Input Requested for Annual Rules Meeting

[MNbiker]

The annual Rules Meeting of the Metropolitan Council of Sports Car Clubs is scheduled for Saturday, December 9th, from 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM. (See this announcement (http://forum.mnautox.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5622) for further details, directions, etc.)

The purpose of this thread is to solicit input and ideas from members, regarding potential rules changes to discuss at the meeting. All ideas are welcome!

The current Met Council Rules may be accessed at:
http://www.met-council.org/rules.html (http://www.met-council.org/rules.html)


Steve Garnjobst
Met Council Rules Chair

[porkbone]

I don't know, I think Met Council is pretty stingy on trophies. Let me clarify... I am NOT an advocate for the "everyone's a winner" philosophy, but I propose a change to the following rule:

7.9 Trophies will normally be awarded to the top 20% in each class (3-7 cars, 1 trophy; 8-12 cars, 2 trophies; 13-17 cars, 3 trophies; etc.). Ribbons or other mementos may also be awarded. Refer to Section 9: CLASSES for procedures to combine classes when necessary.

I propose it be changed to the top 30%. (3-5 cars, 1 trophy; 6-8 cars, 2 trophies; 9-11 cars, 3 trophies; etc.).


Most everywhere else we go, 30% seems to be the norm. Most of our classes are small enough we would rarely have more than 2 trophies anyway.

Just a thought.

P.S. In Denver they had a cool idea where winners had the option of choosing a trophy, a sticker, or a beer mug. Stickers could be placed on cars or helmets as a badge of honor, beer mugs could be filled with frosty beverages after the event, etc.

[Teddy.B]

speaking of trophies...
Maybe there should be an option to pass up plaques for 1 larger (read taller) plaque that could hold 8 or so tags. This way someone who wins their class at every event (or a few events) would end up with one plaque that holds all the tags for the year instead of 8 plaques. It might cut down on cost also, although maybe alot of people already pass on their plaques I don't kown. Just a thought....

[washburn]

I have several of those from the Madison Sports Car Club. The "tags" are seperate pcs of wood, around 1" tall x whatever the width of the plaque is, and they hang with little hooks from the one above. Each tag got an engraved plaque. I thought they were pretty cool. You can spend a little more on the plaque, because each person only gets one. The tags cost less.

[MNbiker]

speaking of trophies...
Maybe there should be an option to pass up plaques for 1 larger (read taller) plaque that could hold 8 or so tags. This way someone who wins their class at every event (or a few events) would end up with one plaque that holds all the tags for the year instead of 8 plaques. It might cut down on cost also, although maybe alot of people already pass on their plaques I don't kown. Just a thought....
Not really a rules meeting topic, but I like the concept.

[porkbone]

Not really a rules meeting topic, but I like the concept.

Yes, just don't forget that this trophy discussion began because I suggested a change to the trophy rule. ;)

[phile]

Yes, just don't forget that this trophy discussion began because I suggested a change to the trophy rule. ;)
A little history. Back in the sixties sometime, Met Council Rally Rules (yes, there used to be such a thing) called for a 10% payout in trophies. Rallies always gave two trophies per entry: one for the driver and one for the navigator. Autocross rules were based on the concept that only one trophy was required per entrant, so 20% would be the same cost to the club.

Later, when Solo 2 (now called simply "Solo") rules came along, they settled on a formula that was more generous to the entrants. I don't know how they came up with this concept. Possibly a general view of practices around the country.

I don't know how I'd vote on changing the Met Council rules to be more generous. I'd expect it would lead to cheaper trophies in more than one sense of the word. Clubs may be reluctant to raise event fees, so they would cheapen up the trophies if they had to give away more.

I ran 11 Met-Council-rules events this season. With the current 20% rule, I received 3 event trophies. With a 30% rule, I would have won 6 event trophies.

In the Mowog series, I ran all 8 events. With the current 20% rule, I won 1 Mowog-event trophy. With a 30% rule I would have won 4 Mowog-event trophies.

