FF nationwide tire suggestion

[Mark Walthew]

Tires are one of racings biggest expenses and have a large influence on performance. Also since different tires are needed to be “competitive” at different levels and within various regions we are limiting our entries.

If we had a durable spec tire for FF and CF nationwide and reinstated the tire rule (race what you qualify on) I believe entries would increase.
Here is my reasoning.

1 Hopefully tire budgets would go down freeing up more funds for more races per competitor. Maybe a new set of hard tires will be quicker than a set that has run a few heat cycles but we already have that situation anyway. Hopefully the difference with hard spec tires will be less. Even if it isn't the hard tires should last longer for those that want to run them in more races without being unsafe and they would at least be the same compound as the guy on new tires.

2 I believe most if not all Regional CFs run a hard spec tire already. To enter a National race requires a different set of tires or be at a competitive disadvantage. If they already had the same tire as the competition there would be more incentive to enter their local National.

3 If all FF/CFs nationwide had the same spec tire then there may be more racing at the Regional level as well. Currently MARRS and SARRC use different brands of hard spec tires for their CF series. If you have the wrong brand of hard spec tire a CF is reclassified as a FF regardless of the chassis age/design. With a nationwide spec tire CF cars could cross over to race at other tracks more easily. Retain the chassis rules for CF at the regional level; just require the same tire as FF nationwide. The more cars we get out at any level will just feed the class more.

4 Maybe the tire price would go down if one manufacturer was guaranteed all of the FF/CF business. I know my proposal kills competition between manufacturers but maybevolume, 1 compound of tire (ease of production, same materials, fewer types of tire to stock) and less development cost will result in lower cost.

This should be implemented with enough lead time so that we don’t obsolete the tires already on cars since that could reduce our fields rather than increase them. Let the drivers replace the tires at a natural cycle; don’t force a new purchase right away. Perhaps we should leave rain tires open for a longer period of time (or forever?) since they are replaced less frequently.
Although it would be nice to be able to cross the border and play with our Canadian cousins more readily (and vice versa) I feel there will be less opposition to a spec slick rather than treaded tires since we are comfortable with the slicks and the cars are set up to work on them.

I know there are problems with this idea. Probably more than can be overcome or than I can even imagine. Regional competitors will want to keep the brand they are familiar with. Maybe the regions even have deals worked out with the manufacturers, I don’t know. Dave Gomberg already mentioned there is opposition to reinstating the tire rule. Why it went away I have no idea. The only legitimate reason I can think of was that the ultra soft tires couldn’t make it through the qualifying sessions and the race at the Runoffs safely. A hard spec tire would leave that reason without merit in my opinion.

I don’t think we can do anything that requires engineering changes such as a new motor (if we could ever agree to one) and keep the fields we have now. Mike Sauce’s idea for different weights looked good at first glance but the heaviest cars would be the ones with the lightest minimum weight, they would have to spend money to get down to that weight. The newer cars would have to figure out how to add substantial weight without much room to work with.

If we can just level the playing field some and reduce the cost it would help the class. I don’t see how this would hurt Formula Ford as a whole. I’m sure some individuals will feel otherwise and I welcome their reasons why.
This won’t cost much in the long run. We all need to change tires at some point.
You may start throwing stones.

Mark Walthew

[bikeguyii]

Mark,

That is the direction we have taken here in AZ. Please visit our site at www.euroformulaford.com and you will see what we up to. We have gone from 2 FF to 17 FF in 7 months, the best part being that all Fords seem to be competative, irrelevant of year or suspension.

This will unfortunately not work for the masses, as there is nothing else to do to the car but bolt on a set of $283 tyres that will last all year. Lap times are a little slower, but there is no benefit to new, shaved, old tyres.

I have been told by numerous people that I am an idiot, that this will not work, that the cars don't look cool, and all the other chest thumping reasons, but we are having a really good time, with no re-engineering needed, readily available cars, easy to repair chassis and engines, and best of all, 11 race weekends cost me a grand total of $5,700 for entry, fuel, tyres, and some parts.

