⚠ Forum Archived — The THSCC forums were discontinued (last post: 2024-05-18). This read-only archive preserves club history. Visit thscc.com →  |  Search this archive with Google: site:forums.thscc.com your search terms

THSCC Forums

Tarheel Sports Car Club Forums
It is currently Tue Apr 07, 2026 10:06 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:40 pm 
Offline
Tire Nerd
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:40 pm
Posts: 1818
Location: Greenville, SC
Steven Carter wrote:
It would be cool to have the time, opportunity and $ to do that testing.


No kidding. Once you decided on the platforms (cars) to use, you then have to decide on the locations. Ponder all the different types of concrete and asphalt surfaces for a moment, and then throw that variable into the mix too (thinking here about training Jackie told me about she went to at http://www.ncat.us/).

_________________
Current stable:
2019 BMW M2 Competition slicktop 6MT
2011 BMW M3 sedan slicktop 6MT
2007 BMW 328i wagon (slushbox for now)
1975 CanAm 125MX2


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 1:31 pm 
Offline
The Giver
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 8:45 am
Posts: 4566
Location: Bashing BMWs!
Ryan Holton wrote:
The UTQC system is certainly not arbitrary, it is an actual test, that has actual specified methods to perform.


Are you saying that a 200 TWR on a BFG tire is the same as the 200 TWR on a Dunlop tire? I've read that's hardly ever the case.

_________________
Vincent Keene
'06 Ford Mustang GT (track rat)
'15 Dodge Charger R/T (yeah, it's got a HEMI!)
'07 Ford Fusion SE (205,000 miles and counting)
'98 Chevy Z-24 (retired)
'93 Acura Integra (Team SWB 24HOL Car)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 1:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 11:37 pm
Posts: 642
Location: Raleigh
Ryan Holton wrote:
Rob Keehner wrote:
I think it is arbitrary. I think the solution is a spec brand for Street and ST.


Nope.

Hi, yeah you are new, ohh I see you don't have the spec Humpmaster tires on your car, you get to run in Street Prepared.

The UTQC system is certainly not arbitrary, it is an actual test, that has actual specified methods to perform. A manufacturer can specify a Lower number if it so wishes (obviously for marketing purposes) but it does indeed meet the lower number.

IMHO, the real barrier to a treaded Hoosier A7 "r-comp street tire" is that Hoosier can't label them "NOT FOR HIGHWAY USE".


The demand for autocross ~200tw tires has encouraged competition among manufacturers to continue improving the product. In addition to class dilution, the vast improvement in street tires was the second most obvious change I noticed in autocross after being out of the sport for 7+ years. In addition to discouraging new attendants, I don't think a spec brand or tire would help foster tire improvement.

_________________
92 Miata 1.9L naturally aspirated. SSM 21


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 2028
Location: Raleigh, NC
Vincent Keene wrote:
Ryan Holton wrote:
The UTQC system is certainly not arbitrary, it is an actual test, that has actual specified methods to perform.


Are you saying that a 200 TWR on a BFG tire is the same as the 200 TWR on a Dunlop tire? I've read that's hardly ever the case.


from Tirerack
"Unfortunately, the rating that is of the most interest to consumers is the one that appears to be the least consistent. While the Treadwear Grade was originally intended to be assigned purely scientifically, it has also become a marketing tool used by manufacturers to help position and promote their tires."

and
"UTQG Treadwear Grades are based on actual road use in which the test tire is run in a vehicle convoy along with standardized Course Monitoring Tires. The vehicle repeatedly runs a prescribed 400-mile test loop in West Texas for a total of 7,200 miles. The vehicle can have its alignment set, air pressure checked and tires rotated every 800 miles. The test tire's and the Monitoring Tire's wear are measured during and at the conclusion of the test. The tire manufacturers then assign a Treadwear Grade based on the observed wear rates. The Course Monitoring Tire is assigned a grade and the test tire receives a grade indicating its relative treadwear. A grade of 100 would indicate that the tire tread would last as long as the test tire, 200 would indicate the tread would last twice as long, 300 would indicate three times as long, etc.

