September Fastrack is out...

[Banzai240]

The September Fastrack is out:

http://scca.org/_Filelibrary/File/04-09-fastrack.pdf

A couple of items of note to IT:

1) Alternate Main Pullies: The CRB/ITAC are seeking membership input on allowing Alternate crank pullies for all IT cars. We basically went through the same iterations on the ITAC that we went through here, and came to the same draw as far as a conclusion. So, we decided that we'd let you guys have an opportunity to convince us one way or the other. Please send your thoughts on the matter to the CRB as soon as possible so we can get this matter resolved.

[email protected]

2) We've classified the 1998-99 VW Beetle in ITC. This should be an interesting discussion point!

3) Wheels: As mentioned, the ITAC/CRB is recommending that the rules be changed to allow all cars currently classified with 13 or 14" wheels to use up to a 15" wheel.

4) Ballast: Should PCAs be implemented, the maximum ballast rule is being recommended to be removed. Since IT is the only class that has this maximum limit, this shouldn't really be an issue...


There may be a couple more, I just skimmed it and those were the highlights for IT that stuck out in my mind...

One interesting thing for E-Production... a Street-Port has now officially been defined for rotaries, which I think is going to be a BIG DEAL... Apparently, the description and associated diagrams are on file with the SCCA National Office...

Feel free to write/post if you have any questions...

Enjoy!


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Edited to correct for fat fingers and wandering mind!!]

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited July 20, 2004).]

[gran racing]

Minor correction with item # 4.

It is the maximum allowance that is being discussed.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER #13 ITA
'87 Honda Prelude

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by gran racing:
Minor correction with item # 4.

It is the maximum allowance that is being discussed.




THANKS! Corrections noted and... corrected!

[racer14itc]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
The September Fastrack is out:

http://scca.org/_Filelibrary/File/04-09-fastrack.pdf

2) We've classified the 1998-99 VW Beetle in ITC. This should be an interesting discussion point!




Oh, the wheels are already turning in our household...

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

MC

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by racer14itc:
Oh, the wheels are already turning in our household...

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

MC

Pretty Cool, Huh Mark! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/cool.gif

DJ

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
... 2) We've classified the 1998-99 VW Beetle in ITC. This should be an interesting discussion point!

Does this mean that the MkIV 2.slow Golf will end up there, too? Errr...

K

[ddewhurst]

Question? In the Fastracks there are reclassing of cars, cars being added & whatever else. What is being done for the 1st gen RX-7 in ITA/IT7 to get the car back in contention with the newer technology cars in ITA? IMHJ it's only fair to let all the cats out of the bag 6 months before the new season. If a bone is being thrown to the 1st gens what is it ? If no bone for the 1st gens say that there is no bone.

David Dewhurst
CenDiv Milwaukee Region
ITA/7 # 14
SCCA 250772

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
If a bone is being thrown to the 1st gens what is it ? If no bone for the 1st gens say that there is no bone.

David Dewhurst
CenDiv Milwaukee Region
ITA/7 # 14
SCCA 250772

David,

At this point, there is no bone... Without PCAs in place, there isn't much we can agree on. Just about everyone believes the car needs help, but just about everyone also believes it's too much car for ITB...

We're working on it, but we just don't have all the tools yet...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Jake]

Here's your bones:

2. Reclassify the 1979-85 Mazda RX7 to ITB. (Siolund) The car fits within the performance parameters of the ITA classes.
6. Reclassify the 1986 Toyota MR2 to ITB. (Glover) The car fits the performance parameters of the ITA class.

This one cracks me up (considering that I can't even get to the SPEC weight of 2370 with my MR2)

3. Adjust the weight of the Toyota MR2 to 2270lbs. (Watney) Competition adjustments are not permitted under our current
rules.

[Diane]

Originally posted by Jake:

This one cracks me up (considering that I can't even get to the SPEC weight of 2370 with my MR2)

3. Adjust the weight of the Toyota MR2 to 2270lbs. (Watney) Competition adjustments are not permitted under our current
rules.



If you can't get to 2370, how can you get to 2270?

Why can't you get down that low? It's not the driver. How far are you over and is anyone running one at the spec weight?

Or should I not be thinking this hard at this time of night? (if that's the case I'll just edit this clean in the morning http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif)

I know we're not at spec weight either but we haven't killed ourselves trying.

Diane

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Jake:
3. Adjust the weight of the Toyota MR2 to 2270lbs. (Watney) Competition adjustments are not permitted under our current
rules.