We are having fun. Great idea Mark, and it works. Just don't expect an organization to do it for you. Start by yourself with a sanctioning body that will work with you, and just do it.

Regards, Jens

[Scotty]

Good post Mark!

And Jens hit right on the head. You just gotta do it!

No-one is saying that this is the answer to saving FF. All I know is that we're having a blast with good fields, close racing, and good comradierie.

[Craig Jones]

Ok, so who negotiates the National FF contract? What do we do when there is a shortage of that brand and model of tire? What about rains? Will that brand of tire dealer be at every track all over the country? Check out the SRF forums for the troubles they have every time they change tires or the manufacturer makes a change to the mold. Or when the new spec tire won't hold air for more than a half hour. Or the new spec tire is too wide for the SRF bodywork and everyone has to cut out a wheel opening. Or the contract runs out and everybody's tires are obsolete.

Just because something works in a region at the regional level doesn't mean it should be adopted nation wide and at the National level.

If you guys want to run in a National spec class go buy a FM or a SRF.

But, not to be too negative here -- just go out and race your FF the way it is with the tires you have! This is still a drivers class. I buy new tires every weekend for Nationals and that isn't enough to make me truly competitive. The answer to your competitiveness is in your your ability to prep the car, how much seat time you get, and in your right foot -- not in the rule book or this forum.

[racer27]

The FRCCA in the North East has been using a Spec Tire for years. Previous spec tire was Season Lasting Hoosier R-60 (Which I won a championship with on one set of tires) and now 1/2 season lasting ARS. In 4 seasons, 8-10 races per season avg, I used 3 sets of tires (avgs to $450 per season, or $45-$50 per race)

They've found the harder tires equalize the differances between older cars (outboard - Lola, Caldwell, Meryln, PRS, with newer cars - VD, EuroSwift, etc).

I believe a hard spec, reasonably priced tire, goes a long way towards reducing costs, equalizing cars, both factors IMHO criticial to increasing fields.

I'm also one of those that don't believe standard should be differant for National vs Regionial. Personally, I have no desire to compete at Nationial level, but would be nice if could just step up with Spec tire. Although I see a viable argument for Regional having cost efficient spec tire and nationial allowing more spending with tire choices.

As for spec tire one possible downside is being at the mercy of a single tire mfg. Maybe the Spec tire is a Grid of Comparable Performing Tires, allowing racer to shop and allowing for natural price competion. A monopoly is typicially unhealthy.


If the Spec tire is treaded even better yet, but most of us Club Level racers can get a set of Good Used Rains for $200 and have them last several season easily.

[mblanc]

I would support it.

I'm repeating myself, but good thoughts are worth repeating.

clip...... from a previous discussion

The answer
The answer guys, is already right here infront of us.

Look at the success of the EWC, and especially the incredible battles that have been had in CFF. The car counts are up, and the competition is fantastic, and yes there is a sharper end of the grid, but there has also been some great racing in the middle of the pack.

Slicks are definitely the way to go, but a HARD COMPOUND!!! Not just a little change, but FF would need to go all the way to the Hoosier R60 or GY R600.

We campaigned argueably the most competitive CFF car for four years straight in the EWC, on R60's. PLUS we also have a ton of experience in Cen-DIV regionals over the last 10+ years that has always had a spec hard compound tire. Everybody said we were always buying tires, but we weren't. I WON A LOT of EWC races, and RARELY, RARELY ran new tires. Yes, we cycled a couple sets back and fourth, and kept putting lots of cycles on the older set, for learning tracks, first 1/2 of a test day, practice, etc., then pulling the better set out for sometimes Q, and almost always for the race. But, we were NOT buying tires all the time!!!

I won an EWC race at ROAD America with a set of 16+ cycle tires. REALLY. We would often not consider demounting before 20 cycles, the crew would always want to, I always wanted to keep em on another round, with that many cycles, you get kinda attached to them.(I'm sure some remember all the hashmarks on the sides). The tire is hard enough that the car has to be really driven, up "ON" the tires, sliding, some, but they still really act like a slick.

