autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: G-Force Tires Report and For Sale

To: "Byron Short" <bshort@AFSinc.com>,
Subject: Re: G-Force Tires Report and For Sale
From: "Joe Goeke" <joe_goeke@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 12:57:55 -0800
You tell'em brother Byron ;-).  I'm dying to try the new G-force and see how
it holds up compared to the R1.  Will find out in San Diego and San Berno!
I'm also hoping the tire works well all the way to cord as the R1 does.

One Hoosier note.  I ran some old A3 Hoosier take offs with lots of tread I
got from Kurt Ormiston last year at a local practice.  Took 8 runs on them.
They felt ok and the times were ok.  Then I put on the just starting to cord
BFG R1's I had from nats, and took two runs and went about 1.5 seconds
faster.  I've heard Hoosiers fall off about 1/2 way though there life, and
it sure looked that way to me after just 2 runs on worn out BFGs.
---JCG

-----Original Message-----
From: Byron Short <bshort@AFSinc.com>
To: Robert M. Pickrell Jr. <brnrubr@midusa.net>
Cc: Net <autox@autox.team.net>
Date: Thursday, February 18, 1999 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: G-Force Tires Report and For Sale


>Robert M. Pickrell Jr. wrote:
>> So for autocross and stock cars the BFG is a much better comparison to
>> the Hoosier. It seems the G-Force is wearing fast for some people, but I
>> am sure there are som die hard BFG fans out there that will counter that
>> idea. Like Byron or Goeke.
>
>Well, if you're gonna mention me by name...  ;-)
>
>I haven't run on them yet, which is driving me crazy.  I've been too
>busy working on the G-Cube to even bolt on our new sway bar, much less
>get tires ordered, etc, etc, etc.  But I can tell you that I've seen
>GEEZ data on a series of back to back tests between the Hoosier and the
>G-Force, and it's very revealing.  Although both drivers *felt* faster
>in the Hoosier, and both felt that the Hoosier was *easier* to drive,
>both were faster on the clock on the G-Forces, albeit by small amounts,
>about 0.2-0.3 seconds on 50 second runs.
>
>Looking at the data revealed why.  The G-Forces produce MUCH higher
>transition rate numbers.   On the order of ~4.5g/sec vs ~3.5g/sec for
>the Hoosier.  Most have reported the tire's snappiness similarly.  But
>the real surprise was the peak lateral g's.  The G-force was
>consistently 0.05g higher in absolute peaks.  However, both drivers
>reported that the increased work of keeping the G-Force on the edge made
>them suspect that the Hoosier would maintain higher levels throughout
>the entire turn.  But it didn't.  While the margin between the G-force
>and the Hoosier closes as the sustain goes up (I compared at 1/2 second
>sustain and 1 second sustain levels), the G-force produced more grip at
>each level.  In fairness, though, by the time you get to one second
>sustains, the G-Force is only pulling 0.01-0.02g on the Hoosier.
>
>The conclusion we reached was that the G-Force telegraphs information to
>the driver.  Therefore the driver more readily feels when he is falling
>off the edge.  This results in the driver expending one heck of a lot of
>work to try to stay on that thin edge.  However, even when he feels that
>he's fallen off the edge, he's still often pulling more g's than the
>Hoosier.  In other words, the BFG makes you work by showing you where
>you can improve.
>
>More data will be needed to see if this is a consistent result.  The car
>in question was a well sorted stock car driven by 2 different National
>quality drivers.  The car had about 1.2degrees negative camber, and
>weighed around 3000 pounds.  That day, on that course, with those
>drivers, we saw the subjective information matching what many have
>reported, but the analysis showed much more insight into the nature of
>the G-force tire.  At least one of the testers is a netter, so I'll let
>him speak up if he likes.
>
>Maybe I *am* just a BFG die-hard, but I was pleasantly surprised by the
>results.
>
>--Byron
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>