Street tires in IT? My Review

[Flyinglizard]

Foregot; Lechump rules state that ITcars run with out any weight. This was in response to drivers that wanted to double dip .
Same for the lower Prod cars.

I am not sure how it has worked out. I have not looked around for results. busy building a roller dyno and trying to make a living.
Sorry to miss the bait tossed at me Fri.

 

[Ron Earp]

but as soon as people start doing everything to become the winner, it gets ruined. so keep it low key and keep it for fun. Still IT cars, still running IT races, just at the prep levels we are happy with and the budget and skills we have available, which we realize is not front-runner level.

It seems that you basically want to split off a portion of the racers into the street tire initiative, but only a selected portion - the mid to back of the pack guys and the guys that are not uber-competitive. This group is to run street tires for the street car cup, while the other folks are to keep running ho hos and run the regular IT race.

You don't want a rule change to mandate street tires because then everyone has to use them and we have front, mid, and back of the pack groups again, just like we do now in IT.

Is that about right?

It would appear you envision a tight race with other street tire minded racers and wish to have a street tire finishing order within the larger run group. But what happens when a new racer shows up and runs new street tires, and uses a fresh engine, or has an impeccably setup car with fresh engine, tires, and driving skills? Are you happy with his prep level and is he allowed into the street car cup? Can he get a street burger in the paddock after the race? Or is he shunned? What happens when five new racers arrive, with shaved street tires, can they be part of the street car cup? I don't think it will be very long at all before "it gets ruined".

I'm not against a street tire initiative. But like Jeff, I want to know what the end game here is, and like Glenn, I'll run street tires but only if everyone is running them a la a IT rule change.

 

[StephenB]

My goal for running street tires was and still is...


1. Allow me to run an endurance race on 1 set of tires, at a reasonable and safe speed. This allowed me to race more affordably, with less crew to change tires, without worrying about botched pit spots trying to change tires, and race a 12+ hr race at a significant savings almost within my budget.

2. Demonstrate to others that may be interested the performance potential and that these street tires work and can be raced on if they want to for whatever reason they have.

3. Get rid of the perceived barrier some of my friends have that you HAVE to spend money on r comps to race in IT.

At this point I met all my goals and had a ton of fun doing it!

Next year my goal, if I can afford the entry to double dip, is to have fun double dipping in ST using 1 set of street tires for the entire season with a few friends. Possibly running extra weight on my car to make me equal to them in ITS with my ITR car. The only goal of that for me is to race against some of my friends in a safe environment that I can't get on my own for less money... so Ya I am using SCCA as a place to play with my friends since I can't afford to rent the track alone... we will of course be following all SCCA rules and if others race with us that is fine by us.

No rule changes, no trying to convince the world to join us, no drama, just fun.

I hope this clarifies my goals.

 

[jjjanos]

why is this so controversial?

The 2002s are having problems keeping up with non-antiques. Or are having problems doing it without spending a lot of $$, so let's have them run their own regional class.

Non Mee-otter ITA cars can't compete with the Mee-otters without spending a boatload of money developing their cars, so let's have them run their own regional class.

Next thing you know, there's going to be 26 different classes running each weekend.

 

[jjjanos]

that's because it is not a stupid idea

1. I would love to save money

And that's why it is a stupid idea. It won't save money. It will save money this year and then we'll be back to where we started.

You are squeezing a damn balloon. The money will just get spent elsewhere on the car and then we'll have stickers for people who run junk yard heads that haven't been machined to the limits of the rule and then we'll have stickers for people who run cheap, but after-market shocks and then we'll have stickers for people who run the stock final drive... wash/rinse/repeat.

 

[Chip42]

You are squeezing a damn balloon. The money will just get spent elsewhere

like on entry fees.

Its a goal anyhow.

not trying to create a division, shun or otherwise split anything - just an effort to make running cheaper tires more attractive by encouraging a number of people to do it. Ron pretty much summed it up, but with the ongoing idea that there's some shunning involved. as I see it, there is not. it just sucks to be the guy who bolt son streets and falls to the back of or farther behind the clump of the field he ran with before. get that group to run streets and you all fall back and keep on doing what you're doing, for a bit less cash per race.

that's it.

so what if someone show sup with a new sets of shaved every weekend? go get'm tiger, lemme know how that works out for you.