These hard compound tires DO NOT GO OFF like the soft tires, they don't slow down significantly enough to make buying new the difference. Not bragging, I just don't think those that disagree with that do not have anywhere the experience of successfully running R60's for more than a decade like we do.

Having switched from the EWC, to go FF National racing with the Swift, I bought more new tires last year, than we ever did in the EWC in total!!! The tire bill is crazy in nat'l FF. Not saying it's unfair, it's just seems silly. I can definitely tell you the fun factor does NOT go up.

In my opinion, the current tire bill really keeps a lot of budget guys that do their own prep and own work from doing the national deal. Its enough work to keep a FF going and competitive, then add the fact that you need 3 or less cycles on tires to be really competitive, and it just gets out of hand. Especially with the typical nat'l schedule, that if you are serious about it, it can just get silly how many tires go on/off the car in a weekend. And that's even with well thought out management of using up the best of the oldest first.

I AM IN FAVOR OF A HARD COMPOUND SLICK. That change comes WITHOUT all the pitfalls of a DOT tire change mentioned previously re: suspension/setup issues. Not to say there isn't something to be gained by engineering for the hard compound, but it would be an easy change in comparison.

***Note this one**** I also feel it would be a HUGE MISTAKE to go to a spec compound tire, that is NOT sufficiently hard. Say the Hoosier R45, or the comparable GY. Without going hard enough, is the situation that many lament about 'that a spec tire-that the fast guys will buy new ones every 3 cycles anyway, and still have a big advantage.' In my experience, those with too much money can buy every 3 cycles new w/ R60's, but they won't change their grid position doing it. With a R45 or comparable and softer, that isn't true.

I would bet that Beeler or Duncan on 10 cycle R60's would still beat most of the EWC field that would be on 1-3 cycle fresh R60's.

Cen-Div has had competitive CFF racing for 15 years now+?? with a spec hard compound tire. The CFF car values are helped by this. The car counts are better than other divisions (while yes they could improve-don't get off track on this) The HARD COMPOUND tire rule has had a part in it. HOOSIER has paid $$$$ and tires in that series for a long time, and did a lot to support the EWC initially with both cash and TIRES. That rule stability was good for the class, and the growth of the EWC.

to RECAP
Why HARD COMPOUND SLICKS is the way to go.
-NO re engineering to make them work
-PROVEN success in EWC and CEN-DIV series for years
-The best of all worlds - real slicks, long lasting, and even playing field.

Let's get a handle sometime soon on the crazy crazy tire bills in National FF racing.

And as far as regionals, the current gap is huge, National guy testing w/ fresh tires, vs the budget racer on super soft/used/just about worn out tires he can afford (ie cheap and used from the nat'l guy probably). Too bad for you, if you don't want to change anything, just because you get cheap 1/2 used up tires from your buddy. Look at the big picture. We'd all spend a lot less as a whole, with a hard compound SLICK rule.

Marc Blanc

......clip

In addition, I would add that I think it really would help some of the slightly less competitive cars out there. While lowering the amount of grip available, the chassis becomes less important, and the older cars with good torsional stiffness, but not good enough, can become competitve. Sure everyone benefits from additional stiffness, whizzy shocks, lightweight everything, but the increases in performance would be less.

Some one was quoted saying
"I'll race on rocks if you get me 10 guys to race with."
I would think ALL real racers want that. Sign me up.

Somebody else said
"A crossle 35F could win the Runoffs at Topeka"
put everybody on R60's, and I'd take mine there to see!

Just don't put me on a shaved dot tire, nor on the dunlop treaded, which is way softer than the Hard compound tires.

IF the compound is hard enough, the 'run what you qualify rule' is redundent and unnecessary, but I'd live with it. I bet even the street rubber guys in AZ would agree with that.

Is this a magic bullet to save FF? no, in fact the long held spec tire rule in cen-div regional hasn't stopped the decline in that area. But, it sure would make the class look more attractive from a budget standpoint, make more cars competitive, and create a situation where participation could increase.

[RoadHazard]

Yup, I like it.

