March FasTrack is up!

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by grjones1:
I know I'm going to get smacked for beating a putrified horse, but, Joe, the same authoritative set of rules says "Gauges and instruments may be added, replaced, or removed." What do you think that means? Please be reasonable.
GRJ



GRJ,

I think the point is that the glossery in the GCR defines what an instrument is...pertaining to the rules we are governed by. A steering column stalk is just not an instrument according to the GCR. Plain and simple. You have argued it well OUTSIDE the context of the GCR, but guess what? We aren't outside the GCR.

In addition, a removable sterring wheel is not a safety item...First off, it isn't required; second, it is listed in the driver/passenger compartment section - not the safety section...so the removal of a stalk would fall under an illegal modification facilitated by a legal one - which is also specifically disallowed.

We all understand that the removal of the stalks isn't going to win you a race...but really, where does this stuff end? You DON'T have to gut all the 'switches' and 'instruments' out of a dash to facilitate a cage install...come on!

Lock this thread down. It's dead.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967

www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[zooracer]

new here, and still learning the GCR...
But, I have read this entire thread, if you can believe it, and here is what I've found.
Take into account I havent met anyone on here.
Grjones presented an idea or interpretation for discussion on here and basically got attacked. His post's were straightforward, not laced with emotion or sarcasm. Not confrontational in any way.
I read the responses to his posts and really got the feeling that some of you guys dont particularly like mr. jones. Although, from his post's, I really cant see why.
Regardless of whether you agree with him or not, it's just a discussion forum.
We all have a really cool common bond, with this road racing lifestyle, something that such a small percentage of the overall population has. Got to keep that in mind.
Personally, I think that if a racer has an older or rarer car (like my suzuki swift) and either the turn signal stalk breaks or was never there, he shouldnt have to go to the dealer or such and pay lots of money for something that is really pointless.
I mean, do they really weigh that much?
I'm all about the cheap. Which is why I picked this class.
matt

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
everyone has there own definition of frivolous.

AB




My modest opinion of frivolous is: would it make a difference in the outcome.. I think a number of members of the advisory board frequent this forum so maybe we should seek to revise the protest process... a suscessful protest for a "non performance item" would result in something less than a dq while a sucsessful protest for performance enhancement would result in a dq and perhaps something more??

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
AB


OK Andy, but I must say (and end it for now) the GCR Glossary definition only holds precedence if the Specification doesn't clarify the rule (as stated in 1.2.4), and when the ITCS says "gauges and instruments" (I know how many times I've said this) then the ITCS is clearly saying an "instrument" is more than a "gauge" (it is also a switch) as defined by Our Instumentation guru.
Anyway, thanks for your attention and I only ask that this rationale be seriously considered. Obviously I earnestly believe it holds water.

HAPPY VALENTINES DAY.
G.Robert

[Joe Harlan]

It ends at the dash board GRW....read the last sentence. It says ,the remainder of the dash "board" or panel shall remain intact They rule is clearly talking about guages and instruments built into the dashboard.



[This message has been edited by Joe Harlan (edited February 14, 2005).]

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
It ends at the dash board GRW....read the last sentence. It says ,the remainder of the [b]dash "board" or panel shall remain intact They rule is clearly talking about guages and instruments built into the dashboard.
B]

Good point, Joe, but I think this means just what it says, the remainder of the "board" or "panel," that is you are not allowed to cut away the plastic or vinyl that makes up the dashboard (really nothing to do with the controls and guages), but it's reasonably arguable.
GRJ



[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 14, 2005).]

[lateapex911]

Matt...

You are probably seeing the backlash from earlier (epic) threads. many around here will never forget the wild "Bettle in ITC" fiasco...

The second element is probably the huge stretch of logic in using the "Guy writing the definition made a boo boo" defense, then later modifying the arguement.

That said, this encounter HAS been more respectful, and your point is noted.


Regarding comments vis a vis the relative performace gains and the appropriateness of various penalties.....search "A protest story" in the rules and regs section. In summary, a driver was protested for internal engine issues, torn down, and found to be running high compression domed pistons. When asked, he denied knowledge, (which is hard to swallow, of course), and he was never asked as to the timing history of the modification. (A question that I feel should be asked square one, before ANYTHING is opened and inspected).

The penatly? "Sorry, don't do that again, we have to DQ you from the race" A good thing the lap record he set on that engine a month earlier was broken that day, or the record, and the previous finishes would stand...as it is the previous finishes stood. Contrast that to another teardown where the book was thrown, points assessed, season points removed, etc, etc, for a stock exhaust manifold that had a weld repair on a SM.

When a system exists that is fairly organized and structured, and it fails so miserably, I would hate to see it replaced with a system that allows greater use of "judgement calls".

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Geo]

Originally posted by gsbaker:
Having seen this event happen live--...

Hehe. Well, someone posted something about this sort of thing on the Rennlist (Porsche) racing forum. I of course posted Bill's fine video AND his emergency steering kit.

But, I got trumped by someone who posted a video of a guy in a Spec Pinata at Laguna Seca that not only got the wheel back on, but he NEVER lifted! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif


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

[Geo]

Originally posted by grjones1:
I know I'm going to get smacked for beating a putrified horse, but....

Horse, no. Beetle, yes. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif


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

[Geo]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Does that mean I can put a Trombone in the grill??

You might have to be careful in the PNW...

You might find a amourous moose chasing you.


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

[Geo]

Originally posted by grjones1:
...the ITCS is clearly saying an "instrument" is more than a "gauge" (it is also a switch) as defined by Our Instumentation guru.

Ahem...

GRJ, please quote the ITCS where it clearly (italics mine) says an instrument is more than a gauge, and bonus points if it clearly says it includes a switch.

I couldn't care less what our instrument guru said. What matters is what the GCR/ITCS says.


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

[Geo]

Originally posted by Fastfred92:

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
I don't think anyone would use an issue like this to win a race. I can tell you I would give the competitor a chance to make the car meet the rules first. If somebody chooses to ignore the rule then a protest would be in order. It shouldn't matter if its a stalk,water bottle or a camshaft. should it? No I guess in the perfect world it should not matter but I see alot of discussion about things on this forum that seem, well trivial. I have been racing for 20 years and I know I have been beat by illegal cams, comp ratios, etc. etc. ( afterall I have raced showroom stock ) but I dont think I have ever been beat by turn signal stalks, washer bottles or lack of, or as in another current topic tubular gussets. Perhaps we should consider "performance enhancement" in our protest in a effort to eliminate frivolous protest???



I know this stuff looks like trivial bickering, and for the most part it is. But I also think it's two other things. The first is someone testing an interpretation (nothing wrong with that). The other is peer pressure to produce a legal car and I'm all for that.


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

[Dave Zaslow]

Spring Fever is getting too close.

Removing the stalk is perfectly legal.

When one removes an item, such as a gauge or instrument, one presumably removes that item's activating device. The oil pressure sender would be removed and the opening plugged along with the removal of the guage. Same with an instrument. Note that the latter removal is outside the limits of the Dashboard or panel. As an instrument is defined as an indicator or readout, is not the turn signal light and high beam indicator one of these? It certainly "contains information about some aspect of car operation for driver reference".

Who wants to be embarassed by driving a race with their turn signal blinking left for a right hand corner? Be rid of it!

Dave (smiling) Zaslow
thinking about the emergency flasher and relay as well............

[planet6racing]

Originally posted by Geo:
Hehe. Well, someone posted something about this sort of thing on the Rennlist (Porsche) racing forum. I of course posted Bill's fine video AND his emergency steering kit.

But, I got trumped by someone who posted a video of a guy in a Spec Pinata at Laguna Seca that not only got the wheel back on, but he NEVER lifted! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif




If the alignment had been better and wasn't already steering for the wall, I would have tried to put it back on. Not sure if I could have done it without lifting, though!

I'd love to see that video!!

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

[ddewhurst]

Been reading this thread for all 6 pages. Whose going to trump Dave Z.

Trump, I like that word Geo.

