PDA

View Full Version : 96+ Civic EX to ITA



Knestis
01-29-2003, 08:29 PM
I have officially submitted my request that the CB consider listing the current SSC (non-Si) Civic Coupe in ITA. Feel free to use the links at...

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/itprop.php3

...to contact the CB, ITAC, and/or your area director to voice your opinion. CRX owners can explain that they like this idea WAY more than being tangled up in IT2. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Ciao!

Kirk

Geezer
01-30-2003, 08:40 AM
Good luck, Kirk. If that doesn't work, come join us in H4.

ITA_CRX
01-30-2003, 08:54 AM
What are the specs for the non-Si Civic Coupe?

Jamie

Knestis
01-30-2003, 11:05 AM
Shortest story is 127hp, 107#/ft SOHC VTEC; 2483# stock curb wt.; 10" discs, rear drums; 14" wheels; 103" wheelbase.

I specifically requested that it be listed using the same percentage of curb wt. math used on other recent clasifications (Integra, 240, now the Eclipse), so about 2340# (using same-source date for the math).

On paper, the Integra is still a better option, I think, comparing apples to apples (if two different kinds of apples)...

Kirk

downingracing
01-30-2003, 02:01 PM
Kirk,

I sent the letter requesting the re-classification of the Civic EX from ITS to ITA. (Stating that it does not need a comp. adjustment, just re-classified to correct the original classification mistake.)

We'll see what happens!

------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

ITA_CRX
01-31-2003, 08:55 AM
That car might have to much motor for ITA.

How much can you change the final drive?

Does the SCCA ever look at that?

Before you flame me, I also agree there should be a class between ITA and ITS for cars with 120 to 150 hp.

Jamie

danielbeeson
01-31-2003, 11:21 AM
I have to say that I am a firm believer that the Civic EX should be in ITA not ITS...My proof is... Lyonel Kent in Honda Challenge ran a Civic EX in H4, what were his co-racers... ITA CRX's, He won 1 (one) Saturday race the whole season... The rest of the 10 races or so were won by the ITA CRX's... Nuff Said!

Dan Beeson

Richy Gonzalez
01-31-2003, 11:34 AM
While I agree that the EX shouldn't be in ITS but if they reclass the car for ITA, I would think the CB would be opening the flood gates since cars like VW 2.0 16v, Nissan Sentra SE-Rs would also have to be reclass. This to me would end the competiveness of the current cars in ITA. ....but all good things must come to an end sometime.



------------------
Richy Gonzalez
GB Racing - #24 ITA CRX (http://groups.msn.com/TheGonzalezFamilyRichySheilaandNyah/projectitacrx.msnw)
Racecar Sponsor: LAMIN-X Protective Films (http://www.lamin-x.com)

lateapex911
02-01-2003, 04:48 PM
If we take the stock power, and multiply it by the generally accepted IT power increase, and convert to wheel HP, we get about 132 plus WHP. A power to weight ratio of 17.6. If we look at the current big dog, the CRX, and we believe the reports that they make 120 WHP, we get a p/w ratio of 17.8.

So far so good. But if we look at the CRX vs. the other cars that made up the mass of the class, like the RX-7, we see that this p/w ratio is much better than the figure of roughly 20. Most cars, such as the BMW 2002 tii and the rest of the class, are close to this.

Essentially, adding cars at this level further closes the coffin on the old standard bearers.

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

Knestis
02-01-2003, 08:42 PM
Apropos of nothing (love to say that), I would buy the later Integra option for ITA, if it weren't important in my plans to have a more contemporary bodyshell.

Additionally, I wouldn't have even bothered to ask for the classification if the 240sx, Integra, and now the Eclipse hadn't established that higher-powered cars with similar wt/power ratios were acceptable.

