Zone 8 Rules for 2012

[Cajundaddy]

The revised tire point proposal would make it possible for identical cars to share a class, one on stock street tires and one on Hoosier/V710 (a 5 second advantage by most estimates or equal to approx.100 hp).

I don't understand or agree with this statement. My personal experience has been from changing tires at every event from a Falken 615K 200 UTQG (0-point) tire in practice to a V710 for times runs. The difference between those two types of tires has consistently been 2-2.5 seconds, not 5, at least on our average autox courses. There is a proposed 80 point difference between these two types of tires, which does not allow me (or an identical car) to run in the same class with them, as you state above, since most classes are separated by only 50 points. I will actually be bumped up a class if I continue to use the V710s next year due to this increased penalty, and may choose to go back to a street tire for timed runs, depending on what other changes in the rules are approved. I actually think that the 60 points we originally had for them is enough of a difference to accomplish what you want (a bump up in class). The Falkens (and many other 140-200 UTQG "street" tires) are nearly as fast now as some of the worst R-compound tires. The 80-point difference between a street tire and V710s might be spent on other improvements that could easily level the speed potential, IMHO, if there were two cars running in the same class with those two tires.

TT

Tom,
Under my humble quick fix, the 80 point spread between 200tw and 30tw tires would not change. We are in agreement over that spread. What would change is the 40 pt spread between 140tw and 30tw which the 2012 revised proposal suggests could share the same class. No one really believes the performance envelope between 140tw and 30tw tires is remotely similar. They should not share the same class. The best 140tw tires are a bit faster than the best 200tw (20pts). The best 100tw (RA1s) are a bit faster than 140tw (40pts). The best 30-40tw (R6/A6/V710) are significantly faster than the previous choices(80pts). Racing slicks are significantly faster than R6/V710 (130pts). The historical TT track records for WSIR, Streets, Buttonwillow between SS and S classes bears this out quite clearly over the years. The difference in times by top drivers is primarily soft compound tires. In nearly every case the spread is 5 seconds plus.

[ttweed]

The historical TT track records for WSIR, Streets, Buttonwillow between SS and S classes bears this out quite clearly over the years. The difference in times by top drivers is primarily soft compound tires. In nearly every case the spread is 5 seconds plus.

OK, you are talking strictly TT here, Dave, and our rules must apply to both AX and TT events, since we did not adopt the dual penalty scheme of GGR with our rule changes. But I would still argue the validity of this comparison of yours for several reasons. First, there are additional improvement points allowed between SS and S class other than tires, which also contribute to the speed differential between the classes. Secondly, the SS drivers are often less experienced than S class drivers, though this is not always true. Third, there are not that many SS drivers entering our time trials in general. A huge majority of drivers are on R-compounds. Also, a quick review of the track records might dispute the claim of the 5+ second interval you cite "in nearly every case." Are these results not statistically significant?

WSIR
GS 1:47.80
GSS 1:49.32
-----
IS 1:36.90
ISS 1:40.05 (note that these records are both held by the same driver, eliminating that variable in the equation)

Buttonwillow - Clockwise/No Star Mazda
JS 2:08.35
JSS 2:10.95
-----
GP 2:12.81 (note that GP is a MUCH faster class than GS, and there was no GS entry to compare )
GSS 2:15.35

Buttonwillow - Clockwise/Star Mazda
GS 2:25.72
GSS 2:24.84 (note the SS class is actually faster in this example!)
-----
IS 2:13.68
ISS 2:16.24 (note this is once again the same driver in each class)

SOW - Counter Clockwise w/ Bowl
MS 1:31.84
MSS 1:36.05

Evidence of this nature, for and against the proposal, is anecdotal and less than conclusive, considering the variables involved. Wasn't it Mark Twain who said "There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics?" I would rather depend on back-to-back testing on the same track, with the same car, by the same driver to compare relative tire performance. Other drivers I have spoken to, like Paul Young, have had the same sort of experience as I have with the various types of tires. Other factors that must be taken into account include the rapid deterioration of the soft compounds when heat-cycled, and their relatively high cost. They are only good when they are fresh, and fall off quickly compared to street tires. I can say from direct experience that an old set of Hoosiers are slower than a new set of 200 UTQG Falkens. And they are at least twice as expensive and last half as long! How many people are actually optimizing their tire points by purchasing new Hoosiers for each event at this level of racing? Not many, that I've seen.

YMMV,
TT

[Cajundaddy]

Thank you Tom, you made my point quite clearly. The soft compound tires are significantly faster than any 140+ street tire and should in no way share the same class. As you know Paul Young is a rare outlier where most time differentials are 5 seconds or more. Even he is typically 3 seconds faster on R-comps in Snickers. Our revised Zone 8 tire point proposal is not consistent with our own track records or any other sports car sanctioning body. Why would we want to do that?