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

[Greg Amy]

Ok, so if someone replaced the radiator in their ITC New Beetle, and the replacement radiator didn't need a reservoir, could you use the reservoir as your windshield washer bottle, removing the washer bottle by forcibly prying with your switch stalks, then use the broken switch (uh, sorry GAUGE) parts as gussets in your rollcage (making sure they meet the minimum diameter) then fabricate an intake restrictor from the leftover material (verifying you go UP TO but not less than), all the while ducting "under hood air" to the modified ECU (but not the wiring harness) and using the MoTec system to control your turn signals (which will be turned off anyway so as not to be functional), simultaneously grinding your G camshaft to fit into a Nissan 510 and possibly breaking the passenger side door glass, would you actually be cheating or simply interpreting the intent of what your mother told you when you were a small and impressionable child without a threaded shock body?

[This message has been edited by GregAmy (edited February 15, 2005).]

[Ron Earp]

Fellows, I'm inclined to agree with Matt (zooracer), particularily in light of David's comment directly above as in "who's turn is it to put the smack down on the latest post?"

These sorts of threads read like a "Whack A Mole" game.

New guy says "What about XXXXXXXX?"

Old guy says "You can't do XXXXXXXX."

New guy pops up with new "idea/concept/rule/addition/change", old guy uses "GCR/rule/intent/philosophy/hearsay/experience/bias" to beat it back down, waits for next new guy to raise his ugly head.

Change is not always bad, IMHO. But from reading and participating in a few of these threads over the last few months I get the impression in the SCCA that CHANGE = BAD. Still a great group and lots of fun so far but these sorts of impressions are lingering in the back of my mind.

Take care,
Ron

------------------
Ron Earp
http://www.gt40s.com
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
My electrons don't care if they flow through OEM wires, do yours?

[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited February 15, 2005).]

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by GregAmy:
Ok, so if someone replaced the radiator in their ITC New Beetle, and the replacement radiator didn't need a reservoir, could you use the reservoir as your windshield washer bottle, removing the washer bottle by forcibly prying with your switch stalks, then use the broken switch (uh, sorry GAUGE) parts as gussets in your rollcage (making sure they meet the minimum diameter) then fabricate an intake restictor from the leftover material (verifying you go UP TO but not less than), all the while ducting "under hood air" to the modified ECU (but not the wiring harness) and using the MoTec system to control your turn signals (which will be turned off anyway so as not to be functional), simultaneously grinding your G camshaft to fit into a Nissan 510 and possibly breaking the pasenger side door glass, would you actually be cheating or simply interpreting the intent of what your mother told you when you were a small and impressionble child wihout a threaded shock body...

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

...said child being strapped into a child seat equipped with a single-point release harness?

------------------
Gregg Baker, P.E.
Isaac, LLC
http://www.isaacdirect.com

[zooracer]

Yes, I've been heavily involved with forums in mountain biking for nearly 7 years and can say that it's easy to misinterpret what is typed on here from how it would come across in person.
My guess is their is great times at the track in person. Nothing like what it seems here on the forum.
Probably because when we are out doing something we love (like racing) we tend to forget about a lot of petty disagreements and such.
I personally think change is good also.
But, I limit this change to things that are either cheap or cost nothing.
If I had been around for the ECU change I would certainly have written some letters to discourage it.
Along with the optional final drives and absolutely NO engine modifications. Even stock headers, but say a straight pipe from there back.
Think about how cheap and easy it would be to get into this class if we were more like a showroom stock class for older cars.
I would say that in the future, no modifications that cost anything, or present a REAL performance advantage should be allowed, EVER.
matt

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Geo:
Ahem...

GRJ, please quote the ITCS where it clearly (italics mine) says an instrument is more than a gauge, and bonus points if it clearly says it includes a switch.

I couldn't care less what our instrument guru said. What matters is what the GCR/ITCS says.



George & Jake,
As I remember the Beetle "discussion" the comments were pretty nasty on both sides of the dead horse. Shall we let it lie in peace?

And if Joe's comments pointed out additional evidence I thought supported my argument and I appeared to shift my argument accordingly, I think that's within the rules of debate. New evidence often "shifts" a presentation.

Anyway, for those of us in the professional writing world (believe it or not) when you use a compound (gauges and instruments) you are adding information , not repeating the same information, i.e., "instruments" should be taken to mean something beyond what gauges means. And if "instrument" is defined by an authoritative source such as the ISA as a switch, then we can logically be assured that the writer meant to say that gauges and switches (controls) may be etc.
And if the ITCS definition takes precedence over the GCR Glossary definition, we are correct.

That's the basis for my and others interpretation.

Again it bothers me (and I think others) that when in considering these rules we don't consider authoritative sources outside our own experience.

And I must add, without attempting to stir up another diatribe, that I find the problem with Jake and Amy is that they feel they can say anything they wish and not expect retaliation. If I have offended I hope it was only in defense of having been offended.

GRJ http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by zooracer:
Think about how cheap and easy it would be to get into this class if we were more like a showroom stock class for older cars.


There is a whole lot more cheating in showroom stock vs. IT..... go to a national SS race and spot the legal cars!

[Joe Harlan]

Try finding enough parts to keep a 30year old SS car running.....

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by grjones1:
And if the ITCS definition takes precedence over the GCR Glossary definition, we are correct.

That's the basis for my and others interpretation.
GRJ http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif


GRJ,

My issue is that there is no definition in the ITCS. The ITCS uses the word in the context of the rules. The GCR Glossery is where the term is defined. Right?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Knestis]

...so if the point is that the Glossary definition needs to be changed to reflect what the rest of the world thinks, make that proposal to the powers that be.

Arguing that it should be ignored because it's "wrong" is going to gain as little traction as would arguing that a rule can be ignored because people are ignoring it.

K

[grjones1]

My issue is that there is no definition in the ITCS. The ITCS uses the word in the context of the rules. The GCR Glossery is where the term is defined. Right?
AB
[/B][/QUOTE]
Andy,
I understand your point (and it's a good one). However, it's just that the use of the word (instrument) in context (of the ITCS) does define it. (Let me add that if you ever taught English, you would know that using a word in context goes further towards defining that word for a student than even Webster's formal definition.) Otherwise, every term used in the Specifications would have to be defined and that's certainly not the case (e.g., "switch" is not defined). And beyond that, again take a look at "Instrument Panel" in the Glossary and see if even that does not expand the concept of "instrument."

And again one does not logically use a word that means the same thing as the word beside it if one does not mean to bring more to the statement than the use of the first word (gauges) means. And I'm not trying to be pedantic here, I'm just trying to explain a rather difficult (for me) linguistic nuance to explain (evidently).

If you are suggesting the writer of the ITCS rule made a boo-boo, that holds no more credence than my saying the writer of the GCR definition made a boo-boo. OK?

And again, I think the ITCS rule was written long before the definition of "instrument" as it presently stands was written in the GCR. But I'm having trouble finding my old GCRs. But again this is moot because the ITCS takes precedence anyway.

I appreciate your continued pursuit of clarity,

GRJ


[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Knestis:
...so if the point is that the Glossary definition needs to be changed to reflect what the rest of the world thinks, make that proposal to the powers that be.

Arguing that it should be ignored because it's "wrong" is going to gain as little traction as would arguing that a rule can be ignored because people are ignoring it.

K
K,
I'm arguing that "instruments" should be allowed to be added, removed, and replaced as I beleive the original writers intended (sorry George), not left in as those who view IT to be super SS believe it to be.

And people are not "ignoring the rule." They are interpreting it as they believe it was intended. Why do you continually replace "interpret" with "ignore"?

And I stated a long time ago that a good editorial board should revise the rules to rid them of as many existing contradictions as possible. But that's another story.

GRJ



[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[grjones1]

[quote]Originally posted by Knestis:
[BK,
Please explain to me why you think "gauges and instruments" was used and not just "gauges."

G

[Knestis]

Because (a) the rules-making process in this organization is incremental in nature, (like Greg's good trailer house analogy), and (B) the rules' thousands of authors were imprecise in their use of language in the first place.

