| ChrisW | 05-23-2002 10:00 PM |
DOT race tires may be made illegall without your help
There is legislation pending that could either make DOT approved racing
tires illegal, or just make them so
expensive that they will be unaffordable to most or the manufacturers
will simply stop making them.
Check out:
[url]http://www.hoosiertire.com/fmvsshlp.HTM[/url]
tires illegal, or just make them so
expensive that they will be unaffordable to most or the manufacturers
will simply stop making them.
Check out:
[url]http://www.hoosiertire.com/fmvsshlp.HTM[/url]
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 05-23-2002 10:18 PM |
Hello,
Hoosier should have stuck a link to the actual proposed legislation... I wonder if it applies to off-road tires, too? Some of the more aggressive DOT offroad tires might be covered by anything that hits the DOT race tires. Link to the law, anyone?
Joel Gat
Hoosier should have stuck a link to the actual proposed legislation... I wonder if it applies to off-road tires, too? Some of the more aggressive DOT offroad tires might be covered by anything that hits the DOT race tires. Link to the law, anyone?
Joel Gat
| ChrisW | 05-23-2002 10:36 PM |
good idea Joel... Here's the link
[URL=http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/rulings/UpgradeTire/Index.html]Docket No. NHTSA-00-8011[/URL]
[URL=http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/rulings/UpgradeTire/Index.html]Docket No. NHTSA-00-8011[/URL]
| Jon Bogert | 05-23-2002 10:46 PM |
I wonder if any manufacturer other than Hoosier makes tires that wouldn't pass the new standards.
<devils'advocate> Hoosier's are pretty borderline as "street" tires anyway--maybe they shouldn't be DOT approved. </devils'advocate>
<devils'advocate> Hoosier's are pretty borderline as "street" tires anyway--maybe they shouldn't be DOT approved. </devils'advocate>
| hotrod | 05-23-2002 10:46 PM |
Try this link
It isn't a law, but a proposed rule making request for comment. Looks like this is the document, Hoosier is refering to.
[url]http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/rulings/UpgradeTire/Index.html[/url]
Havn't had the time to read through it yet, but it has the 8011 number that Hoosier mentions on their page.
larry
[url]http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/rulings/UpgradeTire/Index.html[/url]
Havn't had the time to read through it yet, but it has the 8011 number that Hoosier mentions on their page.
larry
| DrBiggly | 05-23-2002 10:52 PM |
I was just about to post this in Motorsports; I see that you guys are ahead of me. Good to know. :)
| briank | 05-24-2002 07:57 AM |
I take it this is in response to the Firestone/Explorer blowout problem?
-BrianK
-BrianK
| hillman | 05-24-2002 09:48 AM |
BrianK, yes.
Devil's Advocate, the problem is not whether the Hoosiers would pass any test, but rather that the testing and reporting requirements of the proposal would make them much, much more expensive. Probably expensive enough that Hoosier would have little market left, and stop making them. Or possibly worse, only seriously high-dollar teams could afford them.
The same problem will face Kumho, Yokohama, Toyo, Michelin, and anyone else trying to make DOT race tires.
Devil's Advocate, the problem is not whether the Hoosiers would pass any test, but rather that the testing and reporting requirements of the proposal would make them much, much more expensive. Probably expensive enough that Hoosier would have little market left, and stop making them. Or possibly worse, only seriously high-dollar teams could afford them.
The same problem will face Kumho, Yokohama, Toyo, Michelin, and anyone else trying to make DOT race tires.
| Jon Bogert | 05-24-2002 10:08 AM |
hillman, I was just put off by Hoosier's "scare tactics" press release. They don't actually mention WHY this new protocol will hurt them. Is it because:
a) their tires aren't durable enough to pass the new tests
b) it will cost so much money for testing that the market won't pay the price thy'd have to charge
Doesn't look like it's part b:
[QUOTE]C. Testing Costs
The proposed light vehicle tire standard contains six tests with which every applicable tire must comply. Based on a time-based comparison between the time required to run the tests in FMVSS No. 109 and the proposed FMVSS No. 139, the agency anticipates that the proposal will increase test time by 6.5 hours (an additional 5 hours for the endurance test and 90 minutes for the high-speed low inflation test). Labor costs associated with this additional time is estimated to be $53 per hour for a test engineer for the 90 minute low inflation pressure performance test and $31 per hour for a technician for the 90 minute low inflation pressure performance test and for the additional final 5 hours of the proposed endurance test. [b]Therefore, incremental tests costs are estimated to be $281 per tire run[/b] (1.5 hours x [$53 + $31] + 5 hours x $31).[/QUOTE]
Since a few hundred bucks per run is no big deal, I'm guessing that the notoriously flimsy Hoosiers can't meet the new regs.
Right now a situation exists where certain types of racing allow the Hoosier "cheater" tires because they are DOT approved. Since the Hoosiers are very expensive, this makes life tough for the racers who either have to buy Hoosiers or be uncompetitive.
How does forcing Hoosier to make more durable tires hurt anyone but Hoosier?
a) their tires aren't durable enough to pass the new tests
b) it will cost so much money for testing that the market won't pay the price thy'd have to charge
Doesn't look like it's part b:
[QUOTE]C. Testing Costs
The proposed light vehicle tire standard contains six tests with which every applicable tire must comply. Based on a time-based comparison between the time required to run the tests in FMVSS No. 109 and the proposed FMVSS No. 139, the agency anticipates that the proposal will increase test time by 6.5 hours (an additional 5 hours for the endurance test and 90 minutes for the high-speed low inflation test). Labor costs associated with this additional time is estimated to be $53 per hour for a test engineer for the 90 minute low inflation pressure performance test and $31 per hour for a technician for the 90 minute low inflation pressure performance test and for the additional final 5 hours of the proposed endurance test. [b]Therefore, incremental tests costs are estimated to be $281 per tire run[/b] (1.5 hours x [$53 + $31] + 5 hours x $31).[/QUOTE]
Since a few hundred bucks per run is no big deal, I'm guessing that the notoriously flimsy Hoosiers can't meet the new regs.
Right now a situation exists where certain types of racing allow the Hoosier "cheater" tires because they are DOT approved. Since the Hoosiers are very expensive, this makes life tough for the racers who either have to buy Hoosiers or be uncompetitive.
How does forcing Hoosier to make more durable tires hurt anyone but Hoosier?
| 2WDrift | 05-24-2002 11:33 AM |
Here's the request summary.
[URL=http://www.hoosiertire.com/fmvsshlp.HTM]
[url]http://www.hoosiertire.com/fmvsshlp.HTM[/url][/URL] This applies to everything - Kumhos, Toyos, Yokes, etc. [b]Respond to the middle section instructions highlighted below by June 4th[/b].
>>>>>>>>
We ask that you help us in our efforts to convince the governing bodies to exempt small manufacturers of specialty tires from required compliance. To do this, we ask that you click on the following government link to submit your comments:
[b][URL=http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/ProcSubmission.asp]http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/ProcSubmission.asp[/URL][/b] . Once the new window appears, you will need to fill out the form using 8011 for the "[i]Docket ID[/i]". Select NHTSA for the "[i]Operating Administration[/i]." Leave "[i]Docket Type[/i]" filled in as Regulatory.
Next, change the "[i]Docket Existence[/i]" from Unknown to Does Exist. Next, type in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Tires for the "[i]Document Title[/i]". The final two entries can be left at their default settings of "No" and "Enter Comment". Complete the Submitter Information field and then click "[i]CONTINUE[/i]".
Finally, either enter your own text asking for an exemption to the proposed new standards for small specialty tire manufacturers or simply cut and paste the following text into the Comment Box:
[sample]
Maintain the existing FMVSS 109 for tires with annual production per size and design that does not exceed 15,000. And, modification to the proposed FMVSS 119 to maintain the existing FMVSS 119 testing standard for tires with annual production per size and design that does not exceed 15,000 for use on light trucks with GVWR of 10,000 lbs or less.
And click SUBMIT. (We have until June 5, 2002 to submit comments regarding the proposed guidelines.)
[URL=http://www.hoosiertire.com/fmvsshlp.HTM]
[url]http://www.hoosiertire.com/fmvsshlp.HTM[/url][/URL] This applies to everything - Kumhos, Toyos, Yokes, etc. [b]Respond to the middle section instructions highlighted below by June 4th[/b].
>>>>>>>>
We ask that you help us in our efforts to convince the governing bodies to exempt small manufacturers of specialty tires from required compliance. To do this, we ask that you click on the following government link to submit your comments:
[b][URL=http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/ProcSubmission.asp]http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/ProcSubmission.asp[/URL][/b] . Once the new window appears, you will need to fill out the form using 8011 for the "[i]Docket ID[/i]". Select NHTSA for the "[i]Operating Administration[/i]." Leave "[i]Docket Type[/i]" filled in as Regulatory.