Or, to put it in terms you all seem to be using - continue things as usual, and imagine a scenario where someone shows up with more money, skill, investment and/or prep and beats the mid pack guys. yup, IT racing is ruined. oh wait, no, it's not.

exact same thing. only in this case the midpack guy intentionally handicapped the one portion of the car that is the lions share of the consumables cost, rather than by NOT prepping the (insert allowed modification here) to the limits.

 

[Ron Earp]

it just sucks to be the guy who bolt son streets and falls to the back of or farther behind the clump of the field he ran with before. get that group to run streets and you all fall back and keep on doing what you're doing, for a bit less cash per race.

Okay, you state that it sucks to be the guy who falls to the back of the pack for running street tires. Money is an issue and you want to save a bit of cash.

But within a few months of the inception of your rule or experiment, it is likely you'll again fall back to the rear of the pack. Another racer is going to show up with street tires and want to go faster than you. Racers want to go as fast as possible within the rule set permitted, even if that is an ad hoc or localized rule set.

I don't see how you won't end up disappointed in the outcome of your proposal. If it becomes popular then it'll become a victim of its own success and IT as a whole will change, which is fine. Even if it doesn't result in a rule change it is highly unlikely participation will be limited to your your core group of racers, and you'll be disappointed to find yourself running right back where you started.

that is the lions share of the consumables cost, rather than by NOT prepping the (insert allowed modification here) to the limits.

As we showed many posts ago, tires aren't the lions share of the cost of racing. Consumables, sure, but not racing as a whole. Racing is expensive, and even if the tires cost nothing pursuit of the hobby has a significant financial impact on the household budget.

 

[Dano77]

My goal for running street tires was and still is...



3. Get rid of the perceived barrier some of my friends have that you HAVE to spend money on r comps to race in IT.


No rule changes, no trying to convince the world to join us, no drama, just fun.

.

Your guys haven't been paying to much attention to the IT7 Series have they.

Sold another car yesterday, with 100tw Toyos on it. He is prepared to be shunned.

Dan The IT7 Pimp Daddy

 

[lawtonglenn]

...pursuit of the hobby has a significant financial impact on the household budget.

don't say that out loud.... she might be listening!

 

[RSTPerformance]

No Dan... A LOt of people have seen what you guys have done and wish they had that in their region or their class... I see you as the problem!!! Oh PS: you guys shoul be running on Dunlops

Again- as someone mentioned another class is not always the answer, we have to many classes already in scca sprint racing. People that can still develop themselves and there car but don't have the cash to do it should run on street tires, you can easily run mid pack on them and save a ton of money doing it.

Raymond "If you can get a group of guys/girls (as the NE IT7 guys have done) great... You are lucky as you are all saving money without influencing the market enough to change the price or development of the tire." Blethen

 

[Xian]

And that's why it is a stupid idea. It won't save money. It will save money this year and then we'll be back to where we started.

You are squeezing a damn balloon. The money will just get spent elsewhere on the car and then we'll have stickers for people who run junk yard heads that haven't been machined to the limits of the rule and then we'll have stickers for people who run cheap, but after-market shocks and then we'll have stickers for people who run the stock final drive... wash/rinse/repeat.

Okay, you state that it sucks to be the guy who falls to the back of the pack for running street tires. Money is an issue and you want to save a bit of cash.

But within a few months of the inception of your rule or experiment, it is likely you'll again fall back to the rear of the pack. Another racer is going to show up with street tires and want to go faster than you. Racers want to go as fast as possible within the rule set permitted, even if that is an ad hoc or localized rule set.

I don't see how you won't end up disappointed in the outcome of your proposal. If it becomes popular then it'll become a victim of its own success and IT as a whole will change, which is fine. Even if it doesn't result in a rule change it is highly unlikely participation will be limited to your your core group of racers.



As we showed many posts ago, tires aren't the lions share of the cost of racing. Consumables, sure, but not racing as a whole. Racing is expensive, and even if the tires cost nothing pursuit of the hobby has a significant financial impact on the household budget.

You guys (for example) keep saying *will* where it should probably be "may" or "could".

I suspect that Chip knows his sandbox better than anyone out of region and out of class. I also suspect that you guys are exactly the sort of people that *would* ruin the concept of running street tires. Why? Because you want a 10/10ths car... there's absolutely nothing wrong with that but it runs counter to the whole Street Tire Revolution that he's touting. People like you (and me "back then") are the ongoing problem with a Rehional class like IT (insert pond size argument). IMO, the class was never conceived of as a place for folks to go take "pro level" prep and investment to but that's the culture that has developed post-Speedsource/Turner/etc and what we've effectively got now and in the future. We've got this further supported by rule makers that can't/won't look at data for reclassifying a car until every bit of development has been done. I completely "get" that that's what we get when a class becomes popular enough *unless* it has an ingrained culture that limits development (kinda like the IT7 guys). The limitation can be via good, old-fashioned shunning or via diminishing returns in rule exploitation (STC will more likely fall into the latter).

