As bad as times are right now, what are the midget organizations doing to reduce the costs of operating a midget? That's an easy question to answer... NOTHING.

I posed this question to Kevin Miller, President of USAC, at the Gold Crown Nationals. Let's just say that you shouldn't hold ur breath waiting for an answer.

USAC, POWRi, BMARA all have tire contracts with Hoosier. They have a monoply going right now,folks. BMARA is a club that votes on various aspects of how they administer their races. POWRi is a for profit company. USAC... kind of a mix but basically run by executives.

My question for all of the above is why are you allowing the soft compound tires to be raced? Specifically, the SP2 right rear. Well, the softer the compound, the more tires the competitors have to buy..... and a lot more money for the Hoosier Tire Company!!!! Isn't that interesting!

According to the Hoosier web site, they make the right rear in 3 compounds. SP2, SP3, SP4. They also make a front tire in a D12, D15 and D20. So I can logically deduct that Hoosier has the capabilites of building a really hard compound tire.

Tires are a huge expense for competitors. Is the racing product on the track going to change if we are required to run hard compounds? No. By running hard compound tires, would the competitor be able to drastically reduce tire costs? YES!

So my next question for all of the above is: Who are you lookiong out for? Hoosier or the competitors?

The tire situation is a bad deal;especially on pavement.

I respect Hoosier's right to build and sell tires and I appreciate the fact that they aren't made in China with the Hoosier name on them. I just think that if they have a monopoly, then their customers should be the benefactor of the cost saving they enjoy by not having to produce and stock so many different compounds and sizes.

Basically USAC works some sort of deal with Hoosier and then they have the rights to be the lone supplier. Instead of it being a situation where USAC mandates a price structure that benefits the racer, basically Hoosier is left to charge whatever price they see fit and the teams can basically use whatever amount of tires they choose. That really isn't fair in my opinion. I base that statement on the fact that the competitors have no choice. They cannot work an independent deal to benefit their situation as they have to buy that certain brand of tire and that size.

Pavement racing is an area they have to get under control as I know of more than a handful of teams that are not going to run pavement next year. The crazy thing is that they can afford the travel,cars and motors, but not the tire bills. USAC has to step in a start protecting the competitors because if they don't, the competitors will start protecting themselves and stop going.

I have had a few different teams tell me they wish it was a deal where they would stamp tires before the first hot lap session and leave the LR as the only tire you could change without penalty. I think that is the best deal myself.

This is the ugly side of the sport when your sanctioning body is under the control of the suppliers and not the other way around. The suppliers hold the cards right now because USAC believes they need them to survive. Maybe they do, but they also need competitors because the drivers/teams are their product. If they aren't careful, people are going to find a different way to go because even the so-called bigger teams are getting fed up.

Tire costs are on the verge of causing terminal damage at least to the pavement side of openwheel racing.

Must be a slow day in the Music publishing business.

Does the Chili Bowl have a tire rule??
:dologob:

Nope. Only place in the world they run the expensive 84 Hoosier. Those guys can't wait to get in the door to buy em.

I promise I will not slam anyone here because this really hits home.....

Personally all the well funded teams are going to put new tires on as much as they can, weather or not there you make the tires rock hard.

I ran midget week this year with a team from Indiana. We had a new RR tire per event. The SP2 we ran night one we ran night 2 also and were top 15 in qualifying both nights.

That being said....yes I would love to see something done to lower costs, especially as I see people running out of money even more now than in the past or going to sprint cars. I think there are ways of lowering costs but I and I say I think the dirt tire situation is not the answer. Pavement yes....but not dirt.

A harder compound tire is going to last longer than a soft compound, bottomline.

It's time that we step out of the box and implement some drastic changes in the way we go about racing. So.. Publish on here exactly where in the world they have experimented with hard compound tires on midgets.. I'd like to see the data on how a SP2 is going to wear the same as a SP4 or harder.

We can talk all day about this and that but until it's tested with data, we don't know.

Implement the hard tire rule and see where it goes.

I understand the factors that affect a winged sprint car and midget are different, but in my 5+ years of running a winged car, I saw the RR tire rule at Knoxville change a few times. The best one was when there were 3 spec tires, one from each of the manufacturers (Good-year, Hoosier, and American Racer). Each manufacturer would submit a tire that was within the specs of the tire rules. Basically they could not be any softer than a 40 on the durometer. That gave the driver or team the ability to choose what manufacturer to use, and also allowed for those companies to 'fight' for the business of each driver.

Also, the larger teams still put on a new RR every time on the track or night, whatever the current rules allowed for. However, the difference between a brand new RR and a RR with 3 nights on it was minimal, esp. compared to an open tire rule or softer RR tire rules.

Hi Don! How are ya this evening? I am going to have to disagree with you on this one. Just the part about harder tires. I do think something needs to be done. But harder is not better. Heat cycles hurt a tire as bad as wearing. A hard tire that has had a couple heat cycles will not come back to life. We run a very hard tire in the sprint car. My crew has even gone to the extent of grinding the tire on reds when possible to keep it from sealing over. When I ran with SCRA in our own car, we would put a new tire on every night. Not because it was worn. But they were junk from the heat. Also, a hard tire can blister quicker than a softer one. Usually this happens with a hard tire on a fast track. In the Silver Crown series, we have a couple compounds to choose from now, both hard. On the miles, we often blister the right rear in practice when the track is fast. And usually one in qualifying. I feel the only thing the tire rule did was limit the different compounds we bring to the track. We still use up at least 1 tire in practice, maybe 2, 1 in qualifying and another for the race. Just my 2 cents worth.

Well I can't disagree with the expertise of Coondog. You having said all that, what is the solution? As I stated before, I would like to see some testing and data comparing the various compounds that are currently available and the results. You gave some expert feedback about how the tires have reacted in various situations but what is the solution beyond that. Seems to me that I've heard that the use of the Mickey Thompson tires on pavement have been successful as far as longevity. I would like to hear about what has been accomplished there. With only one manufacturer in the spotlight for midget tires, that may limit the possibilities.

Sitting back and doing nothing accomplishes nothing. Most of your feedback involves other race cars than midgets or at least that seems what you've reported. I'm not sure how that translates to midget power. What have been the results of using the SP4? What if the SP4 were the softest compound available? I've heard that the new design SP2 does not wear as well as the old design. Seems to me that if Hoosier is going to have a monopoly with the tires that it should be up to them to come up with some answers. Bottomline is that they want to sell tires and developing a tire that has some longevity is not in their best interests. They have all the cards in their pocket and that's not good in my opinion.