Anyone looked at SCCA T2 Transam? Cheap tires, and engines don't blow up. Sort of joking.

 

What I had heard regarding longevity was that it was much more favorable than what has been presented here by Pete.

It looks like we need a lot more data on the longevity of these tires in order for us to make a determination if we want to consider the RR. The current RA1 is wonderful and I love having a tire that just gets faster as it wears down. I would hate to lose that aspect of SPB.

 

We have extensive feedback about the RR being that we sell more Toyo R comps than just about anyone in the country.

The fast Miata and E30 drivers are seeing 1.5-2.0 seconds a lap faster on RR's over RA-1's. Heat cycle wise the average life is in the 16-20 session range. They don't get faster like a shaved RA-1 does, but they are more consistent and don't fall off as quickly as a Hoosier does. Compared to a Hoosier in last years 25 Hour at Thunderhill some of the front running cars were running identical lap times as the cars with Hoosiers but further in to the race. In regards to the delamination issue - fixed. There is a prescribed mounting and rotation procedure to follow but there have been no problems since.


Any other questions you guys have, we will be happy to answer or get an answer for you.

Phil

 

Personally I'd be happy to stick with a shaved RA1 and have the option of rains -> intermediates. The performance of the current setup is predictable, and as all have mentioned here we can run 'em till they are corded.

 

Phil,

That's considerable time drop. 2+ mile tracks? Are the front runners shaving the RRs? In my experience in SPB, 20+ sessions on 4/32 shaved, performance of the RA1 falls off.

If the longevity and price are similar/equal/better in the other series, let's thoroughly test them in SPB to see if we see the same characteristics prior to voting them in.

If longevity isn't equal/better, stay with the RA1s. If longevity is equal/better, worth considering.

Will Toyo bring back contingency to PCA?

 

The example I'm giving is in the 944 Spec class. I'm not familiar with SPB, but with a more balanced chassis, it might be different as far as a drop in times and or heat cycles.

in our class, Toyo had the current NASA National class champion go out with a former national champion and test these tires extensively at various tracks in Socal in 2012 and report back to the group.

Honestly, it's great to go faster, but a lot of guys don't like the higher cost vs. the RA1 due primarily to longevity. To compare them to Hoosiers is not really an argument unless you're coming from a race class that uses Hoosiers. Coming from a spec class that is used to running RA1s for years to the RR, yea, it kind of blows. My tire costs have gone up as well as additional set of wheels and tires.

 

^^^That is the right tire! Same cost fast out of the can with no fussing, feel better shaved but not faster. Will run faster than the RA1 and are more consistent to the cord. Run either side flipped whatever they don't care.

I ran RA1 in spec 944, the current RA1 does not last as long as the old (10-11)RA1. I had this experience with the last set on the 944, and tried two sets on the boxster, on shaved 4/32 and one full tread, found that they fell off with plenty of tread left and was getting a max of 12-14hc.

The NT01 is a much better tire and is available for the boxster unlike the 944. Just sayin...

 

At least this discussion is a good indicator of healthy interest in SPB

 

Ha! Careful what you wish for

If the RR doesn't last as long as the RA1 I'm against it.

At 16-20 HC's it sounds like more tire sales for Phil

All kidding aside, a PCA weekend is 3 practices, warmup, qualifying, up to 3 sprints and an enduro so at 16 HC's it seems like a new set each weekend would be necessary. Maybe every two weekends. That's more than I'm spending now for sure.

It sounds like there may not be enough data to make that determination.

Maybe this proposal gets shelved until 2015.

 

I think the suggestion that we have tires that are multi functional now and would lose that with the new tire makes the decision easy. Add the longevity issue and its overwhelming. Add to this the issues with 1st year supply chain and it become brain dead.

All of course IMHO. I would like to stay with our current tire until TOYO makes the inevitable decision to discontinue our current tire and support only the new one.

 

I'm not sure I agree with the 1.5-2 second/lap, but otherwise my experience with the RR is similar to what Phil has to say. However, I will add that in my opinion, the RA1's no longer are as fast to the cord as they are out of the box. They fall off in a similar fashion to the RR's. I find I can get two solid race weekends out of the RR's, and then they are practice tires that I drive to the cord. Same thing with the RA1's. Prior to the RR's, I had been shaving the RA1's to 3/32, not 4. They are clearly faster at 3/32's.

