PDA

View Full Version : 1993 Golf III in ITB



itbgti
01-25-2003, 04:55 PM
What is everyone's thoughts as to this car in ITB in '04? Will it be competitive, and can it keep up to the A2 GTI's? Is 1993 the only model classified? Also, is it guranteed that this car go into ITB, or is it just on the meeting table?

Any input would be great.

Regards,
Alan

Knestis
01-25-2003, 05:45 PM
FasTrack makes it sound like a done deal.

If you (or anyone else) is interested in running a mkIII, get in touch with Jeremy Thoennes (say "tennis") at club racing and find out what it would take to get other years of the same car added to the spec line. I spoke with him about my addition and he was very supportive. I came away believing that he IS interested in shaking loose the IT rules logjam.

I don't know about the details but, on paper, it looks like a solid ITB car.

Kirk

JOESELLSVW
01-26-2003, 03:17 PM
I thought that I just read in the Feb. Fastrack that the Golf 3 platform was ruled as too competitve for ITB and would remain in ITA. Is this for 2003 only and the pan is to move the car to B in '04? has anyone built one of these cars for ITA so far? I didn't see any on the results, but I wasn't really looking either... JOE

Ralf
01-26-2003, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by JOESELLSVW:
I thought that I just read in the Feb. Fastrack that the Golf 3 platform was ruled as too competitve for ITB and would remain in ITA. Is this for 2003 only and the pan is to move the car to B in '04? has anyone built one of these cars for ITA so far? I didn't see any on the results, but I wasn't really looking either... JOE

Joe, since you sell VW's I'm assuming you work at a dealership. Can you do some research and see how many 93 Golfs were actually imported into the US? If I remember correctly there was a problem at the factory and we didn't see any 93's until late '93, almost '94.

Edit: Just did a search on Kelly Blue Book and Edmunds and they only list a 4 door Golf. So if you want to build an A3 car wait until they classify the car into ITB and then ask them to classify the other years eligible.


------------------
Ralf
#53 ITB Golf GT
MiDiv



[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 26, 2003).]

Bill Miller
01-26-2003, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by JOESELLSVW:
I thought that I just read in the Feb. Fastrack that the Golf 3 platform was ruled as too competitve for ITB and would remain in ITA. Is this for 2003 only and the pan is to move the car to B in '04? has anyone built one of these cars for ITA so far? I didn't see any on the results, but I wasn't really looking either... JOE

That's they way I read it Joe. I doubt that anyone has built one. Why would you when you're down on HP to the 1.8 16v cars? Be interesting in ITB though. IIRC, the 2.0 8v motor is a Digifant FI motor and makes 115hp stock. That's 10-12 more than a 1.8 8v, and since it's a Digi car, it can be 'chipped'.

I don't follow the A3 stuff, so I don't know what a 'chipped' 2.0 8v is good for. But, if you can squeeze 20hp out of a 1.8 8v in IT trim, I would expect at least that much from the 2.0 8v. So, that works out to ~135hp and the car only weighs 70# more than the A2 Golf. Should be an interesting car. Be interested in knowing how many people are going to build them for next year?



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Knestis
01-26-2003, 10:49 PM
It's not worth the weight of the pixels that make up the image but, considering that...

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/images/autothority.jpg

K

Bill Miller
01-27-2003, 12:55 AM
Looks like 118-120 for HP and 125-128 for torque. Granted the 2000 2.0 8v is slightly different than the '93 2.0 8v (OBDII and all that).

/edit/ But, more important than the absolute numbers are the gains. Looks to be on the order of 10hp and possibly 12 ft-lb.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited January 26, 2003).]

JOESELLSVW
01-27-2003, 11:08 AM
In 1993 there was a strike at VW's Mexican assembly plant in Puebla that plagued the introduction of the then new generation Golf. It hurt so bad that in that year several VW dealers went out of business. In 1994 things got a little better, but there was wide spread talk of VW leaving the US market. Other things contributed to this besides the strike. Flight 803, if I remember right, was shot down over Lockerbie, Scotland and on board were several key members of VW of North America executive board. This sent VW of NA reeling and it took Ferdinand Piech a few years to right the ship. But I digress, in 94 and 95 VW built the Golf Sport, a 2.0, two door Golf in sporty trim, ie: alloys, different seats, etc. , kind of a pre-GTI without the ABS. In 96 the 2.0 GTI was introduced with ABS and 99.95% came with a sunroof. Part way through the year the sunroof was a standard feature on the GTI. I do like these cars, and I do think that there is good potential for them, but the question remains where? In ITA, outclassed by the 16v, in ITB looks like it would be a very strong car.... the crossflow 2.0 has better low end torque than the 1.8 and more at the top end. Not to mention a stiffer chassis. I'm going to stop now before this becomes another hijacked thread. I'm still unclear though... where's this car going to race in '03...'04? JOE

itbgti
01-27-2003, 05:14 PM
Joe,

Definetly not off topic...thank you very much for the information. Maybe you can give some more:

I believe the 93-99 2.0L motors are all the same, as well as the platform for the car. The only major differences (I believe) were the GTI came with an exterior/interior package and disc rear brakes. Some of the other golfs came with disk rear brakes as well. I do not think it would be difficult to get the entire model year line classified as a single line in the GCR, just as 85-92 Golfs are classified.

Please keep the posts coming.

Ragards,
Alan

Knestis
01-27-2003, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by JOESELLSVW:
... where's this car going to race in '03...'04? JOE

For the balance of '03 it will remain in A. The proposal has gone from the Comp Board to the Board of Directors for final approval and there is a period during which comment can be made to them. It is not truly official yet but the BoD - as I understand it - generally defers to the CB, unless there is a hew and cry from the membership on the issue at hand.

