gumby said:In reply to 03Panther :
Hey, I sent you a(completely unrelated) email the other day. Let me know if it didn't come thru
Hey. No computer access now that I don't have that night job. Pain to check that mail from my very old phone I have (no co. provided phone now). I'll check it now! Thanks.
In reply to gumby :
Checked, but we had been using my work email, so...
Try the travelingviking@
(the pm should go there )
In reply to Tom Suddard :
I think a treadwear rule to try to increase attendance is ridiculous.
I'm pretty sure there was only 1 time a rules change made a significant impact on attendance. The old ruleset (designed by Per Schroeder) had grown unyieldy, and you threw out the entire thing and started over. You reduced the rules to a super simple set everyone could understand, and attendance increased.
The new set also had the added benefit of increasing participant morale significantly.
The new replacement set has once again grown into a behemoth that no one can understand. It's 10X as big as Per's set ever was.
Forcing new competitors to learn about all the ins and outs of tire treadwear is just more baggage. It's likely to chase people away (and already has chased at least 1 loyal old timer)
Throw out the existing ruleset, and watch attendance increase.
The second big thing I am aware of that increased attendance was the Gastropod class. Build on that.
Again, simpler rules made more people interested.
I've been competing in the Challenge since 2004. There were 75 competitors that year. Attendance has reduced ever since.
The question I'd be asking is where did those competitors go, and why did they leave?
It wasn't because of treadwear.
I'm concerned that the event is at risk, and this may be too little too late.
GRM has been carrying this event for too long without making the changes necessary to sustain it, and increasing attendance will take time.
Tom, can you put numbers and a timeline to this? How many attendees would be necessary in 2022? 2023?
Is it too late?
One last thing...
I don't know the value of 9 second drag racing in real dollars to GRM. It's cool, and I love seeing it. But I also know it's one reason I have reduced my own participation in recent years.
I'm not a drag racer. I will never have a 10 second car. I enjoy competition, but I don't enjoy playing games that I am incapable of potentially winning.
I had a viable plan for an overall win in 2015. I knew I had to beat Andrew Nelson. In order to do that, I had to beat him by 3 seconds on the autocross. Turns out that was the year he learned to make a car turn, and I only beat him by 1 second on the autocross so he won the overall. It was great fun, but I realized the podium was gonna be hard to reach for me again. So I have reduced my participation.
It wasn't until Datsaniti won that I became interested in competing again.
The fast drag racers are a mixed blessing. They attract a lot of attention, but I am not convinced they increase attendance.
SV reX said:The fast drag racers are a mixed blessing. They attract a lot of attention, but I am not convinced they increase attendance.
And even if they did, would that even translate to increased sales of a magazine that is decidedly NOT a drag racing magazine??
Fair points, everybody. Enjoy the holidays, don't buy or sell any tires for a week, and we'll figure out a compromise in January.
In reply to 03Panther :
I'm just pointing out that there are options. And if the options are legal within the challenge rules regardless of expense there are options. We look at loopholes for challenge budget and hear one would be being given and people are saying, no but that's not what I would want to do.
Tires are consumable. If paying a significant sum of money for wheels makes it so longer lasting 200 tread wear tires that performance wise aren't far off from slicks and are more cost effective than new slicks, Then it's an opportunity cost that allows for greater use and enjoyment of the vehicle. And will actually yield a break even point within about 4 years if it's actually autocrossed locally.
I also intentionally freezed the amendment idea to leave a loophole for someone to potentially exploit. That I will now mention so that the freezing gets adjusted to close it. I did so because I'm a solutions-oriented guy and rather than kick and scream about a scenario (and not everyone is) I try to look at solutions or even advantages that can be drawn from it.
Originally the amendment was wheels that bolt on and allow a diameter increase to run a 200tw with minimum width increase to accommodate that tire would be free from budget. It previously stated nothing about the wheels that originally came on the vehicle. Meaning if someone could pick up some cheap drag slick takeoffs that would fit those wheels, That someone could have swapped them on for the drags without penalty, as The amendment only stated that the additional wheels would not count towards budget.
I'm not singling out you in this response I'm just catching back up after last night. Little nuggets of rules and potential advantages for exploitation though, are what make builds and competition interesting. The devil is in the details. And I feel a lot of people are responding due to their plans being changed, their response is big picture, instead of thinking detail-wise, how can this be used to my advantage.
A bit of digging on the Wikipedia article for UTQG ratings turned up this snippet:
Relation to friction coefficient
A study has shown a statistical relationship between the average friction coefficient (µ) and the treadwear rating of tires tested. This relationship can be represented by the following formula:[8]
As such I propose that competitors should be allowed to build a basic test rig to reverse engineer a new treadwear rating onto their old used slicks. After all, the rule says the tires must have a 200TW+ rating, it says nothing about who assigns that rating.
