RE-71R experiment?
03-27-2015, 02:41 PM
#1
RE-71R experiment?
The new RE-71R "street tire" from Bridgestone seems to be running and more importantly wearing, like a race tire with a tread pattern...and a 200 treadwear rating to make it "legal" for the street-tire classes.
Many people seem to be reporting accelerated wear over previous street-tire offerings from various manufacturers. I would like to quantify this in an experiment.
I'm considering:
1)Fitting a Miata (small, cheap tire sizes) with RE71R's on one side and RE-11A's on the other.
2)Use a traction circle and a pyrometer to set appropriate air pressures for each pair of tires.
2)Constructing a symmetrical course and running it in both directions, repeatedly, with consistent drivers. (-making sure that each driver splits their directional numbers evenly)
3)Document wear with before and after tread-depth measurements and pictures.
*IF* there is a huge difference between two different tires that a single manufacturer has rated with identical tread-wear ratings, then I think it's fair to say that Bridgstone was incorrect with its treadwear rating process/number and the exclusion list should be considered.
If the RE71R's wear similar to the RE11A's, great. But if there is a gross difference in wear, the SCCA has an exclusion list and the RE71R should be on it.
I fear that allowing tire manufacturers to stamp "200 treadwear" on the side of a compound that isn't even close...without repercussions...will be bad for autocrossing.
So, before I bother to set up this process:
-Does anyone even care?
-What other variables should I try to control for?
Many people seem to be reporting accelerated wear over previous street-tire offerings from various manufacturers. I would like to quantify this in an experiment.
I'm considering:
1)Fitting a Miata (small, cheap tire sizes) with RE71R's on one side and RE-11A's on the other.
2)Use a traction circle and a pyrometer to set appropriate air pressures for each pair of tires.
2)Constructing a symmetrical course and running it in both directions, repeatedly, with consistent drivers. (-making sure that each driver splits their directional numbers evenly)
3)Document wear with before and after tread-depth measurements and pictures.
*IF* there is a huge difference between two different tires that a single manufacturer has rated with identical tread-wear ratings, then I think it's fair to say that Bridgstone was incorrect with its treadwear rating process/number and the exclusion list should be considered.
If the RE71R's wear similar to the RE11A's, great. But if there is a gross difference in wear, the SCCA has an exclusion list and the RE71R should be on it.
I fear that allowing tire manufacturers to stamp "200 treadwear" on the side of a compound that isn't even close...without repercussions...will be bad for autocrossing.
So, before I bother to set up this process:
-Does anyone even care?
-What other variables should I try to control for?
Last edited by Z1NONLY; 03-27-2015 at 02:46 PM.
03-27-2015, 05:30 PM
#2
350Z/370Z Tech Moderator
MY350Z.COM
MY350Z.COM
The new RE-71R "street tire" from Bridgestone seems to be running and more importantly wearing, like a race tire with a tread pattern...and a 200 treadwear rating to make it "legal" for the street-tire classes.
Many people seem to be reporting accelerated wear over previous street-tire offerings from various manufacturers. I would like to quantify this in an experiment.
I'm considering:
1)Fitting a Miata (small, cheap tire sizes) with RE71R's on one side and RE-11A's on the other.
2)Use a traction circle and a pyrometer to set appropriate air pressures for each pair of tires.
2)Constructing a symmetrical course and running it in both directions, repeatedly, with consistent drivers. (-making sure that each driver splits their directional numbers evenly)
3)Document wear with before and after tread-depth measurements and pictures.
*IF* there is a huge difference between two different tires that a single manufacturer has rated with identical tread-wear ratings, then I think it's fair to say that Bridgstone was incorrect with its treadwear rating process/number and the exclusion list should be considered.
If the RE71R's wear similar to the RE11A's, great. But if there is a gross difference in wear, the SCCA has an exclusion list and the RE71R should be on it.
I fear that allowing tire manufacturers to stamp "200 treadwear" on the side of a compound that isn't even close...without repercussions...will be bad for autocrossing.
So, before I bother to set up this process:
-Does anyone even care?
-What other variables should I try to control for?