K

Bill Miller
01-27-2003, 08:41 PM
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">It is not truly official yet but the BoD - as I understand it - generally defers to the CB, unless there is a hew and cry from the membership on the issue at hand</font>

And sometimes not even then. The ECU rule is a good example.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Jason Weaver
01-28-2003, 01:00 AM
Hello all, I am a newbie and I wanted to introduce myself. I just recently purchased a 1996 GTi 2.0 8v ITA car, (one of the few that currently exist???)and I have been following the forums for a few days, so I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to chime in.
I orginally had a BMW E36 in mind (I even bought one) until I realized what it would take just to get it on the track. (oneday http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif)At any rate, I really got excited at an affordable already built, current logbook, etc. complete car. I drove the car for the first time at CMP and I absolutely love the car! I was hesitant about getting into a FWD car (only other track experience is in my NSX) but the car really is awesome.
From what I understand from the previous owner, if the car ever got classed down to "B" it would be a real contender (well the car anyway)and I would imagine this will happen at some point. I don't even have my license yet (Feb. hopefully) but as soon as I obtain it I will submit a request for ITB (can't hurt right) or whatever else may be needed to try to get the ball rolling. At any rate, thanks for a great forum and thanks for the space! I look forward to the wealth of knowledge that is here. I'll do my best to add what I can as I learn more about the car etc. Sorry for being so long winded!


------------------
Jason

[This message has been edited by Jason Weaver (edited January 28, 2003).]

Ralf
01-28-2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by Jason Weaver:
Hello all, I am a newbie and I wanted to introduce myself. I just recently purchased a 1996 GTi 2.0 8v ITA car, (one of the few that currently exist???)and I have been following the forums for a few days, so I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to chime in.


Where did the previous owner race this car? According to the ITCS, only the 1993 model is currently listed which means your car isn't legal in SCCA ITA.
Did the previous owner race it in SSC and then convert it to ITA spec before realizing that its not classified in IT and therefore sold it to you? Better do some research fast so you can get the car classified in IT and get to race it this year.


------------------
Ralf
#53 ITB Golf GT
MiDiv

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 28, 2003).]

Knestis
01-28-2003, 02:30 PM
Yup - what he said.

You don't need to make the request to have it listed in ITB, since the '93 looks like it might already be headed that way. It would take as long for that process to take place as it will for the Board of Directors to consider moving the '93.

Your better bet is to request that all of the eligible years (through '98 now) of the car are added to the already-existing classification for the '93. It is a much smaller issue to add cars to the "spec line" than to start from scratch.

You will need technical information to support the contention that the cars are all essentially the same, which shouldn't be too tough for that generation of Golf.

I think others will follow if you lead the way on this...

Best of luck!

Kirk

Bill Miller
01-28-2003, 08:33 PM
One interesting thing is that the SSC cars are listed at 2500# w/o driver yet the ITA version (earlier car but same chassis) is listed at 2350# w/ driver. Nothing like a 330# weight break going from SS to IT (using the 180# avg. driver weight).


C'mon Kirk, you don't think I'd let this pass do you? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Knestis
01-28-2003, 09:36 PM
But, as I am learning by applying the conceptual framework of my dissertation to IT classification trends, the weight spec is grounded ENTIRELY in context.

The Golf III got plunked in A ('cause it was new and scary) but was "lightweighted" as a de facto competition adjustment, knowing that it was in over its head there. The CB responsible for the placement KNEW they had rounded down, whether they paid any attention to the SS wieght or not.

It moves to B at the same weight and...well, I don't have to explain that to YOU. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

My math says that it has an IT-spec power/weight adjusted advantage of about 130# over the MkII, even if it nets out 70# heavier. I would be a little surprised if it can get to the minimum, I think...

K

Bill Miller
01-29-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Knestis:
But, as I am learning by applying the conceptual framework of my dissertation to IT classification trends, the weight spec is grounded ENTIRELY in context.

The Golf III got plunked in A ('cause it was new and scary) but was "lightweighted" as a de facto competition adjustment, knowing that it was in over its head there. The CB responsible for the placement KNEW they had rounded down, whether they paid any attention to the SS wieght or not.

It moves to B at the same weight and...well, I don't have to explain that to YOU. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

My math says that it has an IT-spec power/weight adjusted advantage of about 130# over the MkII, even if it nets out 70# heavier. I would be a little surprised if it can get to the minimum, I think...

K

Ahhhh, I think you may be onto something. But since the CB does not want to be forthcoming w/ the IT weight specification process, you cannot assume that the A3 Golf was intentionally rounded down as a defacto comp. adjustment. As I said in another thread, since the botched the A2 Jetta GLI specs so bad, I could just as easily chalk the ITA weight of the A3 Golf up to nobody doing their research. Hey, they dropped the weight on the ITS VR6 Corrado because it was 'wrong'. It will be interesting to see if the weight is changed. Either way, I'm going to ask why or why not. I know they didn't change the weight on the Accord when it went from B to A.

And, here is another question. Just how many people have actually built and raced an A3 Golf in ITA? Where's that 'fully developed' example to show that it's not competetive in ITA? Where's the data to support the 'lack of comp. potential'? Kind of reminds me of when the 2.0 911 and the 914-6 went from limited prep EP to full prep EP overnight. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

I haven't spoken w/ Jeremy lately, but has he given any indication that the CB is going to be taken to task to get rid of the perception of lack of objectivity?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Bildon
01-29-2003, 10:22 PM
>>Where's that 'fully developed' example to show that it's not competetive in ITA?

Bill, I don't know of any A3s in ITA.
But we all know why. It would have been a complete waste of money to prepare one and then have to run against a far lighter CRX with more HP.

However, now that it's in "B"... this looks like a worthy candidate for class honors...finally VW gets a 2L to chase the Volvos with!

The more I think about it, we may just do an A3!

------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport (http://www.bildon.com)
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2002 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

Knestis
01-29-2003, 10:36 PM
I would like to go on record as saying that this recent development has me a little PO'd. I thought that I had my plans solidified and this option comes along and, frankly, it is a better on in some ways.

Grumble.

K

Bill Miller
01-29-2003, 11:19 PM
Bill,

I was wondering when you were going to chime in on this. Paulo DeCauto (sp?) has done a good job the last couple of years in the MARRS series w/ his A2 GTI against Broring's old Volvo. And we all know what Chris Albin has done w/ his A2. Should be really interesting.

Any comments on the A3 suspension geometry/handling vs. the A2?

BTW, how's the Corrado comming?

Kirk,

You shouldn't be PO'd, you should be happy that this came along before you started the other car! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Ryan Williams
01-29-2003, 11:52 PM
Dear Bill & Bill: Having raced an A1 Rabbit for many years in ITC and now H-Production, I have a very good feel of the A1 suspension. I also drive a '95 VW Golf Sport on the street, and I am amazed at the amount of improvement made by VW with the A3 platform. Before getting the A3 Golf, I drove an A1 Rabbit (slightly modified). The A3 stock platform is so much better than the older platforms. I suspect with some fine tuning, the A3 would handle great. Regards, Ryan.

