froggy47

Come on, 1st gear/full throttle/street tires/WET??? For how long .1 sec?

Seriously, are you talking with traction control full ON?

This is not possible on my part of the planet.

Even with fresh a6's.

autoxer6

For example, at a national tour in Peru (concrete) in the wet, there was enough room for me to go full throttle before going into second. There were several other spots where I was full throttle in second. You just have to modulate easily. I think I cleared my competitors and STU running the same heat by about a second.

froggy47

I wish I had your right foot.

93Rubie

Very true, and I was thinking of toe when I said that.
Again that is easy to set between street and auto-x settings.

Not to thread jack, but I got the Z07 springs and such on my 93. WOW, SO much flatter in the corners. Rides MUCH better than I would have thought. Very streetable. I have yet to auto-x it, however, very soon.

Solofast

There's a world of difference between a base car and a z07... for sure.

justkickin

I haven't been to Nats and I also run streets, and do decently well. Like autoxer6, I can get to full throttle in 1st on Streets, you just have to pay a lot of attention to the car, and be judicious. You can't just stab the throttle and expect it to grip. Ask my 16 year old son. lol

I like the changes being proposed. Maybe now it won't be so hard to get sizes for a C5Z.

Locally we pax based on SCCA classes with no street modifiers. On RS3's in the cooler months, I would get paxed by a Civic or 2011 WRX, also on streets. In the summer, when it was warmer they couldn't beat me, even with their pax advantage.

Can the C5Z be competitive on streets? I think so. But it will require changing pax values (for local events) and/or modifying classes a bit for the head to head class battles. There will be some learning and complaining about learning after these changes, but I do think things are headed in the right direction.

BTW, anybody know of light 18x9.5 wheels? Thinking I need some for the front so I can start running square setups next year. 315's will fit on that right?

Weston

I'm very happy about this, because I just want a lightly modified class where I can run street tires and have two upgraded sway bars (gotta do something to get rid of the C6 base suspension's Buick-like ride!). This is exactly what I was dreaming of when I was looking through the Solo rulebook to class my Vette. Until then, I'll be in SSP, on street tires, competing for last place.

R-compounds are great, but not worth the trouble of me hauling them to an event and swapping wheels for 4-5 minutes of seat time. It's also a bit much to ask of people in a so-called "Stock" class. If you want to tinker or buy expensive consumables, there are plenty of classes for that. But there is currently no real class where you can buy a stock C6, drive it to an SCCA autocross, and be anything but terribly outclassed by guys showing up on R-compounds. RTR via SS is a nice idea, but it's just one of those indexed afterthought classes that doesn't hold much meaning... it's not a true class itself and you're up against a hodgepodge of other cars.

This will shake things up a lot and is very controversial, and it will run plenty of people out of the stock classes, but it will also bring plenty of people in and lower the barrier to entry. I'll be much happier to deal with people's flashed ECU's and camber plates on street tires, than to have to play the Hoosier-A6'es-and-ridiculous-shocks game.

mountainbiker2

But now you have to play with two sway bar changes, expensive shocks still, and wheel changes. The top guys will still win and the beginners will still be in the back. I now have to take my perfectly setup up SS car and spend money on wheels, shocks (because I have canister's) and sway bars. Rule changing, spending lots of money is what racing is all about. If you can handle that, then go have fun.



Steve A.

Solofast

Be careful what you wish for....

If you showed up with a set of nicely tuned Johnny O bars you would get hammered by someone who shows up with a set of custom made 2" bars front and back that he doesn't have to drive on the street. You'll still get beat by a dedicated race car that is taken to the limits of the rules.

If you think that this will save you money you're dreaming.

If you wanted to cure the flaccid handling you could just upgrade to the Z51 setup of springs and bars, and that would be legal as it stands now, and you'd still have a car you can drive on the street.

Z06trackman

Solofast,
3 years ago I ran NT-05s for a season of Solo II in the local PAX Street Tire class in my C5Z with Koni Yellows. I got first place in the season championship with it (~12 contenders). I have since run a season with A6s (lost first place by 1 point out of 1900). I just took delivery of Hankook RS3s to run this season.

My son and I both had just as much fun on the NT-05s (200s) and we did on the Hooters. The car is very driveable on the street rubber. Yes, you have to be much more careful with the throttle, and it definitely doesn't have as much grip. I am going for fun per dollar, and fun per hassle. The RS3s will be changed at home prior to the event, driven to the event, then taken off and saved for the next event. Then they will be next years street rubber. BTW, when I won with the NT-05s, I also used them for the street and for several track days. They were definitely slower at the end the season, and that is why I am keeping the RS3 for autocross only.