Many people seem to be reporting accelerated wear over previous street-tire offerings from various manufacturers. I would like to quantify this in an experiment.
I'm considering:
1)Fitting a Miata (small, cheap tire sizes) with RE71R's on one side and RE-11A's on the other.
2)Use a traction circle and a pyrometer to set appropriate air pressures for each pair of tires.
2)Constructing a symmetrical course and running it in both directions, repeatedly, with consistent drivers. (-making sure that each driver splits their directional numbers evenly)
3)Document wear with before and after tread-depth measurements and pictures.
*IF* there is a huge difference between two different tires that a single manufacturer has rated with identical tread-wear ratings, then I think it's fair to say that Bridgstone was incorrect with its treadwear rating process/number and the exclusion list should be considered.
If the RE71R's wear similar to the RE11A's, great. But if there is a gross difference in wear, the SCCA has an exclusion list and the RE71R should be on it.
I fear that allowing tire manufacturers to stamp "200 treadwear" on the side of a compound that isn't even close...without repercussions...will be bad for autocrossing.
So, before I bother to set up this process:
-Does anyone even care?
-What other variables should I try to control for?
OK, here's the thing, the UTQG or Uniform Tire Quality Grading system of rating a tires, wear, traction, and heat resistance is largely an "arbitrary" system.
Now before anyone flames me for saying that with "But, but, it's an NHTSA 'standard' wahhh wahhh blah blah blah....", please note that while NHTSA created this for the consumer market, it's not heavily policed and there's a trust factor between the NHTSA and tire manufacturers.
Yes, NHTSA and DOT (Dept of Tranportation) DO test tires and make sure that they are safe to run on public roadways. And yes, they will also do periodic checks to make sure that tire manufacturers aren't changing up the tires significantly (V1.1, v2.04, etc, like software) during the tire's production run whether it be one year or 20. So yes, they do try to keep things on the up and up.
But WEAR of a tire, particularly a DOT-legal competition tire, is based mostly on the manufacturer's word and as such, is assigned by the mfgr.
So here's something to ponder.... WHO manufactures the mythological "Standardized 100" tire? Hunh? Hunh? Yeahhhh, thought so....
You get where I'm going with this? It's mostly theoretical. (And maybe things have changed some in the last 20 years but this has been status quo for that long at least; BUT I'm open to qualified info from anyone.... as a matter of fact, would LOVE to be "set straight" on this. Anybody here from NHTSA?)
So, a UTQG rating for wear isn't THAT reliable. Here's how you have to view it:
Look at the rating.... it says 400. "Hmmmm, wears like rocks.... probably handles like driving on rocks too."
Likewise, the UTQG on your RE-71R gumballs say 200. "OK, these aren't gonna last worth s**t in day to day driving but dayam, they're gonna stick on concrete surface at next week's A/X at the air base landing strip!!"
Seriously, that's almost how you have to "grain of salt" view these ratings. A 200 rating from one line of tire does NOT translate to a 1:1 wear ratio with a 200 rated tire from another line - even same mfgr.
You want your comp tires to last? Talk to people. What's everyone's "mileage" (OK, # of events) on what tires? What are the hot tips? What pressures are they running? What types of cars? What types of suspension?
Not trying to tell you NOT to do your testing - which, BTW, closely mirrors how Tire Rack does their testing - as a matter of fact, I'd read the results of your testing.... and summarily take it with a grain of salt. Heh heh.... seriously, I'd read it but if you test on a Miata, a MUCH lighter and very different car from our Z's, it won't mean much. Might to the MX-5 folks and maybe some translation to the Honda S2K crowd....
All I'm saying is there's way too many variables which will lead to something that's pretty much common knowledge: All DOT-legal comp tires are going to vary in wear by car, by size, by style of driving, by weather, by whether Kim Kardashian has a set of 'em (don't go there) blah blah blah.
But DO have fun testing!!!
Mic
03-27-2015, 06:09 PM
#3
Interested in this since I work at Firestone and have RE-11s on my Z and RE-11As on my turbo tercel. I thought it was odd that the original Re11 was a 180 treadwear and then suddenly just became a 200 TW tire with a different article # and no other changes. Shortly after they released the "A" model to allow for the change but in some sizes I can still find the discontinued 180TW article along with the newer 200TW RE-11 and 200TW RE-11A.