Next, change the "[i]Docket Existence[/i]" from Unknown to Does Exist. Next, type in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Tires for the "[i]Document Title[/i]". The final two entries can be left at their default settings of "No" and "Enter Comment". Complete the Submitter Information field and then click "[i]CONTINUE[/i]".
Finally, either enter your own text asking for an exemption to the proposed new standards for small specialty tire manufacturers or simply cut and paste the following text into the Comment Box:
[sample]
Maintain the existing FMVSS 109 for tires with annual production per size and design that does not exceed 15,000. And, modification to the proposed FMVSS 119 to maintain the existing FMVSS 119 testing standard for tires with annual production per size and design that does not exceed 15,000 for use on light trucks with GVWR of 10,000 lbs or less.
And click SUBMIT. (We have until June 5, 2002 to submit comments regarding the proposed guidelines.)
| elgorey | 05-24-2002 12:02 PM |
That is an excellent point Jon
| jeddy | 05-24-2002 02:16 PM |
I have to agree that it seems odd that Hoosier didn't provide a link to the proposed testing procedures. I also think it's perhaps a Bad Thing to start filling the safety "standards" with clauses for limited production runs, or anything else for that matter. DOT approved means the tire must meet federal safety standards, no?
What's comes after that, certain sizes are exempted from certain tests? 55 series and higher can have a different under-inflation pressure standard, etc.? Talk about a pain!
I could see how extra testing _could_ jack up the price of the tires. However, if that <$300 figure above is correct, for a run of, say, 12,000 tires, that's only $.02 per tire. C'mon.
The point is that these are DOT approved tires, right? The DOT standards are changing, so tire makers might have to change their tires if they expect to get DOT approval. Do we need to wait for Something Bad to happen to a car with Hoosiers before agreeing the new standard? I would hope not.
On the other side of that, of course, is that it sucks that the Firestone thing caused this in the first place. One tire maker makes some bad tires, and people underinflate them, and we all have to be protected from ourselves. Oh wait, that's another rant.. ;]
What's comes after that, certain sizes are exempted from certain tests? 55 series and higher can have a different under-inflation pressure standard, etc.? Talk about a pain!
I could see how extra testing _could_ jack up the price of the tires. However, if that <$300 figure above is correct, for a run of, say, 12,000 tires, that's only $.02 per tire. C'mon.
The point is that these are DOT approved tires, right? The DOT standards are changing, so tire makers might have to change their tires if they expect to get DOT approval. Do we need to wait for Something Bad to happen to a car with Hoosiers before agreeing the new standard? I would hope not.
On the other side of that, of course, is that it sucks that the Firestone thing caused this in the first place. One tire maker makes some bad tires, and people underinflate them, and we all have to be protected from ourselves. Oh wait, that's another rant.. ;]
| hillman | 05-24-2002 02:55 PM |
I'm always very skeptical when the government tries to tell me how much something will cost. In this case, I think it is justified.
Look at the break-down of that $281. That is *only* labor. How that can be a valid cost projection, I've no idea.
Then there is this can of worms;
"As discussed above, the agency has only been able to provide preliminary estimates of the
costs and benefits of the proposed high speed and endurance tests. Further, the agency has not
been able to quantify the costs and benefits of the other four proposed tests. While our analysis
would be made simpler if each proposed test yielded similar costs and benefits, the agency
anticipates that each proposed test would produce differing levels of costs and benefits."
It doesn't sound like the proposal has anything remotely like usable cost projections, to me.
Look at the break-down of that $281. That is *only* labor. How that can be a valid cost projection, I've no idea.
Then there is this can of worms;
"As discussed above, the agency has only been able to provide preliminary estimates of the
costs and benefits of the proposed high speed and endurance tests. Further, the agency has not
been able to quantify the costs and benefits of the other four proposed tests. While our analysis
would be made simpler if each proposed test yielded similar costs and benefits, the agency
anticipates that each proposed test would produce differing levels of costs and benefits."
It doesn't sound like the proposal has anything remotely like usable cost projections, to me.
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 05-24-2002 03:17 PM |
Hello,
Well, lot's of controversy... umm, remember what DOT approved Hoosier race tires are - they're the track and autocross tires. They CLEARLY state, on the sidewall, DO NOT USE ON HIGHWAYS. I mean, what more can you ask for? These are DOT approved, but NOT street tires. They're PURELY for race purposes. It's a shame if some federal legislation will affect racing tires. For those of you following the slippery slope arguments, what next? Mininum treadwear ratings of 100 then 200 etc., on pure race tires?
The racing world is a closely self-regulated industry. If Hoosier race tires start popping left and right, racers will simply use another racetire. The USTCC uses the Hoosier DOTs as a spec tire to reduce costs. Otherwise, you'll have racers trying the latest and greatest full slicks (if DOT racetires get phased out).
When we raced the Open Track Challenge, we ran in the unlimited class. Any full racing slick was allowed. The turbo miata (more hp to the wheels than us, better suspension design, 400 pounds less weight) ran on goodyear slicks. We had no reason to stick to our Hoosiers, but we chose to run Hoosier DOTs because we really like those tires. They're predictable, easy to setup, and they work really well. We finished 19 places ahead of the miata, in 5th overall, ahead of vipers, supercharged nsxs, vettes, porsches, lotus elises, 340Rs, ferraris, etc etc etc.
It would be a real shame, again, for anything to affect the availability of such an awesome tire. This is NOT a street tire and no matter how you couch it, Mom and Pop aren't going to be underinflating their Hoosier DOTs on their 5000 pound SUVs. Regardless of what the "extra testing" involved is, the Hoosiers work perfectly as they are now. Any improvements will come from Hoosiers desire to sell more tires to people who look ONLY at the performance aspect of the tires, including safety performance.
So, while I think Hoosier's call for help could have been more informative, I don't think that's any reason not to support Hoosier and the other manufacturers in getting an exepmtion for DOT race tires and even DOT off-road tires (not M+S, but real, pure off-road tires that currently still qualify for DOT approval). These are purpose built tires, not Mom and Pop tires.
Joel Gat
speaking on my own behalf, only.
Crew Chief
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]http://www.teamsmr.com[/url]
Consultant
Vishnu Performance Systems, Inc.
[url]http://www.vishnuperformance.com[/url]
Well, lot's of controversy... umm, remember what DOT approved Hoosier race tires are - they're the track and autocross tires. They CLEARLY state, on the sidewall, DO NOT USE ON HIGHWAYS. I mean, what more can you ask for? These are DOT approved, but NOT street tires. They're PURELY for race purposes. It's a shame if some federal legislation will affect racing tires. For those of you following the slippery slope arguments, what next? Mininum treadwear ratings of 100 then 200 etc., on pure race tires?
The racing world is a closely self-regulated industry. If Hoosier race tires start popping left and right, racers will simply use another racetire. The USTCC uses the Hoosier DOTs as a spec tire to reduce costs. Otherwise, you'll have racers trying the latest and greatest full slicks (if DOT racetires get phased out).
When we raced the Open Track Challenge, we ran in the unlimited class. Any full racing slick was allowed. The turbo miata (more hp to the wheels than us, better suspension design, 400 pounds less weight) ran on goodyear slicks. We had no reason to stick to our Hoosiers, but we chose to run Hoosier DOTs because we really like those tires. They're predictable, easy to setup, and they work really well. We finished 19 places ahead of the miata, in 5th overall, ahead of vipers, supercharged nsxs, vettes, porsches, lotus elises, 340Rs, ferraris, etc etc etc.
It would be a real shame, again, for anything to affect the availability of such an awesome tire. This is NOT a street tire and no matter how you couch it, Mom and Pop aren't going to be underinflating their Hoosier DOTs on their 5000 pound SUVs. Regardless of what the "extra testing" involved is, the Hoosiers work perfectly as they are now. Any improvements will come from Hoosiers desire to sell more tires to people who look ONLY at the performance aspect of the tires, including safety performance.
So, while I think Hoosier's call for help could have been more informative, I don't think that's any reason not to support Hoosier and the other manufacturers in getting an exepmtion for DOT race tires and even DOT off-road tires (not M+S, but real, pure off-road tires that currently still qualify for DOT approval). These are purpose built tires, not Mom and Pop tires.
Joel Gat
speaking on my own behalf, only.
Crew Chief
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]http://www.teamsmr.com[/url]
Consultant
Vishnu Performance Systems, Inc.
[url]http://www.vishnuperformance.com[/url]
| Jon Bogert | 05-24-2002 03:27 PM |
Joel, why do they need DOT approval if they're pure race tires, never to be used on public roads?
| hillman | 05-24-2002 03:53 PM |
How does the USTCC figure that DOT Hoosiers as Spec reduces cost over anything except no tire rule at all?
