMW happy and the TTB C 5 sad.

 

$3000 free mod brakes is not making it cheaper to compete.

[TurboShortBus]

Note that I have actually read all 10 pages before jumping in.

 

I have no desire to run Rs for anything. Hoosier screwed up and sent me a set of Rs and I didn't check before mounting them. I was at RA and didn't see they were Rs until someone was checking out my car and said, "Oh you run Rs?". They were 2 seconds a lap slower even when brand new stickers.

Ah yeah, last June at RA...that was me.

 

Take away the Ho-Ho contingency and you'd have people running the fast Hankooks and Kumhos again.

Hell, I'd go back to RA1s or even bust out my NT01s...aka "tires that last more than a weekend and a half and are relatively cheap to purchase if I'm not winning more of them."

 

2. R6s don't last longer. They heat cycle to garbage long before they cord vs. A6s that work pretty well until they're corded.

Not necessarily. I corded the outside corners on a set of R6s while they still had bite (lap times were still good) and a ton of meat on them, mostly thanks to a highly abrasive track surface with long, unimaginative corners. I would hate to have seen what that track would have done to A6s on my 3260 lb car.

 

$3000 free mod brakes is not making it cheaper to compete.

Although the current +2 for brakes isn't much less ludicrous by comparison.

 

I would be a fan of increasing the points assessment for A6s. As previously stated, if there is a ~2 second difference between the TT classes, and they are separated by 20 points, and A6s are faster than R6s by ~2 seconds per lap, then an increased point value makes sense (although it might not need to be 20 points; 10 would do it, for +20 for A6s). It also makes sense to have a bigger points spread between the +7 RA1s/NT01s and +10 R6s, as the R6s are worth a lot more over RA1s than the +3 spread would indicate. Maybe they get moved back to +5 points where they were a couple of years ago, and make the +2 compounds freebies.

 

As a competitor in TTD, which (down here) consists of a couple of boosted and base-reclassed Miatas that get a bunch of points back for running 205mm tires (with TTD reclasses), I wouldn't mind seeing the narrow tire credit go away. My car's base class is TTE**, and with its MCW of 3260 lbs, there is no way that I can realistically get the same -10 point credit without running 195mm tires.

 

In all fairness, to shoot a hole in my own argument, there is a reclassed 350Z down here (235 rwhp / 3195 lbs) that blew the TTD track record apart a few weeks ago on 225mm R6s on Saturday, but was off the pace on Sunday. With that being said, I can't wait until we are finally able to get a dyno at the track...

 

In conclusion, I am in favor of a massive points credit if Enterprise, Avis, or Hertz owns the car.

 

Mark

[Bnjmn]

The $2-3k brakes are still worth something when you are ready to sell your car. A box full of backing plates and cracked stock rotors are not.

 

In any case, I still think the rules (all of them) should stay as currently written.

 

 

+16 makes * cars impossible to compete in class with anywhere close to base width. If you take away no point back for under it keeps car on the rubber width for class. If that is the intent it lets Evo, Sti and BMW M3 run A6 (base class TTB) and C5Z on a lesser tire in TTA/PTA.

 

You will make the TTB BMW happy and the TTB C 5 sad.

 

$3000 free mod brakes is not making it cheaper to compete.

[TurboShortBus]

The $2-3k brakes are still worth something when you are ready to sell your car.

Are we assessing points for resale value now?

 

Mark

[dans2k]

More data points:

 

TTC:

1st place: E36 M3 245/40/17 A6

2nd Place: S2k 225/40/17 A6

 

Everyone has an opinion and of course it would reflect their own class.

 

aaron ran the 245/40/17 A6 I ran 225/40/17

 

Looking at treadwidth you wouldn't think theres much difference between the 225 and the 245 but people seem to be going a lot faster on the 245 one s2k ran a 1.36.5 at road atlanta I'll know in march how close I can get to him on a 225

 

I've been running some 245/40/17 R6's at roebling and I don't think its much slower than the 225/45/17 A6 - it definitely feels like its got more sidewall on a 9" rim - I did an 8lap session the other day and the tire didn't go off either which was nice

 

for me a 245 R6 is 10 points and a 225 A6 is 9 and the R6 is a bit slower

[philstireservice]

Just to comment on the A6 vs R6

 

 

Keep in mind that A6's are faster sooner than an R6....In a TT situation that works superbly, but the longer you run hard on an A6, the faster/sooner the R6 catches up to it and can surpass it. So in a race situation, and depending on the circumstances/time/distance in that race, a R6 can be faster than A6 over the length of said race.