03-27-2015, 06:22 PM
#4
Bridgstone says BOTH the RE11 and the RE71R are 200 tw tires.
If there is a huge difference in wear when driven on the same car, on the same course, on the same day.....will that not tell us something about how much we can "trust" bridgestone to rate their tires?
Do the games really matter at that point?
Remember, I'm not experimenting on our cars here. I'm challenging a claim made by Bridgstone and I'm using thier own tire as a benchmark.
I understand that a tire maker can lie. But they need to undestand that the SCCA can also put their magic tire on an exclusion list.
I have been running trackable street tires for almost a decade. I have been fine with the 200-ish tread wear tires from various manufacturers for all these years. -as have many competitors.
I know they dont last like 400tw tires, but they can be taken on road trips, driven to events and back home etc.
With the information available now, I would not trust a new set RE71R's to make it to ZdayZ and home.
I have never had this issue with any of the countless street tires I and others have competed with.
The kumho XS' s that won HS last year? Fine.
The Hankook RS3's that won STU last year? Fine too
The Rivals that took first in STU at Dixie this year? Those work fine as well.
If we want science-project level grip, there are race tire classes. Street-tire classes used the 200 tw as the point where tires are sticky but still useable as....well...street tires.
If there is a huge difference in wear when driven on the same car, on the same course, on the same day.....will that not tell us something about how much we can "trust" bridgestone to rate their tires?
Do the games really matter at that point?
Remember, I'm not experimenting on our cars here. I'm challenging a claim made by Bridgstone and I'm using thier own tire as a benchmark.
I understand that a tire maker can lie. But they need to undestand that the SCCA can also put their magic tire on an exclusion list.
I have been running trackable street tires for almost a decade. I have been fine with the 200-ish tread wear tires from various manufacturers for all these years. -as have many competitors.
I know they dont last like 400tw tires, but they can be taken on road trips, driven to events and back home etc.
With the information available now, I would not trust a new set RE71R's to make it to ZdayZ and home.
I have never had this issue with any of the countless street tires I and others have competed with.
The kumho XS' s that won HS last year? Fine.
The Hankook RS3's that won STU last year? Fine too
The Rivals that took first in STU at Dixie this year? Those work fine as well.
If we want science-project level grip, there are race tire classes. Street-tire classes used the 200 tw as the point where tires are sticky but still useable as....well...street tires.
Last edited by Z1NONLY; 03-27-2015 at 06:43 PM.
03-28-2015, 07:56 AM
#5
350Z/370Z Tech Moderator
MY350Z.COM
MY350Z.COM
Bridgstone says BOTH the RE11 and the RE71R are 200 tw tires.
If there is a huge difference in wear when driven on the same car, on the same course, on the same day.....will that not tell us something about how much we can "trust" bridgestone to rate their tires?
Do the games really matter at that point?
Remember, I'm not experimenting on our cars here. I'm challenging a claim made by Bridgstone and I'm using thier own tire as a benchmark.
I understand that a tire maker can lie. But they need to undestand that the SCCA can also put their magic tire on an exclusion list.
I have been running trackable street tires for almost a decade. I have been fine with the 200-ish tread wear tires from various manufacturers for all these years. -as have many competitors.
I know they dont last like 400tw tires, but they can be taken on road trips, driven to events and back home etc.
With the information available now, I would not trust a new set RE71R's to make it to ZdayZ and home.
I have never had this issue with any of the countless street tires I and others have competed with.
The kumho XS' s that won HS last year? Fine.
The Hankook RS3's that won STU last year? Fine too
The Rivals that took first in STU at Dixie this year? Those work fine as well.
If we want science-project level grip, there are race tire classes. Street-tire classes used the 200 tw as the point where tires are sticky but still useable as....well...street tires.
If there is a huge difference in wear when driven on the same car, on the same course, on the same day.....will that not tell us something about how much we can "trust" bridgestone to rate their tires?
Do the games really matter at that point?