I'm not sure how this makes me feel about the issue, but doing the research for it highlights to me that I have gotten a lot of autocrossing in this year. In addition to these 11 events, there was a T&T, an Evo School, a hillclimb and an an airport run. :)

No conventions this year, though.

[fitz]

A little history. Back in the sixties sometime, Met Council
I'm not sure how this makes me feel about the issue, but doing the research for it highlights to me that I have gotten a lot of autocrossing in this year. In addition to these 11 events, there was a T&T, an Evo School, a hillclimb and an an airport run. :)

No conventions this year, though.

I have boxes of trophy's that I have collected over the years. So many that the only ones I display are 1st-place and year-end awards. Everything else means nothing to me, just takes up space. The present rule is more than generous enough in my bool

Just my opinion, value precisely $0.02

[weidnerpaul]

I have boxes of trophy's that I have collected over the years. So many that the only ones I display are 1st-place and year-end awards. Everything else means nothing to me, just takes up space. The present rule is more than generous enough in my bool

Just my opinion, value precisely $0.02

But they meant something to you at the time.
At least until you accumulated so many ;)
Lots of the club members will only ever end up with a couple trophies even the way it currently is...

[the tick]

I have boxes of trophy's that I have collected over the years. So many that the only ones I display are 1st-place and year-end awards. Everything else means nothing to me, just takes up space. The present rule is more than generous enough in my bool

Just my opinion, value precisely $0.02

I think the one large(ish/er) "anual" plaque and smaller "Event specific tags" would help here. If you only get one, you get one, if you get more, well it's still mostly just one with some extra bling. Tha anual plaque could be somewhat generic "blah blah MAC 200X blah blah", and the "tags" could be made available later with the event specific info ("C Stock 2nd place, July...."). I kinda like that idea.........

[stoooo]

I think the one large(ish/er) "anual" plaque and smaller "Event specific tags" would help here. If you only get one, you get one, if you get more, well it's still mostly just one with some extra bling. Tha anual plaque could be somewhat generic "blah blah MAC 200X blah blah", and the "tags" could be made available later with the event specific info ("C Stock 2nd place, July...."). I kinda like that idea.........
I like the sounds of this idea, too. Not that I'm likely to be winning trophies for a while yet. But when I do, this sounds like the kind of thing I'd rather have.

Stuart.

[larry200]

I think the one large(ish/er) "anual" plaque and smaller "Event specific tags" would help here. If you only get one, you get one, if you get more, well it's still mostly just one with some extra bling. Tha anual plaque could be somewhat generic "blah blah MAC 200X blah blah", and the "tags" could be made available later with the event specific info ("C Stock 2nd place, July...."). I kinda like that idea.........

+1

-- Larry B.

[weidnerpaul]

I like ordering the large one with the participants name, and all other tags only need the event name, award position and class. Seems to me a lot less hassle for the trophy guy, the event tags could maybe even be pre-ordered, just a thought

[chuck b]

a request for rules adjustments and the only one that comes up has to do with trophies!? wow, we must be good. we should give ourselves a trophy!

out
chuck

[SmokingTires]

Rallies alway gave two trophies per entry:


Could someone call the editor?
:D

[phile]

Could someone call the editor?
:D
I called the editor. He took care of it.

Now it's time to ask yourself if you really want to start this game with me.

[SmokingTires]

I called the editor. He took care of it.

Now it's time to ask yourself if you really want to start this game with me.

Nope.... Because my spelling and grammar often get bad when I am tired.

I just liked the rare irony :)

[stoooo]

a request for rules adjustments and the only one that comes up has to do with trophies!? wow, we must be good. we should give ourselves a trophy!

out
chuck
We had the kart thing, too.

Stuart.

[MNbiker]

We had the kart thing, too.