Jake,

According to the author of that letter, that's what his "legal" ITA MR-2 weighs... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Jake]

Wow - I'd love to take a look at that "Legal" MR2. Unless the guy is a jockey.

FWIW, with my 200lb carcass, I'm at about 2410 dry on my car and I have taken it to the limit of legal. For weight, I've done such things as remove the radiator cooling fans, evap core, and emergency brake. The cage is the legal minimum. The only thing I haven't done is acid dipped the tub.

I could probably loose another 10-15 lbs if I got some ligher wheels than my Revolutions. (fancy pants Volks or other)

FWIW - I drive a 1987 MR2 which do start a little heavier than the 85-86 models.

[ddewhurst]

Thanks Darin

Please keep the ITAC process moving on this car.

Have Fun http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif
David

[OTLimit]

Originally posted by Jake:
Wow - I'd love to take a look at that "Legal" MR2. Unless the guy is a jockey.



Mr. Watney is on the lean side of 200, if I had to guess. A really nice guy, too.



------------------
Lesley Albin
Over The Limit Racing
Blazen Golden Retrievers

[Bill Miller]

Interesting stuff, I'll have to read it more closely, later.

Darin, Question for you about the New Beetle being classified in ITC. I see that the weight is spec'd at 2760#. A quick review of the ITC specs shows this to be over 400# (actually 405#) heavier than the current heaviest cars in the class ('90-'93 Geo Storm 1.6, 2355#). The next heaviest car is another 75# lighter still (2380#).

The NB also has the same engine that the recently moved to ITB, Golf III. I'm a bit confused how the 1.8 Rabbit GTI w/ a stock HP rating of 90, could be deemed 'too fast' [sic] for the class, yet a car that makes 25 more hp, stock, and has a similar counterpart in ITB (and ITA), is not.

I am also concerned that you now have a car that is 600# - 800# heavier than the majority of the class.

If anything, I would think ITB would be the more appropriate class for this car (albeit at a lighter weight).

I am genuinely curious as to the thought process that went into classing this car in ITC.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Jake]

Originally posted by OTLimit:
Mr. Watney is on the lean side of 200, if I had to guess. A really nice guy, too.


If he is really skinny, and he's gone all out, I suppose it could be possible. I don't want to start calling people illegal without knowing anything about him and his car. However, lowering the spec weight may only help him. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

[Knestis]

I'm baffled by the Beetle in C, too. It might come down to how light it can be legally made in IT trim. They are heavy from the factory and if they just can't get light enough to compete in B, it might be immaterial how heavy they end up in C.

That said, it doesn't make sense at face value. It might be time to request that the Golf IV 2.0 be listed.

I wonder if it comes without ABS? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

K

[Bill Miller]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">just can't get light enough to compete in B</font>

Interesting comment Kirk.

I noticed that the Golf III was able to lose 330# going from SSC to ITA/B (150# actual, plus the 180# driver wt. std., since SS weights are w/o driver and IT weights are w/ driver). Not to mention that there have been several comments here about cars that can't make the min. spec. wt.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Knestis:
I'm baffled by the Beetle in C, too. It might come down to how light it can be legally made in IT trim. They are heavy from the factory and if they just can't get light enough to compete in B, it might be immaterial how heavy they end up in C.

I wasn't present for this con-call (had family emergency that night...), but the weight the car could actually achieve in IT trim, due to the unique cage requirements and initial weight, was a main issue.

The car makes 115hp stock, so if you believe it can make an increase of 25% with IT prep (143.75hp), then the weight works out just right for ITC. Otherwise, it would have to weight in at 2450lbs or so for ITB, something which the committee didn't think was possible.

It's pretty much a straight up "calculation", and ITC is where it made the most sense. I'm supprised you guys are questioning this so much... We are using the same process we've been using for all these other cars... cars whose classifications you guys seem to praise... You can't have it both ways, and, from a non-biased, strictly numbers standpoint, it does make sense... on the surface or otherwise. Compare it to the other cars in ITC and I think you'll realize the same.

Cars in other classes are just going to have to wait until the tools are in place to make some strategic moves...

Hopefully, this move will breath some new life into ITC...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Knestis]

1. I trust your math, Darin.

2. I'm pretty glad that we are actually DOING math now.

3. I'm VERY glad that, since we ARE doing math, we are admitting as much in public.

4. I hadn't done the math so was surprised by the announcement - that's all.

K

[gran racing]

Darin, us guys has only been two people. I think you'll find that most us us are happy with the classification. Pretty cool to finally have another car in ITC.