Just wondering. Spec'ing the 2nd most expensive ( I think the new Michelins are more ) and probably fastest wearing DOT tire as a cost reduction makes no sense to me.
Just wondering. Spec'ing the 2nd most expensive ( I think the new Michelins are more ) and probably fastest wearing DOT tire as a cost reduction makes no sense to me.
| Zahnster | 05-24-2002 03:59 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jon Bogert [/i]
[B]Joel, why do they need DOT approval if they're pure race tires, never to be used on public roads? [/B][/QUOTE]
Completly uninformed bystander here. But I think it mostly have to do with the rules setup in many forms of racing. Some series require DOT approved tires, even if they are racing only DOT approved tires.
AFAIK I believe the DOT also allows you to change your tired at home and then drive to the track. Otherwise you've got to change your tires at the track.
[B]Joel, why do they need DOT approval if they're pure race tires, never to be used on public roads? [/B][/QUOTE]
Completly uninformed bystander here. But I think it mostly have to do with the rules setup in many forms of racing. Some series require DOT approved tires, even if they are racing only DOT approved tires.
AFAIK I believe the DOT also allows you to change your tired at home and then drive to the track. Otherwise you've got to change your tires at the track.
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 05-24-2002 04:26 PM |
Hello,
From the Hoosier webpage:
[quote]NOTE: D.O.T. Labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department of Transportation requirements for marking and performance only and are NOT INTENDED FOR HIGHWAY USE. It is unsafe to operate any Hoosier Racing Tire including DOT tires on public roads. The prohibited use of Hoosier Racing Tires on public roadways may result in loss of traction, unexpected loss of vehicle control, or sudden loss of tire pressure, resulting in a vehicle crash and possible injury or death.[/quote]
And for which marking and performance standards they're talking about, see the NHTSA page, [url]http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/UTQG/[/url]
Joel
From the Hoosier webpage:
[quote]NOTE: D.O.T. Labeled Hoosier Racing Tires meet Department of Transportation requirements for marking and performance only and are NOT INTENDED FOR HIGHWAY USE. It is unsafe to operate any Hoosier Racing Tire including DOT tires on public roads. The prohibited use of Hoosier Racing Tires on public roadways may result in loss of traction, unexpected loss of vehicle control, or sudden loss of tire pressure, resulting in a vehicle crash and possible injury or death.[/quote]
And for which marking and performance standards they're talking about, see the NHTSA page, [url]http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/UTQG/[/url]
Joel
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 05-24-2002 04:28 PM |
Hello,
As for why they need the DOT approval, I don't know... but apparantly, they do, as do several other race tire makers. There must be some reason since they're not trying to sell them for street use (see the warning).
Joel
As for why they need the DOT approval, I don't know... but apparantly, they do, as do several other race tire makers. There must be some reason since they're not trying to sell them for street use (see the warning).
Joel
| rosss | 05-24-2002 05:19 PM |
My personal take on this is: I'll wait 'til the rest of the manufacturers of DOT race rubber (Kumho, BFG, Toyo, Michelin, etc.) start complaining, *then* I might be worried.
So far, it seems only Hoosier is worried about it. I think it's not because they're looking out for *our* best interest, they're worried that their "race slick in DOT clothing" might actually have to conform to some real standards.
I'm one of the few folks that isn't a fan of Hoosier -- yeah, their tires are great and fast, I just don't think they belong in grassroots motorsports -- I watched several sets of Hoosiers disappear during the Atwater ProSolo (sometimes on 1 run due to a spin) -- we used a set of old Kumhos all weekend (with two drivers), and they're still usable. It seems absolutely nuts to me that there is a $500-to-$2000-per-national-event cost in tires associated with "Stock" class SCCA autocross. That's Hoosier's biggest fault, in my eyes.
I'm not arguing that the new standards are or are not needed -- I just don't think we should be too concerned about it *yet* based only on what Hoosier has to say about it.
Then again, maybe I'm just in a bad mood ;)
Sean
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
So far, it seems only Hoosier is worried about it. I think it's not because they're looking out for *our* best interest, they're worried that their "race slick in DOT clothing" might actually have to conform to some real standards.
I'm one of the few folks that isn't a fan of Hoosier -- yeah, their tires are great and fast, I just don't think they belong in grassroots motorsports -- I watched several sets of Hoosiers disappear during the Atwater ProSolo (sometimes on 1 run due to a spin) -- we used a set of old Kumhos all weekend (with two drivers), and they're still usable. It seems absolutely nuts to me that there is a $500-to-$2000-per-national-event cost in tires associated with "Stock" class SCCA autocross. That's Hoosier's biggest fault, in my eyes.
I'm not arguing that the new standards are or are not needed -- I just don't think we should be too concerned about it *yet* based only on what Hoosier has to say about it.
Then again, maybe I'm just in a bad mood ;)
Sean
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| SilverBullet | 05-27-2002 05:52 PM |
The first thing I notice is that most of the people who don't care are complaining about OTHER people using the tire.
BTW, The other tire manufacturers see this as an opportunity to jack up your prices as well. I can't wait to hear all the pissing and bitching when your tires price increases $50 each.
But this only hurts Hoosier.
Sure. You bet.
Curt
BTW, The other tire manufacturers see this as an opportunity to jack up your prices as well. I can't wait to hear all the pissing and bitching when your tires price increases $50 each.
But this only hurts Hoosier.
Sure. You bet.
Curt
| Jon Bogert | 05-27-2002 09:42 PM |
Curt, fill us all in on the details! Do you have any more information? $50 a tire is a lot of money--what's that figure based on?
| tifosi77 | 05-28-2002 05:23 AM |
I see the DOT approval thing as something to get around the rules of series that require DOT tires (this has already been stated) personally I have mixed feelings on this because I can see Hossier's point as well as all of the people responding's point about this only helping HOosier etc. . I am a bit wary of thinking that a law only affects one manufacturer since any increased costs associated with manufacturing are immediately passed on to consumers and to be honest racing isn't cheap in any form so a price increase would affect a lot of people. I also feel that racing is expensive but you have to pay to play so if tires are gonna cost more people are going to have to fork over the cash or go home. As much as I wish that everyone could go racing for as little money as possible nobody is bending over to make building my rally car any cheaper (Let me make this clear I am not insinuating that my situation is being deliberately expensive nor do I intend this to be taken as I feel that things should be expensive just stating the facts of racing) I can just see this loophole causing some other headache since HOssier is not asking for exemption just for DOT approved race tires but for all production runs under 15000 and that is what bothers me. If they realy want to protect racers why not specify racing tires I just don't dig the vague language, I would encourage people that feel that this is wrong of the NHTSA to do to insert their own comments in shich they specify "DOT approved Race Tires" perhaps that is the happy medium.
| Turbo4me | 05-28-2002 09:05 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jon Bogert [/i]
[B]Curt, fill us all in on the details! Do you have any more information? $50 a tire is a lot of money--what's that figure based on? [/B][/QUOTE]
You know as well as I do that the cost will be amplified when passed on to us. If Hoosier has to raise their prices because of a tire redesign, do you [U]really[/U] think that the other manufacturers aren't going to raise their prices accordingly?
If you do, I envy you in your little world.
Curt
Note: the first post above was made on my wifes account. Oops.
[B]Curt, fill us all in on the details! Do you have any more information? $50 a tire is a lot of money--what's that figure based on? [/B][/QUOTE]
You know as well as I do that the cost will be amplified when passed on to us. If Hoosier has to raise their prices because of a tire redesign, do you [U]really[/U] think that the other manufacturers aren't going to raise their prices accordingly?
If you do, I envy you in your little world.