Stuart.
I'm going to take karts off the table for the Met Council Rules Meeting. Other Met Council Clubs have rules prohibiting karts, so it's really only applicable to MAC events. If MAC membership chooses to create kart class(es), the plan is to address karts in the new MAC-only Supplemental Rules we will be creating for 2007.

[washburn]

If no one else is going to throw out any new subjects, perhaps Steve could recap what already is on the Met Coucil rules agenda, if anything.

[MNbiker]

If no one else is going to throw out any new subjects, perhaps Steve could recap what already is on the Met Coucil rules agenda, if anything.
Very little, at the moment. The only firm item I currently have on my list is a minor change, related to STU & STS2. STU is becoming a National class, so we can remove the special reference in the rules - and we need to extend STS2 for another year.

[phile]

I'm going to take karts off the table for the Met Council Rules Meeting. Other Met Council Clubs have rules prohibiting karts, so it's really only applicable to MAC events. If MAC membership chooses to create kart class(es), the plan is to address karts in the new MAC-only Supplemental Rules we will be creating for 2007.
I don't think we can do that at an event we characterize as using Met Council rules:

=========
SECTION 4: SAFETY INSPECTION. (No exceptions to Section 4)
...
4.3 A driver's seat lap belt with metal-to-metal, quick release buckle shall be required in competing vehicles and shall be securely mounted to the frame or body of the vehicle.
=========

[phile]

Very little, at the moment. The only firm item I currently have on my list is a minor change, related to STU & STS2. STU is becoming a Naitonal class, so we can remove the special reference in the rules - and we need to extend STS2 for another year.
This looks like a slam-dunk approval to me.

[MNbiker]

I don't think we can do that at an event we characterize as using Met Council rules:

=========
SECTION 4: SAFETY INSPECTION. (No exceptions to Section 4)
...
4.3 A driver's seat lap belt with metal-to-metal, quick release buckle shall be required in competing vehicles and shall be securely mounted to the frame or body of the vehicle.
=========
We could work around this - if we choose to do so. The only real issue I foresee is for MAC events which are also Met Council Series events. For MAC events, our Supplemental Rules can simply change the "No Exceptions" clause for Section 4. For karts running at a Met Council Series events, we could come up with language in the Supplementals, stating that karts wouldn't be running for Met Council Points and wouldn't be operating under full Met Council rules.

[phile]

We could work around this - if we choose to do so. The only real issue I foresee is for MAC events which are also Met Council Series events. For MAC events, our Supplemental Rules can simply change the "No Exceptions" clause for Section 4. For karts running at a Met Council Series events, we could come up with language in the Supplementals, stating that karts wouldn't be running for Met Council Points and wouldn't be operating under full Met Council rules.

What part of "no exceptions" don't you understand?

[CDeutsch]

What part of "no exceptions" don't you understand?

What part of "changing the rules" (what this thread is about) don't you understand? :p

[phile]

What part of "changing the rules" (what this thread is about) don't you understand? :p
I understand "changing the rules" perfectly. It was suggested here that we didn't NEED to change the rules.

Follow the bread crumbs. ;)

Steve G. was saying that we did not have to talk about karts at the Met Council rules meeting because no change of Met Council rules was required. I thought that we needed to change the Met Council rules to allow vehicles with no seat belts because that part of the rule book is listed as "no exeptions".

Writing our own suplementary rules is functionally the same thing as an eventmaster changing the rules.

=======
1.1 These rules shall be applicable at all Autocross events except for changes made by an Eventmaster. The Eventmaster may not change items labeled "No exceptions". Entrants shall be informed of these changes prior to registration, and they shall be reviewed at the drivers meeting.
=======

The way I see it, we have three choices:

1. Get the Met Council Autocross Rules changed.
or
2. Announce that we no longer use Met Council Autocross Rules.
or
3. Don't allow vehicles without seat belts.