Jake - the MR2 weight. I still think there are some ways that you could get the total weight down. It just never really mattered much because where the car is.

You're cage for example, there may be a way to have it so that not as many bars are needed. Can't remember - do you have a passenger side door bar? Not suggesting you sacrifice safety if felt this adds to it. Under coating? Has all of that been scraped off? You're exhaust header. Still stock, right? I lost some weight when added the aftermarket one. Like you said, a 170 lb or even 180 driver adds to the possible weight deduction as well. Then there are the multiple layers of Krylon paint. (just teasing)

------------------
Dave Gran
NER #13 ITA
'87 Honda Prelude

[m glassburner]

I wonder where the golf turbo diesel would end up?? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif I ponder the fuel milage...enduro possibilites...mike g.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by m glassburner:
I wonder where the golf turbo diesel would end up?? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif I ponder the fuel milage...enduro possibilites...mike g.


We actually have two Mercedes 190s (I think that's the model) turbo diesels that run in ITE up here... Pretty fast too...


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Knestis]

I've actually pictured the Honda Insight as an enduro car, as a promotional and technical exercise.

ITC?

K

[SpeedyDave]

Originally posted by Jake:
Wow - I'd love to take a look at that "Legal" MR2. Unless the guy is a jockey.

FWIW, with my 200lb carcass, I'm at about 2410 dry on my car and I have taken it to the limit of legal. For weight, I've done such things as remove the radiator cooling fans, evap core, and emergency brake. The cage is the legal minimum. The only thing I haven't done is acid dipped the tub.

I could probably loose another 10-15 lbs if I got some ligher wheels than my Revolutions. (fancy pants Volks or other)

FWIW - I drive a 1987 MR2 which do start a little heavier than the 85-86 models.

Hey Jake!
Yeah the '85 is noticably lighter than an '87. My '86 was legal and if I didn't carry around a couple gallons of gas I did not make minimum weight. (those that wonder, I weigh 125-130 lbs).
Are you still running the stock side mirrors? There were still lots of things we could legally remove from our mr2 but due to weight never bothered. Still have the radiator fans on mine. You're not still running that spare tire up front right (grin)?

[m glassburner]

I've seen those benzes run...I thought they were gas powered??? mike g.

[Jake]

Dave - I'd love to entertain ways of lightening up. If I weighed 130lbs, I'd be underweight - but I don't wee that happening soon!

[Bill Miller]

Darin,

I just checked, and the curb weight I found for a '99 NB GL was 2769#. Also, I don't know if you can get that 25% increase out of the 2.0 x-flow motor or not. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to see new ITC cars, I really am. It just really makes me scratch my head when the request to move the Rabbit GTI from ITB to ITC gets shot down, because the car would be 'too fast', yet the NB is not perceived that way.

I also find it interesting that you say the NB would need to weigh ~2450# in ITB, yet the Golf III, w/ the exact same motor, was moved from ITA to ITB at 2350#. IIRC, most of the brake/suspension components are very similar between the A3 and A4 platforms. I'm curious as to what components/technology the NB has over the Golf III that would have added the extra 100#.

And here's another dilema. The specs on the car listed 16" wheels. I checked, and the cars came w/ either 17x7 or 16x6.5. Guys talk about how are it is to find 14x7 wheels, I bet a 16x6 is harder yet. I suppose everyone could go out and buy 15x6 wheels for the cars.

I'm also still bothered by how portly the car is compared to the other cars in the class.

On a totally seperate note, on the subject of PCA's. In the recent issue of the WDCR newsletter (The Straightpipe), there was an article about the recent SportsCar article on adjustments in IT. Throughout the entirel Straightpipe article, they referred to the adjustments as competition adjustments. The point I'm making here, is that I would guess that this is a common perception among members (or at least IT racers), that whatever you want to call it, it's still comp. adjustments.

I'm not sure if the article is availble online or not. If you'd like a copy, I can make you one and send it to you.

BTW, I totally agree w/ Kirk's comments re: math! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[OTLimit]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
I'm also still bothered by how portly the car is compared to the other cars in the class.

How many races does everyone attend where ITC is the only group on the track? This argument holds little water. You have varying types of cars of different weights, drivetrains, and types of body panels/bumpers (metal and plastic) all on the track at the same time. Sometimes the best racing isn't even within the class, so I don't think this is a big deal.



------------------
Lesley Albin
Over The Limit Racing
Blazen Golden Retrievers

[apr67]

I haven't seen enough ITC total in the last few years to fill a grid. 4 or 5 cars at a race is pretty good.

