|
Good to know. I'll probably give the RR a try in the next month or two. I'm with you on the tire compound stuff. Pretty much have to have the sticky stuff for Putnam park, my home track. Mid-ohio has some long straights that like high hp, though... I'm pretty tempted to try one of the new street tires there along with an extra star of pwr on my reclass. The baby 185 Hoosiers I ran at nats last year were tough to drive fast with the big fat sidewalls, but they weren't slow...
|
Originally Posted by emilio700
(Post 1006610)
RR is usually about 1.5s faster than the same size NT01. Usually just under 1s slower than an R6. We find the RR to still be fast enough way out to 10+ cycles. Much like the RA1 in that respect.
It sucks that NASA PT rules favor the softest compounds so much. A 205 RR is nearly a full second quicker than a 225 NT01 and 2 points less. The R6 is only 1 more point and as I mentioned earlier almost a full second faster yet. Agreed on the NASA tire rules. I was shocked, really, when I looked at what it would cost in points to move from NT01s to Hoosiers. It's a no-brainer except for the monetary cost of the tires. robert |
Originally Posted by hustler
(Post 931593)
No 225, no care.
|
has anyone given any thought to running this tire in an autox setting? I liked my NT-01s in autox last year. they were shockingly close to the cobras on hoosiers for raw time.
I would happily pick up a set of these if they have similar autox characteristics to the NT-01 |
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1006798)
Even if the 205 RR is quicker than a 225 NT01 or RA1 despite being cheaper, lighter, and longer-wearing?
Hustlepoo's butthurt because he can't put 205/50 RRs on his bicycle. :dealwithit: |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:42 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands