How about an exclusion list? It may be simplistic, but sometimes
simple is a good thing :-) Start with the exclusion of R-tires, then
add tires to the exclusion list that don't meet the "spirit" of the rules -
say, those supermegabuck Pirelli-lop-ahamas. The most anyone
would be out if their brand is added to the list would be a set or
two of (shaved?) tires.
I imagine eventually we'd still be down to a spec tire or three for the
more serious competitors, but at least then someone just off the
street would have more in common with the class leaders. Now its
a different prep league altogether - R tires vs regular street tires is
like a Stock car running against an SP car.
Eventually a manufacturer may come out with a dominating R tire
that's good for ONE event - then what happens? I already spend
WAAY too much on tires.....
Just IMO,
Kent Rafferty
>It seems to me that the only workable tire regulation would be to mandate
>a spec tire - which IMHO may be fine for some pro race series, but its not
>my idea of the way SCCA Solo should go.
>
>As much as I dread the costlier, shorter-lived g-Farce becoming the
>de-facto standard, I accept it as one of several options. I don't
>know how I'll respond to it. My race budget forces me to maximize
>bang-for-the-buck, but I did buy a pair of g-Farces to satisfy my
>curiosity. Kumhos or Toyos could be in my future if I get the
>same short-life experience I'm reading about, since spins and lockups are
>still a fact of life for me.
>--
>Jeffrey D. Blankenship Senior Technical Consultant
>jblanken@itds.com ITDS - TRIS
>neon enthusiast #478 Champaign, IL, USA
|