Kirk

(who is sorry that the request is even necessary, but doesn't hold very high hopes for the national-level political viability of IT2)

Hracer
02-02-2003, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by lateapex911:
If we take the stock power, and multiply it by the generally accepted IT power increase, and convert to wheel HP, we get about 132 plus WHP. A power to weight ratio of 17.6. If we look at the current big dog, the CRX, and we believe the reports that they make 120 WHP, we get a p/w ratio of 17.8.


How come the "generally accepted" IT power increase has to be used for the EX with the d16a1 motor, while it’s ok quoting 120 whp for the d16a6 crx motor? (I hope I got those engine codes right!) Either stick to the "generally accepted" ratio for both in order to come up with a more equal estimate, or assume the d16a1 EX motor as the same IT power increase potential as its cousin, the CRX Si motor, yielding about 141 whp for the EX.

I always agreed with this. The EX belongs in ITA. And I think the closer its weight is to the G2 integra, the more equal they will be. Regardless, just getting it down to ITA is good. Since I predict it to make about the same power as a G2 teg, but weigh in at over 100 lbs less, it should have a slight edge. Either way, putting the EX in ITA will no doubt add yet another front running competitive car to the mix (240, crx, miata, G2 integra). It will be interesting to see just how far EXs will go once people start building these cars for IT.

------------------
Alex

Knestis
02-02-2003, 07:52 PM
According to OPM, the EX should gain "about 20%" in IT trim, leaving it at about 152hp (engine) - less 18% for drivetrain losses puts it back right about where you figure (in terms of WHP), Alex.

Remember though, weight isn't supposed to be spec'd with consideration toward adjusting competition potential. Even though it SHOULD. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

K

lateapex911
02-02-2003, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Hracer:
How come the "generally accepted" IT power increase has to be used for the EX with the d16a1 motor, while it’s ok quoting 120 whp for the d16a6 crx motor? (I hope I got those engine codes right!) Either stick to the "generally accepted" ratio for both in order to come up with a more equal estimate, or assume the d16a1 EX motor as the same IT power increase potential as its cousin, the CRX Si motor, yielding about 141 whp for the EX.




My math, which could be wrong, came up with a increase from stock quoted power yeilding 152.40 HP.

I spoke to a national Honda shop who suggested that the Honda drivetrain was typically more efficient than the average, so using a figure of roughly 14 to 15% resulted in my estimate of 132 WHP.

I quoted 120 WHP because that is the number I've been quoted by CRX owners. Should I beleive it? I don't know.

If I knew someone with a developed EX, and I had asked them, I would have used that information as well.





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

Bob Roth
02-02-2003, 09:14 PM
I agree with that the IT2 proposal is a lot better and fairer way to solve the problem for the non-competitive ITS cars than weight adjustments is. Ps, if they do move the EX into ITA, I recommend that they also move the Civic '92 to 94 Civic Si into ITA too as it has the same engine.


Originally posted by Knestis:
I have officially submitted my request that the CB consider listing the current SSC (non-Si) Civic Coupe in ITA. Feel free to use the links at...

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/itprop.php3

...to contact the CB, ITAC, and/or your area director to voice your opinion. CRX owners can explain that they like this idea WAY more than being tangled up in IT2. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Ciao!

Kirk

Knestis
02-02-2003, 11:34 PM
True - and the '92-95 EX as well. I didn't actually mention that and it is pertinent. Time will tell but I made my request thinking that, in the current atmosphere, it would be easier to get the '96+ EX listed in ITA than it would be to get the earlier model of the same car moved. The latter requires proof that literally cannot be provided - that it has been fully developed but is still not competitive. Lack of competition is seen as incomplete development so 'round and 'round we go! Whee!

Kirk

racer-025
02-03-2003, 01:34 PM
Kirk, your car choice is interesting. But by the numbers that I have played with, the '96 Civic EX doesn't compare to the 94 Integra. With the Integra's larger engine, more hp and more torque, I would have to select it over the Civic. It will be interesting to see what the numbers will be on any mods to the Civic'c VTEC II's ecu and what those advantages (if any) will be. Now, if you could get the '92 Civic Si HB classed into A, I would definately start building one.