Tires are something that don't excite me. They're a necessary evil, and the cheaper they get the happier I am. Unlike some F1 teams, I don't really care about tire compounds or how to improve lap times with arcane rubber alchemy. Like fuel, they're an expensive consumable, not an object of desire.

Since increasing participation is our goal, reducing cost seems like the #1 way to do it, and tires are the obvious first target. To get the "trailer queens" out of the garage, I think lower cost is more compelling than closer competition. Weight adjustments, etc. make racing more competitive but they don't make it any cheaper.

I gotta believe that if all the regions and/or sanctioning bodies could agree on a single tire, the volume of tire purchases would be so great that we'd all benefit. Maybe in exchange for the tire monopoly, we insist on a price ceiling for the term of the agreement. "We'll buy X thousand tires per year but the price can't exceed Y dollars." That kind of thing.

[Michael Rand]

Hard tires, race on what you qualify on, what is the issue there ?

FYI, I screwed up last weekend at Lime Rock National and wound up on 600's all weekend, I set fastest FF time in the 2nd qualifying session, and finished 3rd in the National, in a 30+ year old Crossle 30F, on Bilsteins, at 1106 post race weight. I had intended to run 175's, though I suspect they would have given upon me half way through.
Then later that afternoon I ran as a NCF and was 2nd OA and 1st NCF in the special Regional Open Wheel Challenge. Led some but ultimately Greg Morins aero advantage won out
And this set of now 5 heat cycle old 600's will likely see me through the season, that is a 2 day at LRP, a double Regional at the Glen, and the NARRC Runoffs in October.

How many heat cycles does a SM get out of a set of whatever they run ?
Or a SRF ?

Do I love a frsh set of stickies ? You bet.
Is there a tickle in the back of my head when turning into the Uphill at LRP essentially flat on a new set ? Yes again.
Do I enjoy paying the same amount of money for a set of tires that lasts 3-4 heat cycles and set that is good for 12+ ? No, not at all.

Am I a dinosauer past his sell by date ? Most likely.

I would LOVE to go toa spec treaded tire, if not across the board at least for CF in Regionals.

[EYERACE]

VIR earlier this year had an event wherein SARRC CF cars raced on their spec tire and northern CF cars raced on their different spec tire. The ARRC recognizes all CF spec tires for their race. So is a nationwide spec CF tire really necessary?

I do not want to see a spec tire in National FF......regionals is debatable.

[Jonathan Hirst]

Just don't put me on a shaved dot tire, nor on the dunlop treaded, which is way softer than the Hard compound tires.

Not sure how to compare the two but the Ontario series uses the "hard" compound Dunlop treaded tires versus the soft compound of the same.

I am using (successfully I think) Dunlops from the 2000 season! It is certainly reasonable to get a season or more out of a set..

No need to buy rains either.

Having said that, I don't think that the "US racer" will ever walk away from the slick on a National level. It has been a fixture on US FFords since very early in the game and my personal feeling is that the cars would be parked and the class would die before a DOT tire is accepted en masse. It is too large a cultural shift for the class. A hard slick is much a more likely compromise.


Jonathan

[thunderracing91]

Why not run a hoosier 35 and whatever goodyears equivelent is? (160??) I dont think either of those tires are soft tires by any means but soft enough to get some decent laps times. Then if we pick just one manufacturer everybody will have to buy from them and possibly the cost of each set will go down?? or go up?

Andrew

[TimW]

Why not run a hoosier 35 and whatever goodyears equivelent is? (160??) I dont think either of those tires are soft tires by any means but soft enough to get some decent laps times. Then if we pick just one manufacturer everybody will have to buy from them and possibly the cost of each set will go down?? or go up?

Andrew

Most national guys are running 160s now. I have not seen 125s on the grid this year in my short national career.

I do support a common tire across the grid. There are only 3 major factors in defining the car performance, the power, the tires & the driver. Eveything else is the significantly smaller in impacting performance (they do, but they are small, and you have to get a lot of them right to add up to a big advantage if the first 3 are equal). The engines are equizlized (enough) now. The drivers should never be. That leaves the tires.

