scca stock class becoming street class!
)
05-01-2013, 11:27 AM
#47
That's part of the thing - SCCA has to balance the desires of the top level diehard National competitors while keeping things accessible and understandable for the casual local guy.
At the top level there's still going to be street class cars showing up on trailers with three sets of tires, shocks that cost more than the car, and alignments that could not be used on the highway. You can't stop that.
However, I agree, the cost and hassle of R-comps was a pretty serious barrier to many. Of course, now you have to buy the hottest street tire, but at least they're cheaper and last longer - for now.
At the top level there's still going to be street class cars showing up on trailers with three sets of tires, shocks that cost more than the car, and alignments that could not be used on the highway. You can't stop that.
However, I agree, the cost and hassle of R-comps was a pretty serious barrier to many. Of course, now you have to buy the hottest street tire, but at least they're cheaper and last longer - for now.
05-01-2013, 11:33 AM
#48
Burning Brakes
That's fine, I would expect that at the national level. At the "I'm just getting started" level its not a great thing. I already run the hottest street tire I can during the summer and have for years. It is a lot cheaper than R-comps, I get 2 summers out of a set of tires right now. I can work with that. It also allows me to invest in things that improve my car even in its DD role, as I can spend some money on things like camber plates and a portable camber gauge instead of having to blow huge money on a rapidly consumed tire and the logistics to support its use.
The problem is many regions don't even though they can and it is still perceived to be a barrier to get those locals to do national events. The SEB is trying to mandate it. I have seen local of vocal complaints from a few that say everyone doesn't want this that is serious about national competition, but the letters from national competitors agreeing with street tires far outweigh those that do not except for Super Stock class.
05-01-2013, 12:08 PM
#49
Time will tell, but I think "street" will overall be much more positive than negative for the sport. Well, at least until road tires go through the same evolution that DOT tires did and we're back in the same boat again.
I'm more interested to see the inevitable shakeup of ST, SP, and SM. You just know that trainwreck is coming.
I'm more interested to see the inevitable shakeup of ST, SP, and SM. You just know that trainwreck is coming.
05-01-2013, 12:19 PM
#50
Burning Brakes
I think street tires will do that, putting a smaller immediate gap between showroom stock and nationally prepared cars. The rest of the mods are questionable and most I really dislike personally. The tire diameter is something that needs to be addressed but how is a good question. if you just let the sub 15 and super 18 sizes switch, you still leave popular cars out to dry in terms of tire options but then you put them in a situation to buy in custom wheels. The rest of the new proposal I think don't belong in the entry level class, while they benefit cars, its another separation of showroom stock to bizarre SCCA only specific modifications.
05-02-2013, 06:55 AM
#51
Drifting
+/-1" tires is due to the limited availability of top tires. It makes little sense to design rules around the Rival and ZII since they'll be 2nd tier tires within a few years. Since width must be the same, competitive advantage is minimized. ST and SP are allowed to run multiple widths and don't have issues with infinite testing costs or people showing up with different wheels for different courses so it probably won't end up to be nearly as negative as many people seem to fear.
Street tire classes are a half-assed solution, though. The pax classes aren't designed for street tires and the street tire pax is not very accurate- Rick Ruth calculated it, but immediately recommended against using it because he knew it was so disparate, and 2/3 of regions pax street tire competitors as if they're on r-comps, burying them 2 seconds down from their peers. If it's not a national class, it fails to attract any top drivers and ends up being a class of also-rans. SEB reported their letters after the proposal were 8:1 in favor of street tires in street class. The V2 proposal reflected the rest of the feedback.
The regions have always been free to do this. My region has been supporting this since 2006.
The problem is many regions don't even though they can and it is still perceived to be a barrier to get those locals to do national events. The SEB is trying to mandate it. I have seen local of vocal complaints from a few that say everyone doesn't want this that is serious about national competition, but the letters from national competitors agreeing with street tires far outweigh those that do not except for Super Stock class.
The problem is many regions don't even though they can and it is still perceived to be a barrier to get those locals to do national events. The SEB is trying to mandate it. I have seen local of vocal complaints from a few that say everyone doesn't want this that is serious about national competition, but the letters from national competitors agreeing with street tires far outweigh those that do not except for Super Stock class.