Remember, I'm not experimenting on our cars here. I'm challenging a claim made by Bridgstone and I'm using thier own tire as a benchmark.
I understand that a tire maker can lie. But they need to undestand that the SCCA can also put their magic tire on an exclusion list.
I have been running trackable street tires for almost a decade. I have been fine with the 200-ish tread wear tires from various manufacturers for all these years. -as have many competitors.
I know they dont last like 400tw tires, but they can be taken on road trips, driven to events and back home etc.
With the information available now, I would not trust a new set RE71R's to make it to ZdayZ and home.
I have never had this issue with any of the countless street tires I and others have competed with.
The kumho XS' s that won HS last year? Fine.
The Hankook RS3's that won STU last year? Fine too
The Rivals that took first in STU at Dixie this year? Those work fine as well.
If we want science-project level grip, there are race tire classes. Street-tire classes used the 200 tw as the point where tires are sticky but still useable as....well...street tires.
Mic
03-28-2015, 11:08 AM
#6
I have a particular Miata in mind that is well prepped, in good working order...and the owner owns a LOT of wheels. I will be talking to that owner tomorrow. Our club president will be there too, and I can ask him about using our venue for the experiment.
Other than that, there's just the issue of money for tires that will basically get burned up for nothing but this experiment. My brother is looking into crowd sourcing on the forums he participates in.
We have an exotic car club coming to our next event for a stand-alone school, so that will move the first possible testing date to May 2nd.
If I can get all the pieces in place, I intend to do this, with the help of a few people.
Other than that, there's just the issue of money for tires that will basically get burned up for nothing but this experiment. My brother is looking into crowd sourcing on the forums he participates in.
We have an exotic car club coming to our next event for a stand-alone school, so that will move the first possible testing date to May 2nd.
If I can get all the pieces in place, I intend to do this, with the help of a few people.
Trending Topics
03-28-2015, 09:32 PM
#8
Registered User
Unlike other brands, Bridgestone’s tread wear ratings follow some convoluted logic with multiple scales for different tire families. For example the popular OEM tire for Zs and other sports cars the RE-050 with its 11/32 tread depth, only has a tread wear rating of 140. However, it’s certainly longer wearing than the extreme performance RE-11A with softer rubber and a measly 9/32 tread depth, but the RE-11 is given a tread wear rating of 200.
Your question, why the RE-71 with only 8/32 tread depth and much softer compound than the RE-11 (9/32 tread depth) gets the same 200 tread wear rating might have something to do with wet/dry performance. The RE-11 is advertised as possessing excellent wet and dry performance with a high resistance to hydroplaning. Since anti hydroplaning performance diminishes as the tire wears, maybe Bridgestone took off a few tread wear rating points. On the other hand the RE-71R is advertised as a dry tire only, with no real resistance to hydroplaning. So its performance will remain consistent as it wears down and it doesn’t lose any tire wear rating points. This may explain why the obviously faster wearing RE-71 is given the same tread rating than its longer wearing brother the RE-11.
Your question, why the RE-71 with only 8/32 tread depth and much softer compound than the RE-11 (9/32 tread depth) gets the same 200 tread wear rating might have something to do with wet/dry performance. The RE-11 is advertised as possessing excellent wet and dry performance with a high resistance to hydroplaning. Since anti hydroplaning performance diminishes as the tire wears, maybe Bridgestone took off a few tread wear rating points. On the other hand the RE-71R is advertised as a dry tire only, with no real resistance to hydroplaning. So its performance will remain consistent as it wears down and it doesn’t lose any tire wear rating points. This may explain why the obviously faster wearing RE-71 is given the same tread rating than its longer wearing brother the RE-11.
03-29-2015, 04:43 AM
#9
The RE11 / RE11A was Bridgstone's competition offering for the street tire segment. The are very fast but just a little off the pace of other offerings.
It appears Bridgstone has taken race rubber and slapped 200 on the side....with some groves of course, in an effort to be the fastest tire. To that end, it's working great. They are WAY faster than any other 200 tw legit street tire.
If this is the case and no one calls them on it, I won't be surprised if Hoosier slaps 200 on the side of their 40tw racing tires and calls them street tires.
