What cars would you add to ITS?

[ITSRX7]

Let's agree that ITS is getting faster. What cars would YOU include if a class popped up between ITS and ITA to filter the myriad of slower S cars out of a non-competitive environment?

I will start:

Current gen Celica GT-S (180hp)
Mercury Cougar V6 FWD (200hp)
Contour SVT (200hp)

What else would be cool/popular?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Geo]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Let's agree that ITS is getting faster. What cars would YOU include if a class popped up between ITS and ITA to filter the myriad of slower S cars out of a non-competitive environment?

I will start:

Current gen Celica GT-S (180hp)
Mercury Cougar V6 FWD (200hp)
Contour SVT (200hp)

What else would be cool/popular?

AB



Z32 NA 300ZX
Most recent NA Supra
E46 323i
Porsche Boxter
Porsche 911 - newer versions with larger engines



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

[Banzai240]

1989-1996 Nissan 300ZX - 222HP @ 6400RPM
190lb/ft @ 4800RPM



[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited November 14, 2003).]

[Banzai240]

Honda S2000
BMW Z3
Altima V6
3rd Gen NA RX-7
VW V6 cars
Honda V6 cars - ex: 1998 Accord 3.0L - 200HP
Eagle Talon/Mitsubishi Eclipse GT




[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited November 14, 2003).]

[RSTPerformance]

1990-1993 Audi Coupe Quattro 20V ~170hp (?)
1996 Audi A4 Quattro 30V~175hp (?)

Just ideas from the Audi camp...


Raymond Blethen

[ITSRX7]

Originally posted by Banzai240:

3rd Gen NA RX-7

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited November 14, 2003).]

If there WAS such a car...

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Nick Leverone]

'89-'96 300ZX, I could easily be swayed back to the Nissan camp if they put those in the class, all good ideas.

------------------
Nick Leverone
04 ITS Mazda Rx-7
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[theenico]

OK Ray, you beat me to it but I will add the '90-'91 Audi 90 quattro 20V sedan. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
If there WAS such a car...
AB


OK, refresh my memory... Wasn't the '93-'9??? RX-7 available w/o turbo??? Were they ALL twin-screwed??? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

If so, then I stand corrected... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/redface.gif

(Would look GOOD out there though!! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif )



[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited November 15, 2003).]

[Bill Miller]

Darin, they were all TT cars. I've seen one in GT2, but that was w/ a NA 13B.


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

[Bill Miller]

I'll add a couple to the list

E36 M3
944 S2
'79 - '89 911 (3.0 and 3.2)
Honda S2000
Mercedes CLK/SLK

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

[philstireservice]

94-95 Acura GSR (i know its ITS already)
97-01 Acura Type R

------------------
Phil Phillips
94 Acura Integra GSR #4
ITS/H3/ST1
www.philstireservice.com
Amsoil Dealer
distributor for FireCharger AFFF fire systems
Hoosier Tire Dealer
Toyo Tire Dealer

[bldn10]

This is going to overlap into the general discussion about the class. All those are cool cars and I would enjoy racing one and watching them race. However, that is totally irrelevant to the question of whether they should be classed in ITS. ITS is getting faster and I am all for that as long as it represents evolutionary development of cars that are appropriate for the class. IT, including ITS, has always been intended as an "entry-level" class w/ limited prep. There are always going to be people who will spend inordinate amounts of money on their cars and that is fine too assuming that the rules maintain constraints that are "consistent with class philosophy." The open shock rule was put in place when $200 single adjustables were state of the art, and it should have been reeled in long before it got to the ridiculous extent it did. I did not blame people for putting $5000 worth of shocks on an IT car (and I don't blame anyone for running a high-dollar 325)- I blamed National for putting their avowed aversion to "rules creep" over adherence to the class philosophy. It was all the more frustrating to see them deny trivial things like jack plates, full interior gutting, etc. on grounds of inconsistency w/ class philosophy. GMAFB! Likewise, the 325s just should not have been classed in ITS when they were. IMHO no car that costs $10,000+ for a decent tub should be in ITS. Now that number is pretty arbitrary and would change as prices generally rise. ... Which brings me back on topic - if the cars that have been mentioned can be generally bought today for <$10,000 and there is a decent supply of junkyard and aftermarket parts, by all means, put them in. Wouldn't it be incredible to have a choice of a half dozen or more competitive cars? But some of them clearly do not meet those criteria. I think the fundamental question that must be answered is whether we want to change the class philosophy. I have been out for 2 years and am thinking of getting back in but I am concerned about the condition and direction of the class.