Curt
Note: the first post above was made on my wifes account. Oops.
| Jon Bogert | 05-28-2002 09:59 AM |
From Tirerack, size = 225/50-16:
Yoko A032R - $145
Kumho Ecsta V700 - $128
Kumho Victo V700 - $130
Hoosier A/R3S03 - $176
In my little world which you envy so much :rolleyes: it doesn't look like the other manufacturers are rapaciously raising their prices to keep even with Hoosier. Why would you assume they'll do so in the future? (Except for Michelin and Pirelli, of course--who don't need any rule changes to put ridiculous prices on their tires. :D )
Especially if their tires will pass the new standards with no changes--and the Hoosiers will have to completely redesign/reinforce their tires to meet the standard. [COLOR=red]Again--this is just a theory and I think we all would love to see some info from someone who has actual informmation.[/COLOR]
Yoko A032R - $145
Kumho Ecsta V700 - $128
Kumho Victo V700 - $130
Hoosier A/R3S03 - $176
In my little world which you envy so much :rolleyes: it doesn't look like the other manufacturers are rapaciously raising their prices to keep even with Hoosier. Why would you assume they'll do so in the future? (Except for Michelin and Pirelli, of course--who don't need any rule changes to put ridiculous prices on their tires. :D )
Especially if their tires will pass the new standards with no changes--and the Hoosiers will have to completely redesign/reinforce their tires to meet the standard. [COLOR=red]Again--this is just a theory and I think we all would love to see some info from someone who has actual informmation.[/COLOR]
| Turbo4me | 05-28-2002 10:25 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jon Bogert [/i]
[B]From Tirerack, size = 225/50-16:
Yoko A032R - $145
Kumho Ecsta V700 - $128
Kumho Victo V700 - $130
Hoosier A/R3S03 - $176
In my little world which you envy so much :rolleyes: it doesn't look like the other manufacturers are rapaciously raising their prices to keep even with Hoosier. [/B][/QUOTE]
OK, OK, Harsh choice of words, however, the prices sit where they are now because people are willing to pay the higher prices for Hoosiers because they do perform better than the other tires in all areas except wear. If the price on Hoosiers goes up because of R&D related expenses, the other manufactures will [U]most likely[/U] (business college speaking here, not insider information) raise their prices at nearly the same percentage in small steps. It is good business strategy, and the budget racers will have no where else to go, thus have the choice of racing on street tires or sucking it up and paying the higher prices.
The increase will not come all at once, but I am willing to bet that within two years after the prices climb at Hoosier (or the demise of that line), we will see that the prices elsewhere have increased as well.
Yes, Hoosier is trying to protect the bottom line, but in the end, we all win.
As to the highway use of Hoosiers, who in their right mind would take tires that wear like that and cost that much, out on the street. The DOT approval is just to allow their use in events that require DOT tires. I know some that have used V700's on the street, but I don't feel like replacing my $130 tires every two months.
Curt (who hates paying more than he has to for anything)
[B]From Tirerack, size = 225/50-16:
Yoko A032R - $145
Kumho Ecsta V700 - $128
Kumho Victo V700 - $130
Hoosier A/R3S03 - $176
In my little world which you envy so much :rolleyes: it doesn't look like the other manufacturers are rapaciously raising their prices to keep even with Hoosier. [/B][/QUOTE]
OK, OK, Harsh choice of words, however, the prices sit where they are now because people are willing to pay the higher prices for Hoosiers because they do perform better than the other tires in all areas except wear. If the price on Hoosiers goes up because of R&D related expenses, the other manufactures will [U]most likely[/U] (business college speaking here, not insider information) raise their prices at nearly the same percentage in small steps. It is good business strategy, and the budget racers will have no where else to go, thus have the choice of racing on street tires or sucking it up and paying the higher prices.
The increase will not come all at once, but I am willing to bet that within two years after the prices climb at Hoosier (or the demise of that line), we will see that the prices elsewhere have increased as well.
Yes, Hoosier is trying to protect the bottom line, but in the end, we all win.
As to the highway use of Hoosiers, who in their right mind would take tires that wear like that and cost that much, out on the street. The DOT approval is just to allow their use in events that require DOT tires. I know some that have used V700's on the street, but I don't feel like replacing my $130 tires every two months.
Curt (who hates paying more than he has to for anything)
| rosss | 05-28-2002 01:45 PM |
Hi Curt, been a while, how's life treating you?
With regards to the "is this only a Hoosier gripe" thing, this came via the Evolution mailing list (which was reposted from yet another list):
[quote]
The new FMVSS standards will require DOT tires to not only comply with
current standards, but to also pass a low inflation endurance test at the
end of the current DOT test sequence. The original DOT test sequence was
created back in the bias tire days of the 60's. (Yes, that's how old the
test is and it needs to be updated.) The current test sequence is a bit of
a joke. As long as the tire holds air, it will pass the test.
It is my personal belief (not Kumho's) that all of our competition tires
will pass this new test sequence. Kumho's DOT competition tires are
engineered similarly to our regular passenger tire lines. They use a
fabric for the body plies and steel for the belts. Hoosier and Goodyear
use fabric for the body plies but fiberglass for the belt material.
Fiberglass does not lend itself to long term durability. The failure mode
is usually belt edge separation. Hoosier knows their tires won't pass the
new DOT test sequence. They also do not want to re-engineer their tires
because it will cost money to do this.
I believe that the current rules of Touring, Showroom Stock, American
Sedan, and Solo should continue to require DOT legal tires now and in the
future. I am afraid that relaxing the DOT rule will allow tire companies
to design even more exotic race tire constructions in the future. It also
takes away from the spirit of the rules. It'll end up pushing the little
guys, like Kumho, out of amateur racing because we won't be able to keep up
with the competition's technology. This will lead to no one buying our
tires because no one will be able to win on them and will eventually lead
to Kumho pulling out of SCCA racing.
It's sad that Hoosier is putting the fear of increased cost to the end
consumer as a means to getting the racing community to change the current
GCR. Why is it that Kumho can offer DOT legal tires that are competitive,
have a lower price and that can possibly pass the newly proposed test
sequence? I'm sure the competition is also wondering.
Anyway, I'm just adding to the debate. The newly proposed test will be
open for comment until early June. Then the feds will come up with a
decision sometime in September and will make it effective in the next two
or three years. There's plenty of time to worry (and plenty of time for
the other tire companies to get their act together and comply).
---
[/quote]
I'm not gonna put the guy's name on there (I'll provide it to anybody that mails me for it) because he probably doesn't need his name plastered anymore places than it already is. It is a Kumho employee though.
Just some more food for thought, and another manufacturer's thoughts (and yes, they're Hoosier's direct competitor in this market, so I won't pretend his opinion isn't biased either).
Sean
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
With regards to the "is this only a Hoosier gripe" thing, this came via the Evolution mailing list (which was reposted from yet another list):
[quote]
The new FMVSS standards will require DOT tires to not only comply with
current standards, but to also pass a low inflation endurance test at the
end of the current DOT test sequence. The original DOT test sequence was
created back in the bias tire days of the 60's. (Yes, that's how old the
test is and it needs to be updated.) The current test sequence is a bit of
a joke. As long as the tire holds air, it will pass the test.
It is my personal belief (not Kumho's) that all of our competition tires
will pass this new test sequence. Kumho's DOT competition tires are
engineered similarly to our regular passenger tire lines. They use a
fabric for the body plies and steel for the belts. Hoosier and Goodyear
use fabric for the body plies but fiberglass for the belt material.
Fiberglass does not lend itself to long term durability. The failure mode
is usually belt edge separation. Hoosier knows their tires won't pass the
new DOT test sequence. They also do not want to re-engineer their tires
because it will cost money to do this.
I believe that the current rules of Touring, Showroom Stock, American
Sedan, and Solo should continue to require DOT legal tires now and in the
future. I am afraid that relaxing the DOT rule will allow tire companies
to design even more exotic race tire constructions in the future. It also
takes away from the spirit of the rules. It'll end up pushing the little
guys, like Kumho, out of amateur racing because we won't be able to keep up
with the competition's technology. This will lead to no one buying our
tires because no one will be able to win on them and will eventually lead
to Kumho pulling out of SCCA racing.
It's sad that Hoosier is putting the fear of increased cost to the end
consumer as a means to getting the racing community to change the current
GCR. Why is it that Kumho can offer DOT legal tires that are competitive,
have a lower price and that can possibly pass the newly proposed test
sequence? I'm sure the competition is also wondering.
Anyway, I'm just adding to the debate. The newly proposed test will be
open for comment until early June. Then the feds will come up with a
decision sometime in September and will make it effective in the next two
or three years. There's plenty of time to worry (and plenty of time for
the other tire companies to get their act together and comply).
---
[/quote]
I'm not gonna put the guy's name on there (I'll provide it to anybody that mails me for it) because he probably doesn't need his name plastered anymore places than it already is. It is a Kumho employee though.
Just some more food for thought, and another manufacturer's thoughts (and yes, they're Hoosier's direct competitor in this market, so I won't pretend his opinion isn't biased either).
Sean
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| jds | 05-29-2002 12:06 PM |
I don't understand what all the hoopla is about anyhow.
Suppose Hoosier/Kumho/Pirelli/Yokohama and all other DOT race tire manufacturers decide to forgo the new testing. What happens then? Their tires are no longer DOT-approved, and can't be used in Solo II Stock classes.
Stock class Solo II competitors move to the next-best thing. That would probably be the Falken Azenis or one of the other tires that are doing so well in STS/STX. No problem. Those tires are not very different, in terms of costs.
Suppose Hoosier backs out of the DOT tire market, but Kumho and others stay in. Again, no problem. I'll continue to run on V700's.
