|
|
Post by illbebetter on Aug 21, 2012 8:41:32 GMT -5
Did anyone else catch this from August Fast Track? This will change things up a bit.
Road Tire
1. Effective immediately upon publication, after consideration of member input the SEB has amended the specifications for
the Road Tire supplemental classes such that the minimum treadwear rating is 180. (7918, 7945, 7953, 7986, 7995, 8004,
8014, 8020, 8026, 8030, 8032, 8051, 8083, 8100, 8115, 8214, 8283). The SEB believes that a higher treadwear rating for
RT than for ST is consistent with the differences in levels of preparation.
|
|
|
|
Post by clemsonmz3 on Aug 21, 2012 9:46:54 GMT -5
The SEB made a mistake listing it as a "Tech Bulletin", should have been a proposed rule that will go into effect 1/1/2013. It was cleared up in the September Fastrack released yesterday... HERE. |
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 21, 2012 12:52:11 GMT -5
Because "Road Tire" and "Street Tire" should by all means have different definitions  But yes.... the rule doesn't take effect until next year. There was actually something published about 2 days after that Fastrack because people got all up in arms about "immediately" happening so soon before Nationals. |
|
|
|
Post by illbebetter on Aug 21, 2012 12:55:32 GMT -5
Cool. I hadn't got to septembers issue yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by cr89x on Aug 21, 2012 18:42:11 GMT -5
Of course that is subjective to each Region. That is mearly the rule set for National level. It will be discussed and announced by or during the off season. Tire class restructure has been a topic of conversation amongst core workers.
|
|
|
|
Post by soloracer on Aug 21, 2012 22:20:16 GMT -5
Street tire and road tire is splitting hairs. i reccomend 320 tread wear for all tires in a street class.
|
|
|
|
Post by ball80 on Aug 22, 2012 5:49:00 GMT -5
So what defines road tire and street tire. For example would I be road tire because I have a separate daily driver tire than the star specs I race on?
Would I have to use my daily driver tires to then be grouped in with street tire.
Can someone go indepth how this will affect drivers. I don't always understand these new rules. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 22, 2012 6:13:27 GMT -5
Nobody understands the new rules. It's an arbitrary distinction that people came up with, and actually a compromise from the 200 treadwear that some people were calling for. ST* classes remain 140 treadwear. As for you, you have enough stuff done to your car that you don't have to worry about stock and the included "Road Tire" classes  |
|
|
|
Post by z3elda on Aug 22, 2012 6:34:23 GMT -5
Nobody understands the new rules. It's an arbitrary distinction that people came up with, and actually a compromise from the 200 treadwear that some people were calling for. ST* classes remain 140 treadwear. As for you, you have enough stuff done to your car that you don't have to worry about stock and the included "Road Tire" classes ^^ What he said. Plus Star Specs are 200 tread wear (if I'm not mistaken) so you'd be Legal in either scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by illbebetter on Aug 22, 2012 8:10:51 GMT -5
Lots of people run Toyos and Hankooks that are both 140's. I run Kuhmo XS at 180 tread wear so I'm still ok in 2013. I also know BFG is coming out with a comparable tread wear tire in 2013 to compete with these brands.