The Glossary is a relatively late addition to the GCR and likely came about - again, in a piece-meal fashion - because the culture of SCCA club racing tolerates the ambiguity of piddling little additions to the rules more readily that it does any comprehensive change.

Back in IT's early days, someone suggested adding aftermarket "guages" and someone else was talking about "instruments." I'll bet you a beer that this allowance goes back to the very first ITCS (I wish I had kept mine) and I can picture the inclusion of both terms as being a way to come to consensus among members of the writing committee that created that document.

15 years on, someone else went through the book and defined terms for the Glossary - to avoid exactly the situation we have here!

You will get NO argument out of me that someone ought to go through the entire document (GCR writ large) and fix the language but I frankly doubt that it will make any difference to people who want a particular thing to be allowed and play word games to rationalize it.

K

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited February 15, 2005).]

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Knestis:
Because (a) the rules-making process in this organization is incremental in nature, (like Greg's good trailer house analogy), and (B) the rules' thousands of authors were imprecise in their use of language in the first place.

The Glossary is a relatively late addition to the GCR and likely came about - again, in a piece-meal fashion - because the culture of SCCA club racing tolerates the ambiguity of piddling little additions to the rules more readily that it does any comprehensive change.

Back in IT's early days, someone suggested adding aftermarket "guages" and someone else was talking about "instruments." I'll bet you a beer that this allowance goes back to the very first ITCS (I wish I had kept mine) and I can picture the inclusion of both terms as being a way to come to consensus among members of the writing committee that created that document.

15 years on, someone else went through the book and defined terms for the Glossary - to avoid exactly the situation we have here!

You will get NO argument out of me that someone ought to go through the entire document (GCR writ large) and fix the language but I frankly doubt that it will make any difference to people who want a particular thing to be allowed and play word games to rationalize it.

K

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited February 15, 2005).]

K,
In the spirit of sportsmanship, I don't believe those of us who advocate rules that depart from a showroom stock mentailty play any more "word games" than those of you who wish to keep your IT racer in "street" condition.

But we are stuck with the rules as written and as I believe Mark Twain wrote, "the trouble with language is, it fails to communicate."

Good luck at VIR. I hope to see you there in the Spring.
GRJ

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by Fastfred92:
There is a whole lot more cheating in showroom stock vs. IT..... go to a national SS race and spot the legal cars!

Whoa. Pretty broad brush that you're using there, Picasso.

Care to cite some evidence ?

[Banzai240]

You guys are a little loopy if you think that a "comprehensive rewrite" of the ITCS/GCR is going to solve ANYTHING... All it will do is introduce a new set of abiguities for you guys to bicker about... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

Just watch Production try to re-write their rules in the coming future... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

Once they are written, the next 15 years will be spent working to get them corrected... in "piece meal fashion", just like we are doing today...

It has little to do with the way the rules are written, and everything to do with the nature of human beings... We live to break/bend/stretch rules...

Rewriting a set of rules such as this that have managed IT racing successfully for 15+ years makes about as much sense as re-writing the constitution of the US in a wholesale fashion...

Sorry guys, that's just not how "Progress" is made... Last time I checked, we make amendments, and incremental re-writes to large sets of rules (Bill of Rights, Constitution, FCC laws, etc...) in response to a changing environment...

Our environment has changed, no one is denying that, but the overlying purpose has not. That being the case, I see no need to make wholesale changes and "starting over", as many of you seem to advocate... The rules just aren't that "broken"...

In fact (well, fact to me...), I just don't see what's so hard to follow here... It's those of you who choose to stretch, contort, analyze, and otherwise make something out of something it's not, who really seem to have a problem with the rules as they are written... example case... those of you who think "up to" allows something smaller... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

Bottom line... yes, there are some sections that could use some work, but people have raced for 15+ years with these rules and gotten by just fine... so I doubt that a wholesale rewrite is really in order...

Besides, you guys can't agree on whether or not a washer bottle must remain in place... how the heck do you expect to get a complete set of rules together that are agreeable to most??? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

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


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[Greg Amy]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">...the problem with Jake and Amy is that they feel they can say anything they wish and not expect retaliation.</font>

"Not expect retaliation"?? Are you kidding me? Dude, I count on it! I can't wait until I read your responses to my comments; in fact, I sit here shaking with anticipation simply waiting for them (and I'm rarely disappointed!)

Hell, it's some of the only true entertainment I get during the work day!

[grjones1]

Originally posted by GregAmy:
[B] B]

Good, Amy. Now if someone would just teach you how to use toilet paper, you wouldn't get that "icky feeling" when you left the men's room.
GRJ

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">(and I'm rarely disappointed!)</font>

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

[Knestis]

Originally posted by grjones1:
...I don't believe those of us who advocate rules that depart from a showroom stock mentailty play any more "word games" than those of you who wish to keep your IT racer in "street" condition. ...

But that is my point: You are NOT advocating for a change in rules. You are taking massive semantic liberties - at least beyond the frame defined for the document at hand - and calling a wiper switch an "instrument."

If you want the rules changed to make them more liberal, fight that fight. I support your right to use the process as it's been defined. Propose additional allowances to the ITCS, propose changes to specific spec line items for your car, propose changes to the terms in the glossary - all OK.

But saying that X means Y is a different thing and, while I'm impressed with the ability of those to stay on-message with these arguments, simply repeating them over and over doesn't make them any more well founded.

I will indeed be at the SARRC/MARRS and hope you and the rest of the WDC guys and gals come down. I wouldn't mind another 70+ car grid to play in.

K

[ddewhurst]

I would like to suggest that within the original glossary that the word gauge was used & as the digital devises came along that the word instrument was added to the glossary so that the old (gauge) & the new (instrument) is covered.

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

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Knestis:
massive semantic liberties - at least beyond the frame defined for the document at hand - and calling a wiper switch an "instrument."
K

K,
Come on, a wiper switch by such authority as the ISA is an instrument, that's not "massive semantic liberty," that's calling something what it is what it is as established not by me but by those who determine such things.

Furthermore, your scenario of how the rules came to be written is no less speculative than mine. The difference is simply that my opinion is different from yours. No less, no more valuable, and you refuse to admit it.

Let's remain cordial at opposite ends of the spectrum. I can deal with it otherwise, but as I think I said I value your opinion and your acquaintanceship.

GRJ

[Joe Harlan]

Just a side note.....History proves every move to loosen the rules has brought every class in history closer to death than any other cause.....Looser rules always mean more money and less competition.

[grjones1]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
I would like to suggest that within the original glossary that the word gauge was used & as the digital devises came along that the word instrument was added to the glossary so that the old (gauge) & the new (instrument) is covered.

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


And David, you may be right.

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">authority as the ISA is an instrument</font>

Who gives a flying crap...The GCR is the authority in this case........

[gsbaker]

All I can say is, "God bless Spec Racer Ford."

Seriously, you guys have put forth a Herculean effort to make work the distinctions between the various production-based classes (how many are there now?), yet it seems that the slicing and dicing of class differences/philosophies never ends.

I suppose that's part of the human condition, always tweaking to optimize one thing or another.

At some point the GCR should be thrown out and rewritten. There are actually people in Topeka who will pound the table defending some cockamamy (sp?) idea brought up in 1960.

------------------
Gregg Baker, P.E.
Isaac, LLC
http://www.isaacdirect.com

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
Who gives a flying crap...The GCR is the authority in this case........


True, but the GCR in most cases deals in generally accepted automotve terms and I believe assumes others will be cognizant of those terms. There are cases of conflict obviously and that's exactly what we're dealing with here.

You know even I am getting tired of the sound of my voice. Why can't I let this go and let some protest somewhere settle it? I guess because I've known too many drivers in the last 15 years in IT (and 34 years in the SCCA) who see this rule the same way I do. We all can't be wrong because a few web-posters say we are. Let's take a poll.

GRJ



[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 15, 2005).]

