[spoier]

Just watched Sno*Job last night, got to admit the coverage is much better than last year, but still has a long way to go. The production company does work for Mitsubishi too you say? Why does that not suprise me....

Anyway, why on earth aren't studs allowed?

It seems silly/insane to be running around in snow without them.

Skye Poier
Seattle, WA

Vive le Prole-le-Ralliat!
http://www.rallyrace.net/

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/

 

[Don Kennedy]

We've been told that it's becuase the state doesn't allow them. Here in PA they are allowed during the winter months but not from April to October (I think those are the months). I can't believe that a state that get that much snow compeltely disallows them.

 

[fieldthis]

SCCA rule book says they are prohibited.

Must be they are afraid of flying studs}>

Rob

 

[Adrian Wintle]

>We've been told that it's becuase the state doesn't allow
>them. Here in PA they are allowed during the winter months
>but not from April to October (I think those are the
>months). I can't believe that a state that get that much
>snow compeltely disallows them.

Why not? Neither Michigan nor Ontario allow studded tires, and both get a lot of snow in the winter - the issue tends to be road damage (or perceived road damage) due to the studded tires.

I believe the Quebec regional cars were allowed to run Hakka 1s with street-legal studs at Perce Neiges this year (studs are allowed in Quebec), but I don't believe that there was a lot of difference in performance between the street studs and top-line ice tires. Where you get the advantage is with the aggressively studded rally tires that are probably illegal even in most jurisdictions that allow studs.

Adrian

 

[John Vanlandingham]

According to Mike Giebault, the rule was a mid-week addition to the book way back in the mid-seventies when the National series had it's ass kicked by Hendrick Blok whoi used studded tires on a red-clay event near Clear Lake in northern California which was slicker than sheeet in the wet.


>SCCA rule book says they are prohibited.
>
>Must be they are afraid of flying studs}>

The standard party line about they are against the law in Michigan and Ontario is well know having heard it thousands of times.

My question is has anybody ever even broached the subject of asking the SAME LOCAL AUTHORITIES which give us the DISPENSATIONS from other rules of the road if they could consider allowing the few 45-80 cars passing by a couple or three times on any given road used for transits.

That's the question, HAS ANYBODY EVEN TRIED to get permission.

Canada won't get a WRC Winter date if studs aren't allowed,
and many competitors I know won't bother towing to crawl along and have NO BRAKING.
>
>Rob





John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/

 

[Adrian Wintle]

>According to Mike Giebault, the rule was a mid-week addition
>to the book way back in the mid-seventies when the National
>series had it's ass kicked by Hendrick Blok whoi used
>studded tires on a red-clay event near Clear Lake in
>northern California which was slicker than sheeet in the
>wet.

Ok. I can believe that.

>The standard party line about they are against the law in
>Michigan and Ontario is well know having heard it thousands
>of times.
>
>My question is has anybody ever even broached the subject of
>asking the SAME LOCAL AUTHORITIES which give us the
>DISPENSATIONS from other rules of the road if they could
>consider allowing the few 45-80 cars passing by a couple or
>three times on any given road used for transits.

At least in Ontario, the local authorities that give us permission to close the roads (at which point they are no longer subject to the traffic laws - this has been tested in court) do not have the authority to suspend the traffic laws on the open transit roads (at least not where they are under a different jusrisdiction, like the provincial highways).

>
>That's the question, HAS ANYBODY EVEN TRIED to get
>permission.

I don't know.

>Canada won't get a WRC Winter date if studs aren't allowed,
> and many competitors I know won't bother towing to crawl
>along and have NO BRAKING.

If it happens, it will be in Quebec where the laws and the government are more flexible when it comes to motorsport. I doubt if we could close a major provincial highway in Ontario, but Charlevoix used to do it regularly (for the Ste. Irenee stage).

Adrian

 

[grinner323]

Now living in Michigan as I do, I know of quite a few people that run studs on their cars north of Interstate 10. This is done because if you don't run studs... you'll never make it down the gravel roads that they live on. They don't get pulled over for them unless they drive below 10.
Philip J. Boer
[email protected]

 

[joeg]

It is prohibited in the rule book because it is easier to prohibit than get into permission exceptions with 50 different state laws.

 

[jprowland]

You guys need to move to Vermont and start a rally. We can legally drive on studs all year round.

--
JP Rowland jeremyrowland -at- mac.com
Visit my boring web page: http://homepage.mac.com/jeremyrowland

 

[markn]

A list of states that allow studs can be found at:

http://www.rma.org/tire_safety/tire_maintenance_and_safety/seasonal_driving_tips/regulations.cfm

 

[Bruce]

>SCCA rule book says they are prohibited.
>
>Must be they are afraid of flying studs}>
>

Having raced on ice for years with cars having significantly less horsepower than modern rally cars, I can tell you that flying studs ARE a problem. With the proliferation of spectators, they become a worse problem.

And as someone else pointed out, REAL studs aren't legal ANYWHERE in the US on public roads.