JOESELLSVW
01-29-2003, 11:53 PM
I've already started on on a new A2 tub as a replacement for my current A2. I'm now thinking about sidelining this in favor of an A3 for next year. Haven't committed any serious money to the new tub.. just striped it out and tacked the sunroof after cutting out the frame. Most of the sound deadening is out. I want to use a Digi setup, but I like the idea of the A3 chassis. The landscape of ITB wil then hold three generations of Golf/GTI models. Pretty cool if you're a VW fan. It almost has the making of a GTI class? Old vs new, light vs heavy, what's everybody think? When will we know about the final decision on this? These cars are getting cheap... as you can tell by my name I sell cars for a living and have a special place in my heart (wallet too!) for VW's...JOE

Knestis
01-30-2003, 12:18 AM
Grumble.

http://www.cars.com/search/used/cc/standar...f=kbb&src=&cid= (http://www.cars.com/search/used/cc/standard/results/single/ld/detail.jhtml?paId=119527006&aff=kbb&src=&cid=)

Grumble, grumble.

Bill Miller
01-30-2003, 11:20 PM
So buy it Kirk. You can probably sell the airbags out of it and damn near pay for the car! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

lateapex911
01-31-2003, 04:07 AM
Simple question here. How much power is the A3 engine expected to produce in IT trim??? Kirk's chart looked like 125 Hp, but that chart probably doesn't apply here. If it's true, then what do you guys think the CRX is making that has made the A3 such a bad choice for ITA?

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

Knestis
01-31-2003, 12:12 PM
121-125 HP at the wheels (per Jackson Racing). Bigger issue is that it weighs 200+ pounds less than the Golf (and most other stuff)...
K

EDIT - Ooh, bad thought. Now limited to 14x6" wheels rather than 14x7. Not that 7" wheels were easy to find or anything!

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited January 31, 2003).]

Bill Miller
01-31-2003, 11:57 PM
Kirk,

Most of the guys that I know that run ITA VWs use 14x6 wheels anyway. BTW, saw a '95 Golf Sport in the paper today for $2200. 5spd, 90k miles.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Fastfred92
02-03-2003, 12:25 PM
I was the owner of the A3 in ITA that Jason Weaver now owns and yes it is leagl in ITA (93 -96) for last year. I also requested SCCA revise its class no less than 4 times and as those of you who saw fasttrack jan 03 can see it was turned down all 4 times. I sold the car to Jason after fully explaining to him that it is not a good ITA car but would be great in B and as a school car. Now it appears SCCA will reclassify. This is great because I have raced both A1, A2 and A3 and the chassis of the A3 is much better.. The reason that the A3 makes a bad ITA car is HP.... The Miata's and CRX both ( we dont even want to mention the 240 Nissan ) make over 130 hp at the wheels and my A3 would reach 109-112 with the legal mods. Plus a CRX, 240 or Miata have a huge areo advantage. The engine could be developed a bit more but as someone else said why? when you will never keep pace in ITA. If ( When ) SCCA agrees it will be in 04 and I would bet it will be the car to have in ITB.. I would like to have mine back!

Ralf
02-03-2003, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by Fastfred92:
I was the owner of the A3 in ITA that Jason Weaver now owns and yes it is leagl in ITA (93 -96) for last year.

Was there a Fast Track change? I don't have a 2003 GCR so I'm going by what my 2002 GCR stated.




------------------
Ralf
#53 ITB Golf GT
MiDiv

Fastfred92
02-03-2003, 02:25 PM
it was addressed by fasttrack and I even confirmed with Aaron Coalwell early in 2002 myself while trying to get changes by the comp board. BTY SCCA had the following figures used to establish old SS classifications: A2 Golf was 20.96 lbs per hp and A3 Golf was 22.39 lbs per hp... kinda makes you wonder why A3 was in ITA to begin with?

lateapex911
02-03-2003, 10:07 PM
If the 125 Hp is accurate, it yeilds a power to weight ratio of 18.8 for the A3. If the CRX does indeed make 130 WHP (I've been told by CRX guys that the figure is 120, but consider the source!), then the p/w ratio nets out at 16.46.

As a guy with a car that is theoretically at 19.83, I wonder, how come I'm not getting moved too?

Actually, I should be clearer. Why the A3? Or...why not the entire rest of the class that are clearly inferior.

When you start moving individual cars, and leaving others that are equal or worse, you open up an ugly can of worms. (No doubt cries of "favoritism" and "backroom politics" could be heard) Would bringing the cars that are the "spoilers" back to the fold be a better idea? (AKA, some form of adjustment to rectify improper initial weight setting)


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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited February 04, 2003).]

itbgti
02-04-2003, 09:48 AM
HP to weight ratio's are not the only thing to look at when classifying a car. There are plenty of other factors that will make/break a "fast" car.

I believe that this car should have never been placed in ITA, and the board is realizing it. This is not a change due to the car becoming uncompetitive over time; since day 1, the car should have never been there. It is going to be and should have always been a perfect fit for ITB. IMHO

Regards,
Alan

Bill Miller
02-04-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by itbgti:
HP to weight ratio's are not the only thing to look at when classifying a car. There are plenty of other factors that will make/break a "fast" car.

I believe that this car should have never been placed in ITA, and the board is realizing it. This is not a change due to the car becoming uncompetitive over time; since day 1, the car should have never been there. It is going to be and should have always been a perfect fit for ITB. IMHO

Regards,
Alan

Alan,

Believe me, I hear what you're saying. But, how do you tell a 1.7 ITB Rabbit that he's now got to race against a 2.0 ITB A3 w/ a better suspension geometry. It's bad enough they have to race against the A2 and A1 GTIs. If they're moving the A3 Golf to ITB, they should move the 1.7 Rabbit/Scirocco to ITC. You want to talk about a car that never had a chance where it was classed!



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Knestis
02-04-2003, 07:32 PM
And the '92-95 Civic DX (108hp) can go to B as well. By the time this all shakes out, the landscape might be very different. Best make hay while the sun shines, and get those requests in before inertia sets in again...

Kirk

lateapex911
02-04-2003, 09:57 PM
Originally posted by itbgti:
HP to weight ratio's are not the only thing to look at when classifying a car. There are plenty of other factors that will make/break a "fast" car.