It appears Bridgstone has taken race rubber and slapped 200 on the side....with some groves of course, in an effort to be the fastest tire. To that end, it's working great. They are WAY faster than any other 200 tw legit street tire.
If this is the case and no one calls them on it, I won't be surprised if Hoosier slaps 200 on the side of their 40tw racing tires and calls them street tires.
03-29-2015, 05:58 AM
#10
General & DIY Moderator
MY350Z.COM
MY350Z.COM
iTrader: (64)
If you want your test to have more validity, you'll need to run a FULL set of RE11As and another set of RE71Rs back-to-back. Running just one side or the other is half-assed, as it still relies on the other side to generate a certain amount of cornering force. Not sure you'll be able to generate enough hard data to get the Solo Events Board to ban any tire, though.
03-29-2015, 07:50 AM
#11
I dont expect a ban to happen on data alone. I first want to make the case to the general scca membership and hope the pressure comes from there.
Full sets leaves excuses for changing track conditions.
There will be excuses no matter what. I understand that.
Full sets leaves excuses for changing track conditions.
There will be excuses no matter what. I understand that.
03-29-2015, 01:31 PM
#12
New Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How have you determined these are way faster than all other street tire offerings? Aside from tire rack, I can't find any reviews. Sounds like they may be rs3 killers but we've heard that before.
03-29-2015, 02:02 PM
#13
They first got my attention at Dixie when one of our loacal fast guys, that also does well at the national level, hopped out of his STX car on RS3'S and into another competitor's STX car on Re71r's and picked up a full second, in one run...on the short test and tune course.
Then other top drivers started giving first hand reports.
Our next local event is this weekend. I have been benchmarking a few of our nation-level locals and I will not be surprised if they show up on the RE71R's. We should have more data ponts after Sunday. If they come to our test and tune Saturday, it will be even better. That course has not changed in a year and we have a lot of times/tires to look at.
Then other top drivers started giving first hand reports.
Our next local event is this weekend. I have been benchmarking a few of our nation-level locals and I will not be surprised if they show up on the RE71R's. We should have more data ponts after Sunday. If they come to our test and tune Saturday, it will be even better. That course has not changed in a year and we have a lot of times/tires to look at.
Last edited by Z1NONLY; 03-29-2015 at 02:03 PM.
03-29-2015, 06:13 PM
#14
Unfortunately, the problem with autox, and all motorsports is that most of the data is pretty relative and soft.
In regards to the UTQG testing, the magic answer is that yes, the testing is standardized and documented against the reference tire. What they don't typically say is that a treadwear rating published doesn't have to match the results of the test. As long as they EXCEED the rating issued, they can publish anything they want.
So it's quite possible that the new bridgestones are the first "true" 200 TW tires produced, and everyone's been issuing really easy ratings regarding wear.
I'm not terribly pleased about the early reports either, but i'm not about to get my panties in a bunch yet. The Rivals had a bit of a similar early rukus a few years back.. Early testing indicated they were great, all these top flight guys came back giving them the thumbs up... and lets just say not a lot of people are running rivals.
All the data at this point is soft, and we wouldn't see much of a change until after nats and next year's rules.. especially when we haven't seen what the new Rival S or Falken have in store yet.
In regards to the UTQG testing, the magic answer is that yes, the testing is standardized and documented against the reference tire. What they don't typically say is that a treadwear rating published doesn't have to match the results of the test. As long as they EXCEED the rating issued, they can publish anything they want.
So it's quite possible that the new bridgestones are the first "true" 200 TW tires produced, and everyone's been issuing really easy ratings regarding wear.
I'm not terribly pleased about the early reports either, but i'm not about to get my panties in a bunch yet. The Rivals had a bit of a similar early rukus a few years back.. Early testing indicated they were great, all these top flight guys came back giving them the thumbs up... and lets just say not a lot of people are running rivals.
All the data at this point is soft, and we wouldn't see much of a change until after nats and next year's rules.. especially when we haven't seen what the new Rival S or Falken have in store yet.
03-29-2015, 06:50 PM
#15
So you think all the trackable street tires up to this point have been over-rated?
