Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

A place to chat about the state of the IPRA nation, ask (non-technical) questions about IPRA, etc.
Public Read and Write

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10483
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by TwinTurbo » Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:34 pm

cossie55 wrote:This probably isn't the place for a 3E discussion. so for those only interested in 3j, turn away now.

This is the 2.2 (f) rule as far as I can see here in the manual.

2.2 (f) Once an automobile has been recognised by CAMS, and its recognition form issued, that make and specific model of vehicle shall remain eligible during its production series, even if the MSRP price of that vehicle exceeds the price cap in subsequent years post its approval, provide it is sold by the manufacturer as an Identical Automobile.

This rule is there to specify that a car that begins under the price cap remains eligible, even if it goes above the cap during its production series. No where does it say that the car becomes ineligible when it is outside its prodction series.
In fact if you try to read it that way it makes no sense, as it would have to be read that the car becomes ineligible once its production series ends, which clearly isn't the case.

I understand that you have read it this way for years, but maybe try to read it the other way, I think that you will see when you do that, that what you are suggesting is not the case.

BTW, I am not trying to say whether it is good, bad, right or wrong that this is the case with 3E. It is merely about the rules as they stand.
I tried to read it the way you read it Jamie but the reg states when the vehicle is eligible (ie; “during its production series”). Hence it doesn’t have to say when it’s ineligible. There’s a tell, “provided it is sold” not “was sold”. Hence current tense, as in “during its production series” not past tense as in “after its production series”. There is no other way that I can read it.

More importantly, to further support my view, that’s the way it was enforced until recently.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
FatBoy
I spend too much time in front of a keyboard
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 6:17 pm
Location:
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by FatBoy » Sat Aug 11, 2018 1:22 am

TwinTurbo wrote:Being a 100 treadwear rating (A050's are 60) getting enough heat into them on the rear of a FWD is going to be very difficult, even at the best of times and next to impossible at Wakefield in winter.

The R888R seems to have a distinct "green tyre" advantage, of course we would have to test it on a range of IP cars. But I would hate to go back to the situation that we had with A048's where guys were buying new tyres every race meeting because they dropped off the cliff after a few heat cycles.

Cheers
Gary
Hi Gary,

A couple of points, as i'm not sure where your "facts" came from ?

The FWD APRA Pulsars run the R888R. Your comment re winter at Wakefield is interesting as the qually record was set in winter last year (2017) at minus 9 degrees. 1.09.6. It had warmed up a little for Race 1 (still below zero) and the result was 1.10.15, a new race record, which still stands today. The best at the last round (July 29th) was a 1.10.19 (so close !) on a nowhere near as chilly day...

The green tyre advantage (based on my experience) is also a fallacy, no-one in APRA invests in new tyres every round, as the advantage simply isn't there. They wear extremely well (admittedly, it's hard to be 100% on this across all sizes of the variety that IP runs), but my best lap time was set on my third outing on a set of R888Rs. Up over a second on the same set when they were "green". I know it's hard to compare across different days and track conditions, but overwhelmingly the feedback is that they are brilliant in terms of grip and longevity v cost. Just throwing it out there for some balance...

Things have evolved from the days of 15's being the most common tyre, and the days of buying a set of 205/60/15's for the RX-7 for a grand (yeah, showing my age) are well and truly gone ! As a comparison, Pulsars run a 195/50/15 at $210 a corner - with rebate it's under $200. 15 years after i was buying A032 then A048 Yokos at $250 a corner. There is no denying the A050 is a bloody good tyre. But cost wise it's potentially scaring people away a bit too ?

Just some perspective / food for thought mate ?

Boppa

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10483
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by TwinTurbo » Sat Aug 11, 2018 8:02 am

The difference Paul is that all of the Pulsars are FWD, so they suffer equally from the slow rear tire warm up. Obviously IP is a mix of FWD, RWD and 4WD which means an advantage to some and not others. That’s what we found on the FWD Production Car, the RWD comparison was obvious. Albeit both on a much larger size tyre than the Pulsars run, which no doubt also contributed to the slow rear tyre warm up. Same as Excels, Pulsars all run the same size, so much easier to manufacture, supply and stock than IP which has a multitude of sizes. That’s why price comparisons are risky. The fact that Toyo didn’t even tender was interesting, but they obviously had reasons not to.