[AlexL]

=======
1.1 These rules shall be applicable at all Autocross events except for changes made by an Eventmaster. The Eventmaster may not change items labeled "No exceptions". Entrants shall be informed of these changes prior to registration, and they shall be reviewed at the drivers meeting.
=======

The way I see it, we have three choices:

1. Get the Met Council Autocross Rules changed.
or
2. Announce that we no longer use Met Council Autocross Rules.
or
3. Don't allow vehicles without seat belts.
Yeah, but the rule you cited was not labeled "No Exceptions." :flame:

[MNbiker]

What part of "no exceptions" don't you understand?

Phil, in the context of MAC events, we can change/delete/disregard ANY PIECE of the Met Council rules we choose to. All it takes is a simple vote at a monthly MAC membership meeting.

Do you think any of the other Met Council clubs give a rip about the Met Council rules, when they're running an event not part of the Met Council Series? MAC is in a unique position, as the club doesn't currently have any rules other than the Met Council Autocross rules. That will change for 2007, as we'll have a set of rules - primarily designed to address issues not covered in the Met Council rules. However, who says we can't also use the MAC rules to modify any sections of the Met Council document we don't feel are appropriate for governing non-Met Council events? It's not like the Met Council rules are a Holy writ. :rolleyes:


-Steve

[phile]

Yeah, but the rule you cited was not labeled "No Exceptions." :flame:
Yes, it is. The entire section 4 is labeled "No Exceptions".
:flame:
:flame:

=========
SECTION 4: SAFETY INSPECTION. (No exceptions to Section 4)
...
4.3 A driver's seat lap belt with metal-to-metal, quick release buckle shall be required in competing vehicles and shall be securely mounted to the frame or body of the vehicle.
=========

[AlexL]

Yes, it is. The entire section 4 is labeled "No Exceptions".
:flame:
:flame:

=========
SECTION 4: SAFETY INSPECTION. (No exceptions to Section 4)
...
4.3 A driver's seat lap belt with metal-to-metal, quick release buckle shall be required in competing vehicles and shall be securely mounted to the frame or body of the vehicle.
=========
What about 1.1?

[fitz]

If no one else is going to throw out any new subjects, perhaps Steve could recap what already is on the Met Coucil rules agenda, if anything.

I'll happily throw an old favorite of mine out there - delete the Stock "Street Tire" or "Street Tire Index" or whatever you want to call it category. With all of the "ringer" street-tires out there I can't think of any class more pointless.

Stock is stock and any DOT approved tire should be allowed.

Again, just my humble opinion, valued at precisely $0.02.

[CDeutsch]

I'll happily throw an old favorite of mine out there - delete the Stock "Street Tire" or "Street Tire Index" or whatever you want to call it category. With all of the "ringer" street-tires out there I can't think of any class more pointless.

We have one thread going at them moment asking for MORE national level "ST" classes.

Why don't you just throw out the idea of getting rid of SI while your at it? :p

I'm going to call the broker and buy some stock in Nomex because it's going to get hot in here.
:flame: lol

For the record there's still a big difference between 140 tread wear and R-compounds. Price "sometimes" isn't the big difference with the actual per tire price, but being able to drive to an event and run the same tires you use EVERYDAY (and not having to have an entriely different second set of rims and tires) is still practical and something people ARE interested in.

[Teddy.B]

For the record there's still a big difference between 140 tread wear and R-compounds. Price "sometimes" isn't the big difference with the actual per tire price, but being able to drive to an event and run the same tires you use EVERYDAY (and not having to have an entriely different second set of rims and tires) is still practical and something people ARE interested in.

x2

I think the turn out in street tire at each event shows this quite clearly.

[AlexL]

I'll happily throw an old favorite of mine out there - delete the Stock "Street Tire" or "Street Tire Index" or whatever you want to call it category. With all of the "ringer" street-tires out there I can't think of any class more pointless.

Stock is stock and any DOT approved tire should be allowed.

Again, just my humble opinion, valued at precisely $0.02.
Every run I take on a set of R compounds in my car is like throwing a $10 bill out the window. Even the most expensive and fastest wearing street tires aren't going to cost you that much.

