Having just driven on these tires in the chump car nelson 25 hr race I couldn’t believe how far street tires have come since I last drove on them on the track (13 years ago). I would recommend these over an R compound tire to any DE guy out there, I had no idea they had advanced so much. They also could have gone the whole 25 hr race. Having said that they will still need to be shaved but I would imagine they are more resistant to heat cycles which is the real killer. Unfortunately I agree with Steve that we don’t really have much option. I think the only thing we can do is to continue to voice our displeasure with NASA and Toyo and see if they can improve the tire. I think if we really push they might allow us to run our own tire but I have no idea. Without testing I have no idea how good the Dunlop would be longevity/durability/performance wise.
Thread for info on how long tires last
[quote=“Ranger” post=60410]But that assumes that 1) We could get good data on tire longevity, 2) We are capable of forming a consensus on anything, and 3) NASA would look kindly on us weakening their sponsorship bargaining position by attempting to go our own way on tires.[/quote]Good summary.
One additional consideration: Under the Toyo contract, NASA obligates us to run Toyo and Toyo obligates itself to deliver the tire (ostensibly at a certain price point and through specified channels, with trackside support at certain events, etc.)
IF <> we as a class could agree upon one tire, how do we get that manufacturer to agree to provide the tire at a certain price point for a certain period of time. I don’t love the RA1s, but I would be pissed if halfway through a season we ran out of the “spec” tire because Tire Company X decided they wanted to put out a new tire.
But I dare say I wouldn’t be as pissed as some folks who wouldn’t/couldn’t scramble to do some testing with a couple different shaves. Or figure out that the old spec was way better than the new spec and buy up a bunch (because there would inevitably be a phase-out period).
[quote=“Steve D” post=60414]IF <> we as a class could agree upon one tire, how do we get that manufacturer to agree to provide the tire at a certain price point for a certain period of time. I don’t love the RA1s, but I would be pissed if halfway through a season we ran out of the “spec” tire because Tire Company X decided they wanted to put out a new tire.
[/quote]
This is a good point, kinda ties our hands really.
Would it be easier to convince nasa to ditch toyo for 2013 for no spec tire than than for another company. I would prefer a treadwear rule. 200 would allow us to run star specs or 615Ks. Compounds change every year, so why get stuck in a contract with any company.
I personally like this idea. Determine a spec wear rating and let everyone figure out the best tire for them. I think 200 might be a little high, I would suggest 140 or 180, but do like the idea.
The argument against a treadwear rule has already been made. The first thing is that obviously a 200 treadwear tire among different manufacturers is not always compareable as treadwear is used internally by a company to denote how much each of their tires wears compared to its other tires not its competitor’s tires. The other thing is it could lead to everyone wasting money trying to find the fastest of the 200 treadwear tires. I ran my Kumho XS tires for at least 65 heat cycles and they felt just as fast as they were when I got them brand new. I sold them to a buddy for $100 and he will continue to run them on his Miata. In fact I ran just as quick at one track on my Kumho XS as I did with a set of Ranger’s well worn RA1s. I agree that looking at the future is all we can do and have a plan in place for when the Toyo contract is up.
Pass that rule and I will buy and test all the tires at that rating. Different tires will work best at different tracks so it could get kind of complex. You will wish for the days when the only difference between my tires and yours was the number of heat cycles. :woohoo:
The treadwear rule has worked for scca autox as long as street tire classes have existed and no one complains. There is never more than half a dozen tires in contention. The top tire usually changes every year but not all the compounds change every year. Yes I realize autox does not equal track. like you guys said 65 heat cycles and 24 hours vs 12 heat cycles and 2 hours and 40 a peice cheaper. The math seams obvious and we won’t be stuck with something overpriced, unavailable or shitty.
Steve is “right on” here. This is a spec series and it really needs to have a spec tire. We don’t need, or want, to have the “Race X” types fiddling with all of the various tire combos. And then the other folks thinking that they need to do likewise.
A cheap tire that lasts longer without a performance penalty would be nice, but I’m not convinced that such a beast has ever existed or exists now. I don’t know, but I suspect that even in the “good old days” the fast guys were replacing their race rubber after limited use.
I would love cheaper, longer lasting tires… If I could drive them to the track and race on them without being at a competitive disadvantage, that would be paradise. If we can’t get durability, cheapness is the next best thing. The toyos just cost too much given the short lifespan. I have only bought one new shaved set thus far, so I am no expert but I am all in favor of bringing tire costs down, even if we switch to a tire that is slower.
Steve is “right on” here. This is a spec series and it really needs to have a spec tire. We don’t need, or want, to have the “Race X” types fiddling with all of the various tire combos. And then the other folks thinking that they need to do likewise.
A cheap tire that lasts longer without a performance penalty would be nice, but I’m not convinced that such a beast has ever existed or exists now. I don’t know, but I suspect that even in the “good old days” the fast guys were replacing their race rubber after limited use.[/quote]
You guys are overestimating the number of options we have in our size. Companies hardly make anything in 15 anymore. At 200+ treadwear the only options I would consider worth testing are the dunlop and the falken. 180+ treadwear there are at least 4. 140+ treadwear includes some very expensive tires. So the options are limited enough to not demand extensive testing, yet open to change when the tire companies get it wrong.
I would say 95% of the tire contingencies are scooped up by 5% of the drivers, so I am fine with no contingencies. I am the 95% join me in my Occupy Toyo #OT campaign. 
Not true. Look at TT and other classes. No ‘Spec’ tire, but several offer contingencies.
Not true. Look at TT and other classes. No ‘Spec’ tire, but several offer contingencies.[/quote]
OK, I’ll start the list:
- Hoosier
PS - Raise your hand if you’ve actually raced in a SpecE30 race. :woohoo:
Having a tire that lasts longer is as good as a contingency in my book! Then everyone wins instead of just the top finishers.
I don’t know any of the other brands well enough to have an opinion, but I would like to have a tire that lasts longer than what we currently have. I don’t mind if it falls off with age. At least it would still be useful as a practice/DE tire. The current RA1s go to cords so fast that you can’t use them for anything!
Not true. Look at TT and other classes. No ‘Spec’ tire, but several offer contingencies.[/quote]
OK, I’ll start the list:
- Hoosier
PS - Raise your hand if you’ve actually raced in a SpecE30 race. :woohoo:[/quote]
Not having the funds for a set of wheels and tires is what kept me from going to comp school this month.
If this is directed at me, that sure isn’t the way to welcome an enthusiastic new member. FYI, I’ve raced in classes with unlimited tire and classes with spec tires. Fair to say I have some experience.