I guess it doesn't make much difference to me, as long as the playing field remains relatively level, in terms of tires. I think that tire budgets are one of the biggest barriers to entry-level Solo II competitors anyhow. Removing the "race-compound tires with just enough tread to be DOT legal" tires from the mix might be a step back towards the "grassroots" end of grassroots motorsports like Solo II.
*nomex underwear on*
-Joe
Suppose Hoosier/Kumho/Pirelli/Yokohama and all other DOT race tire manufacturers decide to forgo the new testing. What happens then? Their tires are no longer DOT-approved, and can't be used in Solo II Stock classes.
Stock class Solo II competitors move to the next-best thing. That would probably be the Falken Azenis or one of the other tires that are doing so well in STS/STX. No problem. Those tires are not very different, in terms of costs.
Suppose Hoosier backs out of the DOT tire market, but Kumho and others stay in. Again, no problem. I'll continue to run on V700's.
I guess it doesn't make much difference to me, as long as the playing field remains relatively level, in terms of tires. I think that tire budgets are one of the biggest barriers to entry-level Solo II competitors anyhow. Removing the "race-compound tires with just enough tread to be DOT legal" tires from the mix might be a step back towards the "grassroots" end of grassroots motorsports like Solo II.
*nomex underwear on*
-Joe
| elgorey | 05-29-2002 12:52 PM |
[QUOTE]Removing the "race-compound tires with just enough tread to be DOT legal" tires from the mix might be a step back towards the "grassroots" end of grassroots motorsports like Solo II[/QUOTE]
I couldnt agree more. Its frustrating that in order to be competitive, you have to spend twice the amount of money for tires that have 1/4 of the life. If Hoosier dropped out of the DOT R-comp market, that would level the playing field and provide competition between drivers, not competition between budgets.
I couldnt agree more. Its frustrating that in order to be competitive, you have to spend twice the amount of money for tires that have 1/4 of the life. If Hoosier dropped out of the DOT R-comp market, that would level the playing field and provide competition between drivers, not competition between budgets.
| hillman | 05-29-2002 01:36 PM |
Joe,
Basically, the problem with your scenarios is only that they might not happen. We don't really know what'll happen under this proposal.
One major factor against either of your scenarios occuring is that if someone, somewhere is willing to buy a legal part that makes their car faster, they can probably find someone to make it. One possibility is that Hoosier ( or some other tiremaker ) continues to make DOT R tires, but now they cost, say, $400 per, instead of $400 per set. Some people will still buy them, and they'll have a huge advantage as a result.
Another possibility is that Falken cannot continue to sell a great, but relatively low production street tire like the Azenis under this new standard, and we all wind up on 80,000 mile tires. Or, the Azenis price goes up substantially to cover the new testing and documentation costs.
Without a rule change, DOT R tires will almost certainly stay. The question is, how much more expensive will they be?
That said, I also wouldn't mind at all if my Kumhos were the fastest legal tires. I just don't think this standard is going to do that.
Basically, the problem with your scenarios is only that they might not happen. We don't really know what'll happen under this proposal.
One major factor against either of your scenarios occuring is that if someone, somewhere is willing to buy a legal part that makes their car faster, they can probably find someone to make it. One possibility is that Hoosier ( or some other tiremaker ) continues to make DOT R tires, but now they cost, say, $400 per, instead of $400 per set. Some people will still buy them, and they'll have a huge advantage as a result.
Another possibility is that Falken cannot continue to sell a great, but relatively low production street tire like the Azenis under this new standard, and we all wind up on 80,000 mile tires. Or, the Azenis price goes up substantially to cover the new testing and documentation costs.
Without a rule change, DOT R tires will almost certainly stay. The question is, how much more expensive will they be?
That said, I also wouldn't mind at all if my Kumhos were the fastest legal tires. I just don't think this standard is going to do that.
| Jon Bogert | 05-29-2002 01:52 PM |
This whole issue splits very cleanly down the middle:
A) It will cost more for DOT approval testing. This will raise the unit cost of low production tires more than mainstream tires. This part of the problem affects everybody, but nobody knows exactly how much.
B) The standards for DOT approval will be raised to a level that only streetable tires can pass. This appears to be a problem for Hoosier and, um, Hoosier.
The best possible outcome is that DOT approved will come to mean a real street tire, which it doesn't mean right now. This is better overall for all grassroots motorsports, since Hoosier won't be able to make a DOT "ringer" even for $400, since it won't pass the tests. Sure those Hoosier class records will be hard to beat, but a result of relatively evenly matched tires available to all for a reasonable price isn't so bad, is it?
A good secondary outcome is that it becomes easier to bring an R-compound tire to market. A manufacturer looks at the market now and says, "we'd have to compete with those fiberglass baloons and that would require a completely new carcass design--screw that" where it should be, "let's put a stickier compound on our stiffest performance tire carcass and go racing!"
A) It will cost more for DOT approval testing. This will raise the unit cost of low production tires more than mainstream tires. This part of the problem affects everybody, but nobody knows exactly how much.
B) The standards for DOT approval will be raised to a level that only streetable tires can pass. This appears to be a problem for Hoosier and, um, Hoosier.
The best possible outcome is that DOT approved will come to mean a real street tire, which it doesn't mean right now. This is better overall for all grassroots motorsports, since Hoosier won't be able to make a DOT "ringer" even for $400, since it won't pass the tests. Sure those Hoosier class records will be hard to beat, but a result of relatively evenly matched tires available to all for a reasonable price isn't so bad, is it?
A good secondary outcome is that it becomes easier to bring an R-compound tire to market. A manufacturer looks at the market now and says, "we'd have to compete with those fiberglass baloons and that would require a completely new carcass design--screw that" where it should be, "let's put a stickier compound on our stiffest performance tire carcass and go racing!"
| hillman | 05-29-2002 04:35 PM |
So a) is bad. Let's talk about b) for a moment.
What are the odds that a new DOT standard, which is being created to address completely separate issues from those relevant to race tires, is going to fall neatly in between existing race tires that are "too expensive" and "acceptably expensive"?
I'll go with slim and none. From what I've read, the impact-resistance test is not a puncture test, but rather a blunt object impact which is going to test sidewall strength and resistance to bead unseating more than anything else.
Anyone have problems with soft sidewalls on their Hoosiers? No.
I see the upsides you are talking about, but I think expecting unrelated NHTSA damage-control to bring them about is wishful thinking at best.
YMMV.
What are the odds that a new DOT standard, which is being created to address completely separate issues from those relevant to race tires, is going to fall neatly in between existing race tires that are "too expensive" and "acceptably expensive"?
I'll go with slim and none. From what I've read, the impact-resistance test is not a puncture test, but rather a blunt object impact which is going to test sidewall strength and resistance to bead unseating more than anything else.
Anyone have problems with soft sidewalls on their Hoosiers? No.
I see the upsides you are talking about, but I think expecting unrelated NHTSA damage-control to bring them about is wishful thinking at best.
YMMV.
| 2WDrift | 05-30-2002 10:44 AM |
[url]www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=2377[/url]
More to it; sounds like the government is just throwing out new rules irregardless of the consequences.
More to it; sounds like the government is just throwing out new rules irregardless of the consequences.
| Jon Bogert | 05-30-2002 11:50 AM |
[QUOTE]Anyone have problems with soft sidewalls on their Hoosiers? No.[/QUOTE]
On the racetrack? No. On the street? Of course. We're talking in circles here--Hoosiers are wonderful race tires and the new rules don't affect race tires at all. Hoosiers as DOT approved road tires? Not under any sane test of road durability.
Regarding Hoosier it is becoming increasingly clear that their campaign is about protecting their little niche as a cheater DOT tire so people with lots of cash can win "stock" class events. I have ZERO sympathy.
2WDrift, the 33% of tires that would fail the new tests includes the 4 for $99 crap rubber that people buy at Pep Boys and Kmart and the horribly bad OEM tires such as the Firestones that started this whole controversy. I would bet that no i-Club member would ever consider running one of those inferior tires anyway.
The thrust of the law is to protect mom-minivan from inferior tires. There are some apallingly bad tires sold to unsuspecting people, and you or I might be in front of them or next to them when they have a blowout or can't stop in time. I think higher standards are a good thing. All well made tires will pass the new tests easily.
On the racetrack? No. On the street? Of course. We're talking in circles here--Hoosiers are wonderful race tires and the new rules don't affect race tires at all. Hoosiers as DOT approved road tires? Not under any sane test of road durability.
Regarding Hoosier it is becoming increasingly clear that their campaign is about protecting their little niche as a cheater DOT tire so people with lots of cash can win "stock" class events. I have ZERO sympathy.
