Attn: First gen guys...

[lateapex911]

Ok, I'm thinking of adding the RX-7 to the list of cars to be considered for a move to a lower class by writing an "official" letter.

So...if we WERE to be moved to ITB, lets look at the issues.

1- Wheels. No more 7" wide rims. The often used sizes on the 7" rim are 225/50-13 and 225/45-13. Some 205/60-13s as well. So, on a 6" wide rim, will these tires work? Or will we need to look at smaller sizes. No matter what, we won't be presenting the same footprint as we are now. Anyone car to guess a potential time loss? (Percentage)

2- Weight. They (the ITAC and therefore, the CRB) will never consider it without a weight change. Just for the record, at the 2003 ARRCs, the IT-7s were about 3.5 seconds off the fast ITA guys, and about a second faster than the ITB guys. So, keeping in mind the performance loss due to the wheel change, what weight should I suggest as a fair number??



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

[ddewhurst]

Jake, I need to ask you a question about your desire to have the 1st gen RX-7 reclassed in ITB. What is your gain in asking for the reclass of the 1st gen ? If you have a 1st gen will reclassing the car make you personaly a winner ?

We have a serious guy here in the CenDiv who races SCCA & MC races & he with his 1st gen is 1 to 1.5 second off the fastest CRX qualifying time & he gives them fits & then some.

I ran my first race this year today with my partial converted 1st gen RX-7 ITA & whipped one of the ITAC members (who racers a ITA honda) who then protested me for rules GCR 4.5, 9.1.1.A, B, & C. The check written ITAC protesting whiner had his protest against me rejected. The same ITAC member got whipped by a real fast ITC Datsun racer so he protested him. The best part of the whole deal is that this protesting fool has had his car reclassed to ITB for 2005. The ITC guy will continue trashing him. I with my Spec-7 have had many good races with the ITC guy & we never touched each other. & if the protester continues I will intentially sandbag & start behind the protester next year with my fully prepared ITA RX-7. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

The protesters new nick name should
be _ _ _ "Racing Room" _ _ _ _ _. He likes nicknames.

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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
Jake, I need to ask you a question about your desire to have the 1st gen RX-7 reclassed in ITB. What is your gain in asking for the reclass of the 1st gen ? If you have a 1st gen will reclassing the car make you personaly a winner ?



Honestly David, I am not exactly sure where you are going with this, so I will take it at face value.

So, what will I gain? Well, I am looking into the idea of the reclass, so that 1st gen RX-7s have a shot at running up front. So, I guess my "gain" would be as good a chance as anyone else.

"If I have a 1st gen will it make me personally a winner"? Ummm....David? Look at my sig...you know I have a first gen! As for the winner part, I don't follow you. Are you referring to race wins or what?



We have a serious guy here in the CenDiv who races SCCA & MC races & he with his 1st gen is 1 to 1.5 second off the fastest CRX qualifying time & he gives them fits & then some.


Who is this guy?? How long is the track? Who are the CRX drivers. Interesting info, but the context is important.




I ran my first race this year today with my partial converted 1st gen RX-7 ITA & whipped one of the ITAC members (who racers a ITA honda) who then protested me for rules GCR 4.5, 9.1.1.A, B, & C. The check written ITAC protesting whiner had his protest against me rejected. The same ITAC member got whipped by a real fast ITC Datsun racer so he protested him. The best part of the whole deal is that this protesting fool has had his car reclassed to ITB for 2005. The ITC guy will continue trashing him. I with my Spec-7 have had many good races with the ITC guy & we never touched each other. & if the protester continues I will intentially sandbag & start behind the protester next year with my fully prepared ITA RX-7. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

The protesters new nick name should
be _ _ _ "Racing Room" _ _ _ _ _. He likes nicknames.

And what Honda is it? And I take it by the "has had his car reclassed to ITB" comment that you feel that he is using his powers on the ITAC for personal gain?

Look David, I'm looking into the concept, and I have no desire to land in a class and be an overdog. Besides, my letter would not be the first letter requesting just such a reclassification.

So, I take it from your response that you feel the car is just fine as it is, and capable of, in the best of hands, running against the best of the class?


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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[dickita15]

david and others
I too am interested in where ist gens are competitive. I have heard that they are in some areas but it is contrary to what i have seen. here in the northeast we have some pretty well developed ita cars and the rx7's are definately way off. when i went to the arrc i found some pretty well developed it7 cars from the southeast and cen div I think and they were much slower than the ita cars.
so under what conditions are first gens running well in ita.
is it there are tracks that favor them.
are the hondas and acuras less than fully developed.
are the rx7's pushing the rules.

just trying to understand

dick patullo

[dyoungre]

David,
Can I ask a question that puts a different spin on your example: Had the ITA RX7 been classed as ITB, how would he have finished in ITB - would he have won? Been an overdog/track record for ITB?
Also, you stated that the RX7 was within 1.5 seconds of the CRX Si - was that CRX the race winner?

As with Dick, trying to understand the context of your example. Thanks!