|
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 22, 2012 10:13:50 GMT -5
Lots of people run Toyos and Hankooks that are both 140's. I run Kuhmo XS at 180 tread wear so I'm still ok in 2013. I also know BFG is coming out with a comparable tread wear tire in 2013 to compete with these brands. Yup, the Hankooks on my Miata are legal for STR, but not RTR. Go figure |
|
|
|
Post by CoolGuy094 on Aug 22, 2012 10:39:21 GMT -5
Yup, the Hankooks on my Miata are legal for STR, but not RTR. Go figure Wait... why did I NOT know you have a Miata? |
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 22, 2012 11:03:57 GMT -5
Yup, the Hankooks on my Miata are legal for STR, but not RTR. Go figure Wait... why did I NOT know you have a Miata? Because the only CCR event I've driven it at was last December at the charity event. It was SUPPOSED to be my primary car this season, but started burning oil and doing horrible things a few weeks before the first points event. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveCouture on Aug 22, 2012 14:26:35 GMT -5
And with the number on the side of the tire being decided on by the tire manufacturer... look for those tires with 140 ratings to suddenly be marked/available with a higher treadwear number and no change in performance. :rolleyes:
|
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 22, 2012 15:03:19 GMT -5
And with the number on the side of the tire being decided on by the tire manufacturer... look for those tires with 140 ratings to suddenly be marked/available with a higher treadwear number and no change in performance. :rolleyes: From how I understand it, there are standards and procedures in place to do testing on tire wear. Tire manufacturers can underrate their tires, but not overrate. It's perfectly okay to take my wife's Toyo 540 treadwear rating tires and slap a 140 on the side, but not to put 540 on my RS-3s or Star Specs. If they bump the numbers for next season, we know they've been underrating them the whole time. Hankooks might get changed.... don't expect the magic Toyos to. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveCouture on Aug 22, 2012 15:07:26 GMT -5
Your understanding is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 22, 2012 15:16:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolGuy094 on Aug 22, 2012 15:56:26 GMT -5
To think that every tire that is manufactured and has a displayed "treadwear" rating number associated with it is sent off to a test facility in Texas to be put under controlled testing by an independent party is silly. Much less that each tire manufactured around the world is subjected to the same exact conditions in a 1,600 mile, 4 car test cycle by some DOT sanctioned ASTM controlled laboratory. It just isn't feasible.
|
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 22, 2012 22:20:23 GMT -5
But there is at least SOME basis for the number. It's not just an arbitrary number that manufacturers decide to use.
|
|
|
|
Post by grey ghost on Aug 23, 2012 4:35:32 GMT -5
Steven,
back in the day when BFG and Yokohama were the tire to have, I was at a few Tire tests. Both said that the tread-wear number was a recommenced number that could be different from one manufacturer or another. they told us to not take stock
in the number on the sidewall.
hell even Hoosier could put 140 or 200 on the side of there tire and bee legal. all they would have to do is increase the depth of the rubber.
I say this for those who have not auto crossed for more than 15 years. the street tire classes will land up with a tire to have just like stock and street prep. its called rule creep. if you look at where st started 10 years ago is where
street prep. started 40 years ago.
just my old 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by z3elda on Aug 23, 2012 8:06:17 GMT -5
Quoted from the Tire Rack Website:
"The problem with UTQG Treadwear Grades is that they are open to some interpretation on the part of the tire manufacturer because they are assigned after the tire has only experienced a little treadwear as it runs the 7,200 miles. This means that the tire manufacturers need to extrapolate their raw wear data when they are assigning Treadwear Grades, and that their grades can to some extent reflect how conservative or optimistic their marketing department is. Typically, comparing the Treadwear Grades of tire lines within a single brand is somewhat helpful, while attempting to compare the grades between different brands is not as helpful."
My Interpretation:
Yeah, they do some tesing - but they apply a fudge factor and select a number that makes the target market for the tire happy - or will otherwise get them to buy the tire.
Even if they really did all that testing on the up-n-up, the number is a comparative value within that Manufacturers product line.
SCCA felt a rule was in order, and this rating happens to be the only measure available without opening an SCCA tire testing facility. - and that's MY old 2 cents worth :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by lancer360 on Aug 23, 2012 8:25:23 GMT -5
That is my understanding of the tire wear also Eric. I figure Toyo and others can rework their testing a bit to get the tires to meet the 180 treadware if the demand for the tires becomes high enough in the Road Tire class.
|
|
|
|
Post by integra55 on Aug 23, 2012 16:21:29 GMT -5
or the SCCA could just leave well enough alone and stay with something that has worked for a long-long time ( I.E. the 140 # associated with ST ) ... oh wait a minute ... this is the SCCA we're talking about ... my bad ....
|
|
|
|
Post by apexemall on Aug 23, 2012 22:23:40 GMT -5
It seems that we might apply the advice a faithful italian catholic told the pope when he outlawed birth control.
"you no playa da game, you no maka da rules."
As someone who is actually running both road tire and street touring classes, the rules make perfect sense.