The problem with UTQG Treadwear Grades is that they are open to some interpretation on the part of the tire manufacturer because they are assigned after the tire has only experienced a little treadwear as it runs the 7,200 miles. This means that the tire manufacturers need to extrapolate their raw wear data when they are assigning Treadwear Grades, and that their grades can to some extent reflect how conservative or optimistic their marketing department is. Typically, comparing the Treadwear Grades of tire lines within a single brand is somewhat helpful, while attempting to compare the grades between different brands is not as helpful."

So, yes it is a real test with real parameters. But no, you can't directly compare between different brands because of the inherent limitations of only driving 7200 miles, then subjecting it to scientific/marketing extrapolation of the different tire manufacturers.

_________________
Steve Carter
1972 Datsun 240Z-- resto pics at http://picasaweb.google.com/srcartermd
2007 GPW Honda S2000-- STR 86


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 10:50 pm 
Offline
Don't I have something better to do?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 3:15 pm
Posts: 551
Location: Earth
Quote:
The UTQC system is certainly not arbitrary, it is an actual test, that has actual specified methods to perform. A manufacturer can specify a Lower number if it so wishes (obviously for marketing purposes) but it does indeed meet the lower number.


Or the other way when SCCA changes a number and Toyo sands a 140 off a mold and stamps a 200 back in. :D

_________________
2006 Civic Si - #24 HS for 2015

2005 GMC Sierra
1991 318is Garage Ornament


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 11:09 pm 
Offline
Honda >> Ford
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 1:54 am
Posts: 2052
OK, I have two brilliant suggestions for street class:

1) Require a minimum manufactured tread depth and ban shaving. Then, define limits on rubber softness at various ambient temperatures. At national events, durometer readings would be required in impound. If the rubber is too soft, DQ. There would need to be allowances for the effects of elevated tire temps after competition runs, but if there was a question the tires could retested once cooled to ambient temperature.

2) The above is too complicated and would likely be subverted by clever tire company chemists/engineers, so just require LRR tires in street class.

_________________
Art McDonald
Premier Amateur #518
2008 Dishman Cup
Pivot Cone Snob

Rodney is a waxer (but in a good way)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 5:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:02 am
Posts: 299
It seems like it would be easier for the SCCA to just put out a whitelist of tires. There are only a small number of performance tires that would be contentious.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:21 pm
Posts: 48
Rob Keehner wrote:
Buy a Vette


I did that. Pretty sure I've got worse tire selections than Chad does.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's here...BFG Rival-S
PostPosted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 2028
Location: Raleigh, NC
Rob Keehner wrote:
Quote:
The UTQC system is certainly not arbitrary, it is an actual test, that has actual specified methods to perform. A manufacturer can specify a Lower number if it so wishes (obviously for marketing purposes) but it does indeed meet the lower number.


Or the other way when SCCA changes a number and Toyo sands a 140 off a mold and stamps a 200 back in. :D


That is exactly what they did. Same tire, same construction, different rating. A driver used R1Rs with a 140 stamped on the side at Dixie this year, was protested and subsequently DSQ'ed.

Quoth the Rack of Tires:
"
NOTE:

At the end of 2014, Toyo changed the Uniform Tire Quality Grade (UTQG) of their Proxes R1R Extreme Performance Summer tire to reflect a 200 Treadwear rating.

UTQG ratings for Treadwear, Traction and Temperature are based on tests conducted by tire manufacturers and reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). These regulations allow tire manufacturers to under-rate their tires’ capabilities, but prohibit over-rating them. UTQG ratings are required to be printed on their labels and branded on tire sidewalls.

Toyo assigned the 140 Treadwear rating to match the UTQG Treadwear rating required by competition rules when the Proxes R1R was introduced, however subsequent Toyo wear data revealed the tire line earned a 200 Treadwear rating.

With some competition rules now requiring higher UTQG Treadwear ratings, Toyo decided it was time to officially change the Proxes R1R line’s rating to accurately reflect its capabilities.

*In order to help drivers confirm which tire they will receive, we have identified the tires by listing their Treadwear rating on the product Specs tab."

_________________
Steve Carter
1972 Datsun 240Z-- resto pics at http://picasaweb.google.com/srcartermd
2007 GPW Honda S2000-- STR 86


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group