Han Solo

I didn't say I hated it. I just don't think it changes much of anything.

On the subject of crash bolts there is no way you will go from zero to 1.8* by moving the top bolt of a strut inward by 1/8". I have already heard of several people saying they put them in top and bottom since some factory allowances just say they are allowed and do not specify only in the top or one hole. That said, I shouldn't have brought them up on the Corvette Forum since they don't apply here.

jamesNewman

I didn't even have 8000 dollars total (let alone in shocks) invested in my A-Stock/S4 build on my FRC, which won the 2013 Pro Solo Championship for it's class. I dont have 8000 total in my C5Z for SSR, and no super shocks (heck, the shocks on my car came OFF my FRC!) or "trick swaybar combos".

I dont think there is a difference, and I'd say I'm extremely logical =P The trashbags that come on Vettes from the factory are fairly useless in both classes, so you'd have to buy tires. I'd wind up spending pretty much about the same amount of money for either class, AS or SSR. You're still going to have to do shocks/exhaust/sway/brake pads/air filter/etc and still going to have to figure out which (extremely deviating from showroom floor) alignment will make the car function.

Now, if you're talking about pure speed, then most certainly. My FRC was 3 seconds slower (raw times worse than HS, not joking) on Rivals. Showroom FRC's would be closer to this than they would on A6's obviously.

TommyBoy72

This is the one thing it does help with and was my point. If I had bought a C6 bone stock and took it to a local autox and ran in A street or Super Stock, which one would I likely have been closer to the leader and thus more competitive. Sure, it would get killed either way but like you said it could be 3 seconds less painful of a loss.

Jim you also left out you likely aren't towing the car for 2014 either, despite running in SSR.

jamesNewman

LOL, depending on which scrubs are actually running A-Street, you might win =P

I towed to Spring Nats in '13, and I think that's it. Drove to-from locals (as far as 200 miles, Hershey's site, round trip) on A6's. No plans on towing for '14 even though I have two trucks available whenever I want them, but may leave the car in Ohio for a while mid-season with my co-driver.

greendot

I'll approach this from the perspective of "how does it affect me".
Many people think like that.

I have an 86 Vette that at one time was a National Championship car in Stock class. Since the 16" Hoosier A6 tires are not as good as the 17" stuff it is not nationally competitive and we quit doing SCCA National events. Now I can run 17" 200 TW tires in Stock and run the same car as I run in NCCC stock class. Yippee!

However, I DO like running A6's and in the future I am screwed with my stock car. Although it would not be competitive I think starting in 2015 they should allow ANY stock car on DOT slicks to run in SSR. How can that hurt anyone? Beats having to run SP class.

BTW, the man who won NCCC #1 in 2013 in a C5Z ran Kumho XS early in the year, then ran alternately A6's and Rivals. He was faster on Rivals than Kumho and slower than A6, no surprise. His comment regarding the Rival is that it wears out fast. so much for longer life concept.

Han Solo

Didn't you just make the same point I was trying to make?

jamesNewman

Yes and no. Yes, it costs as much to prep for street as it would for stock. No, it doesn't cost remotely in the range you think it does.

This whole proposal was littered with misconceptions/lies of how much it costs to "run stock", and your ideas of the cost are way off also. Total cost to prep my car was about 3K. Locally, I could have gotten away with less than half of that. My car was extremely competitive, setting three top indexes nationally and as many locally in the heavy talent laden region of DC. I never had crazy shocks and only had one swaybar (33mm I bought from Strano that is also going on the Z16 for SSR).

SteveC68

Not really sure where you are going with that, but checking the 2012 Nationals results I see exactly 1 Falken pilot in 5th place in RT FWD. Exactly ZERO Nitto pilots with the top finishing Michelin (out of the 3 that bothered to compete with them) in 16th place.

So yeah I did overlook those tires as they don't seem to be really well represented. I'll try explaining again why I left off the RS-3. At the time of the proposal in 2013 the RS-3 had a UTQG of 140, so it wasn't legal for competition.