Tom Suddard said:Enjoy the holidays, don't buy or sell any tires for a week
Pssssshhhhh, thats not how my brain works. Now I have to look for great deals on slicks and 200tw and buy both RIGHT NOW!
I understand that people have time and money and effort into their cars and teams. I have also seen some good suggestions to make things better and feedback on the rules.
I do find it somewhat concerning the amount of second guessing and push back on the hosts. At the end of the day they are trying to run a business and they are hosting an event that they are loosing on and looking to make changes to make it sustainable.
I face similar situations at work where I am making hard choices that require people to change for the long term viability of their jobs. You would not believe the amount of pushback I can get. As the person trying to make it work long term it is frustrating. Sometimes frustrating enough that you find it not worth the effort anymore.
I am not a disciple to this book but have you ever read Atlas Shrugged? I don't want to be looking around in a few years and asking "Who is Tom Suddard?"
So thank you to The GRM staff and the Suddard's. I know making changes is hard. I hope it works the way you intend. I know the people are only pushing back because they are passionate about the topic.
COUGAR said:SV reX said:The fast drag racers are a mixed blessing. They attract a lot of attention, but I am not convinced they increase attendance.
And even if they did, would that even translate to increased sales of a magazine that is decidedly NOT a drag racing magazine??
Quoted for agreement.
In reply to MrJoshua :
John Burget tires. He's my go-to guy for take-off deals.
https://www.jbracingtires.net/images/contactinfo.gif
200tw tires are a touch trickier but spend a season with your local autocross group making friends and being generous and you'll find a source to either buy, rent or borrow appropriate tires (if things go that way). But still, no worries.
There, done. Now go enjoy your holidays.
In reply to Stampie :
When I raced I used shaved tires, so add that potential cost to the mix when buying 200TW tires for serious competitors. The thought had already crossed my mind when looking at potential tires yesterday.
In reply to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :
Dammit bro, I was already working on Tiger Paw stencils for my A7s. 
Indy - Guy said:COUGAR said:SV reX said:The fast drag racers are a mixed blessing. They attract a lot of attention, but I am not convinced they increase attendance.
And even if they did, would that even translate to increased sales of a magazine that is decidedly NOT a drag racing magazine??
Quoted for agreement.
They may not increase attendance, but they're certainly not decreasing it either. To Paul's point about strategy... I too have attempted to build a car , heavily biased toward autocross, to gap the fastest drag cars and have the potential to be the highest dynamic score. To me that's part of the fun. To anyone reading this thread and thinking you must have a wild build, or new Hoosiers to do well, that's just not so. I finished 4th overall on dynamic scoring at the 2017 Challenge in my Miata and my total, real tire and wheel expenditure was $175 , plus the install and balancing cost of 6 tires.
Edit: My drag tires were a pair of $50 Mickey Thompson slicks and two of the Michelin snow tires that came with the car. Who else has run snow tires down the Gainesville strip?
In reply to NY Nick :
well said!
I am going on record here in agreement with svrex, which is not a thing I regularly admit. The current rules are overcomplicated. AC said so early in the thread as well.
It is impossible to give an elevator speech about how to build a Challenge winning entry. The rules have evolved in a competitive direction which eventually leads to increased egos and reduced fun. More rules are rarely a cure-all. Challenge rules should be simple, with a consistent eye toward magazine content, as stated in The Basics at the very top.
Although participation may be the root of this change, I really don't feel a TW restriction will increase those numbers. We have had a street class trophy; did it pull enough numbers to justify a 200tw umbrella for the whole autoX? Gastropods brought good numbers in the same way a 200tw rule may bring cars already in circulation outside of Challenge, but do these cars generally provide exciting magazine content?
Scrapping the current rules and building new won't happen in a month. Reducing exemptions, and simplifying the language may mean having real safety inspections and enforcing limitations. Not fun things to talk about, but part of running any event and dealing with liabilities. Greater participation will bring larger responsibilities, not just more entry fees.
Another thought on encouraging participation: spread the trophies out. As this year's overall winner I brought home a lot of stuff. The recognition of our hard work was great, but I would give up most of the stuff to recognize the work others had done to get there too. Not more trophies, because securing trophy sponsors is a whole nuther deal. And not everyone gets a trophy in a bunch of single car subclasses, but give more competitors a goal to chase. A big pile for the overall winner is one goal for one entrant. Different goals for people who look at the top contenders and feel they "can't compete so why bother," will bolster participation and encourage fun over outright competition.
In reply to gumby :
In for "Least Torsionally Rigid Chassis" award
In reply to gumby :
Hoping for a top-3 in "Best Mid-Engine Corvair"
I should have a lock on the "Old Guy Award".........................unless Frenchy shows up.
Is there gonna be an actual award for "Bob Costas Megadork"?
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
