Quote Originally Posted by Trublu View Post
Been watching these threads over the past few months but have shied away from offering my opinion (imagine that). I loved CMC and only went to AI as I liked the development aspect, what I knew I’d miss was big fields and close racing. Anyway here it is:

1: allowing cars to turn up looking like battered dogshit does nothing to attract new folks and everything to deter them. Wrap costs about half a set of tires and is fairly easy to do, I know a girl who’d be happy to show you. Some time needs to be spent here making sure one or two cars aren’t negatively effecting growth in the group.

2: Tires
A: races are won in the shop and lost on the track. There’s a few that are complaining about tires being the woe of their racing aspirations but not spending much time learning how to make their car handle better such that whenever they hit the track they have their best foot forward. The guys up front are spending (loads) of time doing this and frankly thinking simply dropping on a fresh set of RRs fixes everything is pretty naive. On the flip side if you are interested I’d be glad to help in this area, as would most of the fast folks of CMC.

B: randomly changing tires, forsaking contingencies, with no solid data outside forum rants is simply shifting the problem and akin to kicking a can down the road. The deal NASA has with TOYO benifits CMC, why on earth would the group want to find a reason to lose that? Present solid data to NASA and TOYO to improve the tire and do more of point A

3: we all need to do more on social media to promote both classes. Daniel has been doing a great job at this lately. Remember, most of us joined because of the year end videos, yet we do nothing to compel folks that are good at pulling that together to want to spend dozens of hours doing it. We need to actively discuss how we intend to grow both groups through these areas.

These are the key issues from my perspective. And go
Good discussion and point bye taken on #1.

#2. I think some are missing a point about the tires. NOBODY thinks that changing tires is going to change where anyone finishes. I have felt like some think if we switch tires that it would help where I personally finish which I think is a load of crap. My bet is that the gap between the trophy girls would be larger for me. This is about finding a tire that lasts longer and is cheaper. I spoke with a former racer last night and when some people started showing up in CMC with a new set of tires every event they decided this wasn't the class for them. I know of others who stopped racing in large part due to the tires so if we have a current racer impacted by it then it's fair to say it could impact a prospective racer. (look again at what TT is doing to change this on their own and seeing people come back to their class)
Again-I don't believe for a second that a different brand of tires is going to help where I finish. This seems to the majority wanting to lower the season tire budget while only a few want to keep the status quo.

B. I disagree that NASA's deal with CMC benefits the group as a whole. I have run the numbers on sets of tires purchased by the collective group for a season and even with contingencies we would come out a whole lot better on something like a Falken. Sure the contingency benefits the podium finishers-but my bet is that the gap between the good drivers and hacks like me will be greater on a less grippier tire.

3. Great point on social media which I'm not on.