211 replies to this topic

[Steve Scheifler]

 

Almost every post I have read in the last day has been two people going back and forth at each other. Can we try to something more productive? When I read the first post that listed the goals as shown below they seemed worth while and understandable.

 

Steve - You did not feel the same way. Are there other goals we should be trying to achieve? What clarification are you looking for?...

 

I don't know where you get the impression that I don't agree with the goals as stated?  They are certainly appropriate so far as they go.  I was simply hoping for more details if in fact they exist, and then depending on the answers to explore the flat statement about tire size, which I also suspect to be true but would like facts or at least more thoughts to back it up, because that’s how things should work.

So rather than a longer multiple-part question for once I started with a very simple one merely to confirm that in fact the initial post included ALL of the goals as defined by the SMAC.  I've been here a very long time.  When I don't fully explain myself my words are misunderstood or twisted, when I try to avoid that by explaining myself clearly the first time I am said to be loquacious, and still misunderstood or misquoted.  And now when I ask the very simplest of questions in the most innocuous way, I am negative and argumentative and the topic is locked.  What am I to think?  I attempted to continue the discussion and re-ask my question last night and the entire topic was deleted. Now I know exactly what to think.

[Martinracing98]

I don't know where you get the impression that I don't agree with the goals as stated?

 

Steve, I apologize. I am an engineer. We are not known to be very good at communicating. I did not mean you disagreed with the goals. I meant that to me the goals seemed fairly well identified and complete. You seem to feel more information on the goals was desired.  

[Steve Scheifler]

More like I wanted to confirm them first before following up with a question asking exactly which of those were inconsistent with a narrower tire, why, and how do we know that for certain. As you can see from this old poll, and this wasn’t the first time it came up, it has been discussed before, and given how many people have shown interest and indicated an opinion, it seems very reasonable to pursue those questions politely without fear of dismissal, belittlement, derision, or banishment. Unfortunately that expectation has not been met by the very person most responsible for seeing that it is. For me it adds to a growing lack of confidence.

[Steve Scheifler]

Since I am so often misunderstood, I should be absolutely clear about at least one thing, my issues are not with this site or its owner.  Jim and I often disagree but always respectfully.  My concerns lie only with the Chairman of the SMAC. 

[Bench Racer]

WOW, it truley is the mean season. First somone's busting Shaikh's balls and now someone believes Todd in line for some bashing. Not nice way to play folks, Shaikh of FatCat eliminated a serious issue Spec Miata had of blowing out the bump stop steel washers and the SMAC has been pretty open with all info which is ready or may be released. 

[Steve Scheifler]

Since my separate topic for discussing the 2019 tire contract was deleted entirely and this one is still getting activity, I'll just repeat my questions here.

 

It has been stated that a narrower tread is not consistent with the goals for a possible replacement SM tire. Some of us have already noted that it does seem like a narrower tire might indeed reduce overall grip but possibly at the expense of faster wear and more heat.  Many people feel that the current tire cycles out before the rubber is gone anyway so slightly faster wear isn't necessarily an issue.  Someone always running them to the cord regardless of heat cycles may feel differently.  If narrower tread results in higher typical temps then it may be that they cycle out even faster than the current ones (depending on construction and compound of course).  The one thing I do know, is that most of us don't know.  And that is exactly why I tried to confirm that the three simple goals in the SMAC topic (the first bullet is not a goal) were in fact the only goals being used for identifying a new tire, and if so then exactly which ones are missed by a tire which among other things is narrower?

 

I'd still like answers to those questions, with data or at least something like expert knowledge to support the answers.  If the possibility has already been flatly dismissed then we can assume that it won't even be part of actual testing. Without a better reason that should concern us.

 

One of our biggest expenses is tires and once decided we have ZERO options or ability to negotiate anything.  Shouldn't we at least be able to ask basic questions like this and expect to get an answer rather than sarcasm or silence?

[Johnny D]

Since my separate topic for discussing the 2019 tire contract was deleted entirely and this one is still getting activity, I'll just repeat my questions here.

 

It has been stated that a narrower tread is not consistent with the goals for a possible replacement SM tire. Some of us have already noted that it does seem like a narrower tire might indeed reduce overall grip but possibly at the expense of faster wear and more heat.  Many people feel that the current tire cycles out before the rubber is gone anyway so slightly faster wear isn't necessarily an issue.  Someone always running them to the cord regardless of heat cycles may feel differently.  If narrower tread results in higher typical temps then it may be that they cycle out even faster than the current ones (depending on construction and compound of course).  The one thing I do know, is that most of us don't know.  And that is exactly why I tried to confirm that the three simple goals in the SMAC topic (the first bullet is not a goal) were in fact the only goals being used for identifying a new tire, and if so then exactly which ones are missed by a tire which among other things is narrower?

 

I'd still like answers to those questions, with data or at least something like expert knowledge to support the answers.  If the possibility has already been flatly dismissed then we can assume that it won't even be part of actual testing. Without a better reason that should concern us.

 

One of our biggest expenses is tires and once decided we have ZERO options or ability to negotiate anything.  Shouldn't we at least be able to ask basic questions like this and expect to get an answer rather than sarcasm or silence?