2WDrift, the 33% of tires that would fail the new tests includes the 4 for $99 crap rubber that people buy at Pep Boys and Kmart and the horribly bad OEM tires such as the Firestones that started this whole controversy. I would bet that no i-Club member would ever consider running one of those inferior tires anyway.
The thrust of the law is to protect mom-minivan from inferior tires. There are some apallingly bad tires sold to unsuspecting people, and you or I might be in front of them or next to them when they have a blowout or can't stop in time. I think higher standards are a good thing. All well made tires will pass the new tests easily.
| subrew2 | 05-30-2002 02:21 PM |
Hey John,
Just a suggestion: Unless you have driven on or raced on Hoosiers, you might want to tone it down a bit. Perhaps if you start running on Hoosiers, or at least participate in National level Solo II competition with people who run Hoosiers, and gain a more accurate understanding of the situation, you won't make uninformed comments like:
>On the racetrack? No. On the street? Of course.<
with regard to sidewall stiffness, and
>...protecting their little niche as a cheater DOT tire...<
I don't run Hoosiers on my Subie for several reasons, I run Kumhos. However, Hoosiers are a legal tire for stock class SCCA SoloII competition. They are not cheater tires. They meet the written rule. Also, your ideas that Hoosier sidewalls are stiff on the track, and not stiff on the street is confusing, and goes against logic.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
Just a suggestion: Unless you have driven on or raced on Hoosiers, you might want to tone it down a bit. Perhaps if you start running on Hoosiers, or at least participate in National level Solo II competition with people who run Hoosiers, and gain a more accurate understanding of the situation, you won't make uninformed comments like:
>On the racetrack? No. On the street? Of course.<
with regard to sidewall stiffness, and
>...protecting their little niche as a cheater DOT tire...<
I don't run Hoosiers on my Subie for several reasons, I run Kumhos. However, Hoosiers are a legal tire for stock class SCCA SoloII competition. They are not cheater tires. They meet the written rule. Also, your ideas that Hoosier sidewalls are stiff on the track, and not stiff on the street is confusing, and goes against logic.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| Jon Bogert | 05-30-2002 03:34 PM |
I based what I said on Hoosier's own recommendations that they NEVER be used on the street. Would you drive to and from the track on them?
Everyone agrees that they have sidewalls that are "less durable"--by whatever standard--than street tires. If this were not the case, I doubt this issue would even exist.
Everyone agrees that they have sidewalls that are "less durable"--by whatever standard--than street tires. If this were not the case, I doubt this issue would even exist.
| Thug | 05-30-2002 03:46 PM |
The biggest problem lies with the SCCA. That piss poor organization should either allow full blown race tires in their 'stock' series or limit it to street tires only. And if they allow race tires they should limit it to 5 or 6 choices and strike a deal with a manufacturer(or 2 or 3) to offer those tires to the racers at a discounted price. That way the racer with the biggest wallet doesnt win because he can buy the best tires.
| Lurker | 05-30-2002 03:59 PM |
[QUOTE]Just a suggestion: Unless you have driven on or raced on Hoosiers, you might want to tone it down a bit. Perhaps if you start running on Hoosiers, or at least participate in National level Solo II competition with people who run Hoosiers, and gain a more accurate understanding of the situation...[/QUOTE] What's to understand? I haven't driven with Hoosiers, but I've been beaten by people on Hoosiers, in a class that's supposed to be Stock and use stree tires, where I was using (gasp!) street tires. :rolleyes: Hoosiers are not street tires, and do not deserve DOT approval.
[QUOTE]However, Hoosiers are a legal tire for stock class SCCA SoloII competition. They are not cheater tires. They meet the written rule.[/QUOTE] You're right, they meet the written rule. Because they are currently DOT approved. This begs the question: [i]why are Hoosiers DOT approved?[/i]
[QUOTE]However, Hoosiers are a legal tire for stock class SCCA SoloII competition. They are not cheater tires. They meet the written rule.[/QUOTE] You're right, they meet the written rule. Because they are currently DOT approved. This begs the question: [i]why are Hoosiers DOT approved?[/i]
| bvondran | 05-31-2002 12:41 PM |
[QUOTE]This begs the question: why are Hoosiers DOT approved?[/QUOTE]
Because they meet the DOT requirements to be DOT approved, that's why.
[QUOTE]I haven't driven with Hoosiers, but I've been beaten by people on Hoosiers, in a class that's supposed to be Stock and use stree tires, where I was using (gasp!) street tires. [/QUOTE]
Okay, if we want to get technical, then I guess we should say that cars can only run on stock tires, i.e., the exact same tire that came on the car when it was manufactured, because *technically* it is a "Stock" class. And we should say that people can't run Koni's because they're more expensive than KYB's and people who can afford to shouldn't be allowed to run a more expensive shock! And we should bank K&N Filters, becuase they're more expensive than regular air filters. And we should ban Mobil1, because it is more expensive than regular Quaker State, and even if people can afford it, they shouldn't be allowed to run a more expensive oil.
Then we could get really crazy, and ban the Boxster because it's more expensive than the S2000, and how can we allow someone who can afford a Boxster to run one when the other guy can only afford a S2000.
Oh dear, where do we stop! The Hoosier's meet the letter of the rule and they meet DOT regulations. If you don't like it, either lobby the SEB or DOT, deal with it or quit autocrossing because it's just too damn unfair.
Brian
Note: No one ever said racing was cheap.
Because they meet the DOT requirements to be DOT approved, that's why.
[QUOTE]I haven't driven with Hoosiers, but I've been beaten by people on Hoosiers, in a class that's supposed to be Stock and use stree tires, where I was using (gasp!) street tires. [/QUOTE]
Okay, if we want to get technical, then I guess we should say that cars can only run on stock tires, i.e., the exact same tire that came on the car when it was manufactured, because *technically* it is a "Stock" class. And we should say that people can't run Koni's because they're more expensive than KYB's and people who can afford to shouldn't be allowed to run a more expensive shock! And we should bank K&N Filters, becuase they're more expensive than regular air filters. And we should ban Mobil1, because it is more expensive than regular Quaker State, and even if people can afford it, they shouldn't be allowed to run a more expensive oil.
Then we could get really crazy, and ban the Boxster because it's more expensive than the S2000, and how can we allow someone who can afford a Boxster to run one when the other guy can only afford a S2000.
Oh dear, where do we stop! The Hoosier's meet the letter of the rule and they meet DOT regulations. If you don't like it, either lobby the SEB or DOT, deal with it or quit autocrossing because it's just too damn unfair.
Brian
Note: No one ever said racing was cheap.
| Thug | 05-31-2002 01:58 PM |
He doesnt have to lobby the DOT. Looks like the DOT is handling it on their own. And as well they should be. The Hoosiers(as well as the Kumhos and some others) shouldnt be street legal. They are absolutely unsafe to drive on the street. If they werent, then they wouldnt have any problem passing the proposed tests.
| subrew2 | 05-31-2002 04:53 PM |
>The Hoosiers(as well as the Kumhos and some others) shouldnt be street legal. They are absolutely unsafe to drive on the street.<
That's BS. Are you assuming this? Or do have experience on R compound tires on the street?
if I wasn't running a friends STS Subie tomorrow, I would have mounted up my Kumhos on my G-Stock 2.5RS, and driven the 80 miles each way from home to the site. I have done this several times, with and without rain. Even during heavy Oregon rain, on freeways with deep ruts (thanks studded tires.)
Except for the tendency to follow the ruts and wander over the irregularities of the road (those stiff sidewalls don't flex and soak up the irregularities) more than "street tires" there is nothing unsafe about them. They have way more grip, even on wet roads. It will take some deep puddles for them to be "less safe" than even the best "street tires", and they are way better than most "street tires."
I guess my experience on Yoko A-008, A-032R, Toyo RA-1, Hoosiers, and Kumhos must be a fluke though. Perhaps I got the "DOT Safe for the Street" versions of the tires.
Chris H.
That's BS. Are you assuming this? Or do have experience on R compound tires on the street?
if I wasn't running a friends STS Subie tomorrow, I would have mounted up my Kumhos on my G-Stock 2.5RS, and driven the 80 miles each way from home to the site. I have done this several times, with and without rain. Even during heavy Oregon rain, on freeways with deep ruts (thanks studded tires.)
Except for the tendency to follow the ruts and wander over the irregularities of the road (those stiff sidewalls don't flex and soak up the irregularities) more than "street tires" there is nothing unsafe about them. They have way more grip, even on wet roads. It will take some deep puddles for them to be "less safe" than even the best "street tires", and they are way better than most "street tires."
I guess my experience on Yoko A-008, A-032R, Toyo RA-1, Hoosiers, and Kumhos must be a fluke though. Perhaps I got the "DOT Safe for the Street" versions of the tires.