[ddewhurst]

Folks the crux of the issue is not the GCR, it's not the rules & it's not the people spewing about some rules one way or another. The issue is the fast method of communication we have today. The quickness of the PC provides INSTANT SATISFICATION to ones EGO. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

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

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">True, but the GCR in most cases deals in generally accepted automotve terms and I believe assumes others will be cognizant of those terms.</font>

Could that be because we are racing cars? It really doesn't matter if one has a basic understanding of automotive terms, That's what the definitions in the GCR are there for. Beating your head against the wall is not going to change the fact the GCR is the governing definition and nothing else matters. Once again signing off from this stupid debate over nothing..

[grjones1]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
Folks the crux of the issue is not the GCR, it's not the rules & it's not the people spewing about some rules one way or another. The issue is the fast method of communication we have today. The quickness of the PC provides INSTANT SATISFICATION to ones EGO. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

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

David,
Show me a driver without ego and I'll show you a slow driver.

Just having fun.
GRJ

[Geo]

Originally posted by zooracer:
Think about how cheap and easy it would be to get into this class if we were more like a showroom stock class for older cars.


Oh...

You mean like IT originally was...

Before rules creep and people coming in saying this or that is a stupid rule and the SCCA fears change.

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


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

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Geo:
Before rules creep and people coming in saying this or that is a stupid rule and the SCCA fears change.


please George, just because a person favors some rule change or interpretation that makes it easier to keep an old IT car running and legal such as the signal stalk/washer bottle/wireharness repair don't blame them for ECUs and 40 over pistons.
Dick Patullo

[Geo]

Originally posted by dickita15:
please George, just because a person favors some rule change or interpretation that makes it easier to keep an old IT car running and legal such as the signal stalk/washer bottle/wireharness repair don't blame them for ECUs and 40 over pistons.
Dick Patullo

Come on Dick, you don't find it the least bit ironic? I'm sure Kirk will agree with me that every rule change has occured because someone thought the current rule was stupid or was unfair to them in some way.

One little change here. Another there. And somewhere down the road we wonder how we got here from there.

I just found the question ironic. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif


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

[zooracer]

I have to admit to being pretty ignorant when it comes to the history of IT rules/changes.
So my question is this. If it was meant to be a showroom stock class for older cars, when did the following become rule,
- porting 1" in on exhaust and intake
- open final drive's
- open ECU
Now notice I didnt mention half point rise in compression or 40 over. The reason for this is these may be unavoidable to keep and old car or engine going after a rebuild, or several rebuild's.
Why didnt everyone on here raise such a stink over these modifications that they were turned down by the board? I mean, I can really see how these mods are taking us closer to production; not turn signal stalks.
And if these mods were in place with the origination of IT, then that means they werent really trying to make a showroom stock class for older cars.
This class is so popular because it is the most inexpensive way to go racing in the SCCA, period.
I wish we could go back in time and start over...
matt

[Geo]

Originally posted by dickita15:
please George, just because a person favors some rule change or interpretation that makes it easier to keep an old IT car running and legal such as the signal stalk/washer bottle/wireharness repair don't blame them for ECUs and 40 over pistons.
Dick Patullo

Thinking about this a little more, I think it's even more ironic that you talk about keeping an old IT running, but by the tone of your post it seems to imply that 40 over pistons are another matter entirely.

What's ironic is that I'd bet good money that 40 over pistons were sold to the rules makers as a money saver since "Hey, these aren't new cars and need to be refreshed now and then." As such, 40 over pistons are a money saver." Today some people see that differently.

Oh, and wiring harness repairs are already allowed.


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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by gsbaker:
At some point the GCR should be thrown out and rewritten.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/images/smilies/banghead.gif



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

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
http://www.briskoda.net/forums/images/smilies/banghead.gif



It's my understanding that at least a couple of CS sections of the GCR are up for re-writes (PCS and SRCS, IIRC).

And sorry Darin, but at re-write of the ITCS may actually be warranted.

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

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Geo:
Thinking about this a little more, I think it's even more ironic that you talk about keeping an old IT running, but by the tone of your post it seems to imply that 40 over pistons are another matter entirely.

What's ironic is that I'd bet good money that 40 over pistons were sold to the rules makers as a money saver since "Hey, these aren't new cars and need to be refreshed now and then." As such, 40 over pistons are a money saver." Today some people see that differently.
Oh, and wiring harness repairs are already allowed.


George, I do see the humor. I understand that almost every change proposed since Ben Hur was based on cost savings or safety. One must be very skeptical when one hears that argument. As a matter of fact if I had been the one to decide about 40 overs, I would have said no. When someone proposes a change, I think will that change become manditory to be a winner, if so I would lean against. I don't have a problem with washer bottles, changing switches, or even right side door glass. And yes i think i should be able to wire up my car without using factory connectors.

I am not saying that i know better or that I am even right, but I do think it is not a irational point of view and should not be dismissed without respectful consideration.
dick patullo

[This message has been edited by dickita15 (edited February 16, 2005).]

[grjones1]

And sorry Darin, but at re-write of the ITCS may actually be warranted.

[/B]
May I offer my services? I know I could depend on a number of people from this forum for references. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

You know I must say that I find it extremely ironic that the same people who stood up so valiantly to allow a 2.0L car in a 1.6L class are the same people who tremble at the idea of rules creep. Is there not a contradiction lying somewhere in that application of influence?

And I must add that the other day a new 18-year-old neighbor of mine looking over my racer for the first time pondered a while and his first question was: "Why do you still have the the passenger window in the car?" My answer of course was "It's required in the rules." And he answered, "Boy is that stupid!"- So much for appealing to the new generation.


GRJ

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by grjones1:
And I must add that the other day a new 18-year-old neighbor of mine looking over my racer for the first time pondered a while and his first question was: "Why do you still have the the passenger window in the car?" My answer of course was "It's required in the rules." And he answered, "Boy is that stupid!"- So much for appealing to the new generation.

GRJ

And I would counter by saying that your car, being older than said teenager, is the unattractive piece of the pie, not the fact that you have a window in the car that actually might keep the rain out when you are in pits.

There are 'stupid' rules in every sport.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by grjones1:
May I offer my services? I know I could depend on a number of people from this forum for references. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
Thanks but no thanks! We have seen what you can't do with simple definitions.


You know I must say that I find it extremely ironic that the same people who stood up so valiantly to allow a 2.0L car in a 1.6L class are the same people who tremble at the idea of rules creep. Is there not a contradiction lying somewhere in that application of influence?
I don't find it Ironic at all and it's about time. We have been divided up in to small groups for 2 long. Using a weight to power figure is way better than a displacement with a 2200lb guess for each class. Air restrictors could allow a lot of cool cars to run together at a reasonable weight. This was forward thinking by this group.


And I must add that the other day a new 18-year-old neighbor of mine looking over my racer for the first time pondered a while and his first question was: "Why do you still have the the passenger window in the car?" My answer of course was "It's required in the rules." And he answered, "Boy is that stupid!"- So much for appealing to the new generation.


GRJ

Why is it when ever time somebody wants to make a stupid argument they have a neighbor kid call their car stupid...I don't get it. The kids in my neigborhood think its flat cool to have an old man around that races cars. I bet they have never noticed that I still have a heater.


Since I have no idea what car you drive. It is possible that you may not be able to attract the younger crowd. I think the best thing to do is just outlaw anything thats wasn't built in the last 10 years from SCCA then we could work hard at attracting the younger crowd with nothing but newer cars. A freakin window or a washer bottle is not what keeps them away. First thing that keeps them away is most don't even know we exist and second is the fact we have rules at all. the fix is to first go out and get them to participate at a beginner's level...(SOLO,HPDE) and then give them something to shoot for. Also if you want them for the future you have to get off you ass and go get them. I have at least 15 kids from the local Nissan club coming to an HPDE this year. I will be doing a private tech day for them 2 weeks before to help them prepare. Most of them have seen my RS car and the T2 car I have in the shop and they all the the ITC 510 rental car. these kids are car folk just like the rest of us and when it's time they will join us if they know we exist. RS will catch a lot of them cause they can have some of the stuff they dig...ITE will catch a bunch of them cause of turbo's.

[This message has been edited by Joe Harlan (edited February 16, 2005).]