I believe that this car should have never been placed in ITA, and the board is realizing it. This is not a change due to the car becoming uncompetitive over time; since day 1, the car should have never been there. It is going to be and should have always been a perfect fit for ITB. IMHO

Regards,
Alan

True, but it's easy to do your passing on the straight, and not too tough to be wide in the corners. Cars with good p/w ratios often win races, and cars that handle win (sometimes) qualifying.

The point is, the car isn't
exactly a backmarker in ITA. What will all those guys who got whipped by an A3 (and there were plenty) have to say? Can you blame them?


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

itbgti
02-05-2003, 10:07 AM
Great Topic!!!

Bill- Agreed, the 1.7 has NO chance of ever winning a B race...the A1/A2 GTI's alone place the 1.7 at the back of the pack. Maybe this one should be moved to ITC, I do not have enough knowledge on it to say a Yes/No.

Jake- I see your point, and no, I could not blame people for being upset about something like moving the A3 to ITB. However, anything that is done, there were always be a group who disagrees. Heck, if there wasn't, we could call this UtopianSCCA. I still strongly feel that moving the A3 to ITB will make for some GREAT racing. With all cars, you will have some A3s that are fast, some that are midpack, and some that are slow. Drivers and prep levels will assist in determining that. By adding the A3 to ITB, you are not destroying the class, just adding to it...the A3 will not be dominate, I think the A2's will be able to keep up, A1's will stay in the mix, Volvo's will have no problem with this, McMahon and the Opel will still win, BMW 318 should still hang, Audi's will do just fine...This change will not prompt everyone to ditch there car and build an A3, it will just be another option.

Regards,
Alan

Fastfred92
02-05-2003, 11:25 AM
I must agree with Alan,.. the A3 will be a good B car but dont expect it to crush the field ( E36 / ITS like ) As I said, I ran a A3 in ITA last year and turned lap times that would put me in the the top 3 or 4 of the B field most weeks but still got passed by the Volvos on long straights and a heck of a time keeping up with a hot A2 GTI. The only notable advantage I saw was in brake zones, the A3 really stops well. With the time and development that the A2 has had ( and aftermarket parts support) the A3 will be a winner but remember as every year passes, SCCA will class newer / faster cars in IT.

Bill Miller
02-05-2003, 09:13 PM
I'll just throw this out for fun. Anybody got A3 Golf times comparted to an Accord at the same track??

(crawls quietly away to watch from a safe distance)

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

lateapex911
02-05-2003, 10:21 PM
Sure, Bill, you HAD to ask! I was going to throw that one in the mix but thought ...."nooooooooo don't go there"!

The Pandoras box has officially been opened.

Here in the NE, I think the Accord which you refer to does well for himself, but relative to ITA, it's obvious that the car is not a front runner. (No offense, Peter!...I'm not either!) The one late model GTI that runs at LRP has the Accord pretty well covered.



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

Bill Miller
02-06-2003, 07:41 AM
Sorry Jake, just had to do it. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

BTW, I still want to know where that 'full developed' [sic] A3 Golf is! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

(Looks at Kirk and says, "You know, this stick-poking thing can be fun.")

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Knestis
02-06-2003, 10:02 PM
Hey, don't you be running with that thing in here!

tschwenke
02-07-2003, 01:17 PM
I think that the 125 at the wheel is a more accurate number also. I know what my A2 does and the 2L will do more. Not only that but the integral of the torque curve will yield a very powerful car. I don't care about that extra weight - it counts, but not much. I have come in heavy after a race and still managed good times. (They have it a 2350?)

With the accord being moved out, there is no reason this should be moved in. I know they need/want some new cars, but why not break up the A and S cars? B has a very good mix of cars and in my eyes, the A3 could dominate.

Knestis
02-07-2003, 09:15 PM
Okay - (Joe and others) chime in. All things considered, which year/model gets the nod as the best option? Assume for a minute that (a) confirmation of the move to A comes this year, and (B) that it wouldn't be a big deal to get the rest of the eligible-year MkIII Golfs listed once that happens.

Gear ratios? Sunroof? ABS (yeah, I know but I wouldn't just use the car for IT)? Rear discs? What else?

Kirk

JOESELLSVW
02-08-2003, 02:54 AM
I think you meant to ay "the move to B" instead of "a", I'll forgive you. HA HA. As for gear ratios, ABA engines only came with AMC, CHE, DFQ series 020 transmissions. All of which have the same gear rations and final drive. The other 020 gearboxes came in the EcoDiesel and the Golf CL, both of which were Canadian cars, not for US consumption. So I guess there's no gearbox advantage. As for SR or not, I'd rather have a car without for the lower CG, but don't suggest holding your breath waiting for one. Getting a 93 or early 94 car could have the advantage of not being airbag equipped. Changing the steering wheels of the airbag cars isn't bad, but the passenger side airbag presents a problem in removing if you choose to do so. Selling the airbags is a way of recouping some of the cost of this "newer" IT model. The passenger airbag cover is integrated into the dash design. I'll let you know when I cross that bridge abouthow difficult it is to remove and retain the stock appearance. The question of the discs is also up in the air. I'm thinking that the weight distribution is a little better on the A3 cars (blind hope?) and this discs won't be overkill like o the A2 body cars. As for the ABS, without consulting my GCR, does ABS have to be removed or just disabled? What about the power steering rack? All of these cars came with power steering.... does his stay? More fuel on the fire... Joe P.S. Soon to be offered to a good home...87 Golf tub, welded sunroof, everything stripped out ready to be finished. I think I'll do an A3, but if you're on a budget and want a next to free start of a race car let me know...

Knestis
02-08-2003, 10:52 AM
Sorry - yeah, "move to B". Duh. If every US-spec Golf III came with power steering, it has to be there.

ABS has to be disabled (disconnect/remove wheel sensors) but not necessarily removed. I like the idea of having it around for enduros and other events where IT rules aren't necessarily adhered to.

You might be the perfect guy (Joe) to make the request to list the other years, since you have access to all of the factory data to fill out the technical spec sheets. I just went through the process and some of the info required is pretty arcane - and I didn't want to submit an incomplete application and run the (increased) risk of getting tabled...

Email me ([email protected]) if you want to do this and I'll send copies of the blank forms and info on the process.

K

PS - it's funny but one of the very first questions that I asked on this forum (30+ months ago) was whether anyone was running the Golf III in ITA and if not, if it might be competitive.