Chris H.
| Lurker | 05-31-2002 06:36 PM |
Yeah, I just suck at autocrossing and it's made me bitter at people with money. Go ahead and attack that straw man. :rolleyes: Many of the classes of racing [i]claim[/i] to require DOT approved street tires. Hoosiers should not be street legal. Says who? Me? Bzzzt. No, the people trying to revoke Hoosier's approval is...<drumroll>... the DOT!
[QUOTE]Okay, if we want to get whiny and overly dramatic,...blah blah blah...If you don't like it, either lobby the SEB or DOT, deal with it or quit autocrossing because it's just too damn unfair.
[/QUOTE] That's the whole point. I don't [i]have[/i] to lobby the DOT, because it appears that they're going to kick Hoosier out on their ass. And Hoosier wants [b]YOU[/b], the grassroots enthusiast, to lobby Congress to protect their [i]inviolate right[/i] to produce tires that are not intended for street use [i]under any circumstances[/i] (by their own admission, by the way), and have them approved for street use by the Department of Transportation. :confused:
If that seems like a logical thing to the majority, then I guess it's time for me to check into the Padded Wall Hotel.
PS: I know people who drive Victoracers to/from events. I've [b]NEVER[/b] seen anyone drive Hoosiers on the street.
[QUOTE]Okay, if we want to get whiny and overly dramatic,...blah blah blah...If you don't like it, either lobby the SEB or DOT, deal with it or quit autocrossing because it's just too damn unfair.
[/QUOTE] That's the whole point. I don't [i]have[/i] to lobby the DOT, because it appears that they're going to kick Hoosier out on their ass. And Hoosier wants [b]YOU[/b], the grassroots enthusiast, to lobby Congress to protect their [i]inviolate right[/i] to produce tires that are not intended for street use [i]under any circumstances[/i] (by their own admission, by the way), and have them approved for street use by the Department of Transportation. :confused:
If that seems like a logical thing to the majority, then I guess it's time for me to check into the Padded Wall Hotel.
PS: I know people who drive Victoracers to/from events. I've [b]NEVER[/b] seen anyone drive Hoosiers on the street.
| bvondran | 05-31-2002 07:03 PM |
The DOT isn't trying to nail Hoosier, they're trying to come up with a better formula for testing. Unfortunately the formula requires all the tests to be the most stringent tests possible.
Anyway, it's a moot point. Per Thursday's Wall Street Journal, the implementation of said tests have been put on hold indefinitely because they are simply too stringent. The NHTSA has already tested 27 different tire models, and *suprise* 34% of them failed the test. No listing of tire models tested was given, but I'm pretty sure they weren't out testing any R-compounds. If regular street tires can't make the grade, well let's just say good-bye to all our favorite R-compounds right now.
[QUOTE]Many of the classes of racing claim to require DOT approved street tires.[/QUOTE]
This still qualifies as a pretty lame argument. The DOT has certified Hoosiers as street tires. Whether Hoosier recommends you use them there or not, they are certified. Should the rules then change to "DOT certified tires that the manufacturer recommends running on the street?
[QUOTE]Hoosier wants YOU, the grassroots enthusiast, to lobby Congress to protect their inviolate right to produce tires that are not intended for street use under any circumstances [/QUOTE]
No, Hoosier wants us to participate in our government. They want us, as racers, to make our opinions known and to tell the DOT what we think. Do I want some bureacrat in Washington telling me what kind of tires that I can or cannot autocross on? Hell no! I'd rather leave that decision to the experienced committee members who have been racing for quite some time, and, lest I forget, MYSELF!
Does Hoosier have a vested interest in defeating the new rules? Sure they do, but no more than companies who lobby against congress to defeat laws that affect them adversly. Should we never call our Congressman/Congresswoman, because somewhere there might be a Company that agrees with us?
I don't know why you think that Hoosier believes they have an "Inviolate Right" to make these tires, they are just trying to protect their business and the sport they love. I may be naive, but I tend to think that Hoosier loves racing, and racers. They are a company that supports and nurtures grassroots racing, and I believe they definitely have the end user in mind.
Brian
Anyway, it's a moot point. Per Thursday's Wall Street Journal, the implementation of said tests have been put on hold indefinitely because they are simply too stringent. The NHTSA has already tested 27 different tire models, and *suprise* 34% of them failed the test. No listing of tire models tested was given, but I'm pretty sure they weren't out testing any R-compounds. If regular street tires can't make the grade, well let's just say good-bye to all our favorite R-compounds right now.
[QUOTE]Many of the classes of racing claim to require DOT approved street tires.[/QUOTE]
This still qualifies as a pretty lame argument. The DOT has certified Hoosiers as street tires. Whether Hoosier recommends you use them there or not, they are certified. Should the rules then change to "DOT certified tires that the manufacturer recommends running on the street?
[QUOTE]Hoosier wants YOU, the grassroots enthusiast, to lobby Congress to protect their inviolate right to produce tires that are not intended for street use under any circumstances [/QUOTE]
No, Hoosier wants us to participate in our government. They want us, as racers, to make our opinions known and to tell the DOT what we think. Do I want some bureacrat in Washington telling me what kind of tires that I can or cannot autocross on? Hell no! I'd rather leave that decision to the experienced committee members who have been racing for quite some time, and, lest I forget, MYSELF!
Does Hoosier have a vested interest in defeating the new rules? Sure they do, but no more than companies who lobby against congress to defeat laws that affect them adversly. Should we never call our Congressman/Congresswoman, because somewhere there might be a Company that agrees with us?
I don't know why you think that Hoosier believes they have an "Inviolate Right" to make these tires, they are just trying to protect their business and the sport they love. I may be naive, but I tend to think that Hoosier loves racing, and racers. They are a company that supports and nurtures grassroots racing, and I believe they definitely have the end user in mind.
Brian
| gary p | 06-01-2002 07:02 PM |
There are no rules that allow or disallow "DOT Race tires" or "DOT R-compound" tires, at least in autocross. Just rules that require a DOT-legal tire. (STS & STX just happen to specify a minimum tread-wear rating). There were no special DOT road-race or autocross tires that the rule was intended to include. It was meant to allow you to use any tire certified by our government for highway use and disallow full-on racing slicks.
The current crop of specialized DOT-legal racing tires evolved as an answer to a demand by autocrossers and roadracers for the best performing tires that met the letter of the law for DOT legality. If the letter of the law changes there will still be a demand by autocrossers and roadracers and tire manufacturers will build the best competition tire they can that meets the letter of the new law.
DOT approval is supposed to mean the tire is suitible for highway use. As per Hoosier's own admission their tires aren't, even though they meet the letter of the law necessary to gain DOT approval. The DOT has recognized that it is time to update its testing procedure as tires and vehicles and consumer expectations have evolved significantly in the 35 years that the current standards have been in place. So Hoosier wants me to petition congress to create a loophole that would allow them to continue to have a street-legal status for their unstreetable tire in the event the new standard actually confirms that the tire is not suitable for on-highway use. No sympathy here. Either a tire is steet legal or it isn't, no exemptions based on volume or "intended use."
Hoosier's scare tactic isn't working with me. Hoosier built their tire to the limit of SCCA and DOT standards. Now, for a reason that has nothing to do with racing, the the DOT standards may change and catch Hoosier out. Thats the risk you take when you design your tire to the absolute limits of the rules. Especially when those limits are defined by a government agency that has no political interest in racing one way or another. Do you really think the DOT or congress has any interest in facilitating a tire company's attempts at sidestepping regulation so their tires can remain eligible for specific racing series anyway? It would be much more appropriate to lobby the SCCA to rewrite their rules in a way that allows for the continued eligibility of Hoosiers in the event they don't pass new DOT standards than to ask Congress to create a loophole in a law so Hoosier race tires can get the DOT stamp on the sidewall required in the SCCA rulebooks for use in certain racing classes.
That same loophole could be used to dump poor quality street tires with marginal levels of safety into a marketplace of citizens who don't have a clue how to tell the difference.
[b]"One possibility is that Hoosier ( or some other tiremaker ) continues to make DOT R tires, but now they cost, say, $400 per, instead of $400 per set. Some people will still buy them, and they'll have a huge advantage as a result."[/b]
Thats why the SCCA has a tire exclusion list, at least in SoloII. I'd like to see how long Hoosiers stay legal if their prices go up 4-fold.
-Gary P
[i]"I'd pay Hoosier money for Kumhos if I didn't have to race against Hoosiers! At least I'd get 2-3 times the treadlife for the money"[/i] :D
The current crop of specialized DOT-legal racing tires evolved as an answer to a demand by autocrossers and roadracers for the best performing tires that met the letter of the law for DOT legality. If the letter of the law changes there will still be a demand by autocrossers and roadracers and tire manufacturers will build the best competition tire they can that meets the letter of the new law.
