PDA

View Full Version : 944 Reclassification Proposal



jalexbell
03-13-2004, 10:39 AM
I would like to propose a reclassification of the Porsche 944 from ITS to ITA. I need help in gathering comparative track times across the US. If anyone is intersted in helping me with this project please respond to this post.
Thanks

Greg Amy
03-13-2004, 11:11 AM
You're kidding, right?

lateapex911
03-13-2004, 01:46 PM
Yea, ITA needs a new front runner! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

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

924Guy
03-13-2004, 02:46 PM
I'm in...

------------------
Vaughan Scott
Detroit Region #280052
'79 924 #77 ITA/GTS1
www.vaughanscott.com

JeffYoung
03-13-2004, 05:27 PM
Not to sound like a smart [email protected]#, but, does this mean I can move my TR8 to B?

As much as we complain about classification issues, I don't think there are any glaring problems despite what people say. Yeah, the BMW is probably a little light in ITS but I still see RX7s and even 240zs winning races. In A, yes, the CRX is a very capable car, but the fastest IT7 RX7 here in North Carolina routinely beats the CRXs at VIR.

Everyone has to know that any changes will just make imperfect system imperfect in a different way. Yes, I'm a competitive person, and I'd like to win, but I also know that I bought into the system in part because I reallywanted to race a Triumph in IT. I'll develop it, race it and work on the driver. Have a blast, but probably never win. So be it. If in 3-4 years, my desire to win outweighs my desire to race a Triumph, I'll chose a front runner and buy it and see how my luck goes.

Seems to me to be a less frustratig course of action than trying to make an imperfect system perfect.

RSTPerformance
03-14-2004, 02:33 AM
That idea is even worse than moving the old RX-7 from ITA to ITB...

Read this posting about the RX-7 move... all my thoughts apply to this proposed reclasification as well

Raymond "sorry but I am not in support" Blethen

Geo
03-14-2004, 02:52 AM
The 8v 944 has nearly the same spec as the single cam 240SX.

If you look at the weight/power of the leading ITA cars it's a really good fit. Add some weight for the larger brakes and I think it's a damned good fit.

To show just how poor a fit it is in ITS, look at the weight/power of the 944S and compare it with the 8v 944.

I'll support your request and not because I'm building one. I'll support it because it makes sense when comparing it to other cars in ITS and ITA.


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

JLawton
03-14-2004, 08:54 AM
If that change happens I'll be P.O.ed!!! I just got rid of my 944 knowing it would NEVER be competive in ITS (at least in the Norhteast). Even with a Milledge engine (which I couldn't afford) and done to the extent of the rules, driven by some good drivers (not me), a 944 would be in the mix in ITA and almost 2 seconds off the leaders in ITS at Limerock.

My 83 started with 143HP. That can't compare to the 325 or 944S........ Plus the fact it is VERY difficult to get the car down to the min weight legaly.

Good luck, but don't bank on it!!

------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi

JeffYoung
03-14-2004, 11:33 AM
George, for the sake of discussion, not to argue, couldn't you make that same argument (a power to weight argument that they belong in A) for about 50% of the cars in ITS?

There is more to a car's competitiveness than just hp and weight. Brakes, suspension type, intangibles, etc. 944 stock is about what, 145 hp? With a great stock suspension and brakes. In IT trim, I know it sees less gains than others, but it still should make 160-170 hp.

924Guy
03-14-2004, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by JeffYoung:
George, for the sake of discussion, not to argue, couldn't you make that same argument (a power to weight argument that they belong in A) for about 50% of the cars in ITS?

There is more to a car's competitiveness than just hp and weight. Brakes, suspension type, intangibles, etc. 944 stock is about what, 145 hp? With a great stock suspension and brakes. In IT trim, I know it sees less gains than others, but it still should make 160-170 hp.




Yeah, hey, yet another reason (IMO) to push the issue of correcting all these classification messes by bombarding the Club Racing Board with reclass requests. I think the 944'd make a good ITA car, and I'm an ITA driver! Too bad I have an ITB car.

