Well I guess I'm going to have to respond to the points you make. And
you're correct about much of what you say. However ...
"Witness the Yokohama A032 cited earlier."
I seriously don't see what that example proves at all. Speed ratings are
the result of a lot of factors. Carcass, compound, etc. The fact that
Yokohama (and others) have different speed ratings in the same tire
lines only indicates that there are constructions differences ... most
likely belt changes. Compound differences? Not likely. Carcass
differences? Most likely.
My arguement is that a Z speed rating would limit the softness that a
tread compound can endure. Obviously we differ on this. I've sent email
to Goodyear racing, BFG, Kumho, and Yokohama to see what response I'll
get to this question. I'll forward them when I have any responses.
In the meantime, my proposal was not based at changing the the way that
R tires have been for the last few years. It's designed to keep tire
issues from getting out of hand, as I claim was the case back when. And
that's what's motivating all this. If we can find a simple way to put up
a limit for tire companies we won't see any more seasons where we lose
participants because they cannot afford to race as often as they would
like to.
As far as having a single set of tire rules across the club racers and
autocrossers .... Historically there have been tires allowed to compete
in club racing that are not allowed in solo. Maybe those issues have
dissapated for now. It wasn't long ago that you couldn't run Goodyear
GSC's race tire in autox, for instance. You probably can now.
More importantly, it would be another way of keeping an autocross only
tire from appearing on the scene.
John Whitling
Jay Mitchell wrote:
> John said:
>
> >Those that say that a Z rating only affects the carcass are not
> correct.
>
> Yeah we are. A soft compound can be part of a tire with the
> requisite heat-dissipation characteristics. Witness the Yokohama
> A032 cited earlier.
>
> > The
> >tread compound has a lot to do with how much heat is developed
> and how much heat
> >it can take. As every racer probably knows, softer compounds
> cannot withstand
> >much heat.
>
> You're trying to say, by implication, that a Z-rated tire will
> intrinsically have longer tread life than one with a lower speed
> rating. And you're just wrong about that.
>
> >Therefore, if we were embrace a minimum speed rating for
> specialty type R tires,
> >say a Z rating, tire companies could continue to produce
> specialty performance
> >tires that we could use.
>
> As GH already pointed out, the tires you seem to have so much
> against ALREADY have a Z rating. Ergo, your proposal will have
> zero effect on those tires. Zip. Denada. Zilch.
>
> >Autocross would get more tire
> >participation (something that a dominant tire company might not
> want) and club
> >racers could sell their takeoffs to autoxers
>
> They can do that now, although, if you really want to be
> competitive, you'll get new tires, not cycled-out ones. Answer my
> original question: exactly HOW do the IT tire rules differ from
> Solo II tire rules? I see the same tire designs used in both
> areas, and I'm not aware of any differences.
>
> >What we're seeing with the early reports of the G Force aren't
> any different than
> >what we saw in '89 when BFG produced it's solo only edition of
> the R1. In two
> >years after, we lost Yoko and their Nationals sponsorship, and
> all other tire
> >companies in stock class solo.
>
> We did NOT lose Yokohama in two years. I went to the Solo II
> Nationals in 92 and 93, and Yokohama was not only there, they
> sponsored those events. They chose to stop providing direct event
> support in 1994, FIVE years after, according to you, the world
> ended. Hoosier has been there all along, in the form of
> independent distributors. And now there's Kumho. You're trying to
> create the perception of a problem - lack of competion among tire
> manufacturers - when the facts clearly say otherwise.
>
> What is really motivating all this? Anyone who is unhappy with
> BFGs has at least two other competitive options in DOT
> competition tires. It's never been any better than this, and
> you're trying to get us to believe the sky is falling.
>
> Jay
|