JOESELLSVW
02-08-2003, 12:50 PM
I'd be willing to do the leg work to get the other years on the same line as the 93 cars. please send me the forms... or tell me if I can download them off of the SCCA site. My email is [email protected] or my home address is 19 Price St. West Chester Pa 19382. The question would be though if we are asking the board to "see" the 96-early 99 GTI 4 cyl models the same as the earlier Golf Sport models. The differences being the ABS. If I remember correctly, theGolf Sports also had rear drums... have to check on this though. I'll also check on the VIN designations. I don't know if the same "loophole" that exists with the A2 cars withVIN designation between GTI and two door Golf allowing a GTI to "made" from a 0tandard Golf. I don't want to drop the ball and ask the board to look at too many things at once. I'm looking for a clean A3 as we speak. I figure I can start on the car as an autox car and see how it can progress as we get the other years classified. JOE

Bill Miller
02-08-2003, 02:15 PM
You 'da man Joe!!!

BTW, I checked the 12 Hour entries and didn't see your name listed. Not running this year???

Next step, once it's classed in ITB, is to get it classed as a limited-prep GProd car! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

JOESELLSVW
02-08-2003, 07:28 PM
Hey Bill, Yeah I was away at the beginning of the year and in fact if you look at the Endurance Racing posts on this page I was asking about the 12 HR back in Dec. I faxed my application and credit card number in.. but no entry. I'm thinking that I did it too early? I'll have to talk with the powers that be. If I can't work something out I'll see about renting a ride. My co drivers from last year want to do it, but have schedule conflicts. Hopefully I can make some headway on this A3 thing. I'm thinking abut going ahead and buiding one of these cars. Hey by the way, there is a GT4 Wabbit on EBay. last I saw it was up to $637. what a buy! There's also the IT rabbit from the NE region as well as another ITB prepped (?) A1 on E Bay. Lotsa VW's for sale.... hopefully we'll see some more new drivers this season. I'm thinking of doing the VIR enduro in two weeks... interested? Bill? Kirk? Dave? My car should be ready... God knows I've replacing it piece by piece! JOE

Bill Miller
02-08-2003, 09:31 PM
Joe,

I don't think they started taking entries until 1/1/03, so if you sent it in before that, it was too early. Looks like there are already several cars on the 'waiting list'. I know when we talked last year, you said you wanted to run again, w/ a better setup. I was going to offer to crew-chief the car for you, if you needed one.

Got the links to those ebay cars?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Corradoracer
03-11-2003, 12:07 AM
Maybe one of you guys can tell me were to find one of these cars. I have looked for months for a good two-door 1993 street car, good luck.

------------------
Gary Semerdjian
#98 Corrado ITS

Knestis
03-11-2003, 01:27 AM
Someone just needs to take the hour required to fill out the paperwork to request classification of all eligible years. Then it wouldn't be necessary to find a rare '93. Golf and GTI, 2-door and 4-door, all at the same weight...

Kirk

Bill Miller
03-11-2003, 05:14 AM
Originally posted by Knestis:
Someone just needs to take the hour required to fill out the paperwork to request classification of all eligible years. Then it wouldn't be necessary to find a rare '93. Golf and GTI, 2-door and 4-door, all at the same weight...

Kirk

Kirk,

I'm not really up on the A3 model line, but I'm not really crazy about doing what they did w/ the A2 cars in ITB. I think they got forced into that because there was no way to tell the cars apart vis-a-vis the VIN#. Also, I don't know what the differences were between the 8v GTI and the regular Golf (how many 8v A3 GTI's did they make? Joe?). Most were 16v cars or VR6 cars. Wait, that's it, class the A3 GTI VR6 in ITB!!!!



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

HOOSER 99
03-11-2003, 09:41 AM
CORRADORACER If you keep checking cars.com you might have some luck. As far as finding a 93 maybe not, but hopefully we can get the newer ones class. good luck

jerry monaghan

------------------
jerry monaghan

shwah
03-11-2003, 10:22 AM
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">Also, I don't know what the differences were between the 8v GTI and the regular Golf (how many 8v A3 GTI's did they make? Joe?). Most were 16v cars or VR6 cars. Wait, that's it, class the A3 GTI VR6 in ITB!!!</font>

In the A2 cars - the later 8V GTI and regular Golf are identical from 1989 or 90 on (for the purposes of IT). Same motor, same brakes, same body.

There were no 16V A3 cars. The 1993 Golf Sport is what became the 4 cyl 8v GTI in later years for the A3 body.

I like having them all lumped onto one line, because it makes a lot more cars available for road racing. The only differences are that a few cars have rear disk brakes (again this is the only difference that matters for IT considerations - there were likely some suspension differences, but we don't really care about that).

Chris

JOESELLSVW
03-11-2003, 02:31 PM
The paperwork for Topeka will be going out this week. Basically there are no differences in the 4 cyl GTI cars and the Golfs other than 2 vs 4 doors, and the GTI's had rear disc brakes (not a real issue) and ABS, again not an IT issue. Powertrain was identical, no change in hp or torque spec, gear ratios all the same. The differences in these cars are all either cosmetic, ie: white faced gauges, different interiors etc. The Golf Sports are desirable because of the possiblility of getting one w/o a sunroof and the fact that they didn't have ABS... one less piece of work to do in setting up the car. If you come across an early 94 car, it won't have airbags, however, halfway through the year the airbags were introduced. I'm trying to get some acurate info on the differences in the VIN codes that differentiate the Golfs from the GTI's, however I'm not sure how much value it'd have since it's quite obvious... 2/4 doors. VW also d1d a Golf City edition that would be very desireable to make into a race car... these cars were "dedcontented" This means that they didn't have sunroofs or a/c like the oother A3 cars. This was an ill fated marketing attempt to lower the base model price on the new VW's because of lack of price competitveness with the Asian brands. Good luck finding one of those! JOE

itbgti
03-11-2003, 03:22 PM
Joe,

Thank you VERY much for doing the leg work and sending out the paperwork...I did not know someone had already taken that step. Please be sure to post here with any responses you receive. Once again, THANKS!

Regards,
Alan

edit: Joe, can you post here what you sent? I am curious to see if you asked for all the model years, and what supporting materials you used. Thanks!

[This message has been edited by itbgti (edited March 11, 2003).]