[Geo]

Originally posted by dickita15:
I am not saying that i know better or that I am even right, but I do think it is not a irational point of view and should not be dismissed without respectful consideration.

Dick, I was just pointing out the irony. I think it's kind of funny. It was not mean as disrespect to anyone.

The fact is, there are so many differing and conflicting opinions out there that one could choose any position and be both right and wrong.


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

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
And I would counter by saying that your car, being older than said teenager, is the unattractive piece of the pie, not the fact that you have a window in the car that actually might keep the rain out when you are in pits.


Andy,
Actually, he thought the car was kind of "neat." I'm sorry you have something against a Fiesta that can still hold its own against quite a few Mazdas and others. (I personally don't care for "swoopy" cars that can't can't get out of their own way without swapping their taillights with their hood emblems.) But that really doesn't matter. I was reacting against two ideas: one that I'm simply trying to keep my car in the hunt and two I'm trying to rewrite the rulebook.

First I argued a long time ago that the window rattling around in the door was a safety hazard (at least two people reported on this site window glass thrown throughout the cockpit by a broken passenger door window after a side collision); it really didn't have any purpose for existance (I can throw a cover over my car to keep the rain out) and it was an easy, inexpensive way to help some of these guys get down closer to race weight.

And second, I was actually arguing for the first reading of the instrument replacement rule not trying to rewrite it.The new definition in the Glossary is what rewrote the rule whether Joe or anybody else knew what an "instrument" was or not.

In both cases you get your hackles up and accuse me of simply trying to keep my car competitve. That's weak, was before, is now. I'm beginning to believe that you are more interested in the "intent" of the writer than you are the "sense" of his suggestion.

My comment had to do with your very good idea that the Beetle might attract some new blood, but you were unwilling to seriously consider other changes the "new blood" might also find attractive.

Every once in a while let's stop being smart asses, stop considering the sources for whatever conjured predispositions you may have mistakenly arrived at, and look closely at what is being proposed.

GRJ

[grjones1]

[quote]Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
[B] My offer was written with a heavy dose of irony, Joe, you know with tongue- in-cheek - a joke. Do you think I am so unaware that I think I would break into that very tight inner circle?

And Joe, he didn't think the car was stupid, he thought keeping the door glass in was stupid. Quite insightful for an 18-year-old, I thought - but of course 25 years experience must know better.

I admire your work with the kids Joe. I too have taken dozens to the track to introduce the sport. (However, I think they were more interested in my daughters than they were my driving, but that's normal.)
G




[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 16, 2005).]

[Greg Amy]

"Here we are, folks, bottom of the ninth, score is WAY lopsided against the visiting team but we're havin' a great afternoon. The home team is up to the plate for the last time; here we go...


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I'm sorry you have something against a Fiesta that can still hold its own against quite a few Mazdas and others...you get your hackles up and accuse me of simply trying to keep my car competitve.</font>

"WHOA, FOLKS! You're not gonna believe this one! They surprise us YET AGAIN with something WAAAAY out of left field!! That's right; the ball wasn't even pitched and the defense threw a ball BACK TO THE PLATE from the outfield!!! Where in the HECK did that one come from? The home plate umpire is scratching his head and the first-base umpire simply quit and went home! The guy at third base is already starting to drink heavily and they're all lookin' through the rulebooks to figure how to interpret that one!! Hoo, boy, this one's not over yet, folks, not by a long shot! Stick around, we may have dancing elephants come along soon, too!!!"

[Andy Bettencourt]

This is the kind of post that give you the rap you have. Easy.

I haven't done anything in this thread except debate you - calmly. I just don't agree with you.

I find it hard to belive that, when push comes to shove, a window on the passenger side is what is keeping kids away, but a Fiesta (or any car that 99% of 18 years olds HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS), that is 180 degrees away from what is popular amongst this current culture is 'cool'.

Ya, it's a racecar - and it IS cool. But to say that we are losing potential racers because of the 'stupid' rules? I just don't buy it. Half the RACERS don't read the rulebook, nevermind a batch of kids who are looking for an outlet. They want to look cool and be fast. Seen any ITC cars drifting lately? NOPE. Frankly, ITC is the LAST place I would think would excite them. No agenda, no vedetta, just my opinion. Hence the 'fresh' classification of the New Beetle...but let's not go there.

It was a comment about the rules keeping kids away, not a shot at your car...all IT cars are created equal in my book.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[planet6racing]

To: GREG AMY
From: Planet 6 Racing
Subject: INVOICE

QTY 1 Microsoft Natural Keyboard $35.00

Payment due upon receipt.

Thank you for doing business with us. It has been our pleasure.

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

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Geo:
[B] ... I'm sure Kirk will agree with me that every rule change has occured because someone thought the current rule was stupid or was unfair to them in some way. ...

Like being nibbled to death by ducks.

K

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
This is the kind of post that give you the rap you have. Easy.

IIAB


Andy,
I guess because of the money, time, attention I've spent on my car (just like everyone else) and you say "..that your car, being older than said teenager, is the unattractive piece of the pie," I sense a certain lack of appreciation for it.

Calmly let me report fact: friend and son who crewed for me, helped with setting up the car for years when the son decided to go racing opted to go NASA after weighing the difference in "attitude" between us and them. And "attitude" had a great deal to do with the often nonsensical rules we have established.

Now I don't for a minute advocate NASA or anyone else (we are still the best show in town) but I can't help but think that this one little example may have some bearing on our predicament.

I think, and of course I can be wrong, Showroom Stock is for people who do not want to modify their cars. IT is for people who want to make their cars go faster (or at least handle better) than showroom stock for as little money as possible. And for people who have come to know that race cars bend and break and need to be made stronger and safer than they were made for the street, but again want to do it as cheaply as possible. And when our rulesmakers maintain rules that prevent making the cars stronger and safer for a good price, supporting arguments that find logic in the fact that you can add an instrument but you can't do away with the instrument it replaces. (Think now! How ridiculous a notion is that?) it looks like a paranoid reaction to any suggestion of change other than that made by a few close acquaintances whose idea of reasonableness is: I'm smart, you're dumb, I win, you lose. Period.

OK, I've rambled enough for another year and finish with if "drifting" is anybody's idea of motorsport, I'm damn glad I'll be too old soon to participate in motorsports.

I'm gonna go work on my car and see if I can flap some doors this year with my "unattractive peice of the pie."

GRJ

[ShelbyRacer]

Originally posted by Banzai240:

Just watch Production try to re-write their rules in the coming future... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

Once they are written, the next 15 years will be spent working to get them corrected... in "piece meal fashion", just like we are doing today...


Hey, I'm on that committee dammit...

Thankfully, I'm an SCCAnerd, so I should be fine... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif



------------------
Matt Green
"Ain't nothin' improved about Improved Touring..."

[lateapex911]

Well, I resisted the pull to jump on this many times, and there were plenty of juicy chances...even when I got mentioned by name several times...even in a seperate thread!

But I dunno....I guess being thrown in the same bucket with Amy made it seem like pretty good company, and he came up with some gems...but Bill...man, Bill flat outdid himself!

From: Jake (Lateapex911)
To: Bill (Planet 6)

Please remit $1300 at your earliest convenience to replace 3 month old Dell laptop DESTROYED by the spraying of a sticky Coke Classic into it's keys, etc.


Man..have I laughed over THIS thread!

Thanks guys!

PS...Drifting looks pretty cool to me. different, but a hoot.

And..just curious...what Mazdas has the Fiesta been whupping lately?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Andy Bettencourt]

GRJ,

No sweat. It still appears you took offense to my comment. It has nothing to do with teh Fiesta per se. It has to do with the fact is IS a car that kids don't dig. Curious, what kind of car is that kid racing in NASA...BE HONEST.

The SCCA and NASA have different markets. SCCA is trying (and adapting) to be everything to everyone. NASA has a crap-load of specialty series aimed at niche pockets of 'business' - and they do it well.

I bet that kid is running some import that didn't fit favorably into the current SCCA classing structure.