The pro mazda guys run on a Goodyear 430 combound. I personally think that running rock hard will turn a FF to a SpecMiata. The goodyear 250 or even the 175 is a pretty durable tire. Lilely the 430 is as well but have no data.. I don't need to use one set of tires all season; but I would like to only need one set overy 3-4 weekends instead of every 1-2. Most every other major open wheel series is on a spec tire (IRL, CART-2 compounds, but available to all, ProM, F2000, etc). I don't understand why we as drivers who pay our own bills are against when those that drive cars and don't pay their bills live very happliy with it.

[Joe911]

Most national guys are running 160s now.

I do support a common tire across the grid.

I personally think that running rock hard will turn a FF to a SpecMiata.

I don't need to use one set of tires all season; but I would like to only need one set overy 3-4 weekends instead of every 1-2.

Tim - so you support a common tire compound or hardness, right?

I find that most everyone that I race with is using the same tires already - like you stated above. The brand seems to depend on which tire company supports your area best. It is almost like we have a spec tire now - we just need to agree on how long we want it to last. CF hard or somewhere in the middle.

PS - I think the Goodyear equivalent of R35s are the 240s??? am I right?? The national guys use R25 Hoosier so this would be like the 160s. I used 2 sets of new R35s and the drop off started at about 8 heat cycles. To support this, I was faster the same day on a 6 cycle set than the 2 cycle set.

[TimW]

Tim - so you support a common tire compound or hardness, right?

I find that most everyone that I race with is using the same tires already - like you stated above. The brand seems to depend on which tire company supports your area best. It is almost we have a spec tire now - we just seems like we need to agree on how long we want it to last. CF hard or somewhere in the middle.

Just because everyone is using the same tire does not mean its a spec tire...everyone has settled ont he 160/R25 because thats where the escalation has settled . People would probably run a GY125 if they could live on our cars to gain an advantage. Additionally, no one is running GY250s because they'd be disadvantaged. You are right, we need to choose a tire that has a durability that we are all comfortable with and better then what is the current norm in order to significatnly reduce tire bills.

Tim

[Eric Cruz]

Well, I'm not sure how applicable the SRF tire analogy is to this issue. They are treaded DOT tires, and there is bodywork to contend with, as mentioned. I race an FSCCA (another one of those disdainful spec cars) and of course we have spec tires. Hoosier R45As. All I have to do is call the Hoosier dealer (Appalachian tire) and wherever I race from Mid-Ohio to Sebring, they have my tires there. Never been a shortage - in fact much more likely to have your tires on the truck even if you didn't reserve any, since lots of people are using the same ones. And Mark's speculation about reduced pricing is verfiable fact. A tire contract (I suppose it could be negotiated by the club, nationally, in the interest of its members) will reduce the price per set significantly. It's called economics. Our tires are over $200 less than a comparable non-contracted set. Ask John Gaither how he likes buying little tires tires for his Zink Z-16 for more money than the tires he used to buy for his FSCCA.

I DON'T buy new tires every weekend, and I'm still competitive. Imagine that.

Similar versions of this idea have been discussed ad infinitum on this forum. Three years of experience with spec slicks (and writing the smallest checks ever for a set) have made me a believer. I cannot see any valid reason to oppose it, at this level of amateur racing that we are all theoretically racing at, other than to be able to buy that advantage, however slight. Some folks are just afraid to give that up, I guess. And as Mark points out, there are already spec tires in FF1600 - several of them, depending on which region you wish to run as a CF. At least get together and reduce that to one - as Eye points out, it's doable, since at specific races more than one is accepted....


Best regards,
Eric

[Michael Rand]

Trust me Tim W, rock hard tires does not in any way turn FF into Spec anything.
Here in NEDIV us CF'ers have been on Goodyear 600's for years.
Read my earlier post, I just finished 3rd in a National in a Crossle 30F [vintage 1975] on 600's. Yes, itwas a hot day.
600's force the driver to really drive the car to get tire temp, and once he/she does they work great.
And if everyone is on them, the playing field stays level. Good competition.