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[ITSRX7]

Since we don't have IT7 up here, I will use the last few years of ARRC as data:

Top qualifiers:

2001
ITB: 1:47.7
IT7: 1:47.7

2002
ITB: 1:49.0
IT7: 1:50.2

2003
ITB: 1:48.8
IT7: 1:49.1

Not knowing the weather situations or timing of qualiying, track conditions etc...it seems as if the two classes are capable of the same times given the proper conditions. I have not dug up anything faster than the 2001 qualifying times.

Discuss.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Speed Raycer]

Here's an issue... should the RX get moved to B, and weight is added, what happens to all of the cars using 1.5"x.095 cages? The cut-off is 2200 (+180 for driver in IT) which is right at the limit for the RX. Would they be grandfathered like the cars built before the 100 sq. inch plate rule?

------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it
http://www.izzyscustomcages.com/images/IzysLgoSm.jpg (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)
Izzy's Custom Cages (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Speed Raycer:
Here's an issue... should the RX get moved to B, and weight is added, what happens to all of the cars using 1.5"x.095 cages? The cut-off is 2200 (+180 for driver in IT) which is right at the limit for the RX.

Ummm... Scott... If there are any RX-7s out there with 1.5" x .095" cages, they are illegal RIGHT NOW...


ITCS 17.1.4.C - Specifications

The SCCA shall specify the minimum weight for each classified car as qualified or races, with driver.


You'll notice the SS cage specifications do not say "Without Driver", as the GT, Production, etc. rules do...

IT cars must have cages installed that meet the minimum weights with driver, meaning the RX had better have at least a 1.500x.120" cage in them...

(Why suddenly is the air around impound filled with the sound of checks being ripped out of checkbooks... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif )

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[planet6racing]

I don't have the GCR in front of me right now, and I've been wrong before (but only once!), but I'm reasonably confident that, somewhere in either the General Competion or ITCS sections of the rules it states that the cage is based on the weight minus 180 pounds. I remember this because I went over it 4 times before buying the steel for my car...

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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by planet6racing:
..but I'm reasonably confident that, somewhere in either the General Competion or ITCS sections of the rules it states that the cage is based on the weight minus 180 pounds.

YOU ARE RIGHT! I didn't read into it far enough...


GCR 18.1.6.D
For the purposes of determining tubing sizes, the vehicle weight is as raced without fuel and driver. ... Improved Touring cage tubing sizes are to be calculated based on the published vehicle weight minus 180lbs.


I appologize for the misdirection and not knowing this rule better (only built one cage myself, and it was a Prod car cage...)

In that case... This would definately throw a wrench in the spokes of moving the car to ITB...

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[mustanghammer]

In that case... This would definately throw a wrench in the spokes of moving the car to ITB...

************

It seems to me that this issue would preclude allot of Lead Trophies. For instance, How much weight can be piled on a CRX before cage specs are an issue?

Frankly, using this as an argument to halt the movement of the 12A RX7 to ITB doesn't hold water. How many RX7's running a 1.5" 095" cage weigh EXACTLY 2380 when they come off of the track? Aren't most cars "balasted" for a little insurance against Scale error?

My ITA/7 RX7 weighs 2530 after a race with me in the car (on Hoosier tires). Now before anybody in Mid Div threatens paper my cage was built over-spec by the original owner (1.75 x .125 wall tubing). So, I am legal. But if I were to rip the cage out and use the spec tube for a 2200 car I would still be over weight for the cage.

Please do not allow this cage issue to be used as a crutch. Based on the ARC numbers presented by others, who says we need to add weight?

For what it is worth, I have a pretty well preped car and I have run on 5.5" rims at This knocked about 1-1.5 seconds ff of my best time with the same tire on a 7" rim also at. Again, is extra weight needed JUST because this what was done with other cars?



------------------
Scott Peterson
KC Region
IT7 #17

[Greg Amy]

I wouldn't worry about this issue too much.

First, the GCR 18 states the rollcage tubing sizes for IT are "to be calculated based on the published vehicle weight minus 180 lbs" not the actual weight (emphasis mine).

Second, there is a precedent for roll cage tubing size allowances: Spec Miata. The SM rules state that "Regardless of car weight, all Spec Miata autos may be constructed to the requirements for a 2095-pound car." Given this precedence I'm confident it can be applied to other areas.

Greg

[Speed Raycer]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
I appologize for the misdirection and not knowing this rule better (only built one cage myself, and it was a Prod car cage...)

In that case... This would definately throw a wrench in the spokes of moving the car to ITB...



Actually, my fault for wording it funny. From a cage building standpoint (for IT anyway), I have to think of max weight w/o the driver, otherwise, my clients end up with pigs for cars http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

I will admit Darin, for a second, you had me really scared, but I've read through that rule countless times just to be double sure.



------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it
http://www.izzyscustomcages.com/images/IzysLgoSm.jpg (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)
Izzy's Custom Cages (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)

[lateapex911]

Ok, to sum up here....

So far, no concrete opinions, but it seems that......

....one guy thinks it's fine where it is, or that I have an agenda (or something), and...