The best thing that cold happen for STC or whatever it's called is for everyone at the front of the grid to turn up their noses, proclaim it won't work, and then ignore it. To you guys it won't matter. You'll continue beating (and ignoring) the middle to back half of the field and you'll go right on having your hard fought battles with the front 25-30% of the field. It'll be 100% seamless to you but for the guys further back, who *aren't* spending as much on the Total Race Experience as the front runner's spreadsheets indicate, they'll save some $$ and have a good race amongst themselves. Just like now but with an additional sense of comradery and accomplishment. Heck, maybe they'll even make it to an additional race during the year due to real or perceived savings. And when they do, the fields will be that little much deeper so that the winner gets an extra free Hoosier.

 

[Flyinglizard]

Yuse guys foreget that IT started with 1000$ cars with Yokohama 001 or 008 tires that lasted for a couple of years. Much fun and way cheap. A good 10 MPH slower everywhere.
Then Goodyear year made the GS and it went down hill from there.

 

[Greg Amy]

Then Goodyear year made the GS and it went down hill from there.

Though not directly relevant to the discussion at hand...my reaction to the above statement is..."ummm, nope".

C'mon, you were there, you know better. Prior to the introduction of the Goodyear GS-CS at the Runoffs in 1991(?)* there was already a serious tire war going on for DOT classes. DOT was the direction we were headed, certainly for all newly-introduced classes. And Showroom Stock was a King of the Hill category; auto manufacturers were involved, tire manufacturers were involve, lots of money was involved. Hell Porsche and Corvette were beating the crap out of each other, and Firehawk and World Challenge (or its predecessor) were raking in serious attention and bucks.

If one were to point to a specific 'turning point' in the tires wars, it would probably be the Yoko A001R, maybe the Pirelli P7 before that. Point is, the unshaven DOT "slick" was not the turning point for these tire wars, it was the inevitable result of it. And that is exactly what we're trying to point out: no matter how good the intentions, you just never know who's going to get serious about it and find a way around that intent.

- GA

* I was a 'contract' Goodyear driver that year. GY showed up at Road Atlanta with these tires, unannounced (we had no idea they were coming) and blew us away. Many protests followed, to the point where we were wondering if we'd have any tires for the Runoffs. Eventually SCCA agreed that the molded tires with a couple grooves met the letter of the regs and allowed them. And the damn burst...

Edit: Interesting link on the history of the DOT tire: http://farnorthracing.com/street_tire_faq/

 

[JeffYoung]

I -- with a carbon fiber splitter on a freaking Triumph -- take full responsibility for my contribution to the IT tech escalation wars.

BUT -- I don't think there is anything new about this. Popular classes almost always generate this kind of development. Neither ITA or S are "bolt on and win" classes anymore and haven't been since the late 90s in my view.

I guess the one thing I'd throw out there for anyone looking at S and A and getting discouraged by this is that as opposed to the early part of the 2000s, it's NOT race prep shops driving the development. It's pretty much individual guys putting a ton of owrk into cars in their own garages. Meaning, you can do this too. If you have the time and the commitment to do it.

Moving to street tires isn't going to solve that problem, which to me is the biggest impediment to people getting involved and staying involved in IT racing. SM and SRF are great classes, but it is much easier to "get" a front running car. Not cheaper, easier.

IT? You're pretty much going to have to build it and develop it. The days of the turn key RX7 or E36 or CRX are over, as newer cars --- without top race shop support -- have come out to play.

I personally like where IT is and where IT is going. To me, at least in S/R/A, it's the best multi-marque racing out there and is essentially "Prod lite." Yeah, we hated that concept for years but maybe we should embrace. We are far more of a tinkering than a bolt on class, and have been for much longer than we will admit.

But we stick to core principles that keep the costs down -- stock body panes, stock suspension geometry, essentially stock motors.

THe prod rules, even limited prep, to me still have too much flexibility for spending big dollars, and if prod fields ever got huge again you'd see high dollar cars. Not knocking guys like Kevin R. or his efforts there at all, and I think what the Prod guys have done is oustanding in changing the perception of their class away from being one of constant rule shifting and rewards weight.