[EYERACE]

i tried a set of FF GY250's recently - nice tires i thought ..........but remember > like eye know anything

[M.L.Sauce]

I can live with a hard slick as long as there are at least 2 different brands to choose from.Hard tires last longer but you will slip the car alot more than with the soft ones.Some tracks will wear anything out but hard tires will save us money with our tire budgets.Lets go for it.

[James Hakewill]

Please please please can we have a tire rule..

Here is the UK FF1600 tire rule.. ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you to the Avon ACB10.. it's what the UK and Australia uses for Formula Ford, it's a crossply race tire, loves you long time (they don't go away after 3 cycles), fits on 5.5" rims, and you can buy it here.

http://www.rogerkrausracing.com/AVACB10.html

Having raced in the UK, I simply do not see why an 'entry-level' formula requires spending $800 a weekend on GY175s to be competitive rather than buying tyres maybe twice a season.

Having reduced tire costs may well reduce the country-club membership fee and let in the riff-raff, but the point is to reduce costs to increase participation.. and in my case, to reduce costs. Yes, I'd like to spend less money on tires. Did I mention that I'd like to spend less money on tires?

James


[SIZE=2]

TYRES

[/SIZE][SIZE=2]

[/SIZE][FONT=PFIPAA+Arial,Arial][SIZE=2]

The only approved tyres (subject to a three year contract following competitive tendering) for Formula Ford cars are:-

Size Specification
Front Tyre 6.0/21.0-13 - #7317
Rear Tyre 7.0/22.0-13 - #7319
As per normal the specification number will be moulded on one sidewall of the tyre. In addition each tyre will have a unique number moulded into the same sidewall as the specification number prefixed by an 'A' for tyres sold in the UK and an "X" for tyres outside the UK (i.e. Europe)
No mechanical (other than rubber removal normal wear), heat or chemical treatments permitted to the "as sold" tyres (See sporting regulations 1.11.1)

[/SIZE][/FONT]

[Michael Rand]

Hey Mike, here in NARRC we have a choice of pretty equal hard tires, Goodyear 600 or Hoosier 65. Some swear by one, some the other. Gearing is the same, setup virtually identical, so the choice already exists.
What a happy coincidence....

[jgaither]

"Ask John Gaither how he likes buying little tires tires for his Zink Z-16 for more money than the tires he used to buy for his FSCCA." Eric Cruz

I had an FSCCA for a brief fling before I decided to get self-employed again. Oh, the sacrifices we make. So, I bought this old Zink. Having fun. Eric is right. There's a lot more rubber on those FSCCA R45's than on these CF R60's! The best bargain in tires I've had since returning to racing in '04. I do like the wear so far on the FF R60's & I'm still getting used to the way they give up & then take hold again. But the cost is higher for these skinny little things, so the contract with SCCA Enterprises is the only logical reason for the difference. If you go to a race and expect to have CF tires there, you better reserve them in advance. Not a problem for the FSCCA guys as I can see.

JG

[thunderracing91]

Hey Mike, here in NARRC we have a choice of pretty equal hard tires, Goodyear 600 or Hoosier 65. Some swear by one, some the other. Gearing is the same, setup virtually identical, so the choice already exists.
What a happy coincidence....

This is exactly what I am talking about. Whats so hard about that? Maybe we can run a little softer tire than a 600 or R65......................

Andrew

[Allan Davies]

I can live with a hard slick as long as there are at least 2 different brands to choose from.Hard tires last longer but you will slip the car alot more than with the soft ones.Some tracks will wear anything out but hard tires will save us money with our tire budgets.Lets go for it.

Hey Mike, here in NARRC we have a choice of pretty equal hard tires, Goodyear 600 or Hoosier 65. Some swear by one, some the other. Gearing is the same, setup virtually identical, so the choice already exists.
What a happy coincidence....

I think this is the solution...a choice of hard compound slicks. What can I do to support this and make it happen?

