TIR Class Exclusion List

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 10:35 am

Please re-read my post, for I stated (with the incorrect usage of 'there') that if a person showed up in their car on race tires. I understand co-drivers may be a different situation, but if you are putting race tires on your car to come to an event as a NOV, then your aspirations might be a bit higher than your standard NOV entry. - AB

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 10:39 am

jimpastorius wrote:

We need to exclude the cars that fall within the SCCA Street Touring classes from the THSCC TIR class. If your car is eligible for one of the three Street Touring classes, you already have a street tire class.

STSS for Street Touring Stock - Screwed. :lol:

Same argument could be used to say.....

* No more PRO class. Run in your regular class
* No running "Stock” class legal cars in higher classes (SP or above). This probably doesn't happen much but it might.

:whoknows:

It is hard to tell if Jim is joking or serious here, but once again I think there are better ways to solve the TIR class issue.

While I have posted my idea a number of time on how to “fix” the shrinking open class issue it seems to have little support. In short you force everyone to run open, but publish PAXed results for those that run non-R tires in classes that normaly would allow R tires. Actually this idea would sync up with what Jim is saying as since if you decide to run in a ST class you would be prevented from being part of my proposed TIR result list. If you had a car that could run in an ST class, but decided to run SP with ST tires (i.e. Azenis) you then would be able to have your results published in the TIR result list. I think I am beating a dead horse on my idea, but I will keep trying.

I keep thinking that the TIR guys would love this since it basically allows for TIR to continue into the future with a much reduced risk of going away totally. And at the same time pumps up open class numbers.

Another idea (already mentioned) is to create a tire exclusion list for TIR class. The hidden statement here is to "ban Azenis". But I have a hard time liking that. Currently Azenis is cheap and fast. One issue is the availability of sizes. Also, people like myself drive Azenis nearly all of the time. I drive on mine all of the time except for a few months that we get snow and ice. It is a valid every day high performance tire.

If Kumho, Hoosier or someone else came out with a new killer ST tire and it was VERY expensive and didn't work well on the street (street tire in name only), then I would be in favor of putting it on an TIR exclusion list. SCCA could do the same thing as they have an exclusion list built into the ST rules, but I don't think there are any tires currently on the list.

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 10:43 am

David Teague wrote:

Richard Casto wrote:

The point here is, if they are a novice, let them run the car as classed. If they show up with a totally prepped car or get a great co-drive offer, well then good for them! If they do well, they will win and no longer be allowed in NOV class. The current rule would only make sense if you excluded R tires in NOV and we don't do that.

If you let people in Novice or Tire Run STS/STSX/STSU/ST2 it is an unfair advantage, why you ask? The ST pax is pased on cars that run street tires, while the rest of the class's pax's are based on cars running R compond tires, so if I ran Tire class in STS I would have better chance to win the event since my pax is softer becuase my class runs street tires, where if I ran DSP I might not even place, since my pax would be harder.

You are mixing up my comments about NOV with TIR class.

I totally understand about the Pax issue with TIR class and why you can't allow ST classes. My point was about NOV only. NOV does not equal TIR class for newbies. It is Open class for newbies. If the rules said "no R tires in NOV" then I agree that you should not allow ST pax values.

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 10:52 am

Aaron Buckley wrote:

Please re-read my post, for I stated (with the incorrect usage of 'there') that if a person showed up in their car on race tires. I understand co-drivers may be a different situation, but if you are putting race tires on your car to come to an event as a NOV, then your aspirations might be a bit higher than your standard NOV entry. - AB

Aaron, not sure if you are directing this at Chuck or myself, but I will jump in anynow.

I think you understand the co-driver situation, but I also don't think that a newbie showing up with R tires is that different. Yes they might have high aspirations, but frankly I think that all they have is a large checkbook at that point. I have no doubt that there are newbies who show up that have spent much more money on their cars that I have on mine. If I only had the cash.....

