GTC spec tire change?
08-08-2013, 08:18 PM
#3
Drifting
I'm new to GTC-3 and in full support of run what you want. If there must be a spec tire, let's use the one with the best overall performance factoring in cost. Not sure how you meet all of these objectives but the Pirelli's mentioned may be an option. Curious what the experienced Cup Guys have to say.
08-08-2013, 10:55 PM
#6
Rennlist Member
tires should be free
08-08-2013, 11:11 PM
#7
Rennlist Member
Glad to see them asking for feedback, but it seems that they are stuck on this spec tire idea.
Lets take a step back to address the arguments that were used for this program:
1. We need to increase attendance at smaller races, a national "cup" championship will do this.
I would agree with the goal, but this program has not changed behavior in any material way. Lets look at GTC3/4/5 attendance at the smaller venues...
MPH: 2 cars in 2011, 5 cars in 2012, 2 cars in 2013
Brainerd: 6 cars in 2011, 6 cars in 2012, 4 cars in 2013
Gingerman: 2 cars in 2011, 1 car in 2012, 3 cars in 2013
Roebling: 6 cars in 2011, 2 cars in 2012, 2 cars in 2013
CMP: 5 cars in 2011, 6 cars in 2012
HPR: 7 cars in 2011, 7 cars in 2012
2. We need to bring in a new level of competition and visibility to PCA Cup racing.
The first few races last year they were doing video interviews with the cup winners, but I think they figured out that it was a waste of time and money, we're amateurs and we know it.
3. We need tighter scrutineering, the sponsorship money will give us the opportunity to do that.
We still have plenty of cheater cars out there. They announced last year they were pulling data from all the cars, only to find out the new equipment they bought doesn't work with all the cups. Some cars have gotten a bore test which is great, but does this equipment cost equal the increase in tire costs?
If you look at the price increases from JMG, we are paying an additional $300-500 per set for this spec tire program (not including the out of state sales tax, b/c of their weak accountant). Lets be very generous and say the avg cup racer uses 1.5 sets per weekend. By my count we had 160 cup racers YTD in 2013, so that's roughly $72k-120k in additional costs we've had to bear ytd. Michelin/JMG aren't stupid, they know that they are recouping their sponsorship $ and then some. It's just a shell game that we are paying for in the long run, I vote no spec tire.
Lets take a step back to address the arguments that were used for this program:
1. We need to increase attendance at smaller races, a national "cup" championship will do this.
I would agree with the goal, but this program has not changed behavior in any material way. Lets look at GTC3/4/5 attendance at the smaller venues...
MPH: 2 cars in 2011, 5 cars in 2012, 2 cars in 2013
Brainerd: 6 cars in 2011, 6 cars in 2012, 4 cars in 2013
Gingerman: 2 cars in 2011, 1 car in 2012, 3 cars in 2013
Roebling: 6 cars in 2011, 2 cars in 2012, 2 cars in 2013
CMP: 5 cars in 2011, 6 cars in 2012
HPR: 7 cars in 2011, 7 cars in 2012
2. We need to bring in a new level of competition and visibility to PCA Cup racing.
The first few races last year they were doing video interviews with the cup winners, but I think they figured out that it was a waste of time and money, we're amateurs and we know it.
3. We need tighter scrutineering, the sponsorship money will give us the opportunity to do that.
We still have plenty of cheater cars out there. They announced last year they were pulling data from all the cars, only to find out the new equipment they bought doesn't work with all the cups. Some cars have gotten a bore test which is great, but does this equipment cost equal the increase in tire costs?
If you look at the price increases from JMG, we are paying an additional $300-500 per set for this spec tire program (not including the out of state sales tax, b/c of their weak accountant). Lets be very generous and say the avg cup racer uses 1.5 sets per weekend. By my count we had 160 cup racers YTD in 2013, so that's roughly $72k-120k in additional costs we've had to bear ytd. Michelin/JMG aren't stupid, they know that they are recouping their sponsorship $ and then some. It's just a shell game that we are paying for in the long run, I vote no spec tire.
Trending Topics
08-08-2013, 11:26 PM
#8
GT3 player par excellence
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
yes, i got email.
i like either pirelli or yoko
but it's best to have free tires so the manufacturers and suppliers can compete for quality, service and prices.
i like either pirelli or yoko
but it's best to have free tires so the manufacturers and suppliers can compete for quality, service and prices.