[race95]

For the 2 seasons I have watched this site the hard tire/spec tire/DOT tire conversation/debate has been going on. At what point in the process does conversation turn to action among the powers that be?? I mean does there have to be additional planetary alignment for some rule to be written, or what. Really, I have no clue as to the process!! I see NO WAY a hard tire can hurt the participation level, hell some that haven’t raced recently will buy a set and show up just to see if they are any faster now than they were the last time they got kicked. Could someone briefly explain the process.

Lets get a hard Hoooooooosier and a brick GY and go slide around. I bet it will be a lot more fun than most realize.

[Sean Maisey]

Time is pretty short for making the change for 2007 (if it is not already too late).

This sounds like a great idea to invogorate the class and get some cars out of garages.

I would suggest that we all try to agree here on a specific set of rules, and then all send in the same letter requesting the Comp Board adopt them. To get the ball rolling...

FF TIRE RULE:

FF Tires are restricted.
Only tires on the approved list can be used in SCCA competition.
Approved tires are: (include a list of sizes, model numbers and compounds)
Tires can not be 'soaked' or chemically treated.
The same set of tires used for qualifying must also be used for the race.
Rain tires are open for 2007, but must only be used in designated 'wet' sessions.
Identify something like the AZ DOT Dunlops to replace rains for 2008 on ???...

Shoot, we get this done, I might go FF racing again.

Sean

[racer27]

I think it makes sense for all in the "Yes Hard Spec Slick Camp" to agree on details, draft a single letter and send thru to the proper people in the club to start the process for consideration. Let those not in favor do the same. End the end, this is a member run and supported club, and those who organize, build support and state thier case via proper mechanism should prevail. Regardless of if it for or against.

Im in favor of a hard compound slick (R60, GY600, American Racer, similar Avon, Hannook, ETC). Someone smarter then me and wiht more experiance can desiganite the model & compound.

Last season Hoosier R-60's and ARS Slicks were both run in RCCA as spec tires, wiht hte race results not showing a advantage of one over the other. We personally found the Hoosiers lasted a little longer, but then the price of the ARS was lower (I think less then $500 for set), so it balanced out.

[Ralph Z.]

I would be in support of a hard spec slick for regional racing.

Getting it done in Topeka is the key. The FC guys had success in getting Topeka to accept the Zetec motor. I know that there was a team of individuals including Mark Defer who headed up the lobbying and were successful. I suggest that we interview someone from their team and follow their model. It will likely take more than one letter or even a basket full of letters to get this done.

Let's be smart about the approach. We may not have a second chance if we foul up the first attempt.

"Ready, Aim, Fire" NOT "Ready, Fire, Aim"!

Ralph

[John Robinson II]

I would think a signed petition sent to both the CRB and FSRAC would be a step in the right direction. But I believe it might be to late to get it done for '07. I think it could still be done on a regional level, but it might also be to late for that, as we already have new SARRC rules here in the SE.

John

FWIW, the signed petition worked pretty well to get the club to act on the finance issue.

[LJennings]

Why not go for the Avon ACB10 as in europe?

[Joe911]

My opinion is that we must go with a compromise on this tire issue to get it to fly. Although the DOT type tires ARE the most cost effective, racers used to sticky tires are not likely to be happy going this far. A harder slick seems to be where the most agreement exists.

[Scotty]

Although the DOT type tires ARE the most cost effective, racers used to sticky tires are not likely to be happy going this far.

When they look at their tire bill, at the end of a season, I bet there wouldn't be that many complaints.
Besides, all of our group came from racing on slicks, prior to running DOT.

Big difference is that we just went out and did it.

[Joe911]

Scotty - you are probably right..... but change is hard because it is unknown.

[Scotty]

but change is hard because it is unknown.

"How can you venture out to sea, if you're afraid to lose sight of the shore?"

(don't know why that little quote came to mind)

[Charles Warner]

I have a question regarding the mandated use of hard slicks.

What is the difference in traction levels comparing a new slick to one with several heat cycles/sessions? I assume we are still dealing with the fact that a new slick (regardless of compound) will give a performance advatage over one with several sessions on it. No?

So, what is to stop a zealous competitor from showing up at every race with a new set of hard slicks?

