Opinion:
Some of you need to go back and read the post from
Mark Bradakis (also Jean Kinser) as to what this forum used to
be vs. what it is now. As they point out, this group was populated
by a number of past National champions and others with vast experience
and knowledge.
They great majority of those folks are gone, run off by the junk-yard dog
mentality that permeates the list - most often from the newbies and the
also-rans.
Having been subjected to it over the last two days, I question again
the benefit of being here. Nothing but sheer stubborn-ness keeps me from
also quitting in disgust.
Thanks to so many for the private messages of support & agreement. If
only you had the courage to be public, and suffer the slings and arrows
of the prevailing parochial view, perhaps the impact of the vocal minority
would be lessened, and some semblance of civil discourse might return -
along with the counsel of those that have previously walked away.
Review:
I feel that the success of STS is due mainly to the "140" treadwear rule.
There
has been a long-supressed desire within SCCA and other autocross
organizations
to have a class(es) that run real street tires. STS meets this need very
well.
If the success of the class was because of it's inherent ability to
attract the
described demographic, there would be a far closer balance in participation
between STS and STR. At all National-level events, and in most Regions,
STR participation pales in comparison.
Fact:
Sadly, the tire rule that is the basis for the success in STS does not
translate
to a full National class. All of the arguments and ideas regarding the
"140" rule have been previously discussed & dismissed -- durometers, spec-
tires, exclusion lists, etc. etc. -- starting in 1983 when the A001R was
introduced.
A number of years ago, there was a tire-company forum at an SCCA National
Convention - representatives of 6-7 tire companies on the stage. An
irascible
old bastard named Marv Rifchin was representing M & H. His response to
the concept of regulating/managing tire construction & compounds?
"There isn't a rule we can't beat. Period. Durometers, tread-wear, skid
depth
or anything else you can throw at us, we can get around it if we want to."
And the history in Solo & Club Racing shows he was exactly right.
Some of the other ideas promulgated here are truly "pollyannish". Adding
a tire to the exclusion list can only happen after the horse is out of the
barn.
Sometimes as much as 12-24 months later. Tire company marketing managers
and engineers that want to win THAT bad don't show up in Topeka with
a truckload of their illegal stuff. . . . . .
And their are FAR greater gains to be made (a factor of 10x perhaps?) by
cheating on the "140" rule than there are by cheating on the existing S/SP
rules.
Shaving, tread depth, etc. provide only one more hoop for the engineers
to jump through - they can & will.
Solutions:
There are only two - choose your poison:
Spec tires -or- STR.
Clear disadvantages in both cases, especially the latter.
BTW:
To my knowledge, the Hoosier DOT tires meet, in every way, the
DOT requirements. Remember that these requirements were written
quite a few years back. (Likely to change soon, given the
Explorer/Firestone
controversy.) I believe, in fact, that the DOT specs pre-date the
prevalence
of radial tires.
Conclusion:
This rush & desire to have STS as a National class needs consideration
and contemplation, especially in those rules areas that will most certainly
lead to significant conflict. Far better to wait & do it right, than to
rush
in and leave cleaning up the resulting mess to others.
Dive in at your own peril.
Some of you are akin to a bunch of college football players, lined up
to screw the homecoming queen - knowing in advance she has an STD.
<vbg>
R2
|