08-09-2013, 11:04 AM
#9
Rennlist Member
My opinion is a Spec series should have a spec tire. That tire choice when possible should be more about a consistent tire that gets great wear at a very good price. Less about overall grip. It’s all about close racing with an equal playing field on equal tires. The fact that one tire is faster then another shouldn’t even come into play if we are all on the same tire. Spec series were designed to promote a more level playing field and allow drivers ability to shine through not how much money they have in their car .
08-09-2013, 11:24 AM
#10
Rennlist Member
Phil G.,
I hope that is what you emailed to Bryan. It is quite similar to how I responded as well.
Please respond to Bryan with all of your opinions as public forums don't count in PCA decision-making.
At least we were asked this year before the deal was done.......
I hope that is what you emailed to Bryan. It is quite similar to how I responded as well.
Please respond to Bryan with all of your opinions as public forums don't count in PCA decision-making.
At least we were asked this year before the deal was done.......
08-09-2013, 12:09 PM
#11
Rennlist Member
Hi Scott, yep I sent that to Bryan. There is no doubt that Pirelli and Woodman would give us much better service. The attitude of Jackson Motorsport's is what really pisses me off. You charge a $300-500 premium, but you won't touch a tire if the valve core and weights aren't removed. If they must go with a spec tire, I would go Pirelli, but I don't think we are getting a real benefit from the deal.
08-11-2013, 11:14 AM
#13
Rennlist Member
+1 for free tires. Agree with mooty. Let the tire manufacturers compete to develop a competitive tire at competitive pricing. Let us buy where we can arrange for bulk discount pricing and delivery. I bought 12 sets of R6s last year and got a great deal becuase it was a medium size purchase
Although pricey, the service from Jackson and Sube have been responsive and superb. But I mount my own tires and seldom have to deal with it at the track so no trackside experiences.
Although pricey, the service from Jackson and Sube have been responsive and superb. But I mount my own tires and seldom have to deal with it at the track so no trackside experiences.
08-12-2013, 09:33 AM
#15
I agree with Phil. I know we have been told that we are benefitting from this tire deal with increased scrutineering, but what I most notice is the steady increase in tire cost. Talking in the paddock, the response never seems very positive amongst the racers or shops.
My response to Bryan was mostly related to tire cost. With the N2's being rumored at $2600+, that's a pretty outrageous cost compared to what our cars are worth these days. The C4/5 guys don't seem to complain, but the C3 guys seem to. Look around the forum, and tire costs are one of the main complaints of the cups.
I understand the value of increased scrutineering, but why try and pay for it with a select group? If there's a need in the cup classes for increased scrutineering in the cup classes, surely there is just as much a need in the other classes. Why not increase the entry fee, and distribute that cost and benefit to all racers?
I'm not against a spec tire, but I would be fine with going back to open tires too. I think if tires were open, most would gravitiate toward the grippiest tire anyway. I think there is an advantage to a spec tire if done properly; it fits the mantra of a spec class by trying to level the playing field, and control cost. But I think if we're all being forced to buy one brand, then that brand should should be durable and cost effective. Why run the most exotic tire if everyone is on the same? I would much rather see rewarding one company with all of our business come at the cost of getting a better deal on the tires we buy through economy of scale, to the benefit of the class.
My response to Bryan was mostly related to tire cost. With the N2's being rumored at $2600+, that's a pretty outrageous cost compared to what our cars are worth these days. The C4/5 guys don't seem to complain, but the C3 guys seem to. Look around the forum, and tire costs are one of the main complaints of the cups.
I understand the value of increased scrutineering, but why try and pay for it with a select group? If there's a need in the cup classes for increased scrutineering in the cup classes, surely there is just as much a need in the other classes. Why not increase the entry fee, and distribute that cost and benefit to all racers?
I'm not against a spec tire, but I would be fine with going back to open tires too. I think if tires were open, most would gravitiate toward the grippiest tire anyway. I think there is an advantage to a spec tire if done properly; it fits the mantra of a spec class by trying to level the playing field, and control cost. But I think if we're all being forced to buy one brand, then that brand should should be durable and cost effective. Why run the most exotic tire if everyone is on the same? I would much rather see rewarding one company with all of our business come at the cost of getting a better deal on the tires we buy through economy of scale, to the benefit of the class.