John, trying to get every possible jurisdiction to buy into allowing studs on the transits would be a monumental task. And if they don't ALL buy into it, they issue tickets and impound cars, despite any agreements you might have with others.

Minnesota is another place with a fair amount of snow that bans studs.

Bruce

 

[jose vicente]

Just a thought. The gravel tires we all use are not DOT approved (in the US) and specifically state "for motorsport use only". As I see it, they are just as illegal in road sections as studs, yet this has never seemed to be an issue. True, DOT approved or not they will not damage paved surface and the non-approval status is actually a matter of DOT never testing them. For that matter, most auxhiliary lights are also illegal for road use unless they are covered. 5 and 6 point harnesses are also not approved so if you removed you OEM belts you are in violation. Sound levels accepted by the states are much lower that those set by the SCCA, so if yor car is loud, then it's illegal. And so on, and so on. My point is that when you think about allowing studs it is no different than anything else. It appears to me that it is much easier to get the authorities to look away at violations rather than getting them to approve them. I'm not saying they should allow us to use studs and hope leave it up to us to worry about getting caught or not, but I think if the SCCA got involded and pushed the issue with the local authorities it might be easier.

But the real question is, do we really want studs? Do we want want to spend $1000's of dollars on tires for one or two events a year so that Mark Lovell and David Higgins can look faster on TV? I don't.
The expense/income ratio in rallying is high enough without adding $300.00 tires, per tire. let the lucky boys from the rest of the world who can actually get other people to pay for their tires worry about looking fast for the camera.

Jose

 

[Topi]

- Make "studs optional" for stages ONLY

- You'll find out EVERYONE's willing to do swapping circus between stages and roads...

- This happened in Finland and Sweden before they agreed to run smaller, road friendly studs (still better than anything in the US, including silly "Menard Ice Racing Specials")

- Stupid thing is Laughlin, run on "lawless" Indian land, won't allow studs...I guess they want to give HD filming crew more time focus...

 

[jose vicente]

See how much sense our law makers make?

Stud use
Florida Permitted No restrictions
New Mexico Permitted: No restrictions
Texas Permitted: No restrictions

Wisconsin Not Permitted except for nonresidents
Minnesota Not Permitted except for nonresidents

So I can drive around South Beach on full WRC Sweden spec tires but MN and WI residents can't use even a the lamest studs in a blizzard. Man, something ain't right.

 

[John Vanlandingham]

Jose, good points all.

very good points.

only point is that decent Swedish and Finnish studded tires with glued in an re vulcunized studs can be had for around $175 or so and last really well if driven only on snow and ice. That's where all this import of BlackRocket tires started bringing in tires for ice racers.

And it is just crazy ass funner than sheeet having the grip for turning and braking,
Some people over there only do winter rallies, and when I lived in Sweden and rode moto-cross with 320 studs per tire winter was my favorite time of year.

It's waay fun.

John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/

 

[JTree]

nah, the image of tearing around FL w/ 300+hp car literaly tearing up the road is just sooo right!


*edited for my lame ass spelling

 

[PORFan]

<disclaimer>
I am not (yet) a rallyist, so feel free to ignore my opinon...
</disclaimer>

As a lifetime resident of the UP (a place that _still_ has snow around, albeit not on most roads) it seems to me that a stud-less test of a rally is just that, a test. If rallying is 2 people and a machine against the elements then that's how it should work. If that means slower speeds, that's all part of finishing the rally. Want to go fast on snow/ice to go for the win? You're taking more of a chance of DNFing, plain and simple.

I've been driving w/o studs in RWD, FWD, and AWD road cars and trucks for 12+ years on ice, snow, slush, and every other combination of frozen precipitation concievable, and I am _far_ more impressed by someone who can control a car on said surfaces with "normal" tires than someone who would achieve the same result with studs. Would any of you call for the use of 34" SuperSwampers to get through Menge Creek? }>

 

[tom grossmann]

Jose people in Florida move from New York / Jersey and forget how to drive on ice/snow - which happens about every ten years in Florida , so they need all the help they can get.
People from Wisconsin and Minnesota can drive on ice even in old pick-ups with bald tires.
It's a rule made by the government why would it make sense.

Tom Grossmann

 

[spoier]

>But the real question is, do we really want studs? Do we
>want want to spend $1000's of dollars on tires for one or
>two events a year so that Mark Lovell and David Higgins can
>look faster on TV? I don't.
>The expense/income ratio in rallying is high enough without
>adding $300.00 tires, per tire. let the lucky boys from the
>rest of the world who can actually get other people to pay
>for their tires worry about looking fast for the camera.


You still need specialized snow/ice tires, whether they are studded or not. Although I suppose studs add a bit of extra expense.

Skye

 

[jprowland]

No way, rallying is as much about having fun as a driver as it is about being a challenge. It is no fun at all to drive on ice without studs. It's the most frustrating experience I've ever had, easily. I've stopped going to winter rally-crosses as a result...

--
JP Rowland jeremyrowland -at- mac.com
Visit my boring web page: http://homepage.mac.com/jeremyrowland