HOOSIERS?

[Dan Chambers]

I guess we will never get a definition of SLICKS. The tire companies are going to slap a DOT on anything to skate by any rule and those in charge and those in favor will carry that DOT justification as far and as high and as long as they can.

It really doesn't matter to me.

We started with a simple question, do slicks belong in stock classes? And you know what, we still don't know. We went from that to a complete tire and class overhaul, no wonder none of this ever changes.

For some odd reason, this sounds very similar to the debate on where to put the "new" airport and the various studies that go with it...

Ream Field.

Next?

[Josh Y]

10 PAGES ? ! ? ! ? ! ?

[993Panzer]

You have to go back to March 20th of 2007 to find a thread of this length. Ironically it was titled "Final Zone 8 proposals". Go figure.

[Gary Burch]

No true racing slick will pass these tests.

TT

NOT FOR HIGHWAY USE: All Hoosier Racing Tires including DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires are designed for racing purposes only on specified racing surfaces and are not to be operated on public roadways. DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department Of Transportation requirements for marking and performance only and are NOT INTENDED FOR HIGHWAY USE. It is unsafe to operate any Hoosier Racing Tire including DOT tires on public roads. The prohibited use of Hoosier Racing Tires on public roadways may result in loss of traction, unexpected loss of vehicle control, or sudden loss of tire pressure, resulting in a vehicle crash and possible injury or death.

What was that again...

[Dan Chambers]

No true racing slick will pass these tests.

TT

NOT FOR HIGHWAY USE: All Hoosier Racing Tires including DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires are designed for racing purposes only on specified racing surfaces and are not to be operated on public roadways. DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department Of Transportation requirements for marking and performance only and are NOT INTENDED FOR HIGHWAY USE. It is unsafe to operate any Hoosier Racing Tire including DOT tires on public roads. The prohibited use of Hoosier Racing Tires on public roadways may result in loss of traction, unexpected loss of vehicle control, or sudden loss of tire pressure, resulting in a vehicle crash and possible injury or death.

What was that again...

are not to be operated on public roadways.

are NOT INTENDED FOR HIGHWAY USE.

The prohibited use of Hoosier Racing Tires on public roadways ...

(my italics, and emboldenings)

Facts. Don't muddy the issue with facts, Gary. Facts will only lead to closing loop-holes and leveling the playing field. Better knock it off.

Gary: you'd have better luck swimming up Niagra Falls than convincing the GOBN that DOT ratings means highway-worthy. Listen, Gary, I've got the "Ovine Choral" practicing Handel's Messiah later on today... Care to join me?

[LUCKY DAVE]

TT

NOT FOR HIGHWAY USE: All Hoosier Racing Tires including DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires are designed for racing purposes only on specified racing surfaces and are not to be operated on public roadways. DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department Of Transportation requirements for marking and performance only and are NOT INTENDED FOR HIGHWAY USE. It is unsafe to operate any Hoosier Racing Tire including DOT tires on public roads. The prohibited use of Hoosier Racing Tires on public roadways may result in loss of traction, unexpected loss of vehicle control, or sudden loss of tire pressure, resulting in a vehicle crash and possible injury or death.[/quote][/quote]

That's just CYA language (legalese).

No one with half a brain thinks they would be good rain tires, but as is true of any other high performance part for sale, some of the customers who buy them don't have half a brain.

Either they pass DOT testing and have the certification, or they don't.

[pdy]

The playing field is level, Dan - we all have the opportunity to run our cars within the rules (i.e. use Hoosiers).
But I do use Hoosiers on the street, rather than change them at the track. I drive my car to the track and back with Hoosiers on it.
I even drive it to work several times a month.
Sure, that violates Hoosier's warning (no doubt written by their attorney).
How many times have any of us used a product in a way that the manufacturer suggested not to?

Question for those who run RA-1, R-888, Michelin Cup, or other purpose built tires - how many street miles do you honestly run them per month?
How many of you use other (non-purpose-built DOT) tires for "daily" driving, and keep the track tires mostly for the track?

And sorry, but I really don't appreciate the GOBN reference. It's unfortunate that my car is part of the controvery, and I am also on the Zone 8 rules committee.
Maybe you don't realize or appreciate how much agony and effort goes on by the rules committee to try and make things equitable. Add into that all the hard work
by others (notably Tom Tweed and Steve Grosekemper)...

Yeah, I know. You're not complaining, nor name-calling....

[Dan Chambers]

The playing field is level, Dan - we all have the opportunity to run our cars within the rules (i.e. use Hoosiers).
But I do use Hoosiers on the street, rather than change them at the track. I drive my car to the track and back with Hoosiers on it.
I even drive it to work several times a month.
Sure, that violates Hoosier's warning (no doubt written by their attorney).
How many times have any of us used a product in a way that the manufacturer suggested not to?