.... one guy who thinks it could be moved "as is" with no weight added...the narrower wheels would do the trick by themselves, and...

.... one guy (me) who thinks its a kinda decent fit as is, but the percertion is that it will be a huge overdog, so maybe a little weight is in order,.....

.... and some data that shows the cars are pretty heads up at Road Atlanta.

Here's some empirical data. Since the CRX was mentioned as the "big dog" above, (there are others though...) here's the 'tale of the tape':

Weight: 240 pounds (that's fully 10%) heavier than the CRX.
Power: Rougly the same in legal trim, although the CRX kills with it's prodigious torque! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif
Brakes: CRX is better under braking. Weight helps here.
Handling: CRX holds the edge here as well, better weight and better suspension design. The RX has the big ole live axle, the CRX can do adjustable rear camber.

Where am I wrong here? What have I missed? Is that a fair summation? Are there advantages, (other than the musical exhaust note) that the RX-7 holds over the CRX??

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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[Greg Gauper]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Are there advantages, (other than the musical exhaust note) that the RX-7 holds over the CRX??



RWD vs FWD ............

[lateapex911]

I'm trying to put a number on how much of an advantage that actually is. The FWD guys seem to think that their cars handle better, and I have seen some really sideways Honda products not miss a beat. When asked, they smuggly say "Floor it and let go of the wheel!" I know my leg is getting tugged, but at these power levels, is the advantage that great?

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

[dyoungre]

I like the results comparison at RA - with 7" wheels, the RX7 matched the best ITB time one year, and was slower in the next two. If 6" wheels are 1 second a lap slower (ballpark, but reasonable, based on earlier input) it SURELY does not seem like an overdog. So...

NHIS - Best qualifying at 'Cheap Date' (1st day)

1:17:7 - RX7
1:14:5 - ITB

2nd day
1:24:02 - RX7
1:20:38 - ITB

Limerock - Aug 7 best lap
1:06:11 - RX7
1:04:56 - ITB

Hard to find results! Anyhow, I've yet to see data suggesting that RX7s at our current weight, but with 6" wheels would be an overdog in ITB.


------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[lateapex911]

Dave-

Not to shoot holes in the concept, but those ITB times from NHIS seem mighty suspect. Keep looking...I think that has to be an error. 14 for an ITB car?? No way! They run with ITS..might be a typo?

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

[ITSRX7]

Dave,

Not sure where you got that data! Your ITB times look suspiciously like ITS times. Here is what I found:

Day 1: South Oval
RX-7 - 1:19.1 (Jake)
ITB - 1:18.9 (Carlson - Volvo 142)

Day 2: Chicane/Chicane
RX-7 - 1:24.2 (Sheppard)
ITB - 1:24.0 (Carlson - Volvo 142)

(Edit: these are fast race laps. The qual times are so hard to sort)

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by ITSRX7 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[Hotshoe]

I would like to know the level of prep and the skill level of the drivers.
Put Sam Moore in the Volvo (ITB)and Don Vincini in the Mazda (ITA) Get the cars to their liking and then compare.
I ran a season with the ITB cars. They would have to really do a lot to slow the RX7 down.

I'm all for putting the GSL-SE (13B)on the same line with the 12A. Now that would stir the pot more than anything.

[cpa7man]

I tend to run about 5 seconds a lap slower than the fastest CRX and about 2-3 seconds per lap slower than the fastest RX-7's. I run on 5.5" stock rims with Victoracers. I am running the fastest lap times anyone has ran in this car, but I consider myself a novice.

I'm all for a change in class to B. Make us go back to stock rim size as a penalty. Lots of those wheels available cheap. Ok don't flame me. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

------------------
Paul Pineider
ITA 05 (Soudiv)

WTB - Used transponder.

[RSTPerformance]

I have been the fastest ITB car at LRP since the 90's with a 104.2 I only got 1 the rest are 104.5's Record is from Rick pocock with a mid 1:03 but 3's haven't been touched in a long long time, and I think only by Carlson, Curran and Pocock

I have been the fastest ITB car ever on the 2 chicane combo at NHIS with a 1:23.1 only once, the rest are mid 1:23's and in the race Derek lugar has the lap record at a 1:24.0

The only people to get in the 18's with the 1 combination chicane I beleive is Carlson, and McMahon. Myself and some others have gotton to a 19.0 but no 18's

A normal top 3 finish needed times in ITB:
LRP Low 1:05's
NHIS 2 chicane's Low 1:25's
NHIS 1 Chicane Mid 1:19's
These are the times that the RX's or any other cars should be doing or they will be overdogs in ITB.

Stephen

PS: the ITB time of a 1:14 is correct however he cut through the wall from 3 to 10. The time was never corrected since it was race results not qualifying.

[RSTPerformance]

I forgot to mention.... I would like to see them added to ITB. Car counts would increase as many more people would bring them back! I do think that jsut giving them a 300lb penalty will be fine and keep them to the same rules on wheels... 15" by 6 inches. I don't think the ITAC should be doing adjustments by car like in production. Leave it to weight and keep it simple. also keep the car classified in ITA with the current weight for those that want to stay in ITA. Roll cages definetly would have to be upgraded... no reason to be chincy on safety you can stay in ITA or add the weight and the new cage and run in ITB.