Knestis
02-03-2003, 04:16 PM
Have the request filled out and ready to go in, so you can mail it the minute the '96 EX gets listed. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

What's the fable about a camel getting its nose under the flap of your tent?

Kirk

racer-025
02-05-2003, 07:47 AM
Camels are always welcome except when they start to bite! On another note - here in Atlantic Canada, they let us remove the headlights and replace with sheet metal for IT competition. Those headlight assemblies on the '96 Civic are expensive. Has anyone tabled this request to the CB?

Knestis
02-05-2003, 10:22 AM
Sorry - I don't understand the question. Tabled the EX classification or submitted a requested rule change allowing the removal of headlights?

If the former, it was suggested that it might be 3 months or more before any action was taken on my proposal - even if that action is taking no action (tabling the proposal to the ITAB).

WRT the latter suggestion - and here we go off-topic, WHEE! - I understand the logic but personally wouldn't support the idea. Slippery slope thing again...

Kirk

macrod01
02-12-2003, 01:38 AM
So which generation civic is the 96+ EX considered? Is it 4th, 5th, 6th? Are there any popular websites where I can find more non-rice info on these cars? Thanks.

Knestis
02-12-2003, 09:09 AM
The '96 was the beginning of the 6th generation of the Civic. Most of the info that is useful is buried as much rice as the sheik got on his chessboard in that old math parable. My favorite quick reference page died months ago.

Kirk

macrod01
11-29-2003, 05:26 PM
Just sent my request. I plan on club racing in about 2 years and currently have a '99 EX Civic that I would love to use. I know buying is always cheaper than building, but what the hell. If we get it reclassed to ITA then I'll build it. But I'm not spending the money for ITS.

I agree with Kirk, the websites for the 6th gen Civic suck unless you want a huge wing, NOS, and 20" wheels. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by macrod01 (edited November 29, 2003).]

Geezer
12-01-2003, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by danielbeeson:
I have to say that I am a firm believer that the Civic EX should be in ITA not ITS...My proof is... Lyonel Kent in Honda Challenge ran a Civic EX in H4, what were his co-racers... ITA CRX's, He won 1 (one) Saturday race the whole season... The rest of the 10 races or so were won by the ITA CRX's... Nuff Said!

Dan Beeson

What a difference a year makes. for the 2003 season Lyonel won H4 class in 8 of the 12 HC races he ran, winning every time he didn't have mechanical problems. HC allows the '92-'95 EX to run in ITS trim at 2305lb and ups the CRX weight to 2175lb.

downingracing
12-01-2003, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by Geezer:
...HC allows the '92-'95 EX to run in ITS trim at 2305lb and ups the CRX weight to 2175lb.

FYI: The Civic weight started 2003 at 2400lbs. It was lowered mid-season to 2305lbs (same as the ITS weight...).



------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

Knestis
12-01-2003, 12:18 PM
To clarify - since this strand came back from the dead - the '96-98 EX has been listed in ITA, per the August FasTrack...

http://www.scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/03-...08-fastrack.pdf (http://www.scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/03-08-fastrack.pdf)

...at 2450 pounds. I don't think the '99 will be age-eligible for 2004 (I always dork up that math) so it won't be classified yet. When it does become eligible, make the request based on the fact that the car is essentially identical to those already listed.

FWIW, I would be building one now if they didn't hold their value as street cars so darned well!

Kirk

downingracing
12-01-2003, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Knestis:
...at 2450 pounds. I don't think the '99 will be age-eligible for 2004 (I always dork up that math) so it won't be classified yet. When it does become eligible, make the request based on the fact that the car is essentially identical to those already listed....Kirk

Just don't tell them it's like the 94... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

Matt (still waiting to be moved to ITA!)

