The gains to be had from bringing in a 'ringer' tire to
compete against the existing S/SP rubber are fairly
small - diminishing returns, and all that.
To the marketing manager at ABC tire company, the ability
to advertise a win in "SCCA's latest, greatest, hottest class - STS"
that appeals to the folks who are the stated market for
this class is a BIG deal. He would likely care less about
winning Corvette, Miata or Porsche classes. . . . . look at
what Toyo is spending to attract the Import Drag crowd.
Don't bitch to me: I am simply repeating what has been the
mantra since 1983, every time someone brings up the idea of
doing away with "R" tires in Stock: "Can't be enforced".
Don't bitch to me: I am simply stating what has happened in the
past, when tire companies with aggressive marketing managers
see the opportunity to create a performance image for their tire.
Don't bitch to me: I am simply repeating what was said when the
whole ST concept came along: "Regional only. Common rule-set."
And don't bitch to me when history repeats itself.
R2
>
> There are maybe 5 different street tire models that are extremely common
> that you would be likely to see competing at Nationals in STS. Likewise,
> there are 3 or 4 different R-tire models that are common to Stock & SP
> classes. Now, what's to keep a tire manufacturer from making "ringer
> tires" for Stock classes as we now know them? How does this differ from
> the street tire situation?
>
> I would think that if a manufacturer were inclined to do something like
> this, they'd do it with the R-tires because they'd sell a helluva lot more
> of them than they would to the few of 20-30 STS drivers who would buy new
> tires at Nationals.
>
> STS = 1 class, maybe as many as 3 someday.
> Stock & SP = 14 classes, several of which are at least twice as big as
STS.
>
>
>
> --
> Loren Williams | Loren@kscable.com
> '94 Saturn SC2 | Wichita Region SCCA - http://www2.southwind.net/~scca
|