Anyhow, I don't think we have many newbies showing up with R tires anyhow, the tire issue probably is nearly 100% due to co-driver issues and this doesn't even try to address (not that I think it should) the issue of newbie prep level. Guys that show up with a semi-common "street modification" (i.e. carbon hoods) that bumps them way up into SP or beyond, but are still running OEM springs, shocks and brick tires. It is a problem that can't be solved at the NOV level, so just go ahead and let the cars run as classed. Regardless of what mods and tires they have.

If the driver has any skill at all, and like you say has aspirations, they will quickly win NOV and move on. Let them get a trophy to reward them for their early prep efforts and then they can get beat up in open class.

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 11:00 am

How is the TIR class different than the SCCA ST classes we support?

As for PRO, I agree with dropping that class. It seems that class is now used to make the ride home for some of the competitors a little easier

A change I think would help PRO is to make it only three runs. Hey, you run PRO because you try and run at the National level. At the National level you only have three shots at it. Have PRO run between heats 2 and 3. They do all 3 runs back to back. Since we charge $5 per run on average, use $5 per PRO competitor to pay the winner of PRO.

The exclusion of ST classes from Novice is just plain silly and confusing. Hell, it is tough enough for a new person, now we add that their car is legal STS2, but they have to run CSP.....go figure.

Tom Hoppe · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:16 am **Posts:** 387

<--- best smiley evAr. Aaron you rock.

I actually agree with this "TIR class shrinkage" idea. If your car is STS, STX, STU, STwhatever legal, then you have to run in that class. Don't "up" your car class and then run in TIR, run in whatever class your car was intended for.

As far as PRO class elimination. I will either way, be running and comparing my times vs. PAX times of other drivers. I don't care where I do that, whether its in PRO class (where my runs don't impact other drivers in STX class) or in STX class. I do *like* the concept of PRO class though and wouldn't want to see it go away.

One thing I *dont* agree with is for us in PRO class to lose a run. If its that way, I might just run open for a little more seat time.

-Tom

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:15 pm

If people only want to run 3 runs in any class it is their perrogative, however, I don't see us changing Pro class in that fashion!

What I want to see is good *competition* in as many classes as possible. Elimination of pro class would eliminate that.

Tire class actually has some of the closest competition of all the classes, there are a few others that go several cars deep, but many don't.

Eliminate Pro class and I can predict who will win 90% of the first place season trophies. As it is now, I can predict it for about 60% of the classes (these are ball park figures!). Based on those numbers, I see pro class as a good thing.

As it stands today, Pro class opens up the following classes:

DS, GS, STS (would have been a 2 person battle), STX (2 person battle), CS

In other classes, as it stands now (assuming the "players" run 5 events, and assuming we keep Pro class).

SS: No one
AS: Outcome is certain
BS: any one of 3 people!
CS: any one of 3 or 4 people
DS: any one of about 5 people
ES: Split between codrivers (move those two to Pro, and it could be any of 3 drivers)
FS: None
GS: Any one of 6 drivers (depending on tire budgets)
HS: A few possibilities

ASP: None
BSP: None
CSP: a couple of possiblities, but I'm leaning towards 1.
DSP: Outcome is certain (if MW runs open class)
ESP: Anyone's guess!
FSP: any of several

EP: any of 2 or 3

DM: 1 of 1
EM: 1 of 1

SM: any of a few choices
SSM: one (if PB runs,)

STS: Outcome is certain
STX: could be one of many!

If we got rid of pro class, STS and STX would be the only two classes with more than one driver that has a sure thing.

Scott

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

I agree that TIR class should only include cars that are not eligible for ST classes, but that's just my opinion. I also don't really care if it stays or goes (since I don't ever see myself being interested in competing there), but there are obviously some people who do, so I say let 'em keep it.