------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

Knestis
12-01-2003, 04:16 PM
When you requested the move, did you stipulate a weight change or ask that it be moved at exactly the same specs? The Golf III could be moved to B because it didn't require a weight change, for which there is no provision in the rules.

If you tried to do the right thing and add weight, you gave them a stick to hit you with...

K

downingracing
12-01-2003, 07:05 PM
Kirk,

If you're asking me...

My first request asked for weight to be added. Like you said - the right thing to do. They came back with the 'stick' and said that would be a comp adjustment, and they don't do comp adjustments.

My second request just asked that the classification be corrected to ITA citing the recent addition of the 96-98 EX in ITA. If/when that is denied due to potential @ current weight, i'm going to request that it be added to the existing spec line for ITA and expand the EX years to 93-98.

My last request was tabled for research... Hopefully they have all the information they need and the car will be moved soon. I've already purchased ITA stickers! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

FYI: The 2305 weight is almost impossible to get to. I'm sure with some creative rules reading (read: cheating), it's possible. I'm at almost 2400 right now and could easily get to 2450.

------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

Greg Amy
12-01-2003, 08:21 PM
NO WAY!! I oppose that move!!! I need Matt in IT2, I don't want to be alone!!!!

I'm gonna write the Comp Board on this....

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

Knestis
12-01-2003, 09:26 PM
...or maybe we should all just skip right to MT2.

http://www.reed.edu/~bradley/schnell/index_f2golf.jpg

K

Racerboy03
12-10-2003, 01:17 PM
OT, but does anyone know if the 94 Integra LS has been moved to ITA yet? Any info/sites on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

Knestis
12-10-2003, 07:54 PM
Never seen any success on this request - and it HAS been asked for several times. Check the FasTrack bulletins available at www.scca.org (http://www.scca.org) if you want to see the history of specific requests.

Kirk

il8apex
01-14-2004, 01:28 PM
Hi, all! Been away for awhile...

I love this thread!

I am writing to mention the proposal in the newest Fasttrack to move the ITS Civic EX to ITA at 2305lbs... THANK YOU MATT! What do you think is the probability of success?

Even if it is a success, I think the car will not be a match for the CRX's. Much has been made of power to weight ratios, but not braking-to-weight ratios. If the 3 cars (CRX, Civic EX, and Integra GSR) all have similar power to weight and the same size brakes, I'll pick the lighter car every time for a better brakeing to weight ratio.

-T

Richy Gonzalez
01-14-2004, 07:02 PM
First, if they move the 92-95 EX they would also need to move the 92-95 SI. Secondly, I would agree that the CRX would still be the prime candidate for competiveness but that hatchback SI has a soft spot in my heart. To the point that I'm already considering the idea of selling the CRX for a SI. ...but the SI would need to be reclass before I do.

On a side note, I'm getting excited about the posiblility of a new bread of cars appearing in ITA. ITA might just be the class to be in http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

------------------
Richy Gonzalez
GB Racing - #24 ITA CRX (http://groups.msn.com/TheGonzalezFamilyRichySheilaandNyah/projectitacrx.msnw)
LAMIN-X Protective Films (http://www.lamin-x.com)


[This message has been edited by Richy Gonzalez (edited January 14, 2004).]

Bob Roth
01-14-2004, 09:28 PM
Ditto on moving the Si hatchback to ITA. Iam a CRX racer but know that within a couple of years I will need to build something new. The Advantage of the Si vs the EX for a CRX racer is that we can re-use our 14" wheels. Also, a hatchback is more practical carrying stuff when towing an open trailer with a small van.

[This message has been edited by Bob Roth (edited January 14, 2004).]

Knestis
01-14-2004, 10:18 PM
Make note that the Comp Board won't move the Si just because it makes sense to do so: When the MkIII Golf 2.0 got dropped to ITB, they didn't send the Jetta with it - simply because nobody asked.