05-02-2013, 10:06 AM
#52
Burning Brakes
Where did you see Rick saying not to use .975? I've paid very close attention to this and never see him state that.
I think you are spouting a lot of things you've read on the sandbox and other places and not all of it is accurate. I know because I get to see the real letters vs what people say on the forums and what quantity of letters said what versus what was in V2...
I think you are spouting a lot of things you've read on the sandbox and other places and not all of it is accurate. I know because I get to see the real letters vs what people say on the forums and what quantity of letters said what versus what was in V2...
05-02-2013, 09:53 PM
#53
Drifting
Where did you see Rick saying not to use .975? I've paid very close attention to this and never see him state that.
I think you are spouting a lot of things you've read on the sandbox and other places and not all of it is accurate. I know because I get to see the real letters vs what people say on the forums and what quantity of letters said what versus what was in V2...
I think you are spouting a lot of things you've read on the sandbox and other places and not all of it is accurate. I know because I get to see the real letters vs what people say on the forums and what quantity of letters said what versus what was in V2...
05-02-2013, 10:03 PM
#55
Drifting
Still looking for that thread. Found a post he made (2010) when we were discussing adopting a 0.975 street tire pax for our region:
Originally Posted by Rick Ruth
Also, for the record, I am not personally in favor of the Street Tire Multiplier. There are several Regions that are using an equalizer. I was asked, several years ago, to come up with a factor that was more meaningful than the ".980" that most Regions seemed to use. After checking about 1200 sets of results, over three years, I came up with the .975 factor as being more meaningful. It is offered up for those Regions who insist on using a Street Tire Multiplier. I have to say, I think the notion is, basically, flawed because Street Tires affect different classes, differently. Whereas cars running on "R" compound tires can be compared fairly (the regular PAX/RTP system), because the classes are built with "R" compounds in mind. When you aapply street tires to those same cars, the classes performance levels, compared to one another, change.
H's & K's,
Rick Ruth
H's & K's,
Rick Ruth
06-04-2013, 06:55 PM
#60
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fully disclosure - I haven't auto-crossed on a regular basis in a few years, only 1 or 2 last last 3 or 4 years... I previously raced a SP civic, shifter cart, stock Miata and stock Integra, so a varied experience.
I'm not sure I understand why there are discussions about a STOCK class allowing NON-STOCK shocks, wheel sizes/weights, sway bars, ecu tune?, camber plates, etc... I can fully understand wanting to maximize a cars performance using these parts, but fundamentally that car is no longer STOCK. Heck, even R-comps shouldn't be in stock. Shouldn't there simply be stock, limited prep, normal prep and full prep? maybe a split of limited prep for street / r-comp tires? I just think this is kinda nuts, and I have NO skin in the game.
I currently don't want to modify my car (2012 991 CS mt), and knowing I'd get my butt handed to me in a stock class, buy a guy who trailered his purpose built 991 with custom dimensioned light wheels, auto-x specific tires, crazy (-) camber, custom or Cup derived sway bars and custom shocks - again in a stock class - I wouldn't even show up.... Over time this seems to have moved further and further from reality.
I'm not sure I understand why there are discussions about a STOCK class allowing NON-STOCK shocks, wheel sizes/weights, sway bars, ecu tune?, camber plates, etc... I can fully understand wanting to maximize a cars performance using these parts, but fundamentally that car is no longer STOCK. Heck, even R-comps shouldn't be in stock. Shouldn't there simply be stock, limited prep, normal prep and full prep? maybe a split of limited prep for street / r-comp tires? I just think this is kinda nuts, and I have NO skin in the game.
I currently don't want to modify my car (2012 991 CS mt), and knowing I'd get my butt handed to me in a stock class, buy a guy who trailered his purpose built 991 with custom dimensioned light wheels, auto-x specific tires, crazy (-) camber, custom or Cup derived sway bars and custom shocks - again in a stock class - I wouldn't even show up.... Over time this seems to have moved further and further from reality.