Tip, if your tyres are faster after 3 outings then that’s a good indication that they have too much tread depth as new and would benefit from buffing. :wink:


It is also worth keeping in mind that IPRAVic have pretty good O2L fields, with a number of LM V8's and they have the most expensive tyres. So we shouldn't put too much emphasis on tyre cost as being the issue. Especially since we can't change it, the tender has 2 more years to run. Obviously there are other things that have more influence on how many O2L cars run IP than tyres.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4622
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Steve thomas » Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:20 pm

When we were running 888s in Streetcars the times were quite consistent for the whole life of the tyre, I was looking after a huge power 6 cylinder DR30 Skyline on restricted rim size so we were working them bloody hard. 61sec laps in WA pre current wild Streetcar rules shows how fast they were. Not as good as the 050 but good value and life.
Back to the Past for the Future.

gmontrack
old timer
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 4:48 pm
Location:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by gmontrack » Sat Aug 11, 2018 4:14 pm

Not wanting to turn this into a full on tyre thread/debate, but I think we do need to understand that there is a lot that goes into choosing a control tyre and as GC has said the cost is only part of it all be it a large part, its not the only thing that goes into the successful tender, which is my point.

Also just another point about tyre wear on the big power/ heavier V8's , I think those that run those cars go into it with eyes wide open knowing very well their car is going to be harder on tyres than say a less powerful lighter car Sylvia, Rx7 and the likes. It was their choice to run that car and they knew the tyre budget would be more. Now that doesn't change the fact that we would all like to pay less for things in our motorsport and tyres are no different, but again you pay for what you get and after talking to a few people running those cars, all seem happy with the performance and general wear of the A050, yes cost is mentioned but they also say that they would not be keen on going to a tyre with less performance and end up going 2 or 3 seconds slower around SMSP or Sandown for instance.

Having a control tyre is a good thing, and for IP we have been very lucky to get a considerable amount of support from Yokohama, financially and in other forms like sets of tyres at major events like Clipsal/ Bathurst which in turn adds up to thousands of dollars. I also know that's one of the main reasons just about every other category has a controlled tyre these days, there are "benefits". Our Nationals each year is subsidized dollars wise, which results in entry fees being hundreds of dollars cheaper in some cases, clubs also get benefits directly.

So yes tyres are costly and maybe it keeps some from racing in IP, but overall I think its not the biggest issue we have and some have already mentioned a few others points in this thread, so I suppose its a case of working out what is higher on the list and what we can do to effect a change for the better, something we will endeavor to do.

GM

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4622
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Steve thomas » Sat Aug 11, 2018 11:36 pm

Trouble is we can buy cheaper 050s outside the appointed dealers, That should not be the case with a tender.
Back to the Past for the Future.

gmontrack
old timer
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 4:48 pm
Location:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by gmontrack » Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:33 am

Steve..please provide the details of where in Australia you can buy the A050 cheaper.... pm if you need to

GM

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4622
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Steve thomas » Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:54 am

I don't want to lose the option of cheaper tyres for non IP events.
Back to the Past for the Future.

gmontrack
old timer
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 4:48 pm
Location:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by gmontrack » Tue Aug 14, 2018 4:06 pm

Steve, I think you are being untruthful and trying to be a little misleading , for what reason I'm not sure. If you are not prepared to give details ( even privately as suggested) than I'm afraid I can only assume you may be telling porky pie's and your boat has a few holes in it my friend!!!

Facts::::
There are only two country's in the world that sell the A050 control tyre that IP use, Japan and Australia.

That tyre is only available through the Yokohama Motorsport dealer network in Australia and is NOT available through any general tyre outlets.

Yokohama Aust. control all official stock movements within Australia and they know where ever tyre goes.

Non IP people that are not part of a control tyre contract pay a RRP that is approx 15% greater then those that come under contract agreements.

The only other groups are Porsche 944 and BMWE30 and World Time Attack which also have an agreement with Yokohama Aust
.
Anyone selling the A050 commercially would be in serious trouble legally.

The head of Yokohama M/sport in Australia is in constant communication with Yokohama Japan and assures us that the A050 is not available else where in Australia

Yokohama Aust. are IPRAA's business partners ( and have been for a considerable time) and as such we have 100% confidence in their operation and soundly believe that they are complying with all aspects of our contract with them.

So Steve I will ask that if you can not provide the facts to back up your statement then I'll ask you to withdraw it for the benefit of all concerned.

I see and read your posts and note that you do seem to have a genuine interest in seeing IP progress forward...... please don't undermine that.