After autocrossing for 10 years, racing Karts for 5 years, and 15 years of HPDE, I have never understood spending money on tires to go faster. There is no trophy in HPDE, and when trophies are involved, the key is that everyone is even, not how fast everyone is. I begged the local Karting guys to spec hard tires. I was drowned out by a chorus of folks screaming, "we will be slow and we will have no fun" (the same thing I heard in similar Solo II discussions in the late 80s), so we ended up with tires so soft that you had to have a new set for every event to be competitive. Other regions ran a whole season on their hard tires. Jeez.

My $0.02.

Solofast

Trackman,

I still have some concerns with the move all the way to 200 tires..

I've talked to Woody Rogers (of the tire rack) and he gets about 200 runs and 1500 street miles on a set of 140 UTOG tires. At the end of their life they were pretty much as fast as when they were new. If I had that kind of life and grip, that's probably good enough for me, so I'm a bit up in the air on the need to go to a 200 wear rating.

Seems a bit silly to me to go to 140 one year, and have to test to get the car set up on 140's, and then turn around and do it all over again the next year, for 200's. I'm also not hung up on 200 as a number. There are a lot of 180 rated tires out there and I just don't quite know why 200 was selected, other than the fact that those are obviously street tires.

I've never driven my autocross tires on the street. Even in the days of the 001R I'd change tires at the event. It would be nice to change tires before local events and not be dorking with the car as much on Sunday's.

The ideal life situation is where we were in the mid-80's. When the tires got too bald to run on you saved them for testing. You bought fresh rubber just before or at Nationals, and you used those same tires in the first part of the next season. With one driver those tires lasted most of the next season and you did it again. From time to time you needed a new set and you generally had two or three sets of wheels and that let you pick and choose what you ran on based on the importance of the event. I'm thinking that a tire with a 140 rating might get you to that point, which is really pretty darn good.

If you had two drivers you were pretty much set on two sets per season, including testing, which I could probably live with.

The HoHo's have a treadwear rating of 30.. 710's are 40.. Kinda gives you an idea of where that is in terms of life...

I would prefer that the SEB takes this whole thing a bit more slowly, and maybe just do the 140 tire thing the first year, and see what folks think of that and then determine if that worked and if there's a need to go to 200.

hklvette

I wondered how long it was going to be before this showed up here....

I'm beginning to think that the SEB threw a pile of changes for stock at the wall just to see what sticks. Judging by the way a lot of people that are currently campaigning in stock are reacting, I expect no change at all.

I think the 200TW has more to do with other series' requirements for 200TW.

talon95

I think the tire rule change will happen, but I also think SS will remain intact with R-comps. Although I would be disappointed if we still end up with no class at all for Vettes, Porsche's, etc... (like real sports cars) to run street tires.

hklvette

Actually, I think your latter point is exactly what is going to happen. Read the response to letter #10244. I asked when, if ever, such a class would see the light of day and if not, why not? In retrospect it was a little pointed, but considering the fact that it is the Sports Car Club of America, its a bit perplexing why it didn't exist first.

Solofast

You could well be right, they may have just been trying to respond to everything that is being complained about loudly right now..

I think that a lot of folks are screaming because without some kind of camber allowance they are hosed tring to run A6's, so there was something in there for those folks to give them a nugget of a camber allowance... I've run a lot of cars that had from zero to a half a degree of negative camber and with the present tires that would suck. But with tires that are more camber tolerant and harder, it's not a big deal to get decent life out of them.


If you didn't let SS stay on R-comps, then you have to rearrange the classing with some significant differences. The small light, lower powered (Loti) cars would have a huge advantage over the larger, more powerful cars (Vettes). If they didn't address that, the Corvettes would be gone in one week. Remember that Corvette drivers have other places that they can run, like NCCC, so if you make our cars uncompetitive we just won't run SCCA. Talk about voting with your feet!!! SS is popular because of the Corvette, and while there has, for an awful long time been a Corvette class available, there was a reason for that. At Nationals there were 41 entries in SS. 34 of them were Corvettes.. And the reason for that is really simple. The stock class C5 Z06 is the best bang for the buck, autocross car that there is, and perhaps ever was. Make the Corvette uncompetitive and you will kill the class in a heartbeat.

I don't think going to a 140 or 200 UTOG rating would be a bad thing if the Elise and Porsche were gone from the class. Leave them in and the folks will vote with their feet.

hklvette

I'm not even sure if that would keep the Corvettes in SS around. Why? Judging by the reaction I have seen from some people on SCCAforums, they won't drive a Vette if it doesn't have R-comps on it. In addition, at least up to now the <220TW tire market has been size limited to around the 275/35/18. Obviously not an issue with Hoosiers. Maybe street tires in stock will serve to fix that, but it will take time.