Quote:

As far as PRO class elimination. I will either way, be running and comparing my times vs. PAX times of other drivers. I don't care where I do that, whether its in PRO class (where my runs don't impact other drivers in STX class) or in STX class. I do *like* the concept of PRO class though and wouldn't want to see it go away.

Ditto. But... with the surfaces that we run on, it's almost a given that the winning car will be a Subaru. So it kinda takes a little of the fun out of it for the other guys, I guess. :wink:

Kevin Hoff · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:25 pm

I'm a proponent of dropping PRO. When I was starting autocross my streety mods put me in DSP (now FSP) running against people like Dave Mohler, Geoff Zimmer, and Chris Petersen. I had zero chance of winning a trophy, much less a first place. However, it was clear that the best driver/car combo won the class every time and I wasn't handed a free win like people get when all the best drivers defected to PRO a few years later. I would have felt silly walking up for a 1st in DSP if Geoff, Chris, and David had all soundly beat my times while running PRO.

I also feel that some people like to run PRO as an ego boost who really shouldn't be in the class. All this does is reduce the depth of the open classes, and in a worse way than TIR as the semi-pros actually add competition. Odds are the TIR people just add trophy fodder. (Yes, this is a gross generalization but it fits mostly.)

--Kevin H.

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:02 pm

Quote:

Ditto. But... with the surfaces that we run on, it's almost a given that the winning car will be a Subaru. So it kinda takes a little of the fun out of it for the other guys, I guess. :wink:

That really isn't the case anymore. Laurinburg is good for race tires, Rockingham is good for race tires and Danville is good for race tires, that only leaves one site that is gritty enough that it really favors the street tire classes.

Scott

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

It does seem a little bit silly to have 3 STS cars in PRO class...

:roll:

So if they'd like to move to STS/Open with me, I'm in. And I'll be driving the new RS starting this weekend... bone stock plus seats and engine mounts (so far).

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:09 pm

Kevin Allen wrote:

It does seem a little bit silly to have 3 STS cars in PRO class...

:roll:

So if they'd like to move to STS/Open with me, I'm in. And I'll be driving the new RS starting this weekend... bone stock plus seats and engine mounts (so far).

What 3 STS cars are in Pro class? I'm running a bone stock DS car, however it will be on street tires... STS index is still easier than DS.

Scott

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:14 pm

Kevin Hoff wrote:

I'm a proponent of dropping PRO. When I was starting autocross my streety mods put me in DSP (now FSP) running against people like Dave Mohler, Geoff Zimmer, and Chris Petersen. I had zero chance of winning a trophy, much less a first place. However, it was clear that the best driver/car combo won the class every time and I wasn't handed a free win like people get when all the best drivers defected to PRO a few years later. I would have felt silly walking up for a 1st in DSP if Geoff, Chris, and David had all soundly beat my times while running PRO.

I also feel that some people like to run PRO as an ego boost who really shouldn't be in the class. All this does is reduce the depth of the open classes, and in a worse way than TIR as the semi-pros actually add competition. Odds are the TIR people just add trophy fodder. (Yes, this is a gross generalization but it fits mostly.)

--Kevin H.

Talk about hitting the nail on the head. Very well put.

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:15 pm

I guess it seems we have some differning opinions out there (duh).

I enjoy the *close* competition aspect of autocrossing just as much as the driving itself. It loses some appeal if it isn't close.

Others feel differently. It's quite clear that some people think that a severe butt kicking is fun (some giving, some receiving, some enjoy both).

I doubt we will ever come to an agreement on this.

Scott

Tom Hoppe · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:16 am **Posts:** 387

scottjohnson wrote:

That really isn't the case anymore. Laurinburg is good for race tires, Rockingham is good for race tires and Danville is good for race tires, that only leaves one site that is gritty enough that it really favors the street tire classes.

Scott

What kevin said, still stands though, a Subaru will still win PRO class every time :twisted:

-Tom

THSCC Forums

TIR Class Exclusion List

Who is online