Jump to content
Michael G.

CLOSED 2016 Rules Changes Proposal - non-DOT rain tires adj

Recommended Posts

Michael G.

Proposed change

Treaded 'rain' tires should be excluded from the non-DOT power to weight adjustment for cars that normally run DOT 'dry' tires. The calculation factor used for the sticker on the car's windshield would be used to determine whether the car 'normally' runs DOT or non-DOT tires.

Reason

In most areas, rain races are rare. Rain tires almost always age out of usability long before tread wear or heat cycles end their life. In the interest of safety and fairness, any rain tire should be allowed under the same power to weight rules the car would run under dry conditions. This would allow drivers more freedom to pick up used rain tires from professional teams, fellow competitors, and year-old clearance sales.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg Smith

No.

 

Opens up too many options for rain tires that're faster than the current legal options. I would be okay with making the Continental Extreme Contact(EC) wets legal as a DOT tire. To be clear these are the wet tires used in the CTSCC, not the tires used in the TUDOR series.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scottbm3

Leave the rule as currently written.

 

 

 

 

 

-Scott B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bimmerhead

NO.

 

Why are we trying to regulate a corner case? If rain races are rare, why create more rules to handle them?

 

KISS.

 

Cheers,

-jerry

 

GTS3

Western Region

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MPower6er

I vote No on this proposal; doesn't seem to warrant enough consideration for such a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
noodlexyz

I for one believe tires should be free, run whatever you want. GTS is about simplicity, its essentialy an open performance rule set governed by HP to weight.

 

Yes, lets open up rains and maybe then we can work on drys for next year.

 

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alwaysinboost

let the non-DOT conti wets be counted as DOT tires.

the conti dry non-dot tires are classed as regular old R6's, would make sense the wets would be allowed the same latitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brad Waite

NO.

 

This change is not necessary and I've never heard of this as an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jvanhouten

So this is so people can run "take-offs" without the weight/power penalty? I guess I see that but at the same time, that allows someone to run new Michelin rain slicks without a penalty as well--a HUGE advantage. If I can run those tires with 20 more HP or 110 less lbs I'd do it every time...

 

No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dnvrdrvr

I vote against this proposed rule change. If someone wants to run their non-DOT rain tires, their weight should correspond. There is an advantage by running them over DOT and the existing rule covers this already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John Graber

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
peter*g

No. It's a bizarre edge case.

 

As an alternative consideration, we should review the real performance difference between DOT and non-DOT tires. I have heard multiple racers with experience say that the current generation of Hoosier A's match the performance of a slick, but with a shorter usable life. If we could unlock a class of tires that would let us get more time out of a set (and thereby reduce costs) that would be excellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Schist4Brainz

I am new to NASA, GTS, and racing in general, but the one common thread I have seen in all of the commentary on the recent proposed rules changes is this: GTS is all about simplicity of the rules and almost nobody (at least those commenting here) wants to see new rules adopted that would make things more complicated. What is being discussed here is the elimination of an existing rule in order to make things more simple. Am I missing something or is my confusion warranted?

 

Non-DOTs have a significant advantage over DOTs in dry conditions, because of greater grip at operating temps. But the same does not apply in the rain because everything is different. Tires just dont get up to temp, so I would argue that any performance advantage is moot. Rain is the great equalizer...cliche' perhaps, but true. Having DOT vs. non-DOT rain tires is not what separates fast and slow drivers in the rain. The primary variable is the level of confidence/skill of the drivers in wet conditions. Some drivers that may otherwise be fast in fair weather simply fold in the rain, whereas other drivers have more confidence in the rain and rise to the occasion.

 

The existing rule is effectively a penalty for skill/confidence in adverse conditions. Why not get rid of it and make things simpler?

 

As an alternative consideration, we should review the real performance difference between DOT and non-DOT tires.

 

I agree that this is worth pursuing, but I foresee that the delta will me minimal if any.

 

This would allow drivers more freedom to pick up used rain tires from professional teams, fellow competitors, and year-old clearance sales.

 

To me this is more important than any potential performance advantage. I buy all of my tires as scrubs because they are the most economical, and at my experience level a few more heat cycles doesn't matter to me. I have a set of scrub Michelin wets that I (fortunately) bought just in time for my first ever NASA (or otherwise) race event recently. I would have gladly picked up some Hoosier wets but the Michys were all I could find on short notice. As a result, I had to move up from GTS3 to GTS4 for that race. So, I was penalized simply because I didnt have the resources or time to get DOT wets.

 

If rain races are rare, why create more rules to handle them?

 

Rain may be a non-issue in SoCal, but it is clearly an issue elsewhere. Plus,the proposed change doesn't create a new rule, it eliminates one.

 

Maybe others here can change my mind, but for now I will be the lone dissenter and vote yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jdefelice

I vote NO for this. suck it up and pay for the DOT tires. This is the least of our concerns.... I would assume this was created so that people can run the Conti wets. pay up and buy the proper tires to comply with the existing rules, like we have all done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mmcnw

No thank you.

 

Let's not mess with rules for phantom issues...stability in a rule set is a good thing.

 

McAleenan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mmcnw
No thank you.

 

Let's not mess with rules for phantom issues...stability in a rule set is a good thing.

 

McAleenan

 

 

I forgot to add that a little extra weight in the rain for non DOTrs is maybe a good thing. In my experience, the hp/weight optimization is way less important in the rain anyway, so why worry about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John S.

Against. No need for additional rules in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RCarmichael77

the conti dry non-dot tires are classed as regular old R6's, would make sense the wets would be allowed the same latitude.

 

 

Wait - did I miss something? I saw that they made that change in TT, but in GTS as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...