Hmmm, let's see... 170hp and 2710lbs... well, it might almost be able to keep up with a 150hp, 2100lb CRX... maybe. Still will be hosed on the short tracks, but then, that's why we call it ITCRX around here!

------------------
Vaughan Scott
Detroit Region #280052
'79 924 #77 ITA/GTS1
www.vaughanscott.com

JeffYoung
03-14-2004, 12:50 PM
Guys, I do understand the frustration, trust me. My car is a lot like a 944 in a lot of ways. In some respects, torque for example, it is an ITS class leader. In others, braking, rear suspension, it is not. Doubtful I could ever run with a well prepped Second Gen RX7 or E36 BMW.

But does a 944 or a TR8 belong in ITA, as ITA is presently constituted? I just don't see it. Moving those cars into A would be as big a mistake as classing the E36 at the weight it was classed. So, net improvement to the whole IT scheme is zero.

A more viable option in some ways is a new class between S and A. However, you do that and you start heading down the road towards what you have in NASA, which is a "class for everything" and smaller effective car fields for your class.

I like large IT fields. I get to race with slow S cars, ITAs and IT7s. That's perfectly acceptable to me, I have fun doing it.

I just don't see anything "broke" enough about this system to either (a) make small piecemeal changes that just cause other problems or (B) make wholesale revisions.

Jake
03-14-2004, 01:19 PM
I'd hate to see another IT (low-cost racing) class dominated by another Porsche or BMW, but that said - if the numbers make sence it should definatly be considered. But I sincerely hope that it gets in line AFTER Greg's poor little ITS Datsun.

Geo
03-14-2004, 01:21 PM
I probably shouldn't have opened my mouth.

I'll just say that I'm a fan of having like cars classified together. This is not 100% possible (e.g., what other car is like the CRX), but it should be mostly possible.

And yes, that is a problem at this time (i.e. like cars are not necessarily classified together).


------------------
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 March 14, 2004).]

lateapex911
03-14-2004, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by 924Guy:

Hmmm, let's see... 170hp and 2710lbs... well, it might almost be able to keep up with a 150hp, 2100lb CRX... maybe. Still will be hosed on the short tracks, but then, that's why we call it ITCRX around here!



Thank GOD, the CRX doesn't have 150 WhP! That would be a p/w ratio of 14:1. An RX-7 (120, 2380) is about 20. An Integra is (a bit of a guess) is mid 17s. The CRX is about 17.4. The 944, (170? 2710) is 15.94.

Big brakes, great suspension, and IRS make this a formidable contender. Perhaps PCAs are a better outlet for this one.

Geo, sorry to drag this up, but didn't you yourself make the case that 944s were classed properly, and were winning races, in a thread here about a year ago?

I submit that there are far better candidates for inclusion in ITA, (Nissan NX2000, the Sentra SER, the NEON) than the 944. If a jump to A is to be considered, and if staying in S isn't possible with a weight break (due to the inability to get down legally), how does an ITA weight of 2980 sound? (2980/170 = p/w of 17.53)

I think to examine this further, we need real dyno numbers. Stock is 145, rumour has it at 170, and the standard bump is 166.5. So, what's the real number?

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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited March 14, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited March 14, 2004).]

ITSRX7
03-14-2004, 08:56 PM
Milledge quotes 185hp at the crank for a full bore ITS 8V motor.

Data from the Northeast shows the 944 running almost a second faster than ITA (Russ Jones) in 2002 against very quick drivers (Serra) until he sold the car.

Some cars are more than the sum of their parts. BMW, Porsche, Honda...

I think it's a decent ITS car, not a record breaker, but not an ITA car either.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region #188967

Fastfred92
03-14-2004, 10:50 PM
Hey Jake, what class is ANY Porsche dominating in SCCA ?????? This is the SCCA, right? Even the poor 914 has no chance in IT, or production or any other class. Do not forget that this is the SCCA, a club started by British sports car guys... who by the way hate Porsches. I would support this move but it will NEVER happen !!!

Geo
03-14-2004, 11:34 PM
Originally posted by lateapex911:
An Integra is (a bit of a guess) is mid 17s.