[Knestis]

Anyone besides me worry that maybe the balance of power doesn't really need shifting any further upward? 3.2 911 vs. M3 sounds groovy but does faster necessarily = better racing? Will this get more new drivers on the track? How fast will those cars be on the banks at Lowes and is that a good idea?

EDIT - I'm also curious where the split gets made. Is it the Bimmers and a bunch of new contenders going up and all the rest remaining? There is a huge variation in type/performance currently in S.

K


[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited November 15, 2003).]

[benspeed]

Let me run my Boxster in ITS and it's goodbye Mazda and then go bust after the first problem with the Boxster. The Boxster would smoke anyting legal today. I say, keep the class money managed as much as possible. There's plenty of faster classes already for those who want to drop more $$. I'd prefer to see ITS remain fast, but not open it up to more major $$ invested by the drivers. Personally, I think the BMWs are fast, but the Mazdas still give a great threat for less $. Not so sure that all the talk of BMW dominance is warranted yet. (I may be whining to add weight to 'em next year! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif Plenty of BMWs got beat this year by Mazdas in the NE. Are they better cars? Heck - they're newer. I groove on ITS because it's fast and you don't go broke (not that my wife thinks that!)

Nick - I'd be on the 300ZX in a heartbeat. Unless the Boxster S was in - then I'd go German.

Cheers,

------------------
BenSpeed
#33 ITS RX7
BigSpeed Racing
NNJR

[zracer22]

Originally posted by Knestis:
3.2 911 vs. M3 sounds groovy but does faster necessarily = better racing?


This made some really great racing this season in GTS Challenge www.gtachallenge.com (http://www.gtachallenge.com) We saw some good racing between the two cars. As far as IT is concwerned, if PCA and BMWCCA drivers wanted to race in IT, we would see more of them in ITE, the fact is, they don't want to race in SCCA. (speaking only in general terms, some do race in SCCA IT)

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by zracer22:
....... if PCA and BMWCCA drivers wanted to race in IT, we would see more of them in ITE, the fact is, they don't want to race in SCCA. (speaking only in general terms, some do race in SCCA IT)



I agree that the average PCA guy likes the more genteel "racing" that is regulated in PCA racing. I just think it's too bad that one of the big marques in the sports car world has nothing in IT because every car classed is a huge, expensive uphill battle with little or no reward.

The problem with ITE is the no limits nature of the class. If you want to win in ITE, you better bring a phazer, a light saber and an Uzzi (sp?) to a gunfight. Why bother?

[dickita15]

I must admit with some of these cars added to ITS it would be cool to watch. they would also make me very happy i am in ITA. if these high dollar cars were raced in ITS you know we would be calling the class IT Stupid, (g)
dick

Hmm, guess we don't have it as good as some regions here in the DC Region.
An E-36 has won every MARRS race at Summit Point for the last 3 seasons.The last race I can find in the results by a non-BMW is the Sept. 2000 race.
The closest newly classed car that competes is an Acura Integra GSR that is now getting within 2 seconds of the dominating car/driver that has majority of the BMW wins.

There have been a few requests for the Z32 300ZX to be classed, with the usual "competition potential" reason given for it's not being classed. Guess someone needs to figure out how it can be dismissed when a car that was classed is dominating in many areas.

[This message has been edited by 2Many Z's (edited November 18, 2003).]

[RFloyd]

'84 - '91 Corvette, a la TCC Corvettes but to ITS prep specs - 3300+ lbs, 245 hp - the numbers aren't that far off....... of course something would have to be done about the maximum 7" wide wheels.... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

OK, maybe too much car for ITS, but what about the '84 Vettes? 205 hp throttle body injection.... hmmmm..... ITS?


------------------
Richard Floyd
'86 Acura Integra LS #90
SCCA ITA / NASA ECHC H5

[Banzai240]

Yah know... there is something in the ITCS about the intent of IT including "affordable" cars... Some of these sound like things getting a little out of hand...