AB

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
GRJ,

Curious, what kind of car is that kid racing in NASA...BE HONEST.

AB

Honda CRX. Matt Chambers. Pretty good driver from what I hear.

GRJ

[grjones1]

Originally posted by lateapex911:


PS...Drifting looks pretty cool to me. different, but a hoot.

And..just curious...what Mazdas has the Fiesta been whupping lately?



Quite a few Spec Miatas, and 1st gen Spec RX-7s when we raced in their groups.. You can look at some result sheets from MARRS 02 and 03 and last year at VIR if you find that hard to believe. But I'm certainly not the only one in ITC that beat some of the Miatas, etc.

And I would think that anyone enjoying Drifting as a sport probably considers Joey Chitwood a number one entertainer.

Thought I was going to get out of this and let you guys entertain yourselves pouring coke in your keyboards.

GRJ



[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 17, 2005).]

[Fastfred92]

[
[/b][/QUOTE]
I think, and of course I can be wrong, Showroom Stock is for people who do not want to modify their cars. IT is for people who want to make their cars go faster (or at least handle better) than showroom stock for as little money as possible. GRJ[/B][/QUOTE]

Wrong, a competitive National SS car will cost you more $$$ than many IT cars!

!! And what in the world has happened to this post ??? Is this a record ??? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif Are we passing out more $8.00 trophies ??



[This message has been edited by Fastfred92 (edited February 17, 2005).]

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">And I would think that anyone enjoying Drifting as a sport probably considers Joey Chitwood a number one entertainer.</font>

Yep it is attitudes like this that is what makes it difficult to even get the younger crowds attention...To attract a younger group of people GRJ you must first remove the stick from your butt. Drifting is not only cool and fun it takes car control like you'll never have. I used to think it was stupid to race a front wheel drive car until I drove one and found out it was just different. My guess about your kids racing NASA is they wanted to run the Honda Challenge class and that's kool. NASA has SER cup and a couple of specialty classes that are attractive. IT is getting its flavor back by allowing newer cars and some decent newer cars a chance to be competitive. What it will take if for people to stop protecting their own turf and allow it to happen. ITB and ITC can handle the load of having some cars moved down at them (with adjustments) Freakin door glass and washer bottle are not going to prevent the best racing SCCA has to offer from growing. Attitudes like your's will. I believe your car is classed in GP and you can do all the things you want to do.

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Fastfred92:
!! And what in the world has happened to this post ??? Is this a record ???

Naw. There was a 10-pager recently. It happened so fast, I never had time to keep up with it.

I'm following a 21-pager on another forum, where I check in every other page or so. Those guy are completely lost.

G

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I'm following a 21-pager on another forum</font>

Has to be an engineering forum..... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
http://www.briskoda.net/forums/images/smilies/banghead.gif



Okay, okay Darin. I see your point. How about this: At some point some of the GCR should be thrown out and rewritten.

Would it help if there were fewer production-based classes? Just asking.

G

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
Has to be an engineering forum..... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Ouch! Yikes! Super Zinger!

Damn Joe, that hurt. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif Fast too!

(Where are George's head-slap and mooney smilies when you need them?)

Full signature follows:


------------------
Gregg Baker, P.E.
Isaac, LLC
http://www.isaacdirect.com

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Fastfred92:
[
IT is for people who want to make their cars go faster (or at least handle better) than showroom stock for as little money as possible. GRJ

Wrong, a competitive National SS car will cost you more $$$ than many IT cars!

[This message has been edited by Fastfred92 (edited February 17, 2005).][/B][/QUOTE]

Fred,
I either misspoke or you misread- I didn't say SS was less expensive I just was trying to say among other things that IT was for people who wanted to make their cars better than SS for racing.
GRJ

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
Yep it is attitudes like this that is what makes it difficult to even get the younger crowds attention...To attract a younger group of people GRJ you must first remove the stick from your butt. Drifting is not only cool and fun it takes car control like you'll never have.


Drifting is not racing. Period. Stick in my butt or otherwise. And as far as my car control, I believe there are those with whom I race who might disagree with you. But that's for them to report. You assume a great deal, Joe, about some things you know nothing about.
GRJ

[Joe Harlan]

Have you ever tried drifting? It does not have to be racing to be hard...And it leads kids to cars and kids in cars become people that will become interested in racing solo and future workers and crew people if treated with a bit of respect for the things they like to do. So the stick in the butt still fits. You have not taken the time to understand what it is that excites them or anyone else for that matter.

[Geo]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
NASA has SER cup and a couple of specialty classes that are attractive. IT is getting its flavor back by allowing newer cars and some decent newer cars a chance to be competitive.

What NASA does quite successfully is to provide a place to race for those who not only put together a class, but also provide the competition as well. That said, IIRC, SRX-7 (and possibly SM) is a product of NASA.
I personally know most of the guys in SE-R Cup and I know a number of the Spec 944 guys. In both cases, the classes were created because owners of these cars believed their cars couldn't be competitive in IT (yes, there are other reasons, but that was the main one). Like many classes in NASA they are regional in nature, i.e. not like SCCA regional racing, but if you don't live in the region where it started, most likely you can't race with anyone. SE-R Cup has tried to expand to the east coast, but I wouldn't not call it successful. Spec 944 has not really expanded and in fact, on the east coast there is 944 Cup with different rules. You see, folks build the class and get people to build cars and they have their own little place to race. What the SCCA does well is create classes you can race in from coast to coast with a single set of rules (if not a single interpretation).

I predict that SE-R Cup will not become national now that the SE-R is in ITA. The 944 classes is anybody's guess.

Joe, we don't always agree, and I guess I've got the pole up my butt as well. Ricey is usually described as something superficial and gaudy that is more about style than subtance. I think drifting fits this description.



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

[Geo]

Originally posted by gsbaker:
(Where are George's head-slap and mooney smilies when you need them?)

Always handy..... http://forum.e46fanatics.com/images/smilies/slap.gif

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/images/smilies/moon.gif

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


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

[This message has been edited by Geo (edited February 17, 2005).]

[oanglade]

Originally posted by Geo:
What NASA does quite successfully is to provide a place to race for those who not only put together a class, but also provide the competition as well. That said, IIRC, SRX-7 (and possibly SM) is a product of NASA.


SRX-7 and SM are both a product of Shannon McMasters in SCCA SOWDIV. SM in conjunction with David DelGenio from NEDIV

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[Geo]

Originally posted by planet6racing:
If the alignment had been better and wasn't already steering for the wall, I would have tried to put it back on. Not sure if I could have done it without lifting, though!

I'd love to see that video!!



Sorry Bill, I forgot to post that before....

Here is the link to the thread (so you can see others) http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif :

http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/show...ad.php?t=184365 (http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?t=184365)


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

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and I guess I've got the pole up my butt as well</font>

Look I don't like everything either...But I don't talk down at it like it doesn't count. I have seen these drift events and tried it myself....I am not very good at throwing a car flat ass sideways at 90MPH and a lot of these kids could never figure out how to pull 1.5 to 2 g's on radial tires either. The key here is if you want them you have to find something in common. Cars is it. When they see cars they like doing something we like to do they won't give a crap about a washer bottle or a passenger window they will just want a shot at it. So Geo you can remove the stick from your butt really easy....Take yer 944 out to the local drift event and let a couple of them teach you how to pitch it sideways...Then invite them all out as crew to your next event..Free help and you will make some converts out of them...

[ddewhurst]

**Has to be an engineering forum..... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif **

There are engineering forums & there are shade tree forumns. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

***SRX-7 and SM are both a product of Shannon McMasters in SCCA SOWDIV.***

IIRC the Spec7/SRX7 was started in the SoPac by Mark Holland & Dave Turner. 1994 maybe ???

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

[Russ Myers]

I don't know what the big deal is about drifting, I've been doing that at autocrosses since 1976. Hell, they even used to call me 'the sprint car driver". On rock hard Dunlops, you can get a 280Z really sideways. The real trick is not to hit any cones while sliding.