Stephen

PS using weight to allow cars to be classified in several classes would be a great idea to increase car counts as well since you can just change the amount of ballast. I only added this since this is your overall goal... to increase car counts...not to create a winning car.... right?

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
I do think that jsut giving them a 300lb penalty will be fine and keep them to the same rules on wheels...

300lbs!??? 2680lbs?? That seems a little steep, don't you think? I think 2550lbs to 2600lbs at the most...

What is the LIGHTEST you guys think and RX could be made to weigh??? LEGALLY, ready to race, NO gas or driver, Prepped to the letter of the rules and as an all-out effort??



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

[lateapex911]

Darin-

Glad you stopped by...I think I could get my car down to around 2100, maybe a pound lower if I get a carbon fibre exhaust....

Steven? You must be working too hard...
Think about this for a second...first, nobody is going to move to B just to get whipped by a new bunch of cars!

Second, lets define "overdog" ok? An overdog is a car that other cars in the class can't touch...they're like a second out in front.
So the times you mentioned.....4s at LRP and 18s at NHIS....I know a lot of RX-7s that would be THRILLED to turn those times. I think my best at LRP is mid 4s and NHIS is 18s. Add those times to the ARRC times, and tell me why you think 300lbs is appropriate, when the actual results show the car is very close to the front as is.

As long as you're here Steven, your car weighs 2480, right? and has how much torque? What are the 2.2l 5 cylinders capable of putting down in race trim? (I know you've never had a proper race engine...take a guess)

Show me how 300 pounds works empirically.

But....thanks for at least coming up with a number!

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

[benracin]

My engine was a little off this weekend making me 1 second slower then the other RX7. Due to that I was behind almost every SM, ITA, ITB and even ITC car in the race. Sure it's my second real year, yes my car needs some work done to it, but even when my car is running good all of my battles on track have been with ITB cars. Had a heck of a time with an ITC car at Road America. Sorry I don't have any real numbers, but with me in my car I weight the limit, so you can count me in for going to ITB little change or none.

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by lateapex911:

Steven? You must be working too hard...
Think about this for a second...first, nobody is going to move to B just to get whipped by a new bunch of cars!

Second, lets define "overdog" ok? An overdog is a car that other cars in the class can't touch...they're like a second out in front.
So the times you mentioned.....4s at LRP and 18s at NHIS....I know a lot of RX-7s that would be THRILLED to turn those times. I think my best at LRP is mid 4s and NHIS is 18s. Add those times to the ARRC times, and tell me why you think 300lbs is appropriate, when the actual results show the car is very close to the front as is.

As long as you're here Steven, your car weighs 2480, right? and has how much torque? What are the 2.2l 5 cylinders capable of putting down in race trim? (I know you've never had a proper race engine...take a guess)

Show me how 300 pounds works empirically.

But....thanks for at least coming up with a number!



I weigh my car before almost every session to make sure that I don't come in underweight at the end of a sesion. I have found that 50lbs makes no difference in lap times. get up to 100lbs and your talking less than 1/2 a second. I figured 300 was a good number becaseu this will probably slow you down 1 to 1.5 seconds from my experiences. I was under the understanding that at LRP RX7's where easily in the 3's and at NHIS they where into the low 18's if not 17's at one point. that is how I derived my pounds. that still puts them in the top mixe of cars.

I agree that an overdog would be faster but an overdog would be a car that gets .5 seconds faster than the current times. IE: a car that imediatly hit's 104.0 at LRP or a 1:18.5 at NHIS.

My car I would suspect maxed out would be making around 130HP. Stock it makes 105HP with a header it makes 115HP No .40 over pistons are available so to have them made would be illegal. port matching is already pretty good. so basically all you can do is get that .5 in compresion and that is it other than balancing it. As far as a proper race engine you are correct I have never had a profesional one built with new parts. I do have an increase of .46 in compresion but that is it everything is stock and certainly not blueprinted and balanced. We built it in my garage with craftsman tools 2 years ago http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Stephen

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
No .40 over pistons are available so to have them made would be illegal.

Where did you get this idea?? What do you read in the rules that would make them "illegal"??

Also, the weight would NOT have as much effect on your car... The engine is an entirely different matter. In other words, your 5-cyl. can make some torque...

I suspect the RX-7 would be more greatly affected by a weight increase because it completely lacks torque to overcome the weight...

I still need as many of you as possible to chime in on the weight issue... Jake says he thinks he can get his legally down to 2100lbs less driver... Anyone else willing to provide any real data? Feel free to contact me in private if you'd be more comfortable.

Banzai240 "AT" Yahoo "Dot" com



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

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
I was under the understanding that at LRP RX7's where easily in the 3's and at NHIS they where into the low 18's if not 17's at one point. that is how I derived my pounds. that still puts them in the top mixe of cars.