Poor guess. I'll bet the Integra makes the same power as the 944 at tremendously lower weight.

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

JeffYoung
03-15-2004, 12:01 AM
George, how goes the 944 by the way? Hadn't heard an update in a while.....

Jake
03-15-2004, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by Fastfred92:
Hey Jake, what class is ANY Porsche dominating in SCCA ??????

Good point, they aren't in IT. The Boxters did dominate for a while in Solo2, but that was prior to the Honda S2000. Sorry to lump poor old Porsches in with the bling-bling ITS Bimmers.

lateapex911
03-15-2004, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by Geo:
Poor guess. I'll bet the Integra makes the same power as the 944 at tremendously lower weight.



Really....?
My understanding was the Integra had decent power in the 135 range, but better torque. At the wheels of course. Do you have info leading you to believe a number closer to 160?? At it's weight, that would be a staggering ovrdog.

If the Milledge number is used, and we apply a reduction for drivetrain loss, we're looking at 160 or so, correct?

Too fast for A, a little light for S. Best hope is a thorough weight loss program after a break from PCAs (which is all theoretical at this point!)


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

03-15-2004, 01:29 AM
Looking at these result from the Labor Day double at Summit, the 944 still looks fairly competitive to me.
http://www.wdcr-scca.org/results/results.c...ndex.htm?030801 (http://www.wdcr-scca.org/results/results.cgi/results/index.htm?030801)
If the E-36's were moved to another class, or received the biggest comp adjustments, seems like everyone would be on a fairly level field again. Might bring a lot of cars out of mothballs again for some decent sized fields in ITS again.
The only two drivers to win a race in ITS at Summit in the past 2 years have E-36's and seemingly unlimited budgets. Half the cars(Non-BMW) that used to win, or show at the majority of the races have either been sold or are sitting in the garages gathering dust.

[This message has been edited by 2Many Z's (edited March 15, 2004).]

ITSRX7
03-15-2004, 02:17 AM
Some numbers I have for Built motors:

CRX: 125WHP
Intgra: 135WHP
944: 159WHP (using 15% loss @ 185 crank)
RX-7: 170WHP (128 ft/lb of pavement ripping tourque at 6000 RPM!)

YMMV

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region #188967

JLawton
03-15-2004, 08:54 AM
Although I do think the 944 is out classed in ITS, I also agree this isn't the only car with this problem. I was just speaking from my personal experiance. How many other engine builders out there can get what Jon does from his engines?? I don't know of ANY. And you also pay for that power, A LOT!!

How about if we make everyone happy and get rid of the BMWs??..........Just kidding.....maybe.........



------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi

Geo
03-15-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by lateapex911:
Really....?
My understanding was the Integra had decent power in the 135 range, but better torque. At the wheels of course. Do you have info leading you to believe a number closer to 160?? At it's weight, that would be a staggering ovrdog.

I'd be surprised if a "built to the limit of the rules" Integra engine didn't make pretty close to the 944. The car came with 140bhp stock (vs. 145 for the 944). The Integra should be much more responsive to mods than the 944. One of the problems with comparing numbers with say a Milledge engine is you need to find an engine built to the same level. I doubt the numbers you're hearing are for an engine built to that level.


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

lateapex911
03-15-2004, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
I'd be surprised if a "built to the limit of the rules" Integra engine didn't make pretty close to the 944. The car came with 140bhp stock (vs. 145 for the 944). The Integra should be much more responsive to mods than the 944. One of the problems with comparing numbers with say a Milledge engine is you need to find an engine built to the same level. I doubt the numbers you're hearing are for an engine built to that level.




Veeeeeeeery Interesting...

Andy, I'm sure you know where my 135 figure comes from...do you agree with George that there is that much more "left on the table"?

If that's true Geoge, ITA has a much larger latent problem, as 25 more hp at that weight will be a runaway winner.



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

Greg Amy
03-15-2004, 04:50 PM
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">...do you agree with George that there is that much more \"left on the table\"?</font>

I also know where the number came from, and I *highly doubt* that person has left much on the table, if anything. He has the means, opportunity, and skills to do it properly to the limits, and he wouldn't have done the events he did (and to the distances he drove) with a half-assed engine rebuild.