[phile]

What about 1.1?
What about it?

[phile]

Every run I take on a set of R compounds in my car is like throwing a $10 bill out the window. Even the most expensive and fastest wearing street tires aren't going to cost you that much.
You are right on the money, Alex. I have taken probably 90 runs this year. I plan on using the tires again next year. Although I am not Stirling Moss, I'm having fun. I realize that keeping a supply of freshly-shaved Falkens would make me marginally faster, but not to the point of R-tires.

Deleting a class that regularly draws 20 entrants because someone thinks the class is "pointless" would be pretty silly, in my opinion. This is a well-subscribed and very competitive class. I'm not sure what other "point" the class needs to have.

Like Pat Washburn, I was against the idea of National classes using "street tires". I was in favor of local clubs and Regions having their own street-tire classes so it stayed under the radar. The advent of ST classes at Nationals put paid to that idea, but if the SEB does not hesitate to put ringer tires on the exclusion list, that's fine. The fact that the SEB has put the Pirelli P Zero Corsa on the exclusion list shows that they are not afraid of the exclusion concept. Of course, there is no reason local organizations around the country can't have their own exclusion lists anyway.

[AlexL]

What about it?
It's not labeled as "no exceptions."

[phile]

It's not labeled as "no exceptions."
So you want us to identify as "no exceptions" the paragraph that defines the use of the term "no exceptions". Sounds like circular logic to me. Have you been talking to Bob Kosky? ;)

[MattD]

Every run I take on a set of R compounds in my car is like throwing a $10 bill out the window.

I think you should actually throw $10 bills out the window when you take your runs. (and I will be sure to be a cone picker for your run group) :D

[MattD]

... I am not Stirling Moss ...

:?

Jackie Stewart?

[phile]

:?

Jackie Stewart?
I walk like Jackie Stewart.

I don't talk like Jackie Stewart, and I certainly don't drive like Jackie Stewart.

[fitz]

We have one thread going at them moment asking for MORE national level "ST" classes.

Why don't you just throw out the idea of getting rid of SI while your at it? :p

I'm going to call the broker and buy some stock in Nomex because it's going to get hot in here.
:flame: lol

For the record there's still a big difference between 140 tread wear and R-compounds. Price "sometimes" isn't the big difference with the actual per tire price, but being able to drive to an event and run the same tires you use EVERYDAY (and not having to have an entriely different second set of rims and tires) is still practical and something people ARE interested in.

Let's just all get our undies in a bunch why don't we?

For the sake of argument I think it is useful to go back to why we originally created a category for Street Tire, particularly for Stock Street Tire, so let's set the way-back machine to ancient history - you know, the late 90's.

A Street Tire category for Stock classes was seen as a way of allowing the novice or occaisional autocrosser to run with a truly "Stock" vehicle and still be competitive. In other words, you could show up on your OE RE-92's, MXV4's, CH95's or (god forbid) Eagle GA's and - at least in theory - have some hope of being competitive. You didn't have to worry about running against folks who had dedicated autocross tires and you didn't have the expense of an extra set of wheels and tires to be competitive. The super-sticky-but-not-quite-competition-tire market did not exist at this time.

Then Falken, BFG, and later Yoko, BFS, Dunlop and Hankook all came out with super-sticky tires which had the totally arbitrary but magical "140" treadwear rating and everything changed. Now in order to be competitive in "Street Tire" you have to go out and buy an extra set of wheels and tires. The original intent of the category has gone right out the window - unless someone wants to convince me the Azenis is a practical all-season tire for Minnesota. OK sure, your tire budget on these will be somewhat less than if you bought true R-comps but you are still buying what are essentially a set of competition tires and wheels with all the on-street comprimises that entails. Now that novice or the person who is just a part-time autocrosser still shows up with the same handicap they had before the Street Tire category. If they want to be competitive they have to get new rubber and wheels.

So why then does the category exist?