Russ

[grjones1]

You have not taken the time to understand what it is that excites them or anyone else for that matter. [/B][/QUOTE]

My daughters were excited about rap when they were 6-years-old, but I introduced them to classical and blues to expand their horizons. Thank goodness they outgrew the rap. Get my "drift"?

GRJ

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by grjones1:
You have not taken the time to understand what it is that excites them or anyone else for that matter.

My daughters were excited about rap when they were 6-years-old, but I introduced them to classical and blues to expand their horizons. Thank goodness they outgrew the rap. Get my "drift"?

GRJ

[/B][/QUOTE]

You're making eveyones point. Guess what is the most popular genre fo music in todays pop-culture? RAP.

Not for me, but you can't ignore it. JUST LIKE THE DRIFTING CROWD.

AB

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
You're making eveyones point. Guess what is the most popular genre fo music in todays pop-culture? RAP.

Not for me, but you can't ignore it. JUST LIKE THE DRIFTING CROWD.

AB
Yes Andy, and many people like monster trucks, demolition derbies, and drag racing, but I don't think I'm going to change that mindset by pretending to like it myself.

As a high school and Jr. college teacher on and off for 30 years, I can tell you dishonesty and hypocrisy are the first things that turn kids off.

Teaching a kid to build a car with max oversteer so he can throw it sideways and waste rubber and components to impress his friends is not my idea of introducing him to motorsports. But I concede to Joe's 25 years of experience. He knows more about everything and everybody than I could possibly know.

GRJ

[Geo]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
You're making eveyones point. Guess what is the most popular genre fo music in todays pop-culture? RAP.

Not for me, but you can't ignore it. JUST LIKE THE DRIFTING CROWD.

I do!

But I'm kind of weird I guess. I want to get satelite radio just for the jazz. The only rap I hear is from the car three cars back at a light. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif


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

[Joe Harlan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Teaching a kid to build a car with max oversteer so he can throw it sideways and waste rubber and components to impress his friends is not my idea of introducing him to motorsports. But I concede to Joe's 25 years of experience. He knows more about everything and everybody than I could possibly know.</font>

Thank you I do more than most http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif Here is one thing I know for sure, You come here looking for a fight because it gets you off. Nobody is being dishonest by taking part in being a friend and mentor to a younger person. Here is a news flash for you......I was a drag racer and motorcycle racer before that. I was 25 when I was introduced to sports car racing. I had never built a car engine that had less than 8 cylinders and 400 ft lbs of torque... The feeling of having yer head slammed to the back of your head was all I ever cared about. Almost 20 years later I make my living at building racing cars and I have had great sucess at that. All because some 45 year old dude introduced me to the sport. Changing the rules in IT will not help you remove the stick from yer butt or do any more to attract the younger crowd. I am off to the Dyno for 6 days so ya'all have a good time cause I am not taking this thing with me.

[lateapex911]

Drifting might not be racing, but it IS a competition. It's similar in a way to figure skating, gymnastics and diving, to start.

Give credit where credit is due. Do you know how hard it it to autocross at the stock level and even run in the front two or three in Topeka!??!! If you haven't been there, you don't.

Diving, as well, is incredibly difficult sport in which to succeed at at the top level.

Drifting is in it's infancy, and while I wouldn't consider the event to require the same level of athleticism of diving or gymnastics, the good guys are good for reasons. I for one don't think I could jump in a car and compete with them without a lot of practice.

Winning an event in a car that involves elements other than time as the final arbitrator should be respected.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[badal]

Originally posted by zooracer:
I have to admit to being pretty ignorant when it comes to the history of IT rules/changes.
So my question is this. If it was meant to be a showroom stock class for older cars, when did the following become rule,
- porting 1" in on exhaust and intake
- open final drive's
- open ECU
Now notice I didnt mention half point rise in compression or 40 over. The reason for this is these may be unavoidable to keep and old car or engine going after a rebuild, or several rebuild's.
Why didnt everyone on here raise such a stink over these modifications that they were turned down by the board? I mean, I can really see how these mods are taking us closer to production; not turn signal stalks.
And if these mods were in place with the origination of IT, then that means they werent really trying to make a showroom stock class for older cars.
This class is so popular because it is the most inexpensive way to go racing in the SCCA, period.
I wish we could go back in time and start over...
matt

The 1" porting and alternate gears were allowed from day 1.
The old SS arguement is just marketing.
In Spec Miata there was the same deal. I've seen plenty of purpose built SM's, but no ex-SS cars.

------------------
"Bad" Al Bell
ITC #3 Datsun 510
DC Region MARRS Series

[grjones1]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Drifting might not be racing, but it IS a competition. It's similar in a way to figure skating, gymnastics and diving, to start.

Give credit where credit is due. Do you know how hard it it to autocross at the stock level and even run in the front two or three in Topeka!??!! If you haven't been there, you don't.

No, Jake I haven't been at the "Topeka" level, but I have won a number of autocrosses and I was a WDC Region Solo I champion. I appreciate your analogy to diving, etc., but I really can't in good conscience support Drifting as a good starting point for road racing: karting, autocrossing, solo - yes; drifting- no. That's my straightforward opinion - not some kind of wall that separates me from bringing young people into our sport. You guys can find any excuse in the world and fabricate any characterization to impugn an opinion that differs from yours.
GRJ



[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 19, 2005).]

[Andy Bettencourt]

I don't think that Drifting is the starting point for road racing. BUT, that croud is a huge target market for the SCCA. The Street Touring classes in Solo are the fastest growing...and they aim right at that crowd and the kind of cars they drive.

I have been top 3 at the Solo 2 Nationals, I have won Pro Solo's, I have won National Tours, blah, blah, blah. The skills that they top guys have in drifting will translate to track prowess. It's about car control and positioning. They will just have to learn how to do what I had (and still am) to do...RACE. Driving will be easy...RACING will be the hard part.

BOTTOM LINE? These kids like cool cars - and we have to make sure there are cool cars in ALL the IT classes.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[ddewhurst]

Throw another log on the fire.

How about Ice Racing for car control ?

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

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
I don't think that Drifting is the starting point for road racing. BUT, that croud is a huge target market for the SCCA. The Street Touring classes in Solo are the fastest growing...and they aim right at that crowd and the kind of cars they drive.

I have been top 3 at the Solo 2 Nationals, I have won Pro Solo's, I have won National Tours, blah, blah, blah. The skills that they top guys have in drifting will translate to track prowess. It's about car control and positioning. They will just have to learn how to do what I had (and still am) to do...RACE. Driving will be easy...RACING will be the hard part.

AB


Andy,
I get your point and appreciate it. However, having to reteach someone that feathering the throttle and countersteering out of a broadslide is not the fast way around on asphalt (as we all know - and I don't mean we don't have to learn to control a high-speed "drift" [big difference from a "broadslide"]). It flies in the face of "smooth is fast."

I for one gave up autocrossing because it translated to bad habits on the racetrack (too quick turn-ins and the like), but of course that was me and probably not true for everyone. But Drifting as it is being promoted is not teaching good lessons- maybe if we were mentoring prospective stunt men, but that is not (I hope)the idea of SCCA Club Racing.

My point is if road racers are seen to advocate Drifting, they are posturing in opposition to their experience and helping to promote what I see as an adverse exercise. Your argument would suggest that anything related to cars is a good thing. I think not the case. Discretion applies in all matters.
Look, there's nothing wrong with comic books, but I'm never going to convince the kid to pick up Shakespeare if he thinks I believe "Captain Marvel" has any mature literary value. But I grow exceedingly boring, forgive me.
GRJ

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 19, 2005).]

[Banzai240]

To me, Drifting and Ice Racing go right along with Truck racing... Niche parts of the sport at best...

That being said... one needs to ask themselves an important part of this question...

IS the point really the people "drifting", or the cars they drive??

Just like the differences between Road Racers, Circle Racers, and Drag Racers... Each has their own interests...

I'm more interested in getting those CARS into the SCCA, than in getting those Drivers over here... If the cars are here, they will do the attracting of qualified drivers themselves... We (the SCCA Club Racing) are WAY behind the times from a technology standpoint, and there simply isn't a place for these types of cars in modified form currently...