First, there is no change to the street touring rules. Good sense prevailed.
Second, the purpose of the 3 new road tire classes has to be considered. They are indexed STOCK classes. They are for people who want to play in our sport and be competitive without having to significantly modify their cars or get extraordinarily sticky tires with the attendant low mileage penalty. If promoted, it can lead to significant expansion in participation - especially in smaller markets.
The tires in the 200 treadwear range fit that purpose. The Hankooks and Toyos do not. Most people cannot afford them on a daily driver. So, I can run Michelin Pilot Super Sports which have a rating of 300 and be competitive in my Corvette in RTR. (if I knew how to drive the thing)
I love my R1R's and I also love my PSS's, and with the old ST classes and the new RTR classes, I can play on both of them.
Clyde Stahl
|
|
|
|
Post by lilgunny on Aug 24, 2012 7:02:03 GMT -5
^^^^What he said. And remember this is on a National level. At present CCR doesn't run "road tire" classes like SCCA, but instead runs a "tire" class that takes in all tin top cars and classes, not just stock as the RT classes are at the national level.
LilGunny
|
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 24, 2012 7:53:16 GMT -5
^^^^What he said. And remember this is on a National level. At present CCR doesn't run "road tire" classes like SCCA, but instead runs a "tire" class that takes in all tin top cars and classes, not just stock as the RT classes are at the national level. LilGunny I'm sure it'll be discussed in the off season, and I highly doubt anything will change. From what I've seen, most of us in tire class are running Star Specs (200TW) and would be fine under the new rule anyway, but I can't see any reason why we should change it locally. *shrug* |
|
|
|
Post by yellow CR on Aug 24, 2012 14:59:36 GMT -5
You do know it is the tire manufacturer that says what treadwear is on the tire. Their is no independent party testing durometers.
Just because your tire says 140, 200 or 300 doesn't mean they are any softer or harder than the competition. I run 200 treadware Star Specs and am not changing anytime soon to a tire that says 140 on the side, they are are soft as the competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by apexemall on Aug 27, 2012 9:41:50 GMT -5
^^^^What he said. And remember this is on a National level. At present CCR doesn't run "road tire" classes like SCCA, but instead runs a "tire" class that takes in all tin top cars and classes, not just stock as the RT classes are at the national level. LilGunny I'm sure it'll be discussed in the off season, and I highly doubt anything will change. From what I've seen, most of us in tire class are running Star Specs (200TW) and would be fine under the new rule anyway, but I can't see any reason why we should change it locally. *shrug* For clubs that already have an all-inclusive tire class, it would not work to "change" to the RT classes. A "change to" would exclude people with mods more than stock rules. Not fair to them. The way to get in synch with National rules would be to ADD the three classes (RTR, RTF, and RTA) and see how popular they are. I've been running my Corvette in Atlanta in RTR. We started with 2 cars and it we now run 5 - 8 at each event. The rules are exactly the same as the STOCK rules with the tire restriction. The RTA and RTF have not caught on at all. I would think it would be a great recruiting tool to be able to honestly tell people they can compete with "FEW or NO" modifications to their cars. Clyde |
|
|
|
Post by srduck on Aug 27, 2012 10:22:49 GMT -5
I would think it would be a great recruiting tool to be able to honestly tell people they can compete with "FEW or NO" modifications to their cars. But they already can compete like that in the Tire class we have now. And if we add the RT* classes, what's the motivation for jumping out of the inclusive tire class we have right now to go to under-subscribed classes? |
|
|
|
Post by SteveCouture on Aug 27, 2012 12:48:33 GMT -5
I would think it would be a great recruiting tool to be able to honestly tell people they can compete with "FEW or NO" modifications to their cars. But they already can compete like that in the Tire class we have now. And if we add the RT* classes, what's the motivation for jumping out of the inclusive tire class we have right now to go to under-subscribed classes? But they could also compete in any of the regular open classes we had even before tire class.  There is nothing in the rules that says you *must* have "race" tires to compete in *ANY* class. You could run A-Mod on 500 treadwear Sears all-season Weather-Handlers if the car is otherwise legal for that class. |
|
