Proposed changes to AROCA Vic Competition Rules for 2009

[Brad M]

Attached are the current Competition Rules (effective from 2007).

Attached are the Proposed changes for 2009.

Check the calendar for the details of the meeting on Tuesday.

[Eddy Bidese]

Hi Brad, I am unable to attend tom night due to a business comitment. Could I make a couple of comments for consideration at the meeting.
1. Standard class Shock Absorbers free....do not attempt to define...Koni Red is not a specification and cant be easily checked. So if the intention is free then let it be free.
2.Standard and Modified  Wheel width and tyre aspect ratio. I understand the wheel width logic in attemting to provide a control. As for aspect ratio this should be left free as most people who fit different diameter wheels will choose an aspect ratio for overall wheel clearance and gearing needs.
3. R spec.  I agree completely with Jim Neilson's input. However if this is not voted up then I believe we should nominate a list of Tyre brands and model numbers which defines the " R" spec type.....this alternative will be painfull to keep up to date.
4. Average times. While I understand the philosophy of Peters suggestion, the concept of sprints is that of a " Fastest" lap time. Transponder timing should eliminate discrepancy.

Thanks for taking the time to review and good luck with the meeting
Eddy Bidese

[Scott Farquharson]

Hi all,

Had quick look at the revised class structure (thanks Bruno - lot of work there) and just wanted to ask what the new structure was trying to achieve - ie. the case for change, what are the problems we are having that need this type of revision.

Agree on the r spec tyre issue - we either dispense with it all together cos it has never made sense cos there is no definition of an R spec tyre anywhere - or we maintain a list - and then who decides what is on or off?  The CAMS production car tyre list is NOT an r-spec tyre list but a list of tyres that are acceptable for use on production cars and can include for instance any old road legal radial.

I think dump the rule for all classes bar standard and then maintain a list of tyres excluded from standard class - before a competitors uses a tyre that could be deemed a road legal competition tyre the Comp Sec must be consulted and apprval sought.

Even if we keep the rule we still need to maintain a list as one doesn't exist at the moment.

Dorians should solve the timing issue

Grp S stuff should be there already

I'll be there Tues night

[jimnielsen]

So.. what happened Scott? Did the status quo prevail?

[jimnielsen]

Any update at what happened at the meeting?

jim.

[Scott Farquharson]

Brad did minutes - not sure if he will be posting them.

New class structure which really just combined base and super modified, list of "r" spec tyres - really for just standard class as any tyre bar slicks are ok for the new "modified class", Grp S class and race trophy in, pretty good result all round.

[jimnielsen]

It would be nice to see the final (or even draft) 2009 comp rules so that "investments" for 2009 can be planned

[Brad M]

Just so happens I have a report completed on the meeting (attached).

I have also completed the draft, which won't be distributed until the committee has reviewed it. Expect the Draft rules to be distributed within a fortnight.

Also note, these rules will be rubber stamped at the next Club Night in July.

[jimnielsen]

Brad.. re the composing of a list of "R" tyres based on treadwear numbers.. see the below from wikipedia

'In general, manufacturers tend to overstate the treadwear of their tires in an effort to create the impression that their tires last a long time. The exception to this is in competition racing tires, which customers expect to have very soft rubber compounds and very short lifespans. Manufacturers tend to give their race tires low treadwear numbers (often zero) to emphasize how soft and sticky their rubber is.'

Unfortunately treadwear numbers are at the mercy of tyre manufacture marketing departments, they can't really be used for the purpose proposed.

jim ~

[branko.gt]

Brad.. re the composing of a list of "R" tyres based on treadwear numbers.. see the below from wikipedia

'In general, manufacturers tend to overstate the treadwear of their tires in an effort to create the impression that their tires last a long time. The exception to this is in competition racing tires, which customers expect to have very soft rubber compounds and very short lifespans. Manufacturers tend to give their race tires low treadwear numbers (often zero) to emphasize how soft and sticky their rubber is.'

Unfortunately treadwear numbers are at the mercy of tyre manufacture marketing departments, they can't really be used for the purpose proposed.

jim ~

well this makes it quite easy then to discern R tyres. Your supporting quote actually supports opposing argument to yours. If manufacturers are over-emphasizing the stickiness of a tyre by a low treadwear and durability by a high treadwear factor, no tyre is to be found at 100 which should then be used as a cutoff!

[jimnielsen]

um, well problem solved.

[Thmpar]

no tyre is to be found at 100 which should then be used as a cutoff! Can this idea really be used as the new Kumho ku37 has a tread wear of 400.

[branko.gt]

that was never a serious suggestion, i was just trying to make a point.
I believe that not all manufacturers publish the tread wear factor anyway.

the Kumho tyre in question is not a sports/track tyre and hence  the marketing is (over) emphasising the durability by using factor of 400 (being four times the standard)