If ITC ends up with 20 NB at every event, this might turn out to be good. I imagine that a NB would have a tough time with a 510 or a Honda anyway.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
I also find it interesting that you say the NB would need to weigh ~2450# in ITB, yet the Golf III, w/ the exact same motor, was moved from ITA to ITB at 2350#. IIRC, most of the brake/suspension components are very similar between the A3 and A4 platforms. I'm curious as to what components/technology the NB has over the Golf III that would have added the extra 100#.

Bill, as you might recall, the Golf III move from ITA to ITB was before the current ITAC had much say in the specifications... It happened just as we were forming, if I recall. If someone had run it by us and asked for our recommendation for weight, it may have been different... (just for grins... what is the stock HP output of the Golf III? I'll run the math and let you know what I think it should weigh...)


<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">And here's another dilema. The specs on the car listed 16\" wheels. I checked, and the cars came w/ either 17x7 or 16x6.5. Guys talk about how are it is to find 14x7 wheels, I bet a 16x6 is harder yet. I suppose everyone could go out and buy 15x6 wheels for the cars.</font>

We'll just have to see how this one pans out... If it were up to me, all of IT would be limited to 7" rim widths, and whatever diameter they could fit in the stock wheel wells, but it's not up to me...


<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">I'm also still bothered by how portly the car is compared to the other cars in the class.</font>

Well, I think this is going to be more the norm than the exception as time rolls on. If we are going to get these things in classes where they can actually be competitive, the class that seems logical may not yield a logical weight, so moving the car down at a heavier weight is the other choice...


<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">The point I'm making here, is that I would guess that this is a common perception among members (or at least IT racers), that whatever you want to call it, it's still comp. adjustments.</font>

I suppose, but if you look at what is happening, cars are NOT being moved based on their race results (OK, it may trigger a look...)... When a car is considered for reclassification, it is looked at for it's mechanical characteristics, with on-track performance a secondary consideration. Weights will get adjusted if the math says they should be. This is a case where we need to educate the competitors as to the real intent and use of PCAs...

And, I would like to see a copy of that article. Sounds like we have some issues we still need to address to get everyone to understand...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Bill Miller]

Darin,

The A3 Golf has the same 2.0 X-flow motor as the NB (albeit, some are OBD I and some are OBD II, depends on the year), and it makes 115hp stock. While you're at it, run the numbers on the Rabbit GTI for both ITB and ITC. Stock hp is 90.

I just checked, and they don't have the most recent version of Straightpipe online. I'll try and get a copy out to you. Sene me an email w/ your snail mail address

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Catch22]

I'm an ITC competitor and I LOVE seeing the New Beetle there. A few points (and admittedly I know nothing about the car other than what I've read in Magazines).

1. Weight is not an issue compared to the other cars in class. Every enduro I've ever been in included 2700+lb cars all over the track. So if the NB is "Too Heavy" for ITC, then using the same logic we need to start splitting enduros into 2 or 3 groups <toungue planted hard in cheek>.

2. It'll need to be able to use 15x6 wheels.

3. The car is a big fat pig. As an ITC competitor I'm not worried about it at all. I look forward to seeing some on the track, but I ain't building one.

4. Class more cars like this and bring life into ITC. There are plenty out there that fit. Sure, newer cars tend to have bigger wheels/brakes and more power than the VWs and Hondas from the late 70s to early 90s, but they also tend to be a shitpot heavier.
The Honda CX hatchbacks, Low end Tercels and Sentras, Hyundais... Bring it on!!!
Anything with around 100hp and 2500lbs. It won't upset the class at all.

ITC is all about overcoming some sort of major deficiency with the car. Lack of power, crappy brakes, horrendous gearing... and now... Porkiness.

Scott, who thinks his 4 speed, 2140lb Civic could probably handle that fat VW without much trouble http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif. Where ya at Coffin?

[Dick Elliott]

If and when we get to use 15" wheels, will we be allowed to change over to 5 lug bolt circle for safety and availabilty of present mfg 15" mag wheels. A 15" wheel with a 4 lug bolt circle is usualy a custom made wheel ($$$$) Changeing a car over is a easy and cheap mod.

[ITSRX7]

Originally posted by Dick Elliott:
If and when we get to use 15" wheels, will we be allowed to change over to 5 lug bolt circle for safety and availabilty of present mfg 15" mag wheels. A 15" wheel with a 4 lug bolt circle is usualy a custom made wheel ($$$$) Changeing a car over is a easy and cheap mod.