Which brings up the point WHEN the decision was made to limit the treadware to a minimum of 200 they effectively limited the tire selection to 2 tire models. To me that just seems like a poor decision.

jamesNewman

RS3 was 200tw as early as April of 2013, which puts it right out the time of this mess.

sd7ss

On the crash bolts. You start with about -.75 on a newer S197, and with crash bolts (one each strut-lower hole) you get about -1.5. This isn't enough, but if you drive smoothly, and flip the Hoosiers inside out every 20 runs, they'll last 40 runs without cording the edges; at which time, you buy new Hoosiers, because they've heat cycled out. This, of course, works out to about $40 a run, which is about my only real expense. I run 295/30-19 A6s and don't think any other tires will put down the torque as well, or hold this relatively heavy car in a turn with the inside front tire off the ground.

At least that's my experience with a 2012 GT the last two years in FS.
Needless to say, I'll be running FS-R one more year...

I apologize for discussing another marque on this forum. In my defense, I have owned and raced several Z06s.

Cashmo

Bruce, at a rainy event imagine everyone scrambling to find AWD rides. Or on a tight, slalom filled airport runway course being beaten by a GS Mini. I can probably think of other scenarios that we don't want to put folks with SSR classed cars through.

Regions might allow what your asking or they can continue to allow otherwise Street legal non-SSR cars to run in a combined index class. But I don't see it happening at Tours/Nats.

Jeff

AverageVetteNut

We have a non-SCCA region that has always had their stock class on street tires. They have a PAX class for those of us that come and want to run on R-comps.

Our street tire index class is going to be re-vamped into a class for people in M,P,SP classes that are still on streets so they have a place to play.

What's done is done ( for now at least ) so the only way to bring change is to speak with attendance. With how many people doing just what James has done (nice car BTW), I don't see the tide changing anytime soon, even IF the board decided to listen.

greendot

HI Jeff,
Just as "offensive" is that a Corvette that runs ASR or BSR in 2014 will have to either go back to street tires or run in SP.
The SSR class for 2015 needs to be amended to include those cars.
If I have a non-Z06 C5 I should not get penalized (or a C4 for that matter)
And if is is "equivalent" to have the AWD cars in BSR (with C4's) then your scenario currently exists.

SteveC68

Really James? Check the date on the first post of this thread. The proposal came out BEFORE April. Ergo the 200 treadware decision would exclude the RS-3, and the initial decision to go with 200 came from before March 2013 I can 100% garuntee.

Why was 200 the magic number? Why not 300, or 400, or 600 for that matter? Remember the Federal Government does NOT regulate UTQG ratings. It is 100% the tire manufactures decision on what number to put on their tires.

What's more at the time of announcement the BFG Rival wouldn't even have met the 2015 minimum number of available sizes, because the big sizes weren't available until the 3rd quarter of last year. So why exclude 3 tires that were already available and in plenty of sizes? Were they worried that Toyo would try and re-rate the R1R from 140 to 180? If so I'll bet none of them thought Hankook would go from 140 to 200! I'm all for street tires in stock, but I think there should be a little more transparency as to how and why 200 became the minimum requirement when there were already plenty of 180 rated tires that would have easily met the intent of the original proposal.

Dr. Evil

Just about the time I'm thinking of getting back into to SOLO stuff I see this. What a mess. To make matters worse I no longer have a corvette but a CamaroSS which is by all accounts not very competetive. And I have to run 20" tires (yay! look at my huge selection of tires) or spend uber $$ and get of set of custom 19" wheels since no one makes them with the factory offsets in the same width.

i'm all for the 200tw rating if it can be policed but I dont think it will. One manufacturer will rate their tire at 200 but it will really be 100. People will catch on and chase the fast tire just like before. They may get a few more runs out of the tires but that will be the only benefit I see.

I got fed up with the tire chasing a few years ago and the cost. I was buying used takeoffs and had fun at local events but knew that if I wanted to be competetive outside of a region I had to have new rubber. The 200 TW rule will help only mildly with this.


Lastly, I am considering getting back into a C4 but am looking at a GS this time, maybe a Collector since both of those have the larger rears. A Z51 equiped LT4 on 275F/305Rear street tires will push pretty bad but depending on course layout could put some serious power down (for what it is) compared to others in its class. It's sure be nice if GM would have kept those ZO7 rates all the way through 96.

Cashmo

Sorry Bruce, you lost me on where the "offensive" quote came from. You asked how your idea could hurt anyone and I gave you some examples. To be clear, I'm not the one you'd have to convince, it's the rest of the folks running SSR. You know where to write to, http://sebscca.com. I think restricting your list to heavier, higher HP cars will have a better chance of being successful.

I can only imagine Newman's reaction to competing against a Mini in SSR.