Classes and Tyres - again..

[Jim Spencer]

Hi All

Sorry for dragging this one back up again.

The rule change note in the current motorsport now mag, wherby it now says that Tyres for 2010 are to be List 1A or List 1B, for the road going classes, has raised a question or three.


Firts one is that this rule isn't changable by local SR's?
As, if I understand it correctly, it would only need for that to go into the blue book in italics and we could all be back to the same situation we're in now, where we have to change half the car to move to an event a little bit further down the road?


Second bit
With an organisers hat on (albeit a very different motor sport discipline, where speeds are a problem) does it strike anybody else that making the cars significantly faster isn't a good idea?
For example it's not unusual to see cars from 2A/2B (Road spec Locaterfields) in the top 20% of the overall finishers - even done it myself a couple of times - and when one of the quick lads comes out to play not far off the top dozen at all (Regional level sprints this is)
So
If we go and make them a couple of seconds a minute quicker what will that achieve other than somebody turning round and going "That'll be full cages required for 2011 then.."


Last bit
Mechanically i'm on the very limit of what's reliable with a wet sump on 1A's, any more grip and a dry sump is going to be essential for some (most?) applications.
Now I know the argument that some cars leave the factory with B's fitted but with all due respect to the owners you don't (or shouldn't ) pull the same lateral acceleration on the road as you do the track - so arn't they looking at a much more expensive modification than changing the tyres and maybe the rims?


In short it might be me (probably is..) but I really can't get my head round this being a good idea somehow, any thoughts anybody before I document the above into the relevant bit of motor sports house?
Especially the last two where the folk from down south must experience these situations already?

[JamesK]

Perfectly put Jim, can't see the sense in it personally...

(Cue Me and Wilko falling out on the web again )

J

[Radical]

The reason was clearly given in Motorsports now, i.e most classics cannot get list 1A tyres to fit their wheel size and also regional champ complained about the imposition of 1A when most of their runners were currently using 1B.

[Jim Spencer]

Originally Posted by Radical

The reason was clearly given in Motorsports now, i.e most classics cannot get list 1A tyres to fit their wheel size and also regional champ complained about the imposition of 1A when most of their runners were currently using 1B.

Classics yup can go with that - though to be fair they've now been given a complete dispensation from 1A's or 1B's, if I'm reading that right, which seems the best solution.

Not with you on regional champs, as i'm sat here in the North West doing such champs (Midland Speed etc) and we're on A's..
But
In either event, although your point does illustrate the logic somebody used to get to their current proposal it doesn't answer any of the questions I put, - and they are questions - would like other folks opinions before making a prat of myself..

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Jim Spencer

In short it might be me (probably is..) but I really can't get my head round this being a good idea somehow, any thoughts anybody before I document the above into the relevant bit of motor sports house?
Especially the last two where the folk from down south must experience these situations already?

In the South West Championship they have had the phrase "road legal tyres" inserted in their Championship Regs for some time (i.e. you can run tyres from the 1A or 1B list). This doesn't seem to have increased the number of high speed accidents.

I can understand your reasoning w.r.t. additional modifications being necessary to a car when it upgrades from 1A to 1B tyres and I think this is a very valid point to make to the MSA.

If the regulation in the Blue Book made this optional then there would be chaos with various regional or club championships making their choice between 1A and 1B listed tyres and leaving the competitor in a quandry - that way madness lies.

Maybe these questions should be catalogued and put before the Speed Events committee which I understand are divided on the issue.



PS Jamie why would we fall out over a difference of opinion?

[St Eval]

We in the Southwest are against the enforced use of List 1a. We have used the catch all, (any road legal tyre) in our regs for years. This allows anyone to come along with their road car and have a go without the expense of buying a set of tyres. List 1b are generally cheaper than a competitive 1a and you don't need to shave them to be competitive, so a saving there as well. Our road going classes are very competitive and we don't suffer from an excess of crashes, probably less so than if we ran 1a. I also don't think that there is too much of a problem with oil surge, I will have a look around the road classes and see how many run a dry sump system. I can't understand why anyone would want to go slow on purpose, I'm having enough problems going fast enough this year.

[dado]

I run in the "Roadgoing specialist production car class up to 1700/1800cc. IE "kit cars".
The class is mostly made up of Caterhams, Westfields, Strikers etc, "you know the score".
My concern is that these types of car are being taken so far away from their original ethos, that it makes a mockery of the term "Roadgoing".
Running 1B's and the possibility of not requiring to have a windscreen is going against what these cars are supposed to be all about.
I might just aswell buy a single seater, at least then when I turn up to an event it will be a case of the class I run in, is down to engine size only!

[CNHSS1]

just to add to the debate re increase or not of accidents moving from 1A to 1B etc, i started on 1As for 2 seasons, 1Bs for 5 years and now on slicks for last 2, albeit not quite as light a car as Jim's 'Coffin Dodgem' . i would have to say that in some respects 1Bs are safer, the grip jump over 1As is sizeable, especially in braking areas, so no more dangerous but that the speeds if you do have an excursion into the undergrowth will be greater. that being the case, further safety levels should be required to combat the higher accident speeds (cant see anyone disagreeing with that one). so the amount of accidents may not alter, but the severity or potential severity, is greater.
the second thing with 1Bs especially the super soft jobbies (slicks with patterns drawn on!) is that the loadings on components are greatly increased. on the subject of 'kit cars', many of them use a threaded Transit van top link in shear, which although on the tyres the car was intended for (1As) and road use is A-OK, it may be pushing it a bit on super sticky 1B rubber on track. Maybe not the best example, but you get my drift. as cornering speeds go up, the loads on components go up exponentially (as does the cost in many cases), but does the fun, value for money or the competitors enjoyment?
we should cater for all levels of competitor and car, or as a previous poster put it, we are all gonna end up with near-single seaters.

no axe to grind as its not my class thats affected, but can see a storm brewing and potential loss of badly needed competitors if the right decision isnt made

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by dado

I run in the "Roadgoing specialist production car class up to 1700/1800cc. IE "kit cars".

My concern is that these types of car are being taken so far away from their original ethos, that it makes a mockery of the term "Roadgoing".

Running 1B's and the possibility of not requiring to have a windscreen is going against what these cars are supposed to be all about.

Several Locaterfield style kit-cars are now being run on the road without windscreens. This is nothing new as Jaguar XKs were often run without screens in the 1950s and 1960s.

There does seem to be a blurring of what is the required roadgoing equipment and I have seen several of these Locaterfields moved into the relevant Modified Specialist Production class after scrutineering despite being 100% road legal.

[Jim Spencer]

Originally Posted by dado

I run in the "Roadgoing specialist production car class up to 1700/1800cc. IE "kit cars".
The class is mostly made up of Caterhams, Westfields, Strikers etc, "you know the score".
My concern is that these types of car are being taken so far away from their original ethos, that it makes a mockery of the term "Roadgoing".
Running 1B's and the possibility of not requiring to have a windscreen is going against what these cars are supposed to be all about.
I might just aswell buy a single seater, at least then when I turn up to an event it will be a case of the class I run in, is down to engine size only!

Yup concour with that thought, getting silly isn't it?