philstireservice Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 just figure they are for the most part dead after a Friday practice day with a Sat and Sun race weekend . and if you do that have them heat cycled before you get them . And we can heat cycle them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmy70go Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 Phil, What do you mean they can't be rotated on the same side of the car, only crossed? Has Toyo gone backwards in technology but upped the price? I don't get it, call me ignorant. If you cross them the direction changes, if you flip them, chances are, the direction changes. If it's a directional thing, than are we buying two lefts and two rights? I've read your post twice just to make sure I read it correct, but still confused as to why they will need indexed by location. Wouldn't it be wise for Toyo to just build them square out of stone? Fred and Dino would approve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Watson Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 from the link provided in a previous post: http://www.nasaproracing.com/contingency/toyo_tires/Toyo_RR_Mounting_Rec.pdf apparently there is a splice joint, ie in construction of the RR they wrap the rubber sheets around the tire and there is a joint where the rubber overlaps. seems to me they want the joint/lip to 'roll' in the direction of most torque applied to the tire. ie one way the seem will slide over the surface while the other the seem will peel. from the diagram torque on the front is braking while rears are opposite more torque accel than braking. I've only seen this on the F1 cars, not from hooiser or bfg or other typical road race stuff we deal with. kind of a turn off if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philstireservice Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 Phil, What do you mean they can't be rotated on the same side of the car, only crossed? Has Toyo gone backwards in technology but upped the price? I don't get it, call me ignorant. If you cross them the direction changes, if you flip them, chances are, the direction changes. If it's a directional thing, than are we buying two lefts and two rights? I've read your post twice just to make sure I read it correct, but still confused as to why they will need indexed by location. Wouldn't it be wise for Toyo to just build them square out of stone? Fred and Dino would approve. Todd, if they WERE directional and you crossed them, then it would change. the Toyo RR is NOT directional. You have to consider these tires asymmetrical ( think an inside and outside), then when you cross them the outside remains the outside no matter what side of the car they are on. Every race tire made is made the same way, with a butt splice, Hoosiers, BFG's, and Toyo's. And whether you or anyone else realizes it they all are SUPPOSED to be run in a certain configuration. When we mount race tires we mount them in a certain way. This is difference between "people" who know and "people" who think they know. There was an issue with the Toyo's when they first came out last year, but they have since adjusted it at the factory. It is advisable ( read - DO IT THIS WAY) that the RR's be run in the direction that is recommended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philstireservice Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 from the link provided in a previous post: http://www.nasaproracing.com/contingency/toyo_tires/Toyo_RR_Mounting_Rec.pdf apparently there is a splice joint, ie in construction of the RR they wrap the rubber sheets around the tire and there is a joint where the rubber overlaps. seems to me they want the joint/lip to 'roll' in the direction of most torque applied to the tire. ie one way the seem will slide over the surface while the other the seem will peel. from the diagram torque on the front is braking while rears are opposite more torque accel than braking. I've only seen this on the F1 cars, not from Hoosier or BFG or other typical road race stuff we deal with. kind of a turn off if you ask me. Al, the technical aspects you quoted are true.........but......As I stated above, Hoosier and BFG etc build them the same way and they HAVE and still do occasionally have issues too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Watson Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 Roger that Phil... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic_Cobra Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) This is too hard. Can we just RACE!?!? Edited January 21, 2014 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpoz27 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 good info. thanks but still a car under 3000 lbs. my si car is 3560 post race so I have about 600 lbs of more weight. I found them to be really good for about 8 cycles as well but then fall from that anything over 10 and they are on the way out . 12 and pretty much done. . When did Ford start making Panzer tanks?! Our mustang is 3013# and the Camaro is 3200# with a LOT of weight to take out. Why are you guys building 3500-3700# cars knowing full well you are on a 275 tire and will get wasted by 2700-3000# cars on the same tire...? Spec Iron is spec and all but the AI guys with light cars are going to do very well on the RR especially in long races. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevepoe Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Just about every boss mustang is 3500 post race.That is very common . Spec iron cars carry heavy spec rotors and wheels 28lb along with not much being able to be removed . 3500 is pretty common as well post race . They have been like that for a few years . lightweight low hp mustangs in ai don't get it done up in the great lakes regions . willing to bet top 3 ai national cars where close to 3500 post race Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smitty328 Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 willing to bet top 3 ai national cars where close to 3500 post race Udell was well above 3600 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 When did Ford start making Panzer tanks?! A Panzer tank would be a heavy BMW or Porsche. The American equivalent would be a Sherman tank. Jeez you guys, know your history. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I think I am going to make my turbo car fit into AI. I just need to pull a 5500# trailer to make weight. The rules don't say you can't pull a trailer.... I can see it now. A trailer with 4000# of plate steel with a ride height of 6" and 1500# of fancy suspension with 8 wheels. Dual 18" wheels front and back. The rules don't say how many wheels are allowed, just what size. I have to figure out to hook up the 8 calipers on the trailer wheels. Think of the stopping power! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpoz27 Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 When did Ford start making Panzer tanks?! A Panzer tank would be a heavy BMW or Porsche. The American equivalent would be a Sherman tank. Jeez you guys, know your history. Chris Panzers were FAR heavier than a Sherman which was considered a light weight in the tank world and was only successful due to superior numbers, not firepower or armor. The Russians also received Shermans as aid early in the War so they weren't exclusively for Americans. How much more tank history you wanna learn? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olaaf Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 When did Ford start making Panzer tanks?! A Panzer tank would be a heavy BMW or Porsche. The American equivalent would be a Sherman tank. Jeez you guys, know your history. Chris Panzers were FAR heavier than a Sherman which was considered a light weight in the tank world and was only successful due to superior numbers, not firepower or armor. The Russians also received Shermans as aid early in the War so they weren't exclusively for Americans. How much more tank history you wanna learn? if you want to get nitpicky about it.... you are confusing the mark III and IV Panzers with Tigers and Panthers. the III and IV's were medium tanks like the sherman. American's used Tank Destroyers (M10's, M12's, and later M36's) to take on the larger german tanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I see a better idea. We should all convert our cars to tracks! Then they will last forever and we don't have to worry about tire wear. We can then race in winter, the track rental will be cheaper, and we can get half of our summer back! http://www.motorward.com/2014/01/ken-block-reveals-ford-f-150-raptor-trax/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Shows how much you know about tracked vehicles! Price out a set of replacement tracks for a skid steer and let me know what you think about tire prices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UBR Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I see a better idea. We should all convert our cars to tracks! Then they will last forever and we don't have to worry about tire wear. But what about all the Toyo bucks? Looks like Chris is bored waiting for Sue to load the toter for Daytona. j Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.