Contingency money has been on the line for years and all the tire makers have been sand-bagging with harder/slower compunds than they needed to meet a legit 200tw rating?
What is to stop Hoosier from submitting their A6 as a 200tw tire?
Contingency money has been on the line for years and all the tire makers have been sand-bagging with harder/slower compunds than they needed to meet a legit 200tw rating?
What is to stop Hoosier from submitting their A6 as a 200tw tire?
03-29-2015, 08:33 PM
#16
The original RE-11 was a 180TW, then they went to 200. I have the 180's on my Z at the moment. They are from 2009 though.
The OEM RE050A with the 140 TW wear out quicker in street driving, so that seems accurate to me. I had to replace my OEM rears at 10K miles, where as my RE-11s have lasted longer with more drag racing and abuse and on a setup with more power, so based on my totally random conditons I'd say the TW is accurate in a street setting.
Remember, in testing they don't have to get the tires super hot to where they soften up, and if the RE-11 or RE71 isn't getting really warm and sticky in the TW testing, it may outlast the RE050 or similar. But once on a course it's acting like an R-comp and softening way up giving great grip but shorter life.
Bridgestone spends way more money on tire R&D than almost any other company, maybe they came up with some shady compound tricks that nobody has looked for yet.
The OEM RE050A with the 140 TW wear out quicker in street driving, so that seems accurate to me. I had to replace my OEM rears at 10K miles, where as my RE-11s have lasted longer with more drag racing and abuse and on a setup with more power, so based on my totally random conditons I'd say the TW is accurate in a street setting.
Remember, in testing they don't have to get the tires super hot to where they soften up, and if the RE-11 or RE71 isn't getting really warm and sticky in the TW testing, it may outlast the RE050 or similar. But once on a course it's acting like an R-comp and softening way up giving great grip but shorter life.
Bridgestone spends way more money on tire R&D than almost any other company, maybe they came up with some shady compound tricks that nobody has looked for yet.
03-31-2015, 05:50 AM
#17
So you think all the trackable street tires up to this point have been over-rated?
Contingency money has been on the line for years and all the tire makers have been sand-bagging with harder/slower compunds than they needed to meet a legit 200tw rating?
What is to stop Hoosier from submitting their A6 as a 200tw tire?
Contingency money has been on the line for years and all the tire makers have been sand-bagging with harder/slower compunds than they needed to meet a legit 200tw rating?
What is to stop Hoosier from submitting their A6 as a 200tw tire?
Federal reps have actually said they believe their 595R would test out at over 200 easily from their current 140 rating, but they wouldn't change them because of marketing reasons in europe, where they're a hot track day tire.
As i mentioned, there is a confirmed and consistent test. Everyone likes to judge it as being inadequate/********/etc.. I don't personally think it is. I think we feel that way, because we never see the results actually coming off this test, and as i mentioned, tire manufacturers can put whatever they want on the sidewall as long as it's lower than the tested value.
I think bridgestone may have thrown the gauntlet and actually built a 200TW Tire, instead of under-rating them, and that everyone will be scrambling to catch up.
Last edited by Shane86; 03-31-2015 at 05:55 AM.
03-31-2015, 08:38 AM
#18
Being numerical values, i'd say under-rated to be accurate.. But i wouldn't be surprised to see a mk1 rival UTQG test at over 300.. Those things wear like rocks.
Federal reps have actually said they believe their 595R would test out at over 200 easily from their current 140 rating, but they wouldn't change them because of marketing reasons in europe, where they're a hot track day tire.
As i mentioned, there is a confirmed and consistent test. Everyone likes to judge it as being inadequate/********/etc.. I don't personally think it is. I think we feel that way, because we never see the results actually coming off this test, and as i mentioned, tire manufacturers can put whatever they want on the sidewall as long as it's lower than the tested value.
I think bridgestone may have thrown the gauntlet and actually built a 200TW Tire, instead of under-rating them, and that everyone will be scrambling to catch up.
Federal reps have actually said they believe their 595R would test out at over 200 easily from their current 140 rating, but they wouldn't change them because of marketing reasons in europe, where they're a hot track day tire.