HOOSER 99
03-11-2003, 05:16 PM
There is a 95 gti with salvage title on ebay at 500.00 and a 97 with door damage on cars.com for 1700.00. I think both are in Maryland.
Does anybody know the overall length of a 2 door A3 or where I can find out.

thanks jerry



------------------
jerry monaghan
itb 99

JOESELLSVW
03-11-2003, 06:51 PM
Hey, stay away from that car! Lol! That's mine! It's a no reserve auction for a car that needs some body work as well as a motor and trans. It does have a sunroof however. JOE

itbgti
03-11-2003, 07:47 PM
Hey Jerry, don't go the A3 route....that was my idea http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif Hope everything is going well and to see you this year at LRP (although I will not be on track, I will be there)

Joe,

If you could respond to my above post, that would be great...sorry to be a pest, but I have a GREAT interest in this topic....cough, cough, wink, wink

Thanks,
Alan

JOESELLSVW
03-11-2003, 07:59 PM
I'm about to send it out if I can put together the time to complete some of the details! I'm asking for all Golf 4 cyl two door hatchback models from 93-99 to be specified. I know that they won't specify the later models, but I'm going out of my way to make a point as a favor to anyone who'll have to do this later that the cars are the same. I wasn't going to ask to have the Jetta or Golf GL four door cars included, but if some other people would like for me to do so I will. There are no mechanical differences regaring engine/trans spec. Just the the stuff that you can see.... Hopefully later in the week I'll get this stuff up and ready. JOE

Knestis
03-11-2003, 08:38 PM
I am a pessimist but I would recommend NOT including ineligible years. I don't know that the CB has the option of amending your proposal to correct the years or if instead, it might be a poison pill that kills the entire proposal. Only ask for things that they can't say "no" to...

Kirk

HOOSER 99
03-11-2003, 09:28 PM
Allan--Congratulations on your upcoming nuptials. Just starting the second 25 years of my life sentence and its been just great. Hope you can get out a couple of times.

Joe--Don't worry, I bought an A3 this past Monday. Pros--looks to be in good shape and was cheep Con--requires a road trip from NY to balmy Milwaukee to get it. Thanks for puttting that stuff together and if I can help let me know

jerry

Corradoracer
03-12-2003, 02:44 AM
Guy’s, check out this great site. I have used this company and found price, service and warranty are one of the best in my area. They will ship any were in the US. www.specializedgerman.com (http://www.specializedgerman.com)

Knestis, being a pessimist with SCCA is the wrong approach. We all have to remember this is our club and we are members with a voice. Car classifications and rule changes are possible only if we act as a team. United one group has a stronger chance in making changes, than an individual.

For years SCCA has made mistakes with car classification and weight, this car is a good example, Corrado is another. If you don’t ask you won’t get.



------------------
Gary Semerdjian
#98 Corrado ITS

Knestis
03-12-2003, 09:46 AM
Me, a pessimist? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

If that were truly the case, I wouldn't have stuck it out for so long and wouldn't continue to try to change things.

I just think it's asking for trouble to include model years in the request that aren't age-eligible, that's all. Picture these two scenarios:

1. (CB) "Next we have a request to classify Golf/GTI III, model years '94-98. No problem, since the specs are all the same as the already classified '93. All in favor?"

2. (CB) "Next we have a request to classify Golf/GTI III, model years '94-99. Heck, we can't do that - 1999 model's too new so isn't eligible. Denied. Next item..."

K

itbgti
03-12-2003, 10:19 AM
Joe,

I would agree with Kirk that the request should only contain legal model years, 93-98. I would also ask that you do include the four door golfs, just so a second request later on does not have to be done. If this four door request is going to muddy the water, leave it out.

Thanks again,
Alan

Dave Zaslow
03-12-2003, 10:21 AM
Joel,

I also recommend keeping your request on a narrow track. Other requests can be made later to supplement the original. I would also not ask for the Jetta as the ITA Jetta has not been the subject of the reclassification and the weight (in ITA) is greater.

I have found no meaningful differences in the basics amongst the various 93-96 models, other than the switch to OBDII in early-to-mid 96 build vehicles. The idle controls/throttle body had some changes at that time. Side intrusion seems to have been redesigned for 95. The first 2 door models appear in 94 as a GL. 95 has a GL and a Sport. The sport has discs in back. In 96 the Sport becomes the GTI (4cyl). The 97's started to get contented to catch up to the competition.

When does the "plus axle" start to come into play, and does it affect the 4 cyl cars?

There is also a hint at a different head at edmunds.com....

"What's New for 1997
....Meanwhile, the 115-horsepower inline four that powers the base GTI is fitted with a new cylinder head for smoother power delivery. "

But no other source I have found shows a different horsepower or torque rating. So perhaps we need to do more research.

For 1997 the 037 103 351 N is the 49 state head while 351 P is for California.

For 1996 the 037 103 351 J and M are the 49 state heads while 351 P is for California.

All take the same headgaskets: 037 103 383 M or N

If Mr. T DeRonne is still hanging around here, do you have access to these MVMA sheets?

Good luck to all.

Dave Z

PS: Joel, If you need help with those forms I'll help in what I can. [email protected]


[This message has been edited by Dave Zaslow (edited March 12, 2003).]

tderonne
03-12-2003, 11:33 AM
Nothing that new for Volkswagen.

I'll double check for hardcopies, but it doesn't look good...

JOESELLSVW
03-12-2003, 12:11 PM
Someone had asked the overall length of the Golf.... 160.4 in.

I'm currently going on the Technical Specifications from VW that were part of the 1997 Product Guide that I got as a salesman.
I'm still in friendly contact with the local VW area rep who'll supply me with the needed technical data.
One of the "issues" that I've come upon is weight. I was surprised to learn that the GTI base weight is 2566 lbs and the Golf is 2540. I'm assuming that this is the difference between the GTIs having a standard sunroof and it being optional on the Golf.
I'll complile what I have and either post it or email it to any interestede parties later this week. JOE

Dave Zaslow
03-12-2003, 01:12 PM
Joe,

If you need something from an A3 Bentley manual I have access.

Dave Z

[This message has been edited by Dave Zaslow (edited March 13, 2003).]

JOESELLSVW
03-12-2003, 03:05 PM
Got the manual so I'm ok there. JOE

Bill Miller
03-12-2003, 09:20 PM
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">For years SCCA has made mistakes with car classification and weight, this car is a good example, Corrado is another. </font>

Yeah Gary, but they can't seem to recognize them all.

Dave, it's Joe not Joel http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

marker
03-13-2003, 05:57 PM
Hello all. I have been a lurker here for some time, and thought I might add my $.02 worth.

I have run both an ITA Civic, an ITC Scirocco, and am building an ITB Golf now. I have sold parts for years, and have worked at a VW dealer in my time.

I am surprised that the A3 Golf has such a low weight, when compared to an A2 Golf, but I have not personally weighed each example. I am not 100% sure that you could get the A3 to that weight.

I see no difference between the 2 cars' suspensions, as most of the parts are interchangeable. In fact, some are exactly the same. Since the "Plus Axle" geometry is only on VR6 cars, it does not come into play here.

The A3 car has larger front brakes than the A2 car, but some do have rear discs, which would be the same as a rear disc A2. The rear drums on the A3 cars are the same as the 90+ rear drums on A2 cars.

The extra displacement and more advanced engine controls may yield more power and more than overcome the extra weight, but I would want to wait. I am not so sure that the car could be made to meet the min weight.

I still don't think that this car will dominate ITB, but it would fit right in.

Pete Mills

Eric Parham
03-13-2003, 10:30 PM
I've been sidelined for awhile but getting the itch again...

The A3 looks OK on paper, but has a fairly wide gearbox. Since it's much wider than an A2 GTI close-ratio, different R&Ps might be needed for different tracks.

A few hints: The first batch of '93s ALL had rear disks, although the later ones came with drums. Also, the Canadian glovebox slides right in to replace the pass. side airbag. '93s were all 4-doors. '94 2-doors exist but are quite rare. 2-drs are more common for '95-up. I believe the earlier cars had a distributor, while the later ones (at least '96-up) had direct ignition. It's not entirely clear whether they "all" had power steering. My brother's ex-girlfriend had a white '93 Golf "Citi" 4-door that he thinks had a manual rack. I might try to track that car down... There may also have been a switch from a metal intake to a plastic one at some point, but I'll have to do more digging. Oh, and a metal sunroof from an A2 is supposed to bolt in and be lighter than the glass one.

Eric
Yellow/Red #44 ITB Scirocco

Vantage #51
03-14-2003, 12:58 AM
First- Hi Peter Mills Give me a call sometime.
Second - should we be asking for a weight along with classification ?
Our group runs 5 A-2 golf so don't kill these cars completely[value and performance wise]
Just be careful in what you ask for.
Third- our canadian cars are somewhat different,mostly 1.8 litre throttle body
mexican motors,the only two litres are 94+up
GTi and 4 dr GL models.

Knestis
03-14-2003, 01:00 AM
I am really enjoying this strand. Thanks, everyone, for your contributions...

Kirk

Fastfred92
03-14-2003, 06:21 PM
Hey guys, as I said earlier I have built, and raced this car in ITA and have run into all these problems already... I could not meet min weight but I weigh 240 lbs, I was off by 70 lbs dry. All 2.0 ABA motors for US cars had aluminum intakes and all cars for the US ( even the "City" ) had power steering. As for the sunroof it needs to be removed and the legal sheetmetal installed, not the A2 panel,it weighs more than flat stock welded in. If it will help anybody I have the factory parts catalog on my computer and can check items if needed. If you look at the past two years of Fasttrack you will see I requested this change 5 times and have supplied the CB with several pages of specs

Bill Miller
03-14-2003, 07:47 PM
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">If you look at the past two years of Fasttrack you will see I requested this change 5 times and have supplied the CB with several pages of specs </font>

Well, at least you didn't get the "Quit bothering us, the weight is correct" response that all the Rabbit GTI guys keep getting! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Knestis
03-14-2003, 11:35 PM
eBay salvage GTI is still there, at http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...item=2406757916 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2406757916) - currently at $800. Is that one of you guys?

K

Dave Zaslow
03-24-2003, 08:44 AM
Caution, I'm being oblique out of necessity....

1 - I have been led to understand that the comp board /IT Ad Hoc has received letters for and against the reclassification of the A3 into ITB. I have also been led to understand that most have been negative. However you feel about this keep those letters going.

2 - I have also been led to understand that the reclassification may only be for the '93 as originally requested. I have written, as I hope others have, to expand that to the full A3 Golf production run. If that does not happen we will have to request the classification in a later board action.

Again, it is important for you to voice your opinion.

Have Fun!,

Dave Z

Knestis
03-24-2003, 10:24 AM
Of course that is going to be the case that current ITB folks are going to be unhappy - it's the nature of the system.

The other option, should the Golf III move to B not fly, is to rally for support of creating IT2 above A. If the ITA index were returned to a pre-CRX/240sx/IntegraII level, the Golf might be in good company.

K

Bill Miller
03-24-2003, 07:17 PM
Dave,

Are you building a new car??? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

racer-025
03-25-2003, 12:24 AM
I have been reading this A3 post with interest. A lot of you folks have been indicating that certain cars need to get reclassified. Usually down the line. I totally agree. Now if indeed the A3 gets put into ITB then of course I will grumble, jump up and down and perhaps cry a little, but ultamately I will accept it. My little 1.3L Suzuki won't have a chance.

I do believe we need to periodically push the cars down and make way for the newer models. I have been preaching this for years. If we don't, the classes will fade away until nothing is left except spec series. Just like the A3 getting lowered into ITB, I think the 92 Civic Si (1.6L 125hp-VTEC) should be sent down into ITA and de-thrown the CRX. This is just IT evolution and makes sense. So, I will complain about the ITB A3, but when my Swift gets chucked down into ITC, look out.

Dave Zaslow
03-25-2003, 10:06 AM
Bill,

I am seriously thinking about it. For some reason the A3 speaks to me much more than an A2. The Rabbit has been tweaked and rolled. It is still running well, but I wanted to re-shell it after 10 years. No rot Rabbit shells are too rare for me to find within a reasonable distance, or are too expensive because they have been modded. I am tired of looking at "no rot" cars with large holes in the crushed rocker panels. The Rabbit racecars that are for sale in the northeast are all ones I have beaten. I could do an A2 easily, but building and developing an A3 should carry me into my dotage. The A3 has lousy gearing and no great power advantage over other B VW's. There is no great increase in HP available from legal mods. The chip adds only a little. We will see where all of this shakes later this year.