I agree that an overdog would be faster but an overdog would be a car that gets .5 seconds faster than the current times. IE: a car that imediatly hit's 104.0 at LRP or a 1:18.5 at NHIS.

Stephen



OK OK before I get bashed I want to change my thoughts!! I looked up the times from every race over the past years to 2001. IT looks like Ray and Jake both have turned consistant 1:18.2's both of them have several laps with these times and I beleive Ray has the fastest time at a 1:18.0 At LRP Ray has the fastest time I could find at a 1:05.0 and both Jake and Ray turned several laps in the 1:05.2 range. I think that back when Dan had his RX-7 running both him and Ray where faster but It's really not woth it for me to go digging up that information prior to 2001.

With this data I would say that 100lbs would be sufficient to keep a level playing field...... oh wait a second our comp board went crazy with wheel sizes so now someone smart will have to consider the larger wheel size as well. that's probably equivilent to another 100+ lbs since they will be running a wider wheel than before with much larger tires available to them.

Stephen

[tdw6974]

If We are talking 1st generation. I just don't see how to change or offset the fact the Top cars are all Fuel injected electronic management systems(That can be programmed) I always look to se how we run against the carb vrs injection cars. How would have a class within a class ITA-FI & ITA-C ? Sure would eliminate changing wheels, tires,ballasting etc etc. TW

------------------
Tom Weaver: Logistics & Technical Support Manager IE truck driver for 1980 RX-7 ITA #63
"Hemi Haulin' Rotary"

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Where did you get this idea?? What do you read in the rules that would make them "illegal"??



Actually lets go the other way.... where does it say you can put in .40 over pistons. If it doesn't say you can than you cannot. It says only stock replacement, not go and make your own that look like stock but are bigger. My car and I'm sure several others do not have a .40 stock replacement part number therefor it is not allowed. I do not have the GCR handy so if you do please feel free to quote the paragraph here from the GCR. We also may wnat to have this on another thread so we don't hijack Jakes.

Stephen

[This message has been edited by RSTPerformance (edited October 12, 2004).]

[Knestis]

I've got to chime in here and suggest that it's a little worrisome that we are talking about moving a car from one class to another and using onesy-twosy, fast-lap data from disparate events to support positions...

There is NO evidence that the biggest variables - driver skill and budget - have been managed in this comparison. In fact, it hasn't even been demonstrated that the cars involved were legal.

It's particularly disturbing any time someone trots out ARRC results like they are somehow representative of the bigger picture. This gets WAY too close the practice of using RubOffs results as the basis for competition adjustments in Prod or GT classes, for my tastes.

If there's a case to be made for the RX7 going to B, make it based on the physical attributes of the car.

K

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
...since they will be running a wider wheel than before with much larger tires available to them.

Ummm... Stephen, you seem to be going off the deep end here...

Take a DEEEEPPPP breath.... There....

Now, I don't know where you get this idea, but the new wheel allowances are for DIAMETER ONLY...

Widths would be 6", just like the rest of the ITB/C cars...

The RX would be LOSING an inch of wheel width...

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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Knestis:
If there's a case to be made for the RX7 going to B, make it based on the physical attributes of the car.

K

I could NOT AGREE MORE! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

The most I've ever heard of a legal RX-7 making from a flywheel hp standpoint was 136hp...

136hp and NO torque to speak of, tells me that the car WILL respond to weight adjustments, either + or -...

The way I see it, it would be a really nice ITB car with a appropriate amount of weight added, and shouldn't "dominate" anything.

Unless, of course, someone shows up in one that is better preparred and more skillfully driven than the other ITB frontrunners on that given day...

The ONLY hitch in that plan is the cage issue, i.e.: someone having used 1.5" x .095" tubing, but this may be something that can be worked around, or that otherwise might not BE an issue, if the BoD and CRB are able to finally work together to get the cage rules standardized, which would likely result in the Prod/GT tubing sizes being standardized for all weld-in "GT" style cages...

Of course, that may be just wishful thinking on my part, but I do think it needs to be done and I'm not alone in that thinking.

Maybe that's something that many of you could write in about and get the CRB to consider it harder...??? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



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

[ddewhurst]

***Jake, I need to ask you a question about your desire to have the 1st gen RX-7 reclassed in ITB.***

***What is your gain in asking for the reclass of the 1st gen ?***

***If you have a 1st gen will reclassing the car make you personaly a winner ?***

Jake, I think my questions are real simple for you to answer. But now that there is more posted about your times don't bother with anserws I think I can figure out the ansewers myself. I will figure out the answers using your lap times given & the hypothesis that each racer has his own agenda.

On the subject of 1st gen RX-7 legal race car weight I am very skeptical that a 1st gen can be brought down to 2100 POUNDS in IT trim without driver. My 1st gen RX-7 ITA/7 (S model) at this time weighs 2429# with 3 gallons of gas & a 200# driver. So lets call the car weight 2211#. From that 2211# I need to remove the tar which is inside the car, the undercoating, OEM fuel tank or fuel cell weight ? & ? to get to 2100# Come on weight wizzards please tell me how to get my car to 2100 pounds.