If the goal is to marginally reduce the competition tire budgets for some and not to improve competition, particularly for novice or part-time competitors, and we think this is a worthwhile goal then great, a Street Tire category that allows these tires is all well and good.

But I have my doubts.

If we decide this is not a worthy goal we could exclude some of these tires from the category, but then we have to police that, which is a pain in the butt.

Now I know that Street Tire Index has been a reasonably popular category, but is that because people want to run it or is it because it encompases so many different classes lumped together that its bound to attract a reasonable percentage of 150 entries at each event? I mean, you could index any combination of classes you want and chances are it would be "successful".

When it gets right down to it I don't think STI accomplishes what it set out to do anymore. It seems to me that SI actually does a better job of fulfilling the mission of Street Tire Index. I'd rather see STI dropped, which would allow fuller fields in some of the other classes instead of this constant delution that we have been seeing these last few years. Without STI for example, the number of entries in the class I run would at most events at least double, or even triple. As it stands, I count myself lucky if even one other competitor shows up.

Again, just my humble opinion, valued at precisely $0.02

[MNbiker]

Fitz,

I wasn't in the club when the original Street Tire classes were formed - and frankly, I don't really care why they were created. What's important to me is the reasons the current Street Tire Index class exists, and why it's so popular. Here's my take:

1. The savings are more than "marginal". Street tires - even the most expensive ones - are FAR less expensive on an ongoing basis than r-compounds. Street tires are going to last twice as many runs as r's (actually, more like 3 times the runs, vs. A6's or slicks).

2. Street tires allow competitors to drive their cars to & from events without changing tires. From many members I've talked to, this is a significant factor. In addition, while Azenis may not be an acceptable Winter tire - they're completely acceptable as a Summer tire. I know a number of members who buy a single set of Azenis in the Spring, and get an entire season of street AND event use out of them.

3. Some people simply like running in a large class. By offering a single indexed street tire class, we give people wanting lots of competitors a place to play. If we had an index class that allowed r-compounds, I seriously doubt participation would be as high.

FWIW - classes very similar to MAC's Street Tire Index are popular thoughout the country - so evidently the concept has a broad appeal.

It's obvious you don't get the appeal of the Street Tire Index, which is fine - there are plenty of other classes for you to participate in. However, IMHO it makes no sense to change or eliminate the club's most popular Series-eligible class.

-Steve

[fitz]

Fitz,

FWIW - classes very similar to MAC's Street Tire Index are popular thoughout the country - so evidently the concept has a broad appeal.

It's obvious you don't get the appeal of the Street Tire Index, which is fine - there are plenty of other classes for you to participate in. However, IMHO it makes no sense to change or eliminate the club's most popular Series-eligible class.

-Steve

I don't participate in, and never have participated in, STI. I did run in DS, competitively, for several years on OE Conti's though. I just don't think that the way STI is set up makes any logical sense. I also think - when looking at the other side of the coin - it detracts from other classes. I know it sure would be nice to have 6-8 cars in my class instead of 2. Maybe I'm in the minority in this, but I thought it was worth throwing out there for consideration. And again, if we think it is worth creating an entire category just to save some competitors a little cash on psuedo-competition tires, so be it.

I would also add that tires like the Azenis or RE-01R etc, are hardly "street tires" in a true sense. They were all designed specifically for competition use with the bare minimum of streetability built into them for rules compliance. To my mind at least they sort of defy the concept of a true "street tire" class.

[MNbiker]

I also think - when looking at the other side of the coin - it detracts from other classes. There's also a different way of looking at the situation. In a number of cases, results would indicate competition has actually gotten better, as a result of MAC's current class setup. Those drivers who want to run on a single set of street tires have largely migrated to Street Tire Index (or one of the ST classes) - whereas a high percentage of cars in the other SCCA classes are running on r-compounds. For instance, the competition in DS and CS was much more heated than in past years - partially due to a more level playing field. More drivers in a class doesn't necessarily equate to better competition.