Question for those who run RA-1, R-888, Michelin Cup, or other purpose built tires - how many street miles do you honestly run them per month?
How many of you use other (non-purpose-built DOT) tires for "daily" driving, and keep the track tires mostly for the track?

And sorry, but I really don't appreciate the GOBN reference. It's unfortunate that my car is part of the controvery, and I am also on the Zone 8 rules committee.
Maybe you don't realize or appreciate how much agony and effort goes on by the rules committee to try and make things equitable. Add into that all the hard work
by others (notably Tom Tweed and Steve Grosekemper)...

Yeah, I know. You're not complaining, nor name-calling....

Sorry if I offended Paul. I do indeed know how difficult being on the rules committee is and how tough it is to keep things fair and equitable... one of the reasons I'm not involved with Rules Committee.

I wasn't trying to point any fingers directly at you or any one person in particlular. It is, infact, a bummer your car is somewhat at the hub of the controvery, 'cause I know deep down you're a fair and honest competitor. If I offended you, I'm sorry. I was just trying to stir the pot. (Guess I managed that okay.) If it appeared I was name-calling, I do apologize.

Saying that (and hear it comes!): like any organization, there is a GOBN in the PCA and they do work together, IMHO. Mostly, they work toegther to improve the condition of the club. That's my philosophical view (oh G*d, not that Philosophy cr@p again!)

Now: I'm new to PCA (relatively) but I'm more than familiar with GOBN surviving well in many organizations, especially competitive ones. Personally, I've never liked them.

That's why I quit competitive surfing. The GOBN tended to favor those who followed the Pied-Pipers of the sponsorship programs in the 70's and 80's in a sport I believed was more connected to nature than $$$$. So, I quit competitive surfing because I found no value in the sponsorship of surfing. That was my philosophical dilema. That was my personal opinion. I chose leaving a sport I liked competing in. Since I refused to wear the sponsorship names on my jersey or board, I was black-balled. (Ironic that I'm sponsored now, eh?)

That's why I stopped play volleyball competitively. The GOBN was very careful in who they placed as partners in what was supposed to be "blind-draw" tournaments. This always led to a somewhat pre-determined factor of who would make it to the finals and ultimately win the tournaments. When I chastised a friend of the oraganizing committee for muttling with the pairing, I was black-balled and not asked to return.

So, do I see GOBN in place at PCA? Sure I do. Sorry, that's just my view. Part of what I see of the social patterns of "clubs" in general ... whether it be BMW, surfing, volleyball, slot-car, whatever club you want ... is like-persons bonding and creating conditions of like-behavior and values and incentives. Just my view. (No, I'm no sociologist.) It is not unusual for the older members of a club to group together, IMHO. That, IMHO, is human nature.

I personally don't see the GOBN being ncesessarily bad for the club in respect to the PCA. As I said, most of the time this network works for the betterment of the club.

So again, if I offended anyone in referencing the GOBN, my apologies.

Have a nice day.

[Don Middleton]

This forum thread has been very informative for me. I started out in it very supportive of Gary's position. Now, I understand that the inclusion of the S/S class, plus the expansion of Stock class to 8 points, has created the confusion.

From what I've gathered in reading posts from Paul Y., Tom B. and Tom T., the Stock class was never meant to be anything other than a first level Preparation class. The addition of S/S confused that intent.

So, I'm back to supporting Paul and others in the notion of leaving Stock as it is now. Perhaps we can change the class name to avoid the confusion, but I don't really have a good suggestion other than changing Stock to Prepared-1 and moving the current Prepared to P-2. Still, "...a rose by any other name..." is just semantics.

Sorry, Gary, Dan, and others, but I think I've seen the light

[cam]

So So tire-ing What's a GOBN? Should I be offended or just embarassed for not knowing

[tb911]

So So tire-ing What's a GOBN? Should I be offended or just embarassed for not knowing

Good Old Boys Network

[cam]

So So tire-ing What's a GOBN? Should I be offended or just embarassed for not knowing

Good Old Boys Network

Thank you--FYI I just joined AAAAA (american association against acronym abuse) TTFN


Cameron

[ttweed]

I was just trying to stir the pot.

So when are you going to quit stirring and offer a constructive proposal? I still haven't seen you or Gary propose any specific rule change, just rants against Hoosier tires.

Don't muddy the issue with facts, Gary. Facts will only lead to closing loop-holes and leveling the playing field

The most important fact that you are both ignoring in highlighting the CYA language in the Hoosier disclaimer is this: "DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department Of Transportation requirements for marking and performance." Repeat: They meet the DOT performance standards. They are legal under our rules, as well as SCCA's, POC's, etc. The Kumho V710 is just as fast a tire and has no such disclaimer attached, so banning Hoosiers won't solve your problem. What are you trying to accomplish? Why are we going in circles on this issue?

I'm more than familiar with GOBN surviving well in many organizations, especially competitive ones. Personally, I've never liked them.

That's why I quit competitive surfing...

That's why I stopped play volleyball competitively...