Someone made a suggestion adding the 13B to the spec line. How many HP is that with a carb & how many HP with FI ? If this is reality I like it better using the 13B & added weight if required than going to B.

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

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Knestis:
I've got to chime in here and suggest that it's a little worrisome that we are talking about moving a car from one class to another and using onesy-twosy, fast-lap data from disparate events to support positions...

If there's a case to be made for the RX7 going to B, make it based on the physical attributes of the car.
K

well kirk when this thread started we were talking about the atributes of the car and david seemed to feel the car was competitive in other parts of the country. our request to learn when and what the local condition are in those places has gone unanswered. the rx7 has lower power to weight, very low torque and a live axel.
my memory from an old thread was that few ITA rx7's could lose more than 30 pounds, so lower weight to help it in ITA does not seem probable.

I run a 225/45/13 tire on a 7" wheel. I do not think they would work well on a 6" wheel. I would probably run the 205 in B. some fast guys run the 205 now so i don't think it will be a lot slower.
dick patullo
NER ITA Rx7

[ddewhurst]

Here ye, here ye David got off his & looked up a couple times for the CRX vrs the RX-7 or vise versa.

Mid Ohio (2 ? mile 15 turn)

CRX C. Botha Q time 1:47.4 R time 1:47.2

RX-7 T. Duncan Q time 1:48.1 R time 1:47.8


Blackhawk Farm (2 ? mile 10 turn)(don't have Q times)

CRXSI M. Seaman R time 1:24.6

Honda T. Burns R time 1:24.4

RX-7 T. Liakapoulos R time 1:24.9

RX-7 M. Piecko R time 1:24.5

Granted Mid Ohio & or Blackhawk Farm are not high hp tracks like Atlanta but then IMHU the CRB does not use a high hp track when they look at Production car differences to compare.

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



[This message has been edited by ddewhurst (edited October 12, 2004).]

[RacinRich]

Gotta add my 2 cents...comparing the CRX with the 1st gen. RX7 isn't fair. How about comparing the ITA CRX wtih the SECOND gen RX7.

Waterford 1st Place CRX - 1.16.867
Waterford 1st Place ITS RX7 - 1.16.602

MidOhio 1st Place CRX - 1.44.581
MidOhio 1st Place ITS RX7 - 1.46.194

Grattan 1st Place CRX - 1.31.651
Grattan 1st Place ITS RX7 - 1.32.092

Dave D - A specific ITA 1st gen RX7 had questionable legality and doesn't provide a correct CRX comparison baseline.

[ddewhurst]

Rich, you guys in CenDiv area 4 race with the specific ITA 1st gen RX7 that had questionable legality & at the same time there is this Mazda racer from the big ol state of Texas who used to get accused of the big "C" on a regular basis when he was racing Spec-7. Guess what when he went National racing maybe 3 years ago he is just as fast at the national level with his 1st gen RX-7 in E Production.

See ya sometime next year at Mid Ohio with the car now converted to ITA/7.

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

[Speed Raycer]

Not sure if this contributes anything (let me know if it doesn't and I'll edit it out).
All Races at Gateway International

March 26 2004 Group 3
ITB BRIAN A. GLASSBURNER DODGE OMI 1:13.984
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:14.220
ITB SAM SMITH BMW 2002 1:15.986
ITB PATRICK FINDLEY VW GOLF GTI 1:16.699
ITB SCOTT E. WILLIAMS VW GOLF 1:19.362

March 26 2004 Group 5
IT7 JAMES STEVENS MAZDA RX7 1:14.871
IT7 NADEEM BARI MAZDA RX7 1:15.898
IT7 JIM EUBANKS MAZDA RX7 1:17.674
IT7 TODD GIBBS MAZDA RX7 1:19.970
IT7 SCOTT RHEA MAZDA RX7 1:21.633
IT7 SCOTT GIBBS MAZDA RX7 1:22.112
IT7 SHEILA BURKETT MAZDA RX7 1:23.072

Race # 6- MAY 1 2004
ITB MICHAEL D. GLASSBURNER DODGE OMNI 1:14.304
ITB PATRICK FINDLEY VW GOLF GTI 1:17.540
ITB TRISTAN POPLIN VW GTI 1:17.037
IT7 BARRY BETZ MAZDA RX7 1:17.484
ITB PAUL HEUER VW GTI 1:18.056
IT7 CONNIE LAMB MAZDA RX7 1:19.978
IT7 SHEILA BURKETT MAZDA RX7 1:19.679

MAY 2 2004
ITB MICHAEL D. GLASSBURNER DODGE OMNI **1:13.709
IT7 NADEEM BARI MAZDA RX7 1:16.147
ITB PATRICK FINDLEY VW GOLF GTI 1:16.537
IT7 MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:16.869
ITB PAUL HEUER VW GTI 1:16.807
ITB TRISTAN POPLIN VW GTI 1:16.503
IT7 BARRY BETZ MAZDA RX7 1:18.234
IT7 SHEILA BURKETT MAZDA RX7 1:19.395
IT7 CONNIE LAMB MAZDA RX7 1:19.765