The argument that R6 tires are only in top form for a few heat cycles is not really relevant. If you share the grid with others who are all on similar tires you have to decide how you will use those tires to best advantage. Everyone is in the same class and in the same situation. You choose your tires and take your points. Whether you make the most of those tires is up to you.

AX is even more dependent on grip than HP or aero so the tire differential between 30tw and 140tw is even greater here. Shorter tracks will yield smaller time differentials of course. The problem with comparisons is the AX track is always changing so lap time comparisons are more difficult to make.

GGR has it right and I fear we are bringing in old Z8 biases and sacred cows that will serve the few and not benefit the majority of drivers in the Zone 8 driving programs or make them more competitive.
For reference here is the GGR points:
200+tw = 0pts
101-199tw = 25pts
50-100tw = 50pts
0-49tw = 100pts
Racing slicks=175pts

[Don Middleton]

Dave, interesting discussion...your position seems to be that a 5 second improvement in a 40tw over a 140tw is worth 75 points. Correct? That is, of course, 15 points per second improvement. Would be nice to look all the points penalties in the same way, but it doesn't seem to work out that way. Maybe the problem isn't with the way the tires are penalized, but how the points are assessed across all modifications. But, that's a whole other "can of worms". Based on other modification points, +40-50 points for a 40tw over a 140tw seems more consistent with other points for other non-tire modifications.

[gulf911]

+1 Tom

Tom is absolutely right , same driver on an 1 minute ax course is not a 5 second difference (140tw - 710). There are a handful of 'other' reasons that add up to those 5 seconds. Tread wear is also not a perfect indicator and is given by the manufacture. Should they be in the same class? maybe. Depends on the other point mods for motor and suspension. Sounds like the proposed point difference is out of whack.

[Carl Vanders]

Hi All, Need to chime in hear. Tom T makes many excellent observations and have to agree them.

In regards to current breed of street tires vs 710 or a6 there is significant evidence that they are apx 1.75-2.25 average time difference.
The new breed of street tires are amazing (IE- hankookz212, toyo r1r, dunlop Z1, advan 08, etc)

Its a proven fact, several street tire classes running in SCCA are actually running times closer to the A6 than ever before. Last months Grassroots motor sports did extensive testing between the several of the afore mentioned street tires and the A6 and their results were close to the above mentioned time difference. They used the exact car and exact same wheels and brand new tires. In addition, the testing was done on a track.

I believe on average, our drivers are on race tires tend to be more experienced and this tends to skews our local microcosm into thinking there is a big difference.. In addition, in S class the cars also have the choice to add camber, stiffer springs, better shocks, sway bars etc. Any one mod or two combined can add 1-2 seconds respectively.

In regards to Slicks, I went to SCCA nationals last week (had a blast). Anyway, several cars all in the same highly prepared class had their choice to run any brand Slicks or A6 tire. The difference was quite close from the First place car (over two days) running slicks to the third place car on A6. It was under 1 second! So average .5 per day. Actual top time on west course was taken by a Boxster running A6's. Beat the slicks by a few tenths. There are currently mixed reviews as to which is Actually faster or the better choice for Autox. There are several variables including type car, weight, temperature, and course dependent etc. There should be some good test results coming out this year.

In regards to RA'1 vs a 710 A6 the time gap is understood as less than the street tire. But, the RA1 driver must know how to drive at the limit of the tire with more slip angle and throttle steering to take full advantage..( Our Club has some of the best ra1 drivers out there)
If you drive the RA1 like an A6 by just maintaining grip they are going to be quite a bit slower (at least 1-2sec). A6 is an easy tire to drive. I think the current tire rule base has done a good job and worked well.

To be redundant, I had the opportunity to do testing comparison in two of the same model cars at the last PCA el toro event. One had factory 19inch cruddy Pirelli's rated 220 and the other on Brand new A6. The streets were 19s were 235/265, the A6 were 255 275 on 18's (plus had better gearing due to smaller dia tire) in addition the stock camber was maxed at almost 1 degree neg. Plus, the Hoosier car also had a gt3 front bar. Time diff was about just under 3s. If the street tire SS car had been a yok or dunlop on 18's and ran the wider size the time diff would have been easily at or under 2 seconds.

In my humble opinion, with the current proposed added pts to race tires, one has to consider running street tires or stay in SS. And running Slicks and the huge pt hit, for get about it, as currently it appears there really is not have enough facts and only guess-timates. Add the threat or fear of them dominating, and we have a bit of the posse mentality -just run them race slicker's out of town:) They are too expensive anyway. But seriously its still too high a pt hit.

[Cajundaddy]

Guys guys,
It doesn't really matter whether there is a 5 second spread at Buttonwillow, a 3 second spread at WSIR, a 2 second spread at the Q, or a 1 second spread on a 30 sec. SCCA AX. We are picking nits. You know and I know that A6/R6 have no business sharing a class with an identical car running 140tw street tires. You can't make up the difference running adjustable sways. The tire points should reflect that. I have no problem with anyone running any tire they want as long as they are reflected in the tire points. Those "run Hoosiers out of town" chants are long gone. Let it go.