So, what are you going to do about the biggest GOBN in existence that is currently running our country into the ground? Emigrate?

Please make a rules change proposal stating exactly what you want to see done and let people comment on it and have the Rules Committee and the Zone 8 presidents vote on it. If you want to ban R-compound tires from Stock class, then put that proposal out there and see how it flys. If you want to make Hoosiers a 20-point tire, then go for it. This discussion is going nowhere but around and around in a death spiral.

There is now a proposal on the table which I think will accomplish exactly what you want--it's #7 on the Zone 8 Rules Proposal page. Please review it and if it meets your needs, then provide a positive comment and encourage others to do so. That may actually get something done rather than just b!tching about it and making veiled, retractable insults towards people who have been around a long time and have helped make this club what it is.

Thx,
TT

[Dan Chambers]

I was just trying to stir the pot.

So when are you going to quit stirring and offer a constructive proposal? I still haven't seen you or Gary propose any specific rule change, just rants against Hoosier tires.

If you go way back ( a few pages) I offered the idea of either > 149 ratings or > 99 (to allow RA-1, R-888's) in Stock Class. Tire rating restrictions similar to the resrtictions in S/S. I guess you might have missed it. If we're going to give 1 point for Azenis, and restrict S/S class to certain tires, could we not create restrictions for Stock class tires as has already been done in S/S? I know: no more rules.

[

Don't muddy the issue with facts, Gary. Facts will only lead to closing loop-holes and leveling the playing field

The most important fact that you are both ignoring in highlighting the CYA language in the Hoosier disclaimer is this: "DOT labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department Of Transportation requirements for marking and performance." Repeat: They meet the DOT performance standards. They are legal under our rules, as well as SCCA's, POC's, etc. The Kumho V710 is just as fast a tire and has no such disclaimer attached, so banning Hoosiers won't solve your problem. What are you trying to accomplish? Why are we going in circles on this issue?

Maybe because there appears to be a difference between the definitions of street-legal or highway safe tires, and racing tires "prohibited" from use on the street/highway. As Don Middleton expressed, there appears to be a semantical issue between "legal" and highway safe. You say Hoosiers are "legal" in POC, PCA, etc: legal for what use? Racing? Highway use? Both? How about this:

"Stock class vehicles shall be restricted to only highway-legal tires as defined by the manufacturer. The use of highway-restricted legal tires shall be allowed only in P class and upward classes." There. There's another proposition. That makes 3 I've presented in this thread. Not just rants against Hoosiers, Tom. Alternative ideas.

Maybe if we just identify the classes by points alone, there'd be no issue:

Class:

0-2
3-8
9-20
etc
etc

There. There's yet another alternative idea. I know, it'll never happen.

I'm more than familiar with GOBN surviving well in many organizations, especially competitive ones. Personally, I've never liked them.

That's why I quit competitive surfing...

That's why I stopped play volleyball competitively...

So, what are you going to do about the biggest GOBN in existence that is currently running our country into the ground? Emigrate?

Australia is looking better every day.

Please make a rules change proposal stating exactly what you want to see done and let people comment on it and have the Rules Committee and the Zone 8 presidents vote on it. If you want to ban R-compound tires from Stock class, then put that proposal out there and see how it flys. If you want to make Hoosiers a 20-point tire, then go for it. This discussion is going nowhere but around and around in a death spiral.

There is now a proposal on the table which I think will accomplish exactly what you want--it's #7 on the Zone 8 Rules Proposal page. Please review it and if it meets your needs, then provide a positive comment and encourage others to do so. That may actually get something done rather than just b!tching about it and making veiled, retractable insults towards people who have been around a long time and have helped make this club what it is.

Good idea.

Thx,
TT

You're welcome.

[ttweed]

If you go way back ( a few pages) I offered the idea of either > 149 ratings or > 99 (to allow RA-1, R-888's) in Stock Class. Tire rating restrictions similar to the resrtictions in S/S. I guess you might have missed it.

I'm not talking about "alternative ideas" or "suggestions" anymore, Dan, I mean make a formal rules proposal and submit it thru the Zone 8 rules process. Your "trial balloons" here in the forum have not accomplished much in terms of positive progress, just a lot of argument.

How about this:
"Stock class vehicles shall be restricted to only highway-legal tires as defined by the manufacturer. The use of highway-restricted legal tires shall be allowed only in P class and upward classes."

As I said above, that would eliminate Hoosiers in the Stock class, and force everyone to run one of the other R-compound tires, at least one of which is just as fast, the Kumho V710. I could not support any rule that singled out a manufacturer in that way while not achieving any real, substantive change for the betterment of the membership. What do you do when or if Hoosier happens to remove that language from their website, for instance, or when/if Hankook or Avon or BFG come out with a killer DOT tire, without any such "no highway use" disclaimer, which leaves the Hoosier A6/R6 in the dust?

Australia is looking better every day.

I rather prefer New Zealand, myself.

TT