Of course, he could be pulling our collective legs on the actual number, but regardless of the numerals the results speak for themselves. Incredibly successful, lots of opportunity, but in the end he still didn't beat the CRX, did he? Of course, more results will be availble in a few weeks...

Nope, George, I'm with Jake and Andy on this one: I'll bet a dollar to a donut there's not much more to be had from the ITA Integra engine.

P.S. Hey, why don't you and Carey take a vacation, come up here and stay with us, and see (or participate in) some Regionals in the Northeast? I honestly think your perspective will change...

Greg Amy
03-15-2004, 04:51 PM
(deleted duplicate post...)

[This message has been edited by grega (edited March 15, 2004).]

Geo
03-15-2004, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by grega:
I also know where the number came from, and I *highly doubt* that person has left much on the table, if anything. He has the means, opportunity, and skills to do it properly to the limits, and he wouldn't have done the events he did (and to the distances he drove) with a half-assed engine rebuild.

Of course, he could be pulling our collective legs on the actual number, but regardless of the numerals the results speak for themselves. Incredibly successful, lots of opportunity, but in the end he still didn't beat the CRX, did he? Of course, more results will be availble in a few weeks...

Nope, George, I'm with Jake and Andy on this one: I'll bet a dollar to a donut there's not much more to be had from the ITA Integra engine.

P.S. Hey, why don't you and Carey take a vacation, come up here and stay with us, and see (or participate in) some Regionals in the Northeast? I honestly think your perspective will change...

Well, here is where I'm coming from.....

Lots of people say they have left nothing on the table, yet builders like Milledge, Sunbelt, and other similar truly professional shops seem to regularly get more than even excellent builders can get. Nobody, and I mean nobody seems to be able to evenc come close to Milledge's numbers for a 944.

So, what do you say that if that Integra engine wasn't build by someone like Milledge or Sunbelt we compare it to a top engine not built by Milledge?

Furthermore, let's go back to the 240SX example.... The single cam 240SX is nearly the same spec (look them up) as the 8v 944 and yet is in ITA at a weight lower than the 944 in ITS.

If the SOHC 240SX is an ITA car, so is the 8v 944, especially when you consider the 944S being in ITS.

As for a vacation, thanks for the offer Greg. We won't be able to this year (I'm changing jobs and we are hoping to go to Australia at the end of this year), but I'm already thinking about possible vacations next year and the northeast is a real possibility.


------------------
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 March 15, 2004).]

cherokee
03-16-2004, 10:23 AM
I don't think that the 944 is the problem, just like I don't think the RX-7 is the problem. The problem is in the ITA & ITS classes. Why don't we see these kind of debates for the B & C classes?...Because as someone once said they are frozen in time. Every dog in the pound knows what those old cars are going to get with the mods they are to use. The newer cars (computer cars) we all know that just by playing with the computers you can move the curve all over the place, the problem is that you don't know how high the curve will go. Car X responds well to ECU mods Car Y does not. And until you get someone out there running one you will not know. The BMW needs to be slowed down, the CRX needs to be slowed down, do that and everyone will be happy....until the next new car comes along. Honda and BMW drivers will not like it, but the only other option is to re-make the classes...and that ain't gonna happen.
Open computer cars are new to IT, you are going to need new rules to regulate them.

ITSRX7
03-16-2004, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by lateapex911:
Veeeeeeeery Interesting...

Andy, I'm sure you know where my 135 figure comes from...do you agree with George that there is that much more "left on the table"?




Nope, I don't agree. That motor + that level of prep + that driver equals the fastest lap of the ITA race at the 2003 ARRC...not to mention that I believe that engine builder has engines in cars that hold the track record in ITA at LRP and NHIS. (Tom B. can verify)

The CRX does not stick out like a sore thumb in ITA. The 240SX and Integra are equal when developed and driven well - and the Miata IMHO will be right there soon.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

cherokee
03-16-2004, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by ITSRX7:

The CRX does not stick out like a sore thumb in ITA. The 240SX and Integra are equal when developed and driven well - and the Miata IMHO will be right there soon.