My suggestion still stands. Leave the tire points as proposed for soft compound R-comps and slicks because they are probably right. Adjust the points for 100 &140tw to create separation:
101-199 - 20pts
51-100 - 40pts
1-50 - 80pts
slicks - 130pts

It's fair, it works, and it is pretty consistent with other sanctioning bodies including Zone 7, POC, SCCA and NASA. I have made my case as clearly as I am able. Others will decide the outcome.

[tb911]

in conjunction with Proposal 10, if applicable

Sorry if this wasn't clear. The intention is that if you change both weight and horsepower, you have to re-calculate using both your new horsepower and your new weight. No double penalizing was intended to be implied

[Jad]

Lets remember NO set of rules is going to make everyone happy. QUIT constantly changing them!

In the last 3 years, without changing our car, we have been in OP, MI, OI, CC06, and maybe others, I can't keep track. I think I have gotten more track records than finishes the class changes so much. And it looks like another new class this year, STOP!

And if it matters, I run against cars with slicks 90% of the time, and virtually always win despite never having run a set of slicks. So, high points may (or may not) be appropriate for slicks in S class, but they may not be worth nearly as much in the higher classes that use them more. No rules are perfect, so lets quit changing them everytime someone has an idea.

See you at Big Willow. Hopefully I am still in cc06 and OI?

PS- I think the real racer motto is, "if you really do find an unfair advantage, use it, don't complain about it!"

[gulf911]

You know and I know that A6/R6 have no business sharing a class with an identical car running 140tw street tires. You can't make up the difference running adjustable sways.

I think I see the problem here... Since when are all identical cars (points) running in the same class? Is there not a spread of points in a given class to use as you see fit? And said points can encompass Motor , Trans, Suspension etc? Or is this new class system different? So in a given class you cannot add 'other' points sans stickier tires or just stickier tires sans other points? Is the spread that small between classes? The point Carl and I and Tom were making was its no where near your 5 second (incorrect) spread which matters a great deal. The 1.5 to 2.5 second spread can be much easier to make up via 'other' points than a incorrectly perceived 5+ second spread. Can you not add points to motor and gearing and use 140tw tires within a class? I do not know so i am asking the questions. I have not even pointed my car yet as the class changes have been many and now I see the class numbers will be inverted? CC1 is lowest? Now I know why I havent wasted my time yet, but I digress,,

20 points for 140tw and 80 points for 710's? I am sticking with , its out of whack. Double points yes, quadruple?

[Gary Burch]

Lets remember NO set of rules is going to make everyone happy. QUIT constantly changing them!

In the last 3 years, without changing our car, we have been in OP, MI, OI, CC06, and maybe others, I can't keep track. I think I have gotten more track records than finishes the class changes so much. And it looks like another new class this year, STOP!

And if it matters, I run against cars with slicks 90% of the time, and virtually always win despite never having run a set of slicks. So, high points may (or may not) be appropriate for slicks in S class, but they may not be worth nearly as much in the higher classes that use them more. No rules are perfect, so lets quit changing them everytime someone has an idea.

See you at Big Willow. Hopefully I am still in cc06 and OI?

PS- I think the real racer motto is, "if you really do find an unfair advantage, use it, don't complain about it!"

The unfair advantage here is skill, hard to overcome, even with slicks ...

[gulf911]

I run against cars with slicks 90% of the time, and virtually always win....

Thats only because I dont have a koni challenge car...

[Jad]

Thanks, I would love to just say it is skill, but in reality it takes a lot of constantly changing components, including good tires, skill, a well balanced car, etc. Depending on the situation, different components have a completely different effect was my point. A twin turbo 997 adding 100 hp is virtually pointless, whereas 100 hp in a 944 spec would be world changing. Similarly, 335 rear slicks would be great on the twin turbo, but slow down the 944 spec. The rules will not be perfect no matter which points proposal is used, the time results will be very different in the two classes and NO, I don't think each model should have its own points system

The new system seems pretty good, lets use it as is and only fix BIG issues, not continually tinker causing more problems than improvements. It gives everyone more freedom in moving up/down classes and provides greater competition within classes among different (and yes not perfectly equal) cars.

Just me $.02 or less

[ttweed]

Lets remember NO set of rules is going to make everyone happy. QUIT constantly changing them!

Hallelujah and Amen, Brother Jad! Rules stability. What a concept! I have been trying to preach that idea for a decade.

TT

[Mike Cornelius]

I agree with Jad.
The new system looks ok. We need to just give it a chance and see what happens.
Part of the challenge to compete is finding the advantages in the rules that might help you. Those same advantages might not work for another car or help only on certain tracks etc...
Tires can help but skill is more important.

With this new system, at least for now, that challenge has gone away. We don't even know what the classes will look like and any improvements to the car have been put on hold.

At this point I'm just building the car the way I want and run it, have fun with it and not worrying about where it classes.

See you all at Willow Springs...gunning for top ten!