 

I'm assuming we're sticking with the mold we have, thus same size. An added cost. I guess be grateful they're giving us samples.

 

After review, it appears that both Hoosier and Toyo sidewall to sidewall are the same but only the tread width is different.

 

Any increase in Contingencies ?

 

And since most are happy with the track support, you're not looking for another MFG.

 

You can always ask, not sure you'll get a answer.

 

How exciting though not knowing what the future will bring.   But you'll really not know much anyway until you get on track and test them, so...

They're black and round and you'll need 4 to start with.

 

J~

[Duane Polsley]

The #1 goal should be keeping the cost for the average Joe racer at the minimum. One less set of tires purchased equals more $$ for entry fees.  my .02

[Steve Scheifler]

But it isn’t that simple. Does your average Joe care how competitive the tires remain through the life of the “tread”? Surely the answer is yes, but within what limits? That’s the key to most of it.

[Johnny D]

I hope you guys did see Jim's interview at Sebring. Could be upsetting for some.

 

J~

[Steve Scheifler]

I assume you mean about being surprised that the Toyos were still good (or even better?) after multiple heat cycles? I’m sure he was just sucking up to the sponsor. Right Jim?

[Tom Sager]

My guess is that the SM7 business for Hoosier is less than $1 million a year and less than 6000 tires a year.  That's pretty small in the grand scheme so there are limits to the time and $ that can be invested in a new product unless whatever is developed can be utilized for other racing classes and markets but even with that it's a small piece of business.  Rain tires a much smaller number than that.  There probably isn't anyone active on this forum that is a tire engineer so we have to trust that the tire suppliers and club leadership will come up with something that is better than what we have and what we have now in SCCA is pretty good but with some room for improvement. 

 

Hoosier's product development folks can probably quickly surmise what changes to the existing tire will yield the results we're looking for and they have construction and compound options on the shelf so to speak so that R&D time and cost will be reasonable given the size of the market. 

 

What I think would please the SCCA SM class overall would be published updates in Fastrack along the way that include testing and other info that supports whatever becomes the  conclusion. 

 

Hoosier's great support has in my mind earned them the right to have the last look at the deal but I do think other existing tires from other brands beyond Hoosier and Toyo should be considered and tested.  RA-1 was a great tire for the class IMO and they still make the darned thing and it seems like the RR is popular in NASA.  Maybe Continental should buy Toyo and then we get SCCA and NASA all on the same tire. 

[Jim Drago]

I assume you mean about being surprised that the Toyos were still good (or even better?) after multiple heat cycles? I’m sure he was just sucking up to the sponsor. Right Jim?

 

I was surprised how good the RR was. It was consistent. It seemed and I dont have nearly enough time on them to make this statement... But I felt the newer tires had more grip but fell off more near the end of a session.. The older tires took a few laps to come in but stayed very consistent once they came in. I didnt see much difference in any of the tires I tried.. 

[FTodaro]

I was surprised how good the RR was. It was consistent. It seemed and I dont have nearly enough time on them to make this statement... But I felt the newer tires had more grip but fell off more near the end of a session.. The older tires took a few laps to come in but stayed very consistent once they came in. I didnt see much difference in any of the tires I tried.. 

In my experience the fastest combo with that tire is starting out shaved and they do drop off but they hold that level longer than a Hoosier, but that is just my opinion.

 

I think the solution for the SM7 is just as simple as a harder compound. less grip longer life. you can keep the size the same if that saves them money.

[38bfast]

The Hoosier guys I am sure rolling their eyes at "Just as simple as a harder compound" 

 

Frank I don't think tire compounds are just as simple as. I am sure they are capable of formulating a new compound and coming up with a test to validate it.

 

But I am sure you would also like a tire that does not need to be shaved to make it fast.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

The Hoosier guys I am sure rolling their eyes at "Just as simple as a harder compound"



Frank I don't think tire compounds are just as simple as. I am sure they are capable of formulating a new compound and coming up with a test to validate it.

But I am sure you would also like a tire that does not need to be shaved to make it fast.

Haveing a tire that shaving makes it slower should be the goal, that is what we have currently and it is very nice!

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Also continuing the tire contingencies at the regional level I believe is important, drivers should not be forced to race majors or super tour to have the ability to earn tire contingencies! Regional racers are very important to our class and the continued health of our class.

[Danica Davison]

Also continuing the tire contingencies at the regional level I believe is important, drivers should not be forced to race majors or super tour to have the ability to earn tire contingencies! Regional racers are very important to our class and the continued health of our class.

 

This! ^^^ +1

[Johnny D]

Get them hooked early.

 

Change the bottom words on this pic to Hoosier Bucks. 

 

http://mazdaracers.c.../1505-img-4297/

[Todd Green]

Also continuing the tire contingencies at the regional level I believe is important, drivers should not be forced to race majors or super tour to have the ability to earn tire contingencies! Regional racers are very important to our class and the continued health of our class.

 

To take this one step further, I'd like to see Hoosier go to a Toyo-esque payout scale.  Even though it'd hurt me, I don't think it is healthy for regional racing to give the top one or two people, who are already dominating, free tires for the season.  (Speaking for contingency across all classes, not just SM.)