AB


I agree to a point , but the reason for bringing up this move is the same as it is for the 7. Put one car of every make in the field and both 944 and RX-7 would be a top 5-10 car. Yes there is a problem but the overdogs is the problem, not all the other cars behind it.

lateapex911
03-16-2004, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by cherokee:
Car X responds well to ECU mods Car Y does not. And until you get someone out there running one you will not know. The BMW needs to be slowed down, the CRX needs to be slowed down, do that and everyone will be happy....
Open computer cars are new to IT, you are going to need new rules to regulate them.

Item 1: The CRX is only a visible tip of the iceberg. The Acura and the 240 are also issues, albeit in smaller numbers. But I know of numbers of them that are under construction as I type, and will be driven by fast drivers. There is no question that in A, the big dogs are the 240SX, the CRX, the Integra, and to lesser degrees, the Saturn and the Miata. Then there are all the others.

The Integra in question that set the fast race lap at the ARRCs was, I believe, a conservative engine. Hopefully the owner might pop up here an shed some light, but I bet there's a bit more to be had. But not 160!

Item 2: Good point. The ECU rule was a huge dive into a Pandoras box, and really a defacto competition adjustment for cars that were already classed. And as you point out, a crapshoot for cars thet get classified post ECU rule. The solution lies in more post classification flexibility, in the form of PCAs, or in extreme cases, class migration with appropriate changes.


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

lateapex911
03-16-2004, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by cherokee:
I agree to a point , but the reason for bringing up this move is the same as it is for the 7. Put one car of every make in the field and both 944 and RX-7 would be a top 5-10 car. Yes there is a problem but the overdogs is the problem, not all the other cars behind it.



I wish it could be that way....but the problem with A, and the problem with S aren't limited to each class, but are interrelated. The E36 is a bit fast...fine slap a little weight on it, and duck when the owners hear it. Simple. But what about the Neon?? There are huge numbers of them out there, with cages! Not to mention the hordes of fast Honda/Nissan/insert your favorite ripping fast 2 or so litre car here, as well. It will be next to impossible to get them light enough to get the job done in S. And the health of IT depends on this type of car, so what to do? ITA could be the solution.

Throwing weight on the big three in A would be a start for A alone, but now you're faced with throwing more weight, and a lot of it, on these down from S cars.

A bigger picture look at IT, that involves utilizing all the classes, makes more sense.



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

oanglade
03-16-2004, 05:25 PM
There is no way you can use weight ONLY to balance everything out. Some cars would need a lot of lead and some others would not be able to be light enough.

Any way you want to slice it, you end up with adding an extra IT class AND using weight as PCA.

IT used to have more than 4 classes. We got rid of one on one end and now we are stuffing the one on the other end.

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

cherokee
03-16-2004, 05:26 PM
Jake, I agree with you 100%. The IT classes are not setup well at all, In 198x they where in 200x they are not, time and technology has marched on the rules have not or have had a band-aid stuck on them.

I would think that B&C could be squished together, Call it ITO (old cars) http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif I think that you could get these cars all pretty close with some playing around....and it might that car specific adjustments (I know dirty word)...but we are talking about old cars you have a better idea of what is going to happen if you give someone an adjustment. How many new cars are going to fit in B or C, or even cars build in the last 15 years...not many. Then you will have 3 classes to shuffle the existing A&S cars into. I don't think that any existing A or S driver would object to this idea. I doubt that B drivers would, the only ones out in the cold would be the C drivers. They would most likely have to spend more money/time to make whatever mods are in question, or drop a ton of weight on the faster B cars.
This is a problem that is not going to go away, only get worse, and tough/big decisions are going to have to be made.

jjadczak
03-19-2004, 04:00 PM
I'll support your efforts to reclassify the 944 from ITS to ITA and I am part of a team that races 2 Porsche 924's in ITA. Let me know what I need to do. Contact me off the board.

Jeremy