But the IT ruleset, including the use of R comps, seems to me to be the most attractive out there, and to generate the best multi-marque racing. THat's why I'm perfectly fine with folks running street tires in IT so long as the goal is not a (in my opinion) misguided culture change based on illusory (again my opinion) perceived cost savings.

The "balance" that creates great racing in R/S/A right now is a fine line and I have to admit not entirely intentional. In a lot of ways, we (the ITAC and the IT community) are just lucky that things worked out like they did. I do perceive some risk that switching to street tires (particulary as others have mentioned without fixing the tire diameter and width rules, and even then older cars will suffer) changes that balance in an unknown way.

You guys (for example) keep saying *will* where it should probably be "may" or "could".

I suspect that Chip knows his sandbox better than anyone out of region and out of class. I also suspect that you guys are exactly the sort of people that *would* ruin the concept of running street tires. Why? Because you want a 10/10ths car... there's absolutely nothing wrong with that but it runs counter to the whole Street Tire Revolution that he's touting. People like you (and me "back then") are the ongoing problem with a Rehional class like IT (insert pond size argument). IMO, the class was never conceived of as a place for folks to go take "pro level" prep and investment to but that's the culture that has developed post-Speedsource/Turner/etc and what we've effectively got now and in the future. We've got this further supported by rule makers that can't/won't look at data for reclassifying a car until every bit of development has been done. I completely "get" that that's what we get when a class becomes popular enough *unless* it has an ingrained culture that limits development (kinda like the IT7 guys). The limitation can be via good, old-fashioned shunning or via diminishing returns in rule exploitation (STC will more likely fall into the latter).

The best thing that cold happen for STC or whatever it's called is for everyone at the front of the grid to turn up their noses, proclaim it won't work, and then ignore it. To you guys it won't matter. You'll continue beating (and ignoring) the middle to back half of the field and you'll go right on having your hard fought battles with the front 25-30% of the field. It'll be 100% seamless to you but for the guys further back, who *aren't* spending as much on the Total Race Experience as the front runner's spreadsheets indicate, they'll save some $$ and have a good race amongst themselves. Just like now but with an additional sense of comradery and accomplishment. Heck, maybe they'll even make it to an additional race during the year due to real or perceived savings. And when they do, the fields will be that little much deeper so that the winner gets an extra free Hoosier.

 

[Chip42]

Okay, you state that it sucks to be the guy who falls to the back of the pack for running street tires. Money is an issue and you want to save a bit of cash.

But within a few months of the inception of your rule or experiment, it is likely you'll again fall back to the rear of the pack. Another racer is going to show up with street tires and want to go faster than you. Racers want to go as fast as possible within the rule set permitted, even if that is an ad hoc or localized rule set.

I am not "at the back of the pack". far from the front, yes, but by no means the last car, EVEN as the only guy on streets (SARRC races excluded. as one of 2 or 3 B cars I usually am the last one there, even on Rs). and I have a path to improve myself and my car to close that gap some. the STC is part of that, as it actually saves me money. other people like the idea, too. some of them are old guys who show up with the same car they've been running for ages and just want to race, others might be newer to the sport, less financially able, or simply see this as an attractive thing to try. they may talk about "real IT lap times" or just honestly get that this is the level of development they can support for themselves, or be working on developing a car and driver and cut tire costs to aid in that pursuit. whatever the case, they are, at least for the time being, mid pack too. and this would save THEM money.

how much money varies, certainly. but some of the vagueness of reality doesn't fit on your spreadsheet. lock them up? spin? rains? STC is more forgiving of driver error in that it doesn't kill the tire, and actually seems to be a good learning tool by forcing clean running to get max speed but also being forgiving of oversteps. it's also a bit easier to catch when you do slip up, and many of them are fair rains. less replacement, longer lasting in the first place, and one less mounted set of tires. more savings.

anyone who starts last and ends last shouldn't be surprised to be last. if your expectation is not to be midpack to last, you wouldn't be part of this experiment.