[ITSRX7]

Sounds like everyone wants a class ABOVE ITS!!! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
http://www.flatout-motorsports.com/images/200_06_checkered.jpg

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Sounds like everyone wants a class ABOVE ITS!!! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Andy,

Maybe that's the solution--a separate IT class (or subclass) for cars that begin life with a high stiker price.

If IT is intended as an entry-level class with limited prep, why exclude the guy with a worn out 911 or M3 who wants to go WTW with the SCCA guys? His only other options may be a far too expensive rebuild to keep the car on the street, or trading it in on a new one that will never see a track.

Perhaps changing ITE would help.

I think it would make for some great racing. What the heck, throw in a few Lamborghinis and Ferraris too.

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

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Yah know... there is something in the ITCS about the intent of IT including "affordable" cars... Some of these sound like things getting a little out of hand...


Actually Darin, it says "low-cost" and "inexpensive". I didn't see anything about "affordable". But I do find your comment interesting. Where is it that you draw the line?

Andy,

Why not add two classes? Bring back ITGT, and create IT2.


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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Where is it that you draw the line?


That's a VERY good question... Another is IS it FAIR to draw a line? By doing so, you are essentially descriminating against those who have the money...

As with many areas of motorsports, the real trick is to have a set of rules that negate the benefit of spending a lot of money, which I imagine is a lot easier to say than to implement...

DJ

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
...IS it FAIR to draw a line? By doing so, you are essentially descriminating against those who have the money...


I believe the line should be drawn at "limited prep." That's what makes the IT concept so appealing.

A guy wakes up one morning, spots an extra set of wheel he can get is hands on and says, "I'm wanna go racing." Who cares whether it's a Yugo or a Lamborghini? That's what classes are for.

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

[RSTPerformance]

Entire SCCA class structure (for closed wheel cars)!!!

Showroom Stock (SS) (no limit to years eligable)

Improved Touring (IT) (A little more prep than current)

Grand Touring (GT) (Full prepped cars)

All 3 levels would have more classes to encompase any car in the world from that Bugatti that does 251mph to a 1965 Auto Union 3cyl 2 stroke. Ok maybe not that incompasing but you get the point...

For example in IT:
A class faster than ITS,
then ITS,
then a class slower than ITS but faster than ITA,
Then ITA,
Then ITB,
Then ITC,
and possibly ITD

ya this will happen when pigs fly to hell and freeze...

Raymond

[Knestis]

We NEED to get our collective heads around the reality that rules cannot - indirectly - control costs. No way. Never. As long as there is someone with $50K to spend, he/she will find a way to spend it.

The ONLY way that costs can be controlled is to do it directly, with a claim rule - and that will NEVER fly in this organization. Even at that, testing, development, tires, and a dozen other things that make a difference can still be bought.

Further, money DOES buy competitiveness - no question.

With this understood, it's just possible that arguments about cost are proxies for other interests.

The cost of the donor car - at least in the realm that is being discussed here - is a relatively minor issue, once it is "fully prepared."

K

[eh_tony!!!]

3.0 and 3.2 Carerra... yeah, that's be cool. Spank some serious 325 arse...
Also, those cars can be bought for $13-$17K (10K for a rough future IT car). Bottom ends are good for 300K. parts (except engine) are cheap relatively speaking, rotors, calipers, tie rods, etc.

Seriously speaking
DOHC nissan is cool as is the NA DOHC Supra. I also like the SVT contour..
What about the 190HP 4 cylinder M3??
or the 205hp-215 mustang/camaro years??

I wondered how long it would be before someone mentioned the SSB Mustang's and Camaro's....
The V-8 cars no, as they can be put in AS, but the SSB V-6 cars have no place to go when their time is up in SSB...
I think they could be fairly competitive in ITS...One V-6 Camaro was at the last race at Summit and was turning 1:31's in SSB trim, so take a couple seconds off for IT trim and that would put it right with the times the RX-7's, 944's and 240Z's are turning..still slower than the E-36's... but... who knows what they could do in IT trim.

I'd say the SSB Mustangs and Camaro's are probably the cheapest alternative compared to the rest of the cars so far that have been submitted. After all, isn't IT supposed to be where old SS cars go next?

[This message has been edited by 2Many Z's (edited November 19, 2003).]