Race # 3- July 31 2004
IT7 NADEEM BARI MAZDA RX7 1:15.501
IT7 JAMES STEVENS MAZDA RX7 1:16.402
IT7 BRYAN COHN MAZDA RX7 1:17.249
IT7 MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:20.547
IT7 JIM EUBANKS MAZDA RX7 1:21.191

Race # 4- July 31 2004
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:15.518
ITB PATRICK FINDLEY VW GOLF GTI 1:16.733
ITB BOBBY CALDWELL BMW 320I 1:19.206
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:18.863
ITB SCOTT E. WILLIAMS VW GOLF 1:18.514

Race # 6- October 26 2002
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:14.897
ITA MICHAEL WIGGINS MAZDA RX7 1:14.987
ITB H. DONALDSON VW GOLF 1:15.971
ITB RUSSELL NEELY ALFA ROMEO 1:17.219
ITB ANDY DOYLE TRIUMPH TR7 1:17.847
ITA BRYAN COHN MAZDA RX7 1:18.039
ITB MICHAEL BAUMET VW GOLF GTI 1:17.096
ITB NICO PRELOGAR VW SCIROCCO 1:19.022
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:18.964
ITA JUDE RUDDER MAZDA RX7 1:19.305
ITB PATRICK FINDLEY VW GTI 1:19.519
ITA SCOTT JEFFERS MAZDA RX7 1:19.353
ITB SCOTT E. WILLIAMS VW GOLF 1:20.885
ITB PAUL HEUER VW GTI 1:20.118
ITA GENE HARBOR MAZDA RX7 1:22.413
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:24.694
ITA CHRIS WIGGINS MAZDA RX7 1:17.368

Race # 6- October 27 2002
ITA MICHAEL WIGGINS MAZDA RX7 1:14.894
ITB ALAN RUSSELL VW GOLF 1:15.667
ITA BRYAN COHN MAZDA RX7 1:15.760
ITB MICHAEL BAUMET VW GOLF GTI 1:15.759
ITA CHRIS WIGGINS MAZDA RX7 1:15.923
ITB H. DONALDSON VW GOLF 1:15.750
ITA SCOTT JEFFERS MAZDA RX7 1:16.399
ITB RUSSELL NEELY ALFA ROMEO 1:16.256
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VWAGEN GTI 1:17.763
ITB NICO PRELOGAR VW SCIROCCO 1:18.061
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:18.166
ITB SCOTT E. WILLIAMS VW GOLF 1:17.826
ITA GENE HARBOUR MAZDA RX7 1:21.061
ITB PAUL HEUER VW GTI 1:17.042
ITA SCOTT RHEA MAZDA RX7 1:17.453
ITB PATRICK FINDLEY VW GTI 1:21.747

Race # 6- AUGUST 4 2002
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:14.588
ITB DOUG WARREN VW GTI 1:18.782
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VWGTI 1:19.859
ITA SCOTT RHEA MAZDA RX7 1:19.945
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.713

Race # 6- AUGUST 3 2002
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:15.822
ITB DOUG WARREN VW GTI 1:18.537
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:20.093
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.824
ITA SCOTT RHEA MAZDA RX7 1:19.861

Race # 4 MARCH 31 2003
ITA SCOTT PETERSON MAZDA RX7 1:15.971
ITA JIM EUBANKS MAZDA RX7 1:19.408
ITA NADEEM BARI MAZDA RX7 1:19.303
ITA CHRIS WIGGINS MAZDA RX7 1:15.152
ITA STEVEN L. RHEA MAZDA RX7 1:22.929
ITA MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:21.390
ITA FRED W. HUNTER MAZDA RX7 1:24.658

Race # 6MAY 3 2003
ITB MICHAEL D. GLASSBURNER DODGE OMNI 1:14.904
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:14.667
ITB DOUG WARREN VW GTI 1:18.078
ITB TONY TORRES VW GTI 1:17.855
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:18.927
ITA NADEEM BARI MAZDA RX7 1:18.087
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.623
ITA JUDE RUDDER MAZDA RX7 1:21.050
ITA JIM EUBANKS MAZDA RX7 1:20.827
ITA MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:21.740
ITA SCOTT JEFFERS MAZDA RX7 1:17.816

Race # 6-MAY 4 2003
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:16.555
ITA BRYAN COHN MAZDA RX7 1:16.833
ITB MICHAEL D. GLASSBURNER DODGE OMNI 1:16.723
ITB DOUG WARREN VW GTI 1:17.863
ITB TONY TORRES VW GTI 1:18.368
ITA STEVEN BURKETT MAZDA RX7 1:15.404
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.802
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:20.216
ITA MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:21.973
ITA JIM EUBANKS MAZDA RX7 1:22.072
ITA SCOTT JEFFERS MAZDA RX7 1:18.549