I completely get the evolutionary arguments, but even if this took off, became a national or defacto rule (which again, I am NOT advocating)lower cost longer lasting tires for all means cost savings for many. there will be those who shave and optimize cycles and end up spending more than they do now. fine - you can't stop a racer from being a racer, but you can recognize that a lot of guys out there aren't on header design 3 in season 2. more like "same thing I bolted on in '95". they don't think like you and are already going slower on lesser equipment. this changes nothing in that regard.

and I do not begrudge the evolution of IT into "prod lite" I don't necessarily LIKE it but rules cant stop that from happening, only culture can, and a culture of competition will not. great. I am amazed by the ITS fields in the SEDiv, I am blown away by efforts like Ulbrik and Keane and underwood in ITB, doubly so by team Earpstang and the TR8. it's awesome. but it is NOT the entry level racing series it once was and along with SM, the economy, and life's ebbs and flows, I think the evolution of IT is one reason the car counts are down in IT in so many places. what can be done about that? very little from a rules standpoint. the rules are good now, and we're all proud of the stability of them and the fact that you CAN legally and affordably race in IT, just no where near the front in any well subscribed field. but from my perspective, anything we can do to foster a SUBGROUP of that old "bolt on" culture is good for the club as it could mean more cars, lower costs, and happier racers.

meanwhile, I'll be inching my way up to insane development status as I can afford to do so, so that I can join you front running types in standing on my achievements as measured in wins and records, rather than the successes I'm currently shooting for of helping people have fun and enjoy our club and our wonderful, stable, and balanced IT rules.

 

[Xian]

Jeff, you know I love you man, but there are *very* few people who can do what the front of the pack IT are doing. You're a single guy who makes good money and chooses to spend a big chunk of it on his racing program. Notice I said "racing program". Not "hobby". Guys with closer to average jobs and 2.5 kids don't have a "program"... they have a hobby that has to fit in between family life, fiscal emergencies, and the reality of only getting to the track a handful of times a year.

Everyone who's brought this "pro" mentality to IT has hurt it in the long run. I know I'm guilty of having done it. You are. Dr Earp, Kirk, tGA, Andy, etc, etc... We're all guilty of pushing the development envelope and the resulting expectation of what it takes to run up front. I think the goal here is to try and turn back the clock a little... Make it easy, make it fun, and *try* to make it cheaper. Will it work? Hell if I know but I don't see that it'll make things worse.

I -- with a carbon fiber splitter on a freaking Triumph -- take full responsibility for my contribution to the IT tech escalation wars.

BUT -- I don't think there is anything new about this. Popular classes almost always generate this kind of development. Neither ITA or S are "bolt on and win" classes anymore and haven't been since the late 90s in my view.

I guess the one thing I'd throw out there for anyone looking at S and A and getting discouraged by this is that as opposed to the early part of the 2000s, it's NOT race prep shops driving the development. It's pretty much individual guys putting a ton of owrk into cars in their own garages. Meaning, you can do this too. If you have the time and the commitment to do it.

Moving to street tires isn't going to solve that problem, which to me is the biggest impediment to people getting involved and staying involved in IT racing. SM and SRF are great classes, but it is much easier to "get" a front running car. Not cheaper, easier.

IT? You're pretty much going to have to build it and develop it. The days of the turn key RX7 or E36 or CRX are over, as newer cars --- without top race shop support -- have come out to play.

I personally like where IT is and where IT is going. To me, at least in S/R/A, it's the best multi-marque racing out there and is essentially "Prod lite." Yeah, we hated that concept for years but maybe we should embrace. We are far more of a tinkering than a bolt on class, and have been for much longer than we will admit.

But we stick to core principles that keep the costs down -- stock body panes, stock suspension geometry, essentially stock motors.

THe prod rules, even limited prep, to me still have too much flexibility for spending big dollars, and if prod fields ever got huge again you'd see high dollar cars. Not knocking guys like Kevin R. or his efforts there at all, and I think what the Prod guys have done is oustanding in changing the perception of their class away from being one of constant rule shifting and rewards weight.

But the IT ruleset, including the use of R comps, seems to me to be the most attractive out there, and to generate the best multi-marque racing. THat's why I'm perfectly fine with folks running street tires in IT so long as the goal is not a (in my opinion) misguided culture change based on illusory (again my opinion) perceived cost savings.

The "balance" that creates great racing in R/S/A right now is a fine line and I have to admit not entirely intentional. In a lot of ways, we (the ITAC and the IT community) are just lucky that things worked out like they did. I do perceive some risk that switching to street tires (particulary as others have mentioned without fixing the tire diameter and width rules, and even then older cars will suffer) changes that balance in an unknown way.

 

[JeffYoung]

No worries, you're a smart guy and I value your opinion.