GM

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4622
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Steve thomas » Tue Aug 14, 2018 6:34 pm

Tyres.PNG
Tyres.PNG (284.14 KiB) Viewed 888 times
Ebay store in NSW, Yes I know I can't use them in IP and they are likely a parallel Importer but yes I can buy cheaper online. Online searching is the only way I can have Cars as a hobby.
I do care for the class but I see it failing and cost is a very big factor in that.
Grainy picture as the tyre stores sticker is on one of the tyres, Top 4 in the shed corner are new 255 40 18.
Not one for Porky's, Thats My problem is I speak my mind.
Back to the Past for the Future.

gmontrack
old timer
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 4:48 pm
Location:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by gmontrack » Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:23 pm

Steve, I'm fully a wear that in todays internet world you can buy just about anything off the net and that being the case I accept that it can and does happen.
What people buy of the net is something that companies like Yokohama have to deal with in their day to day business, but I would suggest that the savings a minimal and its also a case of buyer be wear.

The point I wanted to make was that from IP's position we only have one supply, as I out lined, and that comes with all the support from Yokohama, which is available to all IP members and has a value that same regard as very good. There is always going to be a considerable amount of support available with any tyre contract and as I have said that is why most category's these days run a controlled tyre.

Its nice to see that you still consider the A050 the tyre to have and I hope one day we will see you or your car back in IP....... on tyre brought through a Yokohama outlet of course. :D

GM

smitha
one foot in the grave
Posts: 524
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 6:58 pm
Location:
Location: Sydney

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by smitha » Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:59 pm

Some interesting points there, but I have to agree, "control" tyres from various manufacturers can be found from many un-official suppliers for significantly less than the official channels. In one case recently, it was around 50% of the price :shock: but agreed, that is unusual.

I know I have mentioned this before, but I can not see why a simple approved tyre list can not be used. That way, people who want to go fast can use 050, and others who just want to have a run can use something else. I mean wouldn't be awesome if someone had already spent the time to put together an approved tyre list that IPRA could just use.....oh hang on... :idea: they have. Just reference the App J, group N approved tyre list. This would not impact the front runners at all as they can continue to use the tyres they are today (which are probably the quickest anyway) but it provides a long list of lower cost options for a lot of other competitors. In many cases it would also allow cars from other categories to have a run in IPRA without needing to buy new tyres. (APRA, Group N, Excel, Prod Cars etc etc) The relative small cash re-injection from a single tyre supplier could be offset by the increased competitor numbers of a highly successful category.

Something like this, along with other strategic/common sense changes could transform IPRA.
Al Smith IPRANSW

Born Again Racer
one foot in the grave
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:01 pm
Location: Wimmera Vic
Location: Wimmera Vic

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Born Again Racer » Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:48 pm

We used to be like that back in the day. Problem was that the factory teams got choice of better tyres which made it hard to compete. The control Tyre deal was to even up competition and reduce costs and provide some money back to the clubs.

User avatar
FatBoy
I spend too much time in front of a keyboard
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 6:17 pm
Location:
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by FatBoy » Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:51 pm

smitha - =D> =D> =D>

I thought about doing an IP round or two (and even the Nationals) when i had the APRA Pulsar Al, one of the biggest sticking points was i didn't want to pay for a set of Yokos that i'd rarely use. Your idea is worth considering for sure... 8)

Born Again Racer
one foot in the grave
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:01 pm
Location: Wimmera Vic
Location: Wimmera Vic

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Born Again Racer » Mon Aug 20, 2018 10:01 pm

All classes seem to have control tyres these days. I can’t think of class besides sports sedan that have open tyres and even at some levels you have to run certain tyres to get points

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10483
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by TwinTurbo » Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:15 am

One of the things that’s often overlooked is that because A050’s are good till bald they hold their value very well. So buying a new set, using them for one meeting and then selling them afterwards is not an expensive exercise. Second hand A050’s are very sought after, both from within IP and externally.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4622
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Steve thomas » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:54 pm

gmontrack wrote:Steve, I'm fully a wear that in todays internet world you can buy just about anything off the net and that being the case I accept that it can and does happen.
What people buy of the net is something that companies like Yokohama have to deal with in their day to day business, but I would suggest that the savings a minimal and its also a case of buyer be wear.

The point I wanted to make was that from IP's position we only have one supply, as I out lined, and that comes with all the support from Yokohama, which is available to all IP members and has a value that same regard as very good. There is always going to be a considerable amount of support available with any tyre contract and as I have said that is why most category's these days run a controlled tyre.

Its nice to see that you still consider the A050 the tyre to have and I hope one day we will see you or your car back in IP....... on tyre brought through a Yokohama outlet of course. :D

GM
My car is retired from IP before it began. It was the wrong car for the class so the restrictor is off and its being freshened up for Speed events.
Back to the Past for the Future.