All Spec Miata's use 15 x 7's with a 4 lug hub. It may be more common than you think.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[m glassburner]

I just got a set of 15x7...4-100 139$ each they weigh 10.6# each gotta love it!! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif mike g.

[SilverHorseRacing]

So given the newest inclusion of the beetle in ITC, what's the procedure for getting the Mustang moved there as well?

2640 Lbs
105 Hp stock (91-93 trim)
Aerodynamic as most bricks...

And I race with the leaders in ITC now, so it's not like I'd be racing with a different crowd, just I'd be racing the crowd for the win, instead of for PIC.


------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com (http://www.SilverHorseRacing.com)

[racer14itc]

Originally posted by Catch22:
I'm an ITC competitor and I LOVE seeing the New Beetle there. A few points (and admittedly I know nothing about the car other than what I've read in Magazines).

1. Weight is not an issue compared to the other cars in class. Every enduro I've ever been in included 2700+lb cars all over the track. So if the NB is "Too Heavy" for ITC, then using the same logic we need to start splitting enduros into 2 or 3 groups <toungue planted hard in cheek>.

2. It'll need to be able to use 15x6 wheels.

3. The car is a big fat pig. As an ITC competitor I'm not worried about it at all. I look forward to seeing some on the track, but I ain't building one.

4. Class more cars like this and bring life into ITC. There are plenty out there that fit. Sure, newer cars tend to have bigger wheels/brakes and more power than the VWs and Hondas from the late 70s to early 90s, but they also tend to be a shitpot heavier.
The Honda CX hatchbacks, Low end Tercels and Sentras, Hyundais... Bring it on!!!
Anything with around 100hp and 2500lbs. It won't upset the class at all.

ITC is all about overcoming some sort of major deficiency with the car. Lack of power, crappy brakes, horrendous gearing... and now... Porkiness.

Scott, who thinks his 4 speed, 2140lb Civic could probably handle that fat VW without much trouble http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif. Where ya at Coffin?

I'm definitely curious...it could be fun BUT you're right. It is heavy. Tires could be an issue, and the thought of trying to horse a 2700 lb FWD car around Kershaw or VIR...A John Deere comes to mind. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif

For right now, I'm committed to my GP Scirocco so someone else will have to carry the banner. Maybe someone can get BSI interested in building one!

MC

------------------
Mark Coffin
#14 GP BSI Racing/Airborn Coatings/The Shop VW
Scirocco
Zephyr Race Coaching and Consulting
http://pages.prodigy.net/Scirocco14gp

[theenico]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
I suppose, but if you look at what is happening, cars are NOT being moved based on their race results (OK, it may trigger a look...)... When a car is considered for reclassification, it is looked at for it's mechanical characteristics, with on-track performance a secondary consideration. Weights will get adjusted if the math says they should be. This is a case where we need to educate the competitors as to the real intent and use of PCAs...

And, I would like to see a copy of that article. Sounds like we have some issues we still need to address to get everyone to understand...




Darin,

Just for grins, run the math on the 83-88 Scirocco.
1.8 8V 90hp
currently spec'ed at 2270# in ITB

P.S. I built the cage in Watney's car


------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]

[theenico]

anyone out there?

[apr67]

Originally posted by theenico:
anyone out there?

Nico, are you and 2 beer Charile comming to the ARRC this year? I hope so!

Alan

[theenico]

Most definitely, and with any luck, I might actually bring the Scirocco.

------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]

[apr67]

Cool... Make sure you bolt on a supercharger, or a nitrous bottle.

They would never catch anything like that in tech. But paint your intake manifold and "watchout"!

[ITANorm]

Jake -

My '86 car can make weight, and I'm about 180#, suited-up. And Nico built my cage, too. Boy that titanium is great stuff. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

------------------
Norm - #55 ITA, '86 MR2. [email protected]
http://home.alltel.net/jberry/img107.jpg
Website: home.alltel.net/jberry (http://home.alltel.net/jberry)

[theenico]

What's up Norm,

Did the Canadian say anything about the extreme oil pressure yet? I'll send you an email

------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]

[theenico]

Darin and any lurking ITAC people,
any comments?

Originally posted by theenico:

Darin,

Just for grins, run the math on the 83-88 Scirocco.
1.8 8V 90hp
currently spec'ed at 2270# in ITB

P.S. I built the cage in Watney's car






------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]

[ITSRX7]

Nico,

It would seem a little heavy for ITB.

Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.

Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[theenico]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Nico,

It would seem a little heavy for ITB.

Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.

Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula.

AB


Andy,
Thanks for responding so quickly. The "run the #'s" comment was pseudo tongue in cheek, although I do dislike ITC cars out dragging me down a straight. I'm also aware that until PCA's, in one form or another, get passed I'll have to keep hiding the extra 200# I carry in the car. Until that happens, I'll just continue racing when I can afford it (not nearly often enough http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif ) and having fun, because fun is what it's all about.



------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Nico,

It would seem a little heavy for ITB.

Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.

Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula.

AB



Simple solution to the problem Andy, re-run the weight on all the cars in the ITCS. Jake's spreadsheet looks pretty complete. Treat the cars as if they were new classifications, and take it from there. Significant deviations from the current spec weight would warrant a look at re-classification.

You guys want to make IT a better place for everyone, well there you go, give everyone the same shot at getting their car appropriately spec'd.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[ITSRX7]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Simple solution to the problem Andy,

Simple solution to what?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Simple solution to what?

AB




Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.

Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula


Run all the cars through the formula, do the 'adders', and see where the weight falls.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[nlevine]

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/mad.gif Grrr.. Just read through the Sept. Fastrack. My letter to the comp board was completely mis-quoted. For the record, I did not ask to "allow the BMW Z3 to use the stock 8.5-inch wheels". I had asked about being allowed to use the legal SSB wheel configuration for the car (16x8) in IT. I know the car came with 16x7 wheels stock and I know that the limit is 7-in wide in ITA - I was just asking about the possibility of an exemption to enable an easier "crossover" from a legal Showroom Stock configuration to IT (and was anticipating it would get shot down). No hard feelings, I just hate being mis-quoted.

-noam

[Geo]

Originally posted by nlevine:
http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/mad.gif Grrr.. Just read through the Sept. Fastrack. My letter to the comp board was completely mis-quoted. For the record, I did not ask to "allow the BMW Z3 to use the stock 8.5-inch wheels". I had asked about being allowed to use the legal SSB wheel configuration for the car (16x8) in IT. I know the car came with 16x7 wheels stock and I know that the limit is 7-in wide in ITA - I was just asking about the possibility of an exemption to enable an easier "crossover" from a legal Showroom Stock configuration to IT (and was anticipating it would get shot down). No hard feelings, I just hate being mis-quoted.

-noam

Let me assure you that despite being mis-quoted, the ITAC understood what it was you requested. I'm sure the editor of Fastrack just was a little too agressive in his/her editing.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[Bill Miller]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Simple solution to what?
AB

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.
Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Run all the cars through the formula, do the 'adders', and see where the weight falls.

No comments Andy?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[ITSRX7]

Nope. No more pissing into the wind with you.

I will say that the excersize you are asking for is currently under consideration by the ITAC. The resultant 'numbers' could turn the classes upside down - for the better? Maybe.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by ITSRX7 (edited August 21, 2004).]

[Bill Miller]

I'm curious as to what you mean by 'turn the classes upside down'. Do you mean that some cars that may currently have an advantage may lose some/all of that advantage, or that some cars that currently don't stand a chance in hell at a podium, may actually have a chance?

Do you have a problem w/ all cars being given the same chance at an appropriate class/spec. wt?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[ITSRX7]

It means that there could be a lot of changes.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Geo]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
It means that there could be a lot of changes.

And it also means there could be very few.

The fact is, we are taking a fresh look at classifications and weight. Beyond that there is nothing at all to report. This could lead to a lot of changes or very few changes. Who knows? But it's what a lot of people have hoped somebody might do. We have no time table for this at this time. We are more concerned about doing the right thing, whatever that may be.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[Geo]

Oh yeah, if PCAs don't fly we will have at least one hand tied behind our backs.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[Bill Miller]

You're right Andy, there [i]could[/b] be a lot of changes. And if there are, it could indicate a few things. A) There are a lot of cars out there where the weights don't fit the model B) The model is not that good C) There are cars that are 'better than the sum of the parts', and other factors need to be considered.

If you look back at when this whole comp. adj / PCA discussion started, I have always advocated a standard model that was applied to all cars the same, w/ subsequent adjustments to address the 'other factors'.

If the only reason for not publishing the process is that everyone will want their car evaluated, you should publish it. You may get people that aren't happy w/ the results, but at least then everything's out in the open. IMHO, that's a far better situation than who/when/why some cars get looked at, and others don't.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608