autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: STS Tire Rules

To: "Loren Williams" <Loren@kscable.com>
Subject: RE: STS Tire Rules
From: "Steve Hoelscher" <stevehh@hiwaay.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:55:25 -0600

-----Original Message-----
From:   owner-autox@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-autox@autox.team.net] On
Behalf Of Loren Williams
Sent:   Sunday, October 29, 2000 7:51 PM
To:     autox list
Subject:        Re: STS Tire Rules



Loren Williams wrote:

I have come to understand what you're saying here (thanks Roger, et. al.),
but there's still one thing that's not quite clear to me.  How is the
Stock/SP "DOT approved" rule any more enforcable than the STS "140
treadwear" rule?  In either case, if a tire that appears to be legal
(carries a DOT stamp or a 140 treadwear stamp) is protested, and there are
no obvious indications that it is a cheater tire (different tread pattern
from other tires of the same model, for instance), the PC has no choice but
to declare the tire legal.  Why is  the situation more relevant when it's
STS?

Because the tire company is already trying to produce the best possible tire
it can.  It doesn't make any sense for them to make a "cheater" tire.  A
better tire is a better product that they could then sell more of and have
greater success.  Besides, as long as they are available to all competitors,
what's illegal about them?  And no tire company is crazy enough to forge the
DOT stamp just to get a couple of autocross wins.  That is different than
the "140" synario.  It would be very easy to improve the performance of a
"140" type tire with a softer compound.  Remember, the tire company puts its
own treadwear number on the tire, not the DOT or NHTSA.  So there would be
little downside to running a batch of 140 type tires with a softer compound
just for The Nationals.

I still don't understand what is so magic about having a "140" treadwear
rule anyway?  I started autocrossing in the days before "R" compound tires.
The fast guys all bought brand new Pirelli CN36's or Michelin XVS's (later
they were P6's and Eagle GT's) and shaved them to 2/32's.  Yes the were
faster than full tread and only lasted a few events, and yes they had an
extra set of wheels for their "race" tires.  So what is to prevent someone
from doing that now?  They buy whatever the trick "140" treadwear tire is
and shave it to 2/32's.  They only last a few events and you need an extra
set of wheels for them.  So now you are right back to where you were with
"R" compound tires, but you now have more expensive tires with an
un-enforceable eligibility requirement.

A street tire class is a great tool at the local level. It gives beginners
and less serious competitors a place to play and have a good time with a
minimum of effort and investment.  But it just isn't going to work at the
National level in the way it is envisioned.


I think we have to accept that there are things that we just can't afford
the expense of regulating in this sport.  As difficult as it may be to do
at National level, some things may just have to be left to the trust and
good sportsmanship of the competitors.  Tires and ECU's are good examples.

Nonsense.  If a well thought out rules package is implemented and enforced,
it will work fine.  As for ECUs, there are ways to enforce it, it just
depends on what direction the SEB wants to go and I don't think we are far
enough into the issue to determine that yet.  As for tires, the street tires
rule for STS is inherently flawed, therefore it is un-enforceable.  The DOT
tire rule has worked fine for many years.  Yes there have been a few times
when it was stretched further than intended, but it bounced back.  As a
whole, I think the DOT tire rule has been a success.


I'm sure there are others... anybody want to talk about fuel?  What would
the PC do if a stock class driver's fuel were protested?


Take a sample and have it analyzed.  That is nothing new.

Steve Hoelscher #27 DSP


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>