DOT approval is supposed to mean the tire is suitible for highway use. As per Hoosier's own admission their tires aren't, even though they meet the letter of the law necessary to gain DOT approval. The DOT has recognized that it is time to update its testing procedure as tires and vehicles and consumer expectations have evolved significantly in the 35 years that the current standards have been in place. So Hoosier wants me to petition congress to create a loophole that would allow them to continue to have a street-legal status for their unstreetable tire in the event the new standard actually confirms that the tire is not suitable for on-highway use. No sympathy here. Either a tire is steet legal or it isn't, no exemptions based on volume or "intended use."
Hoosier's scare tactic isn't working with me. Hoosier built their tire to the limit of SCCA and DOT standards. Now, for a reason that has nothing to do with racing, the the DOT standards may change and catch Hoosier out. Thats the risk you take when you design your tire to the absolute limits of the rules. Especially when those limits are defined by a government agency that has no political interest in racing one way or another. Do you really think the DOT or congress has any interest in facilitating a tire company's attempts at sidestepping regulation so their tires can remain eligible for specific racing series anyway? It would be much more appropriate to lobby the SCCA to rewrite their rules in a way that allows for the continued eligibility of Hoosiers in the event they don't pass new DOT standards than to ask Congress to create a loophole in a law so Hoosier race tires can get the DOT stamp on the sidewall required in the SCCA rulebooks for use in certain racing classes.
That same loophole could be used to dump poor quality street tires with marginal levels of safety into a marketplace of citizens who don't have a clue how to tell the difference.
[b]"One possibility is that Hoosier ( or some other tiremaker ) continues to make DOT R tires, but now they cost, say, $400 per, instead of $400 per set. Some people will still buy them, and they'll have a huge advantage as a result."[/b]
Thats why the SCCA has a tire exclusion list, at least in SoloII. I'd like to see how long Hoosiers stay legal if their prices go up 4-fold.
-Gary P
[i]"I'd pay Hoosier money for Kumhos if I didn't have to race against Hoosiers! At least I'd get 2-3 times the treadlife for the money"[/i] :D
| DetroitWRX | 06-01-2002 08:48 PM |
Race with Kumho win with Kumho
| Jon Bogert | 06-02-2002 03:23 PM |
I'm glad the debate continued without me as I was driving on some non-DOT approved Pirellis in the woods this weekend. ;)
I'd just like to add that it says some pretty sad things about the SCCA when people start hoping a government agency will do what the SCCA hasn't had the will or desire to do. From the rally side of things, I'm very familiar with the SCCA's pimp-like eagerness to turn out its members at the drop of a sponsor dollar. Does anyone know how much money Hoosier pays the SCCA each year?
I'd just like to add that it says some pretty sad things about the SCCA when people start hoping a government agency will do what the SCCA hasn't had the will or desire to do. From the rally side of things, I'm very familiar with the SCCA's pimp-like eagerness to turn out its members at the drop of a sponsor dollar. Does anyone know how much money Hoosier pays the SCCA each year?
| vivace | 06-02-2002 10:13 PM |
sigh, people, people.
This is not a Race tire versus Street tire debate.
It's Not even a debate. Hoosier is trying to protect the DECADES of R+D they have put into the A3 line and the Still currently legal and popular Bias ply stuff. can't blame them.
while currently working as a private dealer for all the major race tire manufacturers and having some personal prefrence and years of experence for hoosier, this is a NON-Issue.
If the rules change, hoosier needs to adapt to the rules or get out. It's a shame that a small specialized companay like Hoosier that spends Millions a year employing american workers and prefecting their product will be forced to lay off several employees.
But hey that's life. if it saves ONE innocent life so be it.
and as someone that has driven every DOT race tire on the track and the street (yes even Hoosier) I know how much better hoosier is, they specalize their porduct to be the best on the market, successfully, and charge accordingly. They are not a mass production house, their product is VERY labor intensive, and the cost of american labor dosent help.
Look at Goodyear they are 25% more then the hoosier. you will never see them on a car shy of a national level road race.
hoosier does not have the Tire Smack and Discount Tire pimping their budget product line, DTD sells 10,000 kumho 711's PER MONTH!!! how many hoosiers? NONE. With the increase in amature motorsports the past few years Hoosier has seen windfall success and enlarged their production to match that demand. kumho basically just uses the race stuff as a marketing tool for the "not scottish" tires they pass off as "SCCA race inspired" and korean labor is significantly cheaper.
hoosier is all the while creating the best product for the application. and making a small profit on each unit, there is no budget street tire line they can butter their bread with.
Jon, as someone who understands the value of a quality product I am a bit suprised by your position, I mean you DO pay twice what a Kumho rally tire costs for the quality you feel you recieve in the Pirelli product line. is that unfair to Rallispec that ran Kumho's on stage one, because those tires are "uncompeditive". I don't think so, actually I think their stage one time was even a bit quicker then the pirelli shoud Rallystuff car.
(just using Rallispec as an example because of the similar cars)
I like Hoosier, they offer an excellent product for a decent value and employ my fellow americans while doing it.
if the product needs reengineering well it will happen and hoosier will suffer more then anyone it was just a buisness gamble. I understand their concern but do not agree with their apporach, although given a similar situation I'd do the same thing, gotta cry SOS if your going down.
and hey, mabye with all the extra R+D employees Hoosier will finally make that rally tire I asked for a year ago :-) and get some worldwide exposure.
Jeff
This is not a Race tire versus Street tire debate.
It's Not even a debate. Hoosier is trying to protect the DECADES of R+D they have put into the A3 line and the Still currently legal and popular Bias ply stuff. can't blame them.
while currently working as a private dealer for all the major race tire manufacturers and having some personal prefrence and years of experence for hoosier, this is a NON-Issue.
If the rules change, hoosier needs to adapt to the rules or get out. It's a shame that a small specialized companay like Hoosier that spends Millions a year employing american workers and prefecting their product will be forced to lay off several employees.
But hey that's life. if it saves ONE innocent life so be it.
and as someone that has driven every DOT race tire on the track and the street (yes even Hoosier) I know how much better hoosier is, they specalize their porduct to be the best on the market, successfully, and charge accordingly. They are not a mass production house, their product is VERY labor intensive, and the cost of american labor dosent help.
Look at Goodyear they are 25% more then the hoosier. you will never see them on a car shy of a national level road race.
hoosier does not have the Tire Smack and Discount Tire pimping their budget product line, DTD sells 10,000 kumho 711's PER MONTH!!! how many hoosiers? NONE. With the increase in amature motorsports the past few years Hoosier has seen windfall success and enlarged their production to match that demand. kumho basically just uses the race stuff as a marketing tool for the "not scottish" tires they pass off as "SCCA race inspired" and korean labor is significantly cheaper.
hoosier is all the while creating the best product for the application. and making a small profit on each unit, there is no budget street tire line they can butter their bread with.
Jon, as someone who understands the value of a quality product I am a bit suprised by your position, I mean you DO pay twice what a Kumho rally tire costs for the quality you feel you recieve in the Pirelli product line. is that unfair to Rallispec that ran Kumho's on stage one, because those tires are "uncompeditive". I don't think so, actually I think their stage one time was even a bit quicker then the pirelli shoud Rallystuff car.
(just using Rallispec as an example because of the similar cars)
I like Hoosier, they offer an excellent product for a decent value and employ my fellow americans while doing it.
if the product needs reengineering well it will happen and hoosier will suffer more then anyone it was just a buisness gamble. I understand their concern but do not agree with their apporach, although given a similar situation I'd do the same thing, gotta cry SOS if your going down.
and hey, mabye with all the extra R+D employees Hoosier will finally make that rally tire I asked for a year ago :-) and get some worldwide exposure.
Jeff
| Jon Bogert | 06-02-2002 10:20 PM |
Well, since you brought it up, I run Pirellis because they're the cheapest per mile on my overweight car. :D And Dave did have a great first stage!
| Lurker | 06-03-2002 10:49 AM |
[QUOTE]No, Hoosier wants us to participate in our government. They want us, as racers, to make our opinions known and to tell the DOT what we think. Do I want some bureacrat in Washington telling me what kind of tires that I can or cannot autocross on? Hell no! I'd rather leave that decision to the experienced committee members who have been racing for quite some time, and, lest I forget, MYSELF! [/QUOTE] Actually, when I visited the link on Hoosier's site, I [i]wasn't[/i] given a link to the legislation in question, but I [i]was[/i] conveniently provided with some stock text to [i]cut-and-paste[/i] into a email. Yeah, they want me to [i]participate[/i] in my government, all right. :rolleyes:
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét