GT2 Tires

[Administrator]

There's been lots of discussion regarding the dominance of one tire in the GT2 Division. Some have suggested it's apparent there are two GT2 classes. Those with the dominant tire and those with "other" tires. Would you like to see all GT2 competitors with the same tire?

[Nick Koske]

If GT2 becomes GT1 and GT3 becomes GT2...then yes I think that's fine. But if there's four classes racing The top LMP and GT class should have 'full' competition, including tires. Why, because one tire does not always work for all cars. See GA...the last year of the Hoosiers (a new tire compound/contruction) were said to have worked much better on the Rileys than on the Crawford, because of their different suspension geometries.

“Our optimism going into the season was very high,” Bergmeister said. “The team did a lot of testing in the off season. The AJR guys had a year under their belt with the car and the circuits. In Daytona, we had some issues and at Mexico City things didn’t go according to plan either. We were able to come away with a top five finish [in Mexico City], but we really hoped for more by this point. We are still chasing the right car setup with the revised Hoosier tire, but the team remains optimistic and we have some really good tracks coming up.”

Now you pretty much could call it a Riley specs series...is that good for the series?

A rear engine Porsche is probably going to require a different rear tire than a mid engine F430...and one will have an advantage because of this. We already know now that the RSR uses a different rear tire than the F430, wider and probably a slightly different construction. So what happens if a spec tire gives an advantage to a certain make of car? Then what? Kind of becomes a "chasing ones own tail" thing to get the cars to preform equally.

Besides it seems to me if you have a serious program, with full season funding, and can pay the tire contract, at year start, you can get Michelins. Really the only complaining I've heard is from a team that has not committed to a full season and has had a hard time finding funding. Now I'm sure they're not the only one, but name another 'serious' team that lacks Michelins (I don't know if RLR counts because I would think a factory BMW team could get Michelins if they really wanted, I could be wrong on that...it happens every now and then, besides they qualified ahead of the #45 at St. Pete). What other team GT2 team, given Michelins, would be able to instantly compete with the Risis, Lizards, Farnbachers...even RLRs of the world?

[HORNDAWG]

I voted No. I believe that competition is good for the product. That being said though, it should be mandatory for the tire mfg's to supply tires to anyone who wishes them and can pay the bill!! The elitist BS that goes on over who can, and who can't, get product is wrong IMO.

[Nick Koske]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

...
That being said though, it should be mandatory for the tire mfg's to supply tires to anyone who wishes them and can pay the bill!! The elitist BS that goes on over who can, and who can't, get product is wrong IMO.

I would be cool with that...With that said does a tire manufacturer have the right to only service full season entries? Take Michelin for example...every contract comes with a tire 'engineer'. Michelin shouldn't have to pay/hire tire 'engineers' for the guys that decide to race once or twice a year. Also goes to planning. If at a Petit LeMans you have a team come out of the wood works and decide they want to race and on Michelins, but Michelin in their planning only has produced the number of tires for the teams they currently had a contract with and doesn't have enough for this new team...then what? The standard allotment is 20 dry tires (more for the longer races). What if it's two teams...or three. How can a tire company plan it's production without knowing exactly how many tires they would need?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Nick Koske

I would be cool with that...With that said does a tire manufacturer have the right to only service full season entries? Take Michelin for example...every contract comes with a tire 'engineer'. Michelin shouldn't have to pay/hire tire 'engineers' for the guys that decide to race once or twice a year. Also goes to planning. If at a Petit LeMans you have a team come out of the wood works and decide they want to race and on Michelins, but Michelin in their planning only has produced the number of tires for the teams they currently had a contract with and doesn't have enough for this new team...then what? The standard allotment is 20 dry tires (more for the longer races). What if it's two teams...or three. How can a tire company plan it's production without knowing exactly how many tires they would need?

They should be able to do both, but yes under contract. Full season with an engineer or part season without, but enough lead time from the team(s) on which rounds will be atttended. Also they can produce and have on hand enough tires to supply the P/T teams even on short notice (before the truck leaves for the race). They do have a shelf life!

[Nick Koske]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

They should be able to do both, but yes under contract. Full season with an engineer or part season without, but enough lead time from the team(s) on which rounds will be atttended. Also they can produce and have on hand enough tires to supply the P/T teams even on short notice (before the truck leaves for the race). They do have a shelf life!

So in your plan Michelin would have to look into their crystal ball to figure out home many more tires to produce for the one offs here and there that may or may not happen. Where's the production facility...France? What's the lead time to get on a molding machine? It's probably an easy 2-3 week lead time to get tires made, plus shipping time. Do you just expect Michelin to have 1000s of dollars of tires in a storage facility, just in case someone new shows up and wants tires 3 days before and event? With myself not knowing a whole lot about the tire manufacturing industry, I would not want to sign up for that. That's me, sounds like a good way to lose lots of money and resources.

I guess if the manufacturer is allowed to charge more per tire for the P/T competitors that the full season ones, it might make business sense. You know...discounts for volume.

I guess 'normal' years it might be ok...years like this year would definitely screw any plan up. From 30-ish entries last year to less than 20 this year and only 22 entries at Utah in 2006. It sure would be rough to plan for that.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Nick Koske

So in your plan Michelin would have to look into their crystal ball to figure out home many more tires to produce for the one offs here and there that may or may not happen. Where's the production facility...France? What's the lead time to get on a molding machine? It's probably an easy 2-3 week lead time to get tires made, plus shipping time. Do you just expect Michelin to have 1000s of dollars of tires in a storage facility, just in case someone new shows up and wants tires 3 days before and event? With myself not knowing a whole lot about the tire manufacturing industry, I would not want to sign up for that. That's me, sounds like a good way to lose lots of money and resources.

I guess if the manufacturer is allowed to charge more per tire for the P/T competitors that the full season ones, it might make business sense. You know...discounts for volume.

I guess 'normal' years it might be ok...years like this year would definitely screw any plan up. From 30-ish entries last year to less than 20 this year and only 22 entries at Utah in 2006. It sure would be rough to plan for that.

I guess you can read it any way you want, as you have! Maybe if the first part of it was paid closer attention to you would see (or maybe not) that it would be under contract and which rounds the part timers were planning on attending would be known. And they could have a minimal stock of tires on hand in case. And then if they do not have enough to supply everybody (on short notice) to race, then to bad for the team. But hey, whatever!

[Nick Koske]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

I guess you can read it any way you want, as you have! Maybe if the first part of it was paid closer attention to you would see (or maybe not) that it would be under contract and which rounds the part timers were planning on attending would be known. And they could have a minimal stock of tires on hand in case. And then if they do not have enough to supply everybody (on short notice) to race, then to bad for the team. But hey, whatever!

Yeah I did read that slightly different...My bad . "then to bad for the team" if this is the case...then your proposal is fine with me, which as we know is very important to sports car governing bodies .

p.s. Been a while since we've 'gone at it'...

p.s.s. I hope passage through your state can be arranged when I try and escape from CA .

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Nick Koske

Yeah I did read that slightly different...My bad . "then to bad for the team" if this is the case...then your proposal is fine with me, which as we know is very important to sports car governing bodies .

p.s. Been a while since we've 'gone at it'...

p.s.s. I hope passage through your state can be arranged when I try and escape from CA .

Ya, it's been awhile.

Bring wampum and fermented hops!