I would also add that tires like the Azenis or RE-01R etc, are hardly "street tires" in a true sense. I strongly disagree. A set of Azenis will still last 10K-15K miles on the highway - which is pretty comparable to life expectancy of the softest street compounds for the past 20 years.

Sure, the top street tires have gotten faster - but so have r-compounds. I don't see that the gap between the top street and r-compound tires has shrunk dramatically in the past 5 years. On the other hand, the gap between r-compounds & slicks has shrunk a bunch - to the point where some Prepared cars at Nationals were choosing r's over slicks.

-Steve

[AlexL]

I would also add that tires like the Azenis or RE-01R etc, are hardly "street tires" in a true sense. They were all designed specifically for competition use with the bare minimum of streetability built into them for rules compliance. To my mind at least they sort of defy the concept of a true "street tire" class.
Lies. I daily drove my Miata on Azenis for two years and have had no issues with them other than noise near the end of their life. Contrary to popular belief, they work just fine in the rain, and my first set had about 18,000 miles and 100+ autocross runs on them when I got rid of them, (and they still had tread and still worked better than a lot of all-seasons in the rain). You can daily drive on any ST-legal tire just fine.

[SmokingTires]

Then Falken, BFG, and later Yoko, BFS, Dunlop and Hankook all came out with super-sticky tires which had the totally arbitrary but magical "140" treadwear rating and everything changed. Now in order to be competitive in "Street Tire" you have to go out and buy an extra set of wheels and tires. The original intent of the category has gone right out the window - unless someone wants to convince me the Azenis is a practical all-season tire for Minnesota. OK sure, your tire budget on these will be somewhat less than if you bought true R-comps but you are still buying what are essentially a set of competition tires and wheels with all the on-street comprimises that entails. Now that novice or the person who is just a part-time autocrosser still shows up with the same handicap they had before the Street Tire category. If they want to be competitive they have to get new rubber and wheels.



Last I checked, there was still a noticeable difference between Falkens and R's. There have been summer only dedicated tires for a long time now. So there should be no reason to proce any of them to be an all-season. A large part of a tires winter and water traction is due to tread design. I ran my RT-615's for 6k miles and they still had pleanty of tread left on them. They also handles rain very well. I coudl have easily gotten 15k our of those tires.

As far as street tires being too expensive, that is a corperate choice. When they create a more limited production car that is desired by people even outside of autocross, the price is bound to go up.

If we were to more highly regulate street tires, it would become less enjoyable to autocross on them. I ran one run at the last MOWOG on my 400 rated All-seasons, and it was nothing but disappointing. It wouldn't be worth showing up if you had to run on such a slow tire just to meet class ruls, or face the fact that they will be at the bottom of one of the normal classes.

I wasn't around when the original ST classes were created, but to me it seems like they are less about entry level (since it requires serveral thousand dollars to be competitive), and more about a walk in off the street class. A good majority of a lot of the people out there that are tuning their cars fall into one of two classes in general. SM (for guys that have boosted), or ST. A large majority of people who tune their street rides do sway bars, coilovers, etc. However they usually have just some quality street tires. This is a class that most people can just walk into without having the "IT" car, and still run well with good driving.

-Mike B.

[Teddy.B]

I also think - when looking at the other side of the coin - it detracts from other classes. I know it sure would be nice to have 6-8 cars in my class instead of 2.



Without STI for example, the number of entries in the class I run would at most events at least double, or even triple. As it stands, I count myself lucky if even one other competitor shows up.

While I see your point, more than likely (this year) you would still have been the only driver on r-comps. So where is the fun in that.

fwiw. I think some of people that run the azenis store their car in the winter, effectively making the azenis an "all season" tire.

[phile]

I think some of people that run the azenis store their car in the winter, effectively making the azenis an "all season" tire.
Works for me. I bought this car cheap, but that's no reason to rust it out.