THAT should be the focus... Let the drifters drift, the circle jerkers circle jerk, and the drag racers drag... but let's get the CARS those drifters drive into our side of the sport and generate some interest our direction...

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 19, 2005).]

[grjones1]

[/B]

For the most part, Darin, I concur. I guess I just have trouble accepting "business" interests over "philosophical" ones. And in no way is this meant as a slur on your proposition.
GRJ

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 19, 2005).]

[grjones1]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
Here is one thing I know for sure, You come here looking for a fight because it gets you off.

I'm just wondering when in the last 20 years, Joe has had time to garner his expertise in psychology? My goodness the man not only knows how to set camber, he can fix on a person's motivations from a few pages of dialogue. I wonder if the phrase "unabashed presumptuousness" means anything to him?

GRJ

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by grjones1:
No, Jake I haven't been at the "Topeka" level, but I have won a number of autocrosses and I was a WDC Region Solo I champion. I appreciate your analogy to diving, etc., but I really can't in good conscience support Drifting as a good starting point for road racing: karting, autocrossing, solo - yes; drifting- no. That's my straightforward opinion - not some kind of wall that separates me from bringing young people into our sport. You guys can find any excuse in the world and fabricate any characterization to impugn an opinion that differs from yours.
GRJ

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited February 19, 2005).]

I wish the english language had a better method of distinguising the plural "you" from the singular "you"...

I didn't intend my post to be aimed at any one person, per se, but rather those in the world who scoff at things that are close, but not the same.

When I ride my Ninja down the road, I wave to all bikers that pass in the other direction...but the Harley guys rarely wave back. I don't get it...aren't we all bikers?

My garage has had Mazdas and Porsches and Alfas and GMCs and Dodges and Hondas, an old 67 SS/RS Camaro convertible, and I am tempted right now by a 71 Baracuda convertible....I am a car guy...and I like the variety.

Same holds for racing..I am not a NASCAR fan, but there have been some great NASCAR races...and drag racing is really interesting once you get below the surface. Drifting too...subset or not...it's still a car guy thing that requires and rewards talent.

Sorry if you took it personally...but I think it's safe to say our outlooks are different, and I'm fine agreeing to disagree...



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Geo]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
I wish the english language had a better method of distinguising the plural "you" from the singular "you"...

Texas language does.... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif


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

[Bill Miller]

350!

Sorry, couldn't help myself. Also, it's about as relevant as half the posts on this thread! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

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

[grjones1]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Sorry if you took it personally...but I think it's safe to say our outlooks are different, and I'm fine agreeing to disagree...


OK, Jake.

GRJ

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Geo:
Texas language does.... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif


yea but jake is trying to use english. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

dick

[dickita15]

At one of the panel discussions at the national convention it was said that if SCCA could attract 1% of the import tuner crowd to join us it would add 75,000 members. If we were able to expose ourselves to these car people and not allow them to see our contempt for them and how they enjoy cars it is just possible that 1 or maybe even 2% of them might like what we do.
dick patullo

[This message has been edited by dickita15 (edited February 20, 2005).]

[grjones1]

Originally posted by dickita15:
and not allow them to see our contempt for them and how they enjoy cars it is just possible that 1 or maybe even 2% of them might like what we do.
dick patullo
.]

Dick,
Please allow me to declare that I don't consider my lack of recognition of Drifting as a viable motorsport as an indication of "contempt" for the import tuners. I have nothing but respect for what those guys are getting out of their cars. Thank you.

GRJ

[evanwebb]

How about this: I believe all motorsports (and certainly all amateur motorsports) are basically pointless, except of course for having fun. So, if you decide your fun thing is road racing (which I totally dig) or rallying (which I totally dig) or autocross (which is pretty cool to me, but now quite my thing) or drag racing (which is pretty cool becuase of the whole noise and fumes things, but otherwise I don't find all that interesting) or drifting (which I think is silly), what does it really matter? Just do what you like and have fun.

[grjones1]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> what does it really matter? Just do what you like and have fun.[/B]</font>

What matters Evan is that some us believe that we are helping the breed, i.e., showing what's safe and unsafe and how to improve the performance (and safety) of production cars. And that has been proven out by manufacturers' improvement of their cars for the last 50 years.

And many of us think that we are also concerned with improving (young) people's ability to drive and take care of their cars in a safe and efficient manner.

Yes, fun is at the top of the list, but we may do some good at the same time. At least that's one old participant's take on the matter.
GRJ

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by dickita15:
At one of the panel discussions at the national convention it was said that if SCCA could attract 1% of the import tuner crowd to join us it would add 75,000 members. If we were able to expose ourselves to these car people and not allow them to see our contempt for them and how they enjoy cars it is just possible that 1 or maybe even 2% of them might like what we do.
dick patullo

[This message has been edited by dickita15 (edited February 20, 2005).]

Dick,

The import tuner crowd is estimated at 7.5M? Figured it was big, but not that big.

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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by grjones1:
What matters Evan is that some us believe that we are helping the breed, i.e., showing what's safe and unsafe and how to improve the performance (and safety) of production cars. And that has been proven out by manufacturers' improvement of their cars for the last 50 years.

And many of us think that we are also concerned with improving (young) people's ability to drive and take care of their cars in a safe and efficient manner.

Yes, fun is at the top of the list, but we may do some good at the same time. At least that's one old participant's take on the matter.
GRJ



I wonder about the old "racing improves the breed" concept these days. I just don't think it realy is the case anymore. I think there is a much more symbiotic relationship between automotive racing, and automotive building. Many many advances in racing have come from the production world, not the other way around. A paradyne has shifted.

And at our level, it's all about fun. Evan has an excellent point.



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[lateapex911]

Dick, and sorry to take this even further afield, but the concept of the tuner crowd and the percentage of infiltration thing has me thinking.

Is there a growth number that the SCCA is looking to acheive? How much is too little, and how much is too much? Has there been any thought given to an "ideal" level?

I have to think that the future of the club is, of course, in the youth, but I would be interested to hear how that might be managed.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[grjones1]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
I wonder about the old "racing improves the breed" concept these days. I just don't think it realy is the case anymore. I think there is a much more symbiotic relationship between automotive racing, and automotive building.

And that "symbiotic relationship" was established by racers who found better ways of doing things (even at our level) before the factories even cared. (e.g., I'm sure wings and air dams were Detroit beancounters' ideas of how to design cars.)

Jake, if I stated the sky was blue most of the time, you would swear it was green.

GRJ

[Geo]

Originally posted by evanwebb:
How about this: I believe all motorsports (and certainly all amateur motorsports) are basically pointless, except of course for having fun. So, if you decide your fun thing is road racing (which I totally dig) or rallying (which I totally dig) or autocross (which is pretty cool to me, but now quite my thing) or drag racing (which is pretty cool becuase of the whole noise and fumes things, but otherwise I don't find all that interesting) or drifting (which I think is silly), what does it really matter? Just do what you like and have fun.

Amen!



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

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Dick,
The import tuner crowd is estimated at 7.5M? Figured it was big, but not that big.


yes that is what the SEMA guys were claiming.

[evanwebb]

G.Robert, how does a bunch of amateurs racing 10 to 30 year old cars improve the breed of anything? It doesn't. And people of all ages drive badly on the street more as a result of just being ignorant of traffic laws than as a result of not having sufficient car control.

All I'm saying is, let's just try to get past the attitude of superiority about road racing vs. drifting or whatever the current fad is.

[grjones1]

Originally posted by evanwebb:
G.Robert, how does a bunch of amateurs racing 10 to 30 year old cars improve the breed of anything? It doesn't. And people of all ages drive badly on the street more as a result of just being ignorant of traffic laws than as a result of not having sufficient car control.

All I'm saying is, let's just try to get past the attitude of superiority about road racing vs. drifting or whatever the current fad is.

There's a great deal more to the "improving the breed" story than anyone wants to listen to here, Evan. And if I came off sounding "elitist," I'm sorry. I think I said that. Have a good year.

GRJ