As far as the argument about driving your rain tires down to shaved tread depth, I've tried that, and in my opinion, by the time you get the tires down to 4/32, they are already falling off due to heat cycling. They are ok for practice, but they don't make a good race tire at that point.

I don't hear any SM drivers bitching about the RR's. Folks seem to really like the tire. I don't have an SPB, so it makes not difference to me what you guys do, but I do like the RR's a lot, and before you make up your minds one way or another, I'd suggest some of you try the tire out.

 

Paul clued me into the discussion here. I've been gathering a lot of data on these tires over the last year relative to the RA-1 as NASA 944 Spec National director (and a driver). I also run Hoosiers, and the BFG R1 in enduros (separate contingency), so I have some back to back data with those tires as well.

The first production run of RR's in our 225/50/15 size had delamination issues. The specified rotation helped, but did not eliminate this. No catastrophic failures, but lots of splits. The second run (week 50+) tires have been better.

Driving impressions:

Very friendly and easy to drive tire at the limit. We would drop 1.5-2seconds per lap within 2-3 laps, of bolting them on - very easy to drive fast quicklly. Every lap record in 944 Spec Midwest was decimated this year. The RR is a much easier tire to drive than the R1 [is that tire smoke back there - crap, another flat spot!]. It tolerates more slip angle without chattering. Not quite as heroic as a fresh Hoosier, but much more consistent through it's life.

Setup:

We found the RR likes a little more camber, and similar to a hair less pressure than the RA-1. They will be fast just bolting them on to your RA-1 setup, but they won't last as long without some extra camber (at least).
These tires are more fussy to a good setup than the RA-1. Guys who ran lower camber, and less roll stiffness would cord the outside edge fairly quickly, sometimes within 8 heat cycles. The RA-1 is more forgiving of less than ideal setups.

Longetivity:

With proper setup, every bit as good as a 4/32nd's shaved RA-1. Remember the treadwear ratings are based on full tread depth, not a shaved tire. The three National Championship podium drivers in our region (i.e fast, consistent, and work the tires hard) get around 21 heat cycles (range 18-24). For us, this is at least equal to what we seeing out of RA-1's. You results may vary, but with the right setup, should be similar to what you got on RA-1's
We have run 4 back to back trials of tires with 17-18 heat cycles, and new sticker RR's. To our surprise, in every case (at the tracks we run), the old tires were equal or faster. They may have taken slightly longer to come in than stickers (more tire goobers?), but ultimate lap times usually favored (and were never slower) on the old tires. Again, the drivers I'm referencing are very consistent. While this data was a surprise to us, it seems solid.

After a rocky start with delamination, and setup issues, I like the RR. It is a very fun tire to drive, and in our experience, highly consistent, which is key for a spec tire. I also like that I can run it competitively in open-tire enduros (especially now that Toyo has expanded it's contingency to enduros). I liked the RA-1, too, though, and it's a known quantity for you guys.

 

Ok then let's present what we really have (which BTW is a long way from being "Just an RA1 which is molded with less tread" - sorry Paul really not trying to pick a fight just trying to understand what's going on here)

From what we are hearing, we have is a tire that:
-is faster than our current by somewhere between .5 and 2 sec.
-will cost about the same as our current net/net.
-may be more consistent (if that was ever an RA1 issue)

Against this tire we have that it:
-cannot be used as a rain tire and will require the use of a second spec tire.
-may have less life than the current (similar at best)
-can't be swapped side to side
-has less real time data to assess it by than the RA1
-may require use of GT3 bottom arms at the rear (if you arent already using them) to achieve extra camber that MAY be needed.

I know what my choice would be (assuming I Have a choice and the RA1 is not discontinued).

 

Oh and for all those who think they know how I would vote:

I would vote FOR the RRs.

Faster at the same price is entirely consistent with SPB.
I already carry a unique set if wets (that are not even a square set)
I already have GT3 arms all round so I have no problem with extra camber

 

Laurie go back to sleep !