Ray with all respect you are wrong. Or else you are aware of technology that the
rest of us are not. This has been duscussed in detail for years. Durometer
reading
mean very little when relating to tire performance. I watched on year in Salina
a
competitor who used a durometer on almost everybody's tires. Tire with higher
readings ( I am not going to name people or brands) had the durometer stick to
the
tire the surface was so sticky, but generated a high durometer reading. Other
competitors with the same tires from the same truck made with the same dot's did
not demonstarte this characteristic. Rubber compounds can be formulated in more
ways than we can afford to check.
By the way I am not upset and really do not care until you start messing with SP
tires. I have no intention of running any class that requires street tires. By
the
way anyone who thinks street tires are cheaper to run is grossly mistaken. I
have
proved years ago and others have recently.
The grossly mistaken part will like all side of a story have some exceptions.
Rob
And as my friend Roger demostarted, tires are not our big expense. How about a
campoaign to make Roger stay in a Hotel and
RacerRay52@aol.com wrote:
>
> The Street Touring rule(with, possibly, a higher treadwear number) with
> the addition of durometer testing (with a very radical number, a number
> that leaves no room for doubt) would handle the tire problem at any level of
> the sport. The WILL to DO that does not exist among those who write the
> rules and those who influence those who write the rules.
> I find this tire debate rather entertaining. Too bad it upsets some among
> us.
>
|