Admiral Ackbar
racer
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 7:39 pm
Location:

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by Admiral Ackbar » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:42 pm

"The greatest strength of Improved Production is the variety of cars competing."

"The control tyre maintains a level playing field."

Two lines from the IP mantra, which are in direct opposition to each other. No one make of tyre can suit all cars equally. It would be fairer to open up the tyre rules so each racer can choose a tyre that suits his car and his budget.

As for Yokohama sponsorship of the IP Nationals, great if you are one of the big guns that can afford to travel all over the country. Too bad if you race at the nationals once every 7 years.

Paying for AO50s is kind of like getting a speeding ticket...a tax that you "deserve".

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10483
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by TwinTurbo » Tue Oct 02, 2018 7:58 am

Admiral Ackbar wrote:"The greatest strength of Improved Production is the variety of cars competing."
"The control tyre maintains a level playing field."
Two lines from the IP mantra, which are in direct opposition to each other. No one make of tyre can suit all cars equally. It would be fairer to open up the tyre rules so each racer can choose a tyre that suits his car and his budget.
As for Yokohama sponsorship of the IP Nationals, great if you are one of the big guns that can afford to travel all over the country. Too bad if you race at the nationals once every 7 years.
Paying for AO50s is kind of like getting a speeding ticket...a tax that you "deserve".
What happens to the level playing field when your car can't use the "gun" tyre because it's not available in your size?
What happens to the level playing field when the competitors with a "budget" can afford qualifying tyres, dry weather tyres, wet weather tyres or even tyres that work better at some tracks than others?

BTW, as well as supporting the Nationals, Yokohama also pays each State for the tyres sold, which is a valuable contribution that would otherwise have to made up by increasing membership fees.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
mrbarry
pit crew
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 12:26 pm
Location:
Location: Melbourne

Re: Production Cars and IP in the CAMS Scheme

Post by mrbarry » Tue Oct 02, 2018 10:49 am

TwinTurbo wrote:
Admiral Ackbar wrote:"The greatest strength of Improved Production is the variety of cars competing."
"The control tyre maintains a level playing field."
Two lines from the IP mantra, which are in direct opposition to each other. No one make of tyre can suit all cars equally. It would be fairer to open up the tyre rules so each racer can choose a tyre that suits his car and his budget.
As for Yokohama sponsorship of the IP Nationals, great if you are one of the big guns that can afford to travel all over the country. Too bad if you race at the nationals once every 7 years.
Paying for AO50s is kind of like getting a speeding ticket...a tax that you "deserve".
What happens to the level playing field when your car can't use the "gun" tyre because it's not available in your size?
What level playing field? This does not exist in IPRA. Ipra is about choice. When "Barry on a budget" can't use the "gun tyre" because its not available in his size he doesn't care because he would have the choice to buy the cheapy tyre that's good enough for him because he's not out to win at all cost!
When "Cashed up Colin" can't buy the gun tyre in his size he can afford to change rims or even change car and he would do so because he's cashed up and out to win. Barry wants to race as often as he can for the cash he can afford to spend.
The problem with IPRA is cost. Tyre cost is only part of that.
Do we want to encourage cashed up Colins or Barrys on Budgets?
What happens to the level playing field when the competitors with a "budget" can afford qualifying tyres, dry weather tyres, wet weather tyres or even tyres that work better at some tracks than others?
You seem to be suggesting that the tyres are the only factor in performance, and that having the same tyre creates a level playing field. By making "Budget Barry" pay a premium for a control tyre you are making him pay for something he neither wants nor needs. Do you think Barry cares if Colin wins? He's already so far ahead.
BTW, as well as supporting the Nationals, Yokohama also pays each State for the tyres sold, which is a valuable contribution that would otherwise have to made up by increasing membership fees.
A valuable contribution it is. But is it worth it to Barry when he subsidizes the nationals that he may not go to with his tyre purchase, or if he does he has no budget left to do more state rounds?
Road reg in Victoria and Club Cars thrived without a control tyre. Perhaps a good look at whether the state club budget gives good value to the average ipra entrant?

Numbers in ipra, in some areas, at some times, are less than we would like because of cost.
Nationals and "blue ribbon" events such as v8 supports and Bathurst are all very well subscribed and for good reason, they are very appealing.
They are also very expensive to enter and for many, that blows much of their annual budget. A budget that would otherwise have been sufficient for their state rounds.
I don't see how a control tyre firstly benefits the average ipra entrant overall and secondarily the category as a whole.
Ipra doesn't need promotion! it needs cost reduction.
James

Post Reply