[Joe911]

Mr. Rand and Robinson, having won races on both and sticky and harder tires, will hopefully give us a some perspective on this.

I think we all know that the harder tires degrade slower so "less" performance is lost over time. My question is how less competitive would the harder tires be on a third, fourth, and fifth heat cycle? If a good driver can win on two weekend old tires, even the big budget guys will save money. Certainly someone like me will benefit if less performance is lost when I use them for 3 or 4 weekends.

[Charles Warner]

Mr. Rand and Robinson, having won races on both and sticky and harder tires, will hopefully give us a some perspective on this.

I think we all know that the harder tires degrade slower so "less" performance is lost over time. My question is how less competitive would the harder tires be on a third, fourth, and fifth heat cycle? If a good driver can win on two weekend old tires, even the big budget guys will save money. Certainly someone like me will benefit if less performance is lost when I use them for 3 or 4 weekends.

Joe,

I accept that as an argument. However, there will always be someone with pockets so deep, and a fire-in-the-belly to win so strong, that he will pony up the dough to get new tires every weekend and get whatever (perceived) advantage he can.

Bottom line is the bottom line. You can try to contain costs in any number of areas but someone with the money will always find somewhere to spend that money to go the fastest. Tires, shocks, coaches, gearboxes, engine rebuilds, whatever. Unless you go to a true spec class you simply are skewing the expenditures, not limiting them.

[Purple Frog]

Club Ford in the SARRC series has mandated hard tires for a while. When John Robinson won that championship a few years back (before winning the Runoffs), my memory is he did it on fresh rubber for every competitive event.

[Joe911]

You can try to contain costs in any number of areas but someone with the money will always find somewhere to spend that money to go the fastest. Tires, shocks, coaches, gearboxes, engine rebuilds, whatever. Unless you go to a true spec class you simply are skewing the expenditures, not limiting them.

Charlie, you are right - but is this a reason not to support a cost saving and grid tightening change? If someone wants to out spend me for another 2.0 second a lap, OK by me. But most will not. My argument is that we should worry more about the slower 90% of the class. This is where the new or inactive racer well be found.

We have no shortage of winners but too many races with no one in 4,5,6,7,8 etc.

[John LaRue]

Contributing Member

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/image.php?u=822&dateline=1102889814

Join Date: June 25th, 2001
Location: Bath, OH
Posts: 1,180



Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Maxwell
I think John LaRue is right. When it comes to racing on a budget I'm pretty well versed. Yes tires are the biggest cost, by far, but even with a spec hard tire or even DOT's the well funded teams will always be on new rubber every event. And the rest of us will be on thier old rubber. The bottom line is that new tires are ALL a couple of tenths faster. If a well funded driver can gain a couple of tenths they will spend the money and we'll be back to the same game.

Quote: Dave W

Another thing to consider is that (usually) the harder the tire, the more benefit to running new ones. Some soft compounds maintain their grip until the tread is worn off. That does not often apply to hard tires.

My experience mirrors Dave's.

Are traction treatments/compounds going to be permitted?

[Andy Antipas]

As Joe said, the propsed changes are not for the front of the grid. We are trying to rebuild the class, get car numbers up, and reduce costs for the average club racer. We are trying to encourage new drivers to give FF a try. It is hard to imagine that a hard compound tire rule will reduce entries? I would agree that people will find other ways to spend their money. I say let them!

If people can afford to put new hard compound slicks on every race or weekend.....
If they want to have a fresh engine every weekend.....
If they want a shock dyno in the trailer and four way adustables.....
If they can afford a spare car in the trailer......
If they have a coach and masage therapist in the RV........
If (fill in the blank)...........

Good for them! Spend away. FF is supposed to be a drivers class. Some people will reap the reward of their spending and some will not. Some on a more limited budget might surprise themselves and their competitors. That has always been the magic of formula Ford.

I don't think formula ford becomes a spec class if the hard compound rule is approved. The rest of the world uses control tires in formula ford. Even vintage and club formula ford uses control tires.
What is being proposed is a choice of hard compound tire brands, and it is a step in the right direction.

Andy Antipas