Dave Z

Bill Miller
03-25-2003, 10:54 AM
Sounds like a plan Dave, but I'm not sure if I share your view about no power advantage over the over ITB VW's. The conventional wisdom seems to say that a stock A3 2.0 makes as much power as a Rabbit GTI in IT trim. I haven't really explored what kind of real gains you'll get w/ the 2.0 x-flow motor, but I would imagine something on the order of 130-135 CHP.

The gearing is not what I would call 'horrible', and I think that if mated to the right R&P (4.20 perhaps?) that it'll be fine. The 3rd/4th and 4th/5th spacing is actually closer than w/ the 2H or 4K box.

It's only got 70# on the A2 cars, and I would think the larger displacement and bigger brakes would only help. I wish I knew more about A3 suspension geometry w.r.t. A1 and A2 geometry.

If the CB opens it up to all of the A3 2.0 8v cars, it'll be interesting. If not, it's a question as to just how many cars will actually be built.

Good luck!!!!

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

p.keane
03-25-2003, 12:13 PM
I would like to see the A3 golf in ITB, but I find it humorous that some of the people who were against a modern 2.0 liter (110 HP) car in ITB two years ago, are now in favor of the Golf 3.

Bill Miller
03-25-2003, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by p.keane:
I would like to see the A3 golf in ITB, but I find it humorous that some of the people who were against a modern 2.0 liter (110 HP) car in ITB two years ago, are now in favor of the Golf 3.

OUCH! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

Touche Peter.



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Dave Zaslow
03-26-2003, 04:44 PM
Peter,

The 2 liter Volvo's have been in B forever. The Rabbit GTI was an A car originally. It was moved down around '94 or so. The change of the A3 would recognize the 10th anniversary of that historic decision(?)

In my recent letters to the comp board I have asked for a realignment of the IT classes based on grouping cars of certain weight/power ratios together. Take the manufacturers weight of the base model with no options, divide by the manufacturers claimed horspower. Period. I know it is too simplistic, and that many other things should be considered, but I would like something easy to understand and non-political.

I would support a petition to bring the Accord into B along with the 1.6 1st generation Integra.

Eric Parham
03-27-2003, 06:50 PM
A friend offered me a '95, but I'm going to try to hold out for a 2-dr '94 since it's much more likely that that will be included next year (since '95 will apparently be eligible for SS until '05). Did have a close look at the car, though:

Upon casual inspection Golf 3 (A3) front suspension looks identical or at least interchangeable with Golf 2 for IT purposes. Other than spring rates, I'd say the stuff developed for Golf 2s should work fine. Rear suspension is slightly different but not much (only diff I saw was rear pivot bushings). Golf 3 seems more like a restyled Golf 2 -- nothing like the change from Rabbit/Golf 1 to Golf 2, or for that matter, Golf 2/3 to Golf 4.

As far as the crossflow head, my hillclimber friends say the potential is only equal to to non-crossflow heads due to inline valve position. But heck, at least it's not any worse!

Bill made a good point about the trans ratios. I guess I forgot to use my calculator before dissing it. Sure did seem wide during a test drive, though...

Dave Zaslow
04-30-2003, 08:47 AM
From the June Fastrack now posted:

IT

2. Reclassify 1993 Volkswagen Golf.
(Zaslow) Tabled for review of all model year
Golf specifications.

My request was to classify the Golf III from 93 to 98 on one spec line. Keep those cards and letters going.....

Dave Zaslow

Dave Zaslow
05-11-2003, 09:25 AM
I have been told that the reclassification from ITA to ITB is in question, with negative leanings.

Please, if you would like to build one, or you think this would be a good move to keep VW alive in ITB, send the comp board a letter. It is what the IT Ad Hoc committee is waiting for. You may ask that the car be reclassified, and you may further ask that the model years be expanded through 1998.

For those that I've talked to, who said they would do it if given the opportunity, now is the time to act.

If anyone is running an A3 in ITA please send me an email at [email protected]. The committee is seeking results that shows the current cars' competitiveness and there is no-one in NEDiv that I know of.

Thanks,

Dave Zaslow

Bill Miller
05-11-2003, 06:18 PM
Dave,

Is the proposal to move the car from ITA to ITB at it's ITA weight?

BTW, can we piggy-back a proposal to move the Rabbit GTI from ITB to ITC? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

BTW, why aren't they sitting on this until the issue w/ comp. adjustments in IT is decided? I couldn't count the things in the last 2 FasTracks that used that as the reason for delaying any decisions on pending requests.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

Dave Zaslow
05-12-2003, 07:20 AM
Bill,

I cannot divine the thoughts of the comp board, I am only reflecting on what a member of the IT ad hoc committee mentioned to me this week and last. Waiting for weight (comp adjustments) was not mentioned.

Not a large showing of ITC cars at Lime Rock this weekend. Maybe the Rabbit GTI should be moved down to bolster the field...;-)

Dave Z

Bildon
05-12-2003, 01:59 PM
Do we have any idea who (if any) are advising/campaigning against the move?

Members of the comp board do read this forum...so it would behoove us http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif to outline our cause here as well. However, only those issues submitted officially to the comp board will be "counted"...so send you point of view to [email protected]



------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport (http://www.bildon.com)
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2002 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

Knestis
05-13-2003, 04:12 PM
I sent mine - everyone else?

K

Bildon
05-13-2003, 06:27 PM
I would like those of you whom are for the move of the Golf /// to ITB to email me.
[email protected]

The Golf 1 and 2 are getting older and in 5 years it would be sad if us "VW guys" have only ancient cars to race competitively. I would like to see the Golf 3 classed where it can be competitive even if it gains some weight!

For that matter I'd like to see the 2L Golf 4 classed in 1.5 years...

ITB will be full of 2L cars in the future. Even though the 2L Volvo and BMW guys are worried, I know the A3 Golf can be classed in such a way as to be competitive without obsoleting these other cars.

Cheers,


------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport (http://www.bildon.com)
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2002 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

Dave Zaslow
06-04-2003, 07:55 AM
One more time....send those cars and letters, or see this opportunity die on the vine....

From the newly posted July Fastrack:

The following items have been have
been previously addressed, are submitted
for information only, or require no
further action by the Competition
Board.

IMPROVED TOURING
1. I do not support reclass of 1993
Volkswagen Golf. (Various) Thank you for
your member input.