I'd slide, somewhat, your word "can do" though to "want to do." Racing and development take a whole shit ton of WANT. Dr. Earp and Jeff G. (who is a Dr. himself, no slight intended) are examples of the WANT. Steve U. as well.

I just don't see how you rule make any of that out. And I also think that the pointy end efforts in Chumpemons are classic cases of huge WANT to investments of time, etc. And thus not really that different from us.

I'm not opposed to people running street tires in IT at all. I just don't think they will change the cost calculus much, and on the culture side, well, it will take more than just tires to do that. And I guess I do see a potential street tire rule as an example of something that could hurt. Like I said, we have a very finely balanced multi-marque several hundred chassis race class right now that with some issues aside (ITB I acknowledge) works. A move to street tires could hurt that, badly.

I'm not saying "no." I think Chip is doing a great job with this and his reasons for doing so are pure. I'm just saying tread carefully and don't advocate for rule changes based on false or illusory cost savings potential.

 

[Xian]

I completely agree that the "want" has to be there as well... but you can't get there on "want" alone anymore than you or I can "want" our way into a competitive F1 seat.

Help me understand... If we can't rules ourselves into a cheaper place (and there's been no suggestion that there will be a rules rewrite for street tires) and we can't change the culture of "want"ing to build a top car or win and the tires won't make much of a difference to the costs then exactly *how* might this be an example of something that could hurt the category. Either it makes no difference (as has been suggested) or it is potentially something that could be embraced by IT "culture" and drive a change from within. And if there is a "change from within" are you against it because it's different or counter to what serves you best?

FWIW, I say some of this ^^^ tongue in cheek but really, what's it matter if a handful of folks want to run cheap tires and earn bragging rights amongst eachother? Does it take away from your accomplishment in some way? What if they put together an agreement to run worn out Take-Off RA1's or SM Hoosiers? Does that make it any better or worse?

 

[jjjanos]

You guys (for example) keep saying *will* where it should probably be "may" or "could".

Yeah right. When the fleet is town, the bars "could" see more business and the prostitutes "may" be walking bowlegged for a few days.

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and expecting different results​

- Albert Einstein

The goal isn't to go slower. The goal is to spend less on tires. That leaves a googolplex of other ways to spend that money.

Moreover, name one freaking successful series where people didn't spend to the limit of the rules?

I suspect that Chip knows his sandbox better than anyone out of region and out of class. I also suspect that you guys are exactly the sort of people that *would* ruin the concept of running street tires. Why? Because you want a 10/10ths car... there's absolutely nothing wrong with that but it runs counter to the whole Street Tire Revolution that he's touting.

Pull the other leg, it's the one with bells. How many thousands of dollars do people have in their $500 POS Le Chumpmons cars?

People like you (and me "back then") are the ongoing problem with a Rehional class like IT (insert pond size argument). IMO, the class was never conceived of as a place for folks to go take "pro level" prep and investment to but that's the culture that has developed post-Speedsource/Turner/etc and what we've effectively got now and in the future.

And production was never conceived as a category where people spent more on a single season's development than I've spent in my entire racing career. That fart has already left the rectum. This proposal isn't going to stop the consumption of beans. It's just simply saying that we eat the vegetarian beans instead of the pork and beans. We're still going to be sitting around the camp fire letting 'em rip.

The best thing that cold happen for STC or whatever it's called is for everyone at the front of the grid to turn up their noses, proclaim it won't work, and then ignore it. To you guys it won't matter. You'll continue beating (and ignoring) the middle to back half of the field and you'll go right on having your hard fought battles with the front 25-30% of the field. It'll be 100% seamless to you but for the guys further back, who *aren't* spending as much on the Total Race Experience as the front runner's spreadsheets indicate, they'll save some $$ and have a good race amongst themselves. Just like now but with an additional sense of comradery and accomplishment. Heck, maybe they'll even make it to an additional race during the year due to real or perceived savings. And when they do, the fields will be that little much deeper so that the winner gets an extra free Hoosier.

Excellent. They want to run to mid-pack to DFL using street tires and underdeveloped cars. Where is the need for a new set of rules to make this happen? Under the existing rules set, they can still run mid-pack to DFL using street tires and underdeveloped cars.

 

[Chip42]

Excellent. They want to run to mid-pack to DFL using street tires and underdeveloped cars. Where is the need for a new set of rules to make this happen? Under the existing rules set, they can still run mid-pack to DFL using street tires and underdeveloped cars.

yup. exactly. no new rules, just a small incentive. that's the WHOLE idea.