I enjoy driving my coupe on sticky street tires, and maybe that's where the line of "usability" is: between the C5 coupe and the C5 Z06. Don't see many cayman drivers belly-aching over the lack of R-comps either.

I didn't bother asking on the other forum, but would 80TW (R888, NT-01, MPSC) be an acceptable rating for the "new" SS? Most of those tires are "streetable," but wouldn't be confused with a true street tire like the RS-3, ZII, etc.

bsalie99

I will have to agree with the comments I have heard from Many of the current National level SS drivers. The rule is CRAP. It was drawn up with out input from the SEB or the class competitors. It is trashing the entire population of the best subscribed stock class, on the HOPE that they will attract a bunch of first timers, that most likely run 1-2 local events and disappear.
It also goes back to the SCCA's habit of rewarding small, low powered cars at the expense of High HP American cars. They always tend to write their rules to benefit some little, mostly imported P.O.S. , that in most cases is no longer sold in the US because it cant meet standards.
Street tire classes will ALWAYS give an advantage to one of these cars. Grip was the one factor that leveled the field slightly.

Also they always bring up the cost of R-comps as the a factor. That is complete ********. Competitive cars WILL NOT be driving on their (race) street tires. I have seen cars trailered to events, rolled off, and then had new bagged "street tires" installed, raced and then the tires removed and rebagged before they left. These "street" tires cost as much or in many cases esp for larger cars the cost more than Hoosier A6 tires.
They also have not addressed the face that each maker sets his own tread wear rating. a 140 from one company has no reference to a 140 from another. Hell Hoosier could rate the A6 at 1000.
Enough ranting, its a stupid proposal and should not be approved

RX7 KLR

You seem to have a misunderstanding of the rules making process, or you have been misinformed. The staff at SCCA does not make the rules, the Solo Events Board (SEB), which is made up of members who volunteer their time make the rules.

The SEB is in fact the group that put this proposal out for member feedback. Depending on who you want to believe they did so based on limited input from the Stock Advisory Committee (SAC).

The reason this proposal is out is to get input from the members, they don't get input and then put out proposals, it goes out in Fastrack so people will write in.

If you don't agree with the proposal make sure you let them know why: www.sebscca.com

As someone who spent 15 of the last 20 years in Stock I think the proposal is a slap in the face to Stock and Street Prepared, and seems to be very poorly worded - the shock take-back alone is a joke, it effectively does nothing, doubles will still be in place just different brands and models.

ltborg

My big issue with this proposal is that there is no statement as to why the changes are being made. There are people that say they want to see a class with street tires, but will they actually show up to National events? I know of several people that WON'T show up if there are street tires, and they are actively competing in stock classes now. Would their walking away be replaced by more people who want street tires?

What happens when the top guys test everything in the Street class rules and the guys that wanted street tires to be competitive are still near the bottom of the pack?

Is there a problem with attendance levels? I know some events are a little light, but Spring Nationals was at a really high level. Most mid-Atlantic and some NE events are reaching capacity very quickly.

As mentioned above, street tires are harder to drive on, but not impossible as some people claim. I've driven C5s on Dunlops (Star Specs) and it is a lot of fun, but less forgiving than R-Comps. If anything, it will make a bigger split between drivers as some people adapt and others don't.

I also agree with the fact that going from 140 to 200 is just ridiculous. Pick a number and go to it. Don't make the top guys test twice. The argument that people need to burn up 140s is bogus, there are more stock competitors that will have R-Comps to burn up. Changing everything in 2015, just once, would allow people to start testing and making plans for new cars (if they want to change class), new classes (if they go to SP to run R-comps), or vehicle testing (to hit the ground running on street tires).

Letting some cars get camber adjustments and others not others, should be removed. Either let everyone have it or let no one have it.

The top guys will still test, regardless of the rules. Even a factory spec only class would result in guys weighing engine components and stacking tolerances in their favor, that's just how it is in racing. That's why I don't understand the argument of race tires aren't stock. It's just a name. Street Prepared cars (as mentioned already) aren't very street worthy. You can name a dog "Cat" but it's still a dog.

Regardless of the changes, as long as the majority of people are for it, it will be fine. What I would be interested in seeing are the results of a poll showing how many people want this change from the total SCCA membership, active stock class competitors, and SCCA regions active in Solo.

bsalie99

Having spoke to someone who is on the SAC and had been on the SEB, I was told That this was created outside those groups and presented to the membership before they even saw it. they have had follow up meets on it. bu there seems to be an outside force pushing this