My Falkens are stacked up in plastic bags. The Miata is snoozing in the shop wearing steel wheels and the crapola tires it had when it came to me.

[wathornton]

To change the subject a little...

At DCTC events I've noticed there is a lot of variation in the "# of wheels off-course" and you're kicked out rule.

Should this be standardized?
Or perhaps it should continue to be up to the Eventmaster's discretion.

-Bill T

[MNbiker]

To change the subject a little...

At DCTC events I've noticed there is a lot of variation in the "# of wheels off-course" and you're kicked out rule.

Should this be standardized?
Or perhaps it should continue to be up to the Eventmaster's discretion.

-Bill T

This is a topic worth discussing at the Rules Meeting, as you are correct that COM, PCA & MAC each seem to implement the policy a bit differently.

[tmalzahn]

In thinking about this subject, I can see both ends of the (tires) topic.

- With a street tire index class, it makes it easy for someone to get into auto-x on a budget and "try it out" for season or two. Once they get the hang of it, they start saving up for something a bit more auto-x oriented (perhaps R's). However, this theory is also the same one for the SI class.

- Because we have the infinite participation ST indexed class (you can live there forever), are we doing a dis-service to participants? I think encouraging the drivers to grow their skills and perhaps prepare them for national-level competition would be a nice thing to do.

- Maybe there is a middle ground in here somewhere. For instance, make the ST indexed class only for vehicles that would normally be in stock classes if they had R compound tires. Exclude anything beyond stock classes and put them in their appropriate place. For instance, if someone showed up in a vehicle that is modified for SM, they go to SM, not SMt. If they have that much $$ into their vehicle, go get some real tires.

- We could also set some parameters for participation in the ST indexed class. Maybe put a time limit or event participation limit on it to encourage folks to move on to their regular national-level class. Maybe they can participate in a maximum of xx events (or seasons) before being asked to move on to their regular class.

- Don't forget we still have the PRO class out there. This could be where they graduate to if their tire budget did not include R's. PRO is fully indexed, so we don't have to re-invent the wheel to make it work. Maybe just tweak it for only stock vehicles.

Here is how the flow could work:
- Start in SI, win it and move to ST indexed.
- Stay in ST indexed for two full trophy seasons (or whatever we decide).
- Once they complete the ST indexed limits, they move to PRO or on to their regular national-level class.

I have been in all of these classes and was around before the ST indexed class was created. Maybe it isn't broken, but can be tweaked to encourage drivers to improve and perhaps get them ready for regional or national-level competition.

My .02.

-Tim

[tmalzahn]

This is a topic worth discussing at the Rules Meeting, as you are correct that COM, PCA & MAC each seem to implement the policy a bit differently.

Another thing that might be nice to look into would be requiring start marshalls to be experienced (or fully trained).

Events seem to flow much better when we have an experienced start marshall squeezing as many cars as possible on course at a time.

(However, maybe the Met Council is not a place for this. The MAC Eventmaster checklist could include this so we don't have to formalize it.)

-Tim

[Groo]

I've always thought ergonomic mods such as seat alteration/replacement, maybe even steering wheel replacement should be allowed in stock classes. This would be for tall people like myself who, for height reasons, have trouble fitting into the car with a helmet. In my previous car, if I had kept it, replacing the seat would have been my only mod, which would have dumped me out of stock.

[phile]

Tim, I think the T class works just fine. I don't think it needs any tinkering at all.

People can vote with their feet. If you don't like the T class, don't run there. I like the T class, and I'd rather it be left alone.

[MNbiker]

...but can be tweaked to encourage drivers to improve and perhaps get them ready for regional or national-level competition.
This makes absolutely no sense to me. By definition, the Street Tire Index class is designed for LOCAL drivers, who DON'T have immediate National aspirations. Competing at a National level involves a lot more than simply slapping on a set of r-compounds, and many MAC members don't have the money or interest in fully preparing a car. Why would we force members out of a class they appear to enjoy?