SCCA Solo Fastrack Posted

Link
Interesting changes proposed including:

Delete 3.3.3.A.3 (Rule book requirement for Annual Tech).

- Change 7.9.1 to read as follows:
“A clearly-visible line around its base will mark the location of each pylon. The inner edge of the line will be used to describe the outer edge of the pylon base as accurately as possible and this inner edge will be the penalty limit. If the pylon is upset or totally displaced outside the penalty limit, two seconds will be assessed. At Regional events, local methods for locating pylons may be used...."

(Street Touring)...The SEB and STAC are considering whether the treadwear rating minimum in 14.3 should be 180 or 140. Discussions are ongoing and member input regarding this aspect is requested....

180 since I can't get the stupid hankooks anyway :D

Also they're talking about moving the Evo into ASP.

"accurately as possible"

Great another rule with no real limts. (+/- 4in. was as close as possible for me).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert

+/- 4in. was as close as possible for me.

---

Only if you're trying to quit smoking that day.

140 or 180, does it really matter? The treadwear rating isn't a particularly objective rating anyway. Don't we have an exclusion list in ST? Just use that to ban any tires that don't fit the mold for the class.

Ironically, my daily driver 200 treadwear tires are banned from ST, because they're molded at 7/32nds (Nitto NT01). Too bad, as they're a great and inexpensive tire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altiain

140 or 180, does it really matter? The treadwear rating isn't a particularly objective rating anyway. Don't we have an exclusion list in ST? Just use that to ban any tires that don't fit the mold for the class.

Ironically, my daily driver 200 treadwear tires are banned from ST, because they're molded at 7/32nds (Nitto NT01). Too bad, as they're a great and inexpensive tire.

---

NT01 as DD tires or NT05s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altiain

140 or 180, does it really matter? The treadwear rating isn't a particularly objective

---

This was alway my understanding. As far as I'm aware there is no specific way to measuere tread wear so companies, to a point, arbitrarily assign the value to compare it to other products in the companies line up. If the minimum for autox street tires increases then companies will just essentially reassign tread wear ratings and carry on business as normal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ken o

NT01 as DD tires or NT05s?

---

Sorry. NT05s. 200 treadwear, 7/32nd molded depth.

So...why does molded depth matter when you can shave them anyway? Odd rule..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OZMDD

So...why does molded depth matter when you can shave them anyway? Odd rule..

---

Hmmm. Let's think about that for a minute..... SCCA?

140 or 180 does matter

I sent my letter saying no change, not a problem to address

180 eliminates some tires, and as others have said, is kinda meaningless since each manufacturer rates its tire without any govt agency looking to see if they did it "right"

I regularly get 150+ runs out of shaved STS tires; looks like my 4/32 shaved Hankooks could go over 200 since I'm at 97 now and still measure 3/32" ++

Unless they want to change the UTQG to 400, then things will get interesting.