Race # 6- July 26 2003
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:16.031
ITB PAUL HEUER VW GTI 1:16.911
ITA NADEEM BARI MAZDA RX7 1:16.894
ITA MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:17.101
ITA JUDE RUDDER MAZDA RX7 1:18.859
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.379
ITA FRED HUNTER MAZDA RX7 1:22.923
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:20.099

Race # 6-July 27 2003
ITB CHRIS ALBIN VW GOLF 1:15.644
ITB PAUL HEUER VW GTI 1:17.114
ITA MARK JEFFERY MAZDA RX7 1:18.730
ITB BILL BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.452
ITB ROBERT BRIGGEN VW GTI 1:19.897
ITA SCOTT RHEA MAZDA RX7 1:19.945
ITA FRED W. HUNTER MAZDA RX7 1:26.102
ITB C. SHARTZER VW RABBIT GTI 1:19.513
------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it
http://www.izzyscustomcages.com/images/IzysLgoSm.jpg (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)
Izzy's Custom Cages (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)

[This message has been edited by Speed Raycer (edited October 12, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Speed Raycer (edited October 12, 2004).]

[Speed Raycer]

An interesting side bar. Nadeem Bari and Steven Burkette shared the same (magic) RX7 a couple of times. Jude Rudder, Bryan Cohn and myself up until '03 shared the same car. Bryan Cohn also shared cars with Fredrick Hunter a couple of times. So, driver has a huge impact.
There's a wide range of prep in the IT RX's. But just about everyone is running the same Tokiko's with a couple of Koni setups and most are running Hoosiers this year. Nadeems car is so stock it's sickening. Its even running almost a full interior, 60k stock motor, bolt in cage, power windows etc.

[lateapex911]

David-

Too many lines for me to read between. But let me say this. I, like you I suspect, am always trying to make myself, and my car faster. Unfortunately I can't do it overnight. But I race to compete, as we all do, and I want the chance to compete fairly...

I do not consider myself the defacto standard RX-7... I am merely trying to equate the physical numbers I see with others thoughts, experiences and, results...if the context of those results can be conveyed....

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

[lateapex911]

Kirk-

Of course, I am not hanging it all on results...but results that are accompanied by contextual knowledge can be a peice of the puzzle.

For a second, throw out all the cars in the class but two...the CRX and the RX-7. Look at merely the numbers. As I metioned above, in the tale of the tape, the CRX whupps the RX-7. The RX-7 comes in 240 pounds heavier! Huge! And torque numbers are just under 100 to just over 100 for the strong samples. Simply, a car that is 10% heavier, and has inferior power characteristics, is clearly at a huge disadvantage on paper.

So, I am asking for more info...entertaining a concept...trying to flesh out the cold numbers with some real world experience.

Using the ARRCs is obvious because it is common ground for so many. The data that results has real value. But like all data, the context is huge.


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

[RSTPerformance]

Banzai,

Accept my apologies... I haven't gone off the deep end yet but I do admit I was thinking the other way around! You are correct and like I said before I got stupid... a 100lb weight penalty would be appropriate if not less.

Kirk,


I have always "thought" the RX7 was faster than it actually was. This is also why I put down the information on lap times about it. At NHIS the RX7 has been very successfull compaired to the similar ITB cars. however at LRP they are slower. I think the car would fit well into ITB with miner adjustments. I hope others also give us comparative lap times as well so we can compaire throughout the entire country. I am all for the move and would love more people to race with.

Stephen

[ddewhurst]

IMHJ using a horsepower track such as Road America, Road Atlanta & other horsepower tracks is not a good process method of comparing cars. Using Road Atlanta would be the total opposit end of the stick as using Waterford Hills (MI) for rules compare. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

IMHU the CRB uses Mid Ohio as the standard to look at rules for Production cars. If that is the case maybe we should use "Mid Ohio" & "A" similar track from each division (8 tracks) for car compare within IT classes. Or someone from the ITAC get the secret information of which tracks the CRB uses for car compare.

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

[dyoungre]

Back to minimum weight - I know I could reach 2150 lbs (without driver, no fuel). Below that, I'd have to start cutting unnecessary cage bars.

FWIW, I have an '80 chassis with fuel cell, all inside tar removed. Wheels are about 9 lbs each....Headers collect just before axle (so the 'long' style header).

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[Mike Spencer]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Ok, I'm thinking of adding the RX-7 to the list of cars to be considered for a move to a lower class by writing an "official" letter....

Jake -

First, let me put my comments/questions in context; You will notice in my "sig" that I own a 1st gen RX-7. That's why I read this thread with a great deal of interest. HOWEVER, I have only just applied for my Novice Permit. No track time, no real experience. Seeing as I will be competing in the South-East, I am in IT7. I don't (or "won't") race against CRXs anyway.

In reading this thread, as well as others in the past, I recall seeing the CRX referred to as an "overdog". Also, besides the "7", it's the only car being discussed in this thread. I realize the answer to this will probably vary depending upon geographical area, but what's the real problem? Is the "7" perceived as being no longer competitive in ITA, or is the CRX just cleaning up on everybody? If the problem is the CRX, why not consider moving it up when/if the IT2 class is created for all of the cars no longer competitive in