As i mentioned, there is a confirmed and consistent test. Everyone likes to judge it as being inadequate/********/etc.. I don't personally think it is. I think we feel that way, because we never see the results actually coming off this test, and as i mentioned, tire manufacturers can put whatever they want on the sidewall as long as it's lower than the tested value.
I think bridgestone may have thrown the gauntlet and actually built a 200TW Tire, instead of under-rating them, and that everyone will be scrambling to catch up.
The existence of a real test does not mean it is actually being used or, if used, reported honestly.
What stops Hoosier from slapping "200" on an A6?
03-31-2015, 02:21 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: May 2013
Location: US
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta put my .02c into this.
It sounds to me like you have been beaten by someone who was running those tires and want to find some reason that they beat you other than they were a better driver.
Yes, one tire may be better than others. Before it was the specific size of Toyo R1R that people shaved and outran everyone. Big deal, the tire is a little faster than others. So a pro was able to drop a second one run to the next. Have you never found a perfect line and dropped time that you didn't think was possible?
The fact that you want a tire banned from a company that has shown dedication to autocross bothers me. They have come out with great tires that are advanced to the point that it makes others look old and worn out. Do you know how it was tested? Do you know the results of the test? I would worry more about how to be a better driver than what tire company might be lying if I was at a national level in autocross. If the tire is better, then switch to that tire.
It sounds to me like you have been beaten by someone who was running those tires and want to find some reason that they beat you other than they were a better driver.
Yes, one tire may be better than others. Before it was the specific size of Toyo R1R that people shaved and outran everyone. Big deal, the tire is a little faster than others. So a pro was able to drop a second one run to the next. Have you never found a perfect line and dropped time that you didn't think was possible?
The fact that you want a tire banned from a company that has shown dedication to autocross bothers me. They have come out with great tires that are advanced to the point that it makes others look old and worn out. Do you know how it was tested? Do you know the results of the test? I would worry more about how to be a better driver than what tire company might be lying if I was at a national level in autocross. If the tire is better, then switch to that tire.
03-31-2015, 03:01 PM
#20
Gotta put my .02c into this.
It sounds to me like you have been beaten by someone who was running those tires and want to find some reason that they beat you other than they were a better driver.
Yes, one tire may be better than others. Before it was the specific size of Toyo R1R that people shaved and outran everyone. Big deal, the tire is a little faster than others. So a pro was able to drop a second one run to the next. Have you never found a perfect line and dropped time that you didn't think was possible?
The fact that you want a tire banned from a company that has shown dedication to autocross bothers me. They have come out with great tires that are advanced to the point that it makes others look old and worn out. Do you know how it was tested? Do you know the results of the test? I would worry more about how to be a better driver than what tire company might be lying if I was at a national level in autocross. If the tire is better, then switch to that tire.
It sounds to me like you have been beaten by someone who was running those tires and want to find some reason that they beat you other than they were a better driver.
Yes, one tire may be better than others. Before it was the specific size of Toyo R1R that people shaved and outran everyone. Big deal, the tire is a little faster than others. So a pro was able to drop a second one run to the next. Have you never found a perfect line and dropped time that you didn't think was possible?
The fact that you want a tire banned from a company that has shown dedication to autocross bothers me. They have come out with great tires that are advanced to the point that it makes others look old and worn out. Do you know how it was tested? Do you know the results of the test? I would worry more about how to be a better driver than what tire company might be lying if I was at a national level in autocross. If the tire is better, then switch to that tire.
If that were all there was to the story I would be elated that Bridgstone had accomplished such an engineering feat, but multiple drivers in different vehicles reported ridiculous, race-tire-like wear.
THAT is the issue I think needs to be tested and quantified. Maybe Dixie was a fluke. Maybe they won't wear that fast in other settings. Maybe they won't dominate known 200TW tires under other circumstances.
We need more data and I'm suggesting one way to get some of that data.
As for "looking for excuses", you don't know me, and the excuse thing is a common occurrence in the sport (particularly for newer drivers) so I'm not going to take it personal. You are way off base though.
BTW, Not a single driver in my class was on that tire.