Someone needs to specifically ask for the Si to be moved to A and include all of the years that you want listed. Heck, put ALL of the same generation EXs in the request since I don't think they are in the ITCS.

Base the request on the fact that the '96+ EX is already there and the earlier cars are headed that direction and it should go right through. Make SURE that you don't ask for a weight adjustment - either way - however! There is still no provision for this in the rules and your request will be denied simply because they can't adjust weights and won't consider only part of a request.

K

downingracing
01-15-2004, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by il8apex:
...I am writing to mention the proposal in the newest Fasttrack to move the ITS Civic EX to ITA at 2305lbs... THANK YOU MATT! What do you think is the probability of success?

Even if it is a success, I think the car will not be a match for the CRX's. Much has been made of power to weight ratios, but not braking-to-weight ratios. If the 3 cars (CRX, Civic EX, and Integra GSR) all have similar power to weight and the same size brakes, I'll pick the lighter car every time for a better brakeing to weight ratio.

-T

No problem! It was nothing... Nothing that anyone else with +/- 2 years of letter writing and calling couldn't have accomplished! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/tongue.gif I think the car has a heck of a better shot at running towards the front in ITA than it did in ITS! (The only way to run at the front in ITS was to wait till the leaders come around to lap you...)

And as far as braking ability of the cars, don't forget the "crazy mojo - Driver" factor. (I like to brake late!) And brakes only slow your lap times down. And the EX is a much bigger vehicle than the CRX - intimidation factor. And - you are correct, the CRX will probably still be the dominate car, but at least I won't be last anymore! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif



------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

Banzai240
01-15-2004, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Knestis:
Make SURE that you don't ask for a weight adjustment - either way - however! There is still no provision for this in the rules

Read GCR 17.1.11 - Change of Specifications

Some claim this doesn't give the allowance, but some believe it does. Clarification to follow...



...and your request will be denied simply because they can't adjust weights and won't consider only part of a request.

K

I disagree...



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

downingracing
01-15-2004, 05:14 PM
My request was denied because I asked to have the weight increased. Changing the weight would be a comp. adjustment and we don't do comp. adjustments. They wouldn't modify my request - just denied it. My last request was to correct the classification and leave the weight (correct as classified) at 2305...

------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

Banzai240
01-15-2004, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by downingracing:
My request was denied because I asked to have the weight increased.

When was the first request sent in/ruled on???

Thanks,




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

downingracing
01-15-2004, 05:22 PM
First request... Early 2002? The last request to be denied was sent in mid 2003. The next one (the one that got approved) was sent right after the 'denied' note in FasTrack in 2003.

(I don't have all the info in front of me right now. I can dig up the actual dates if need be, but I'm out of this now. Hopefully in 2005 I'll be running ITA!)

------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com (http://www.downingracing.com)

Banzai240
01-15-2004, 05:34 PM
OK, I went and looked... the first one requesting that the '96 be moved to ITA was denied by the ITAC in February 2003, the reasoning being that this was put on hold essentially to be reexamined after a CA or PCA decision was made...

I think that when the '94-'95 cars were moved by the CRB, it was suggested that, since they decided those belonged in ITA, the '96 should go with them...

That's just the off-the-top-of-my-head story... I could get the exact details if I looked hard enough... NO matter really... I think the cars are where they belong and a few people are happy about that...

Wish the path of logic made more sense, but again, the end result seems to be alright for now...

Good Luck,


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

Fastfred92
01-15-2004, 06:21 PM
Hey Darin,

What do we need to do to get the 94-97 Integra non GSR moved to ITA, same engine as pre 94 with more weight but still stuck in ITS ????

Knestis
01-15-2004, 09:03 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
I disagree...

My observation is based on recent past experiences of people actually trying to do this: Darin's may be based on more current inside information - I hope. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

K

Banzai240
01-15-2004, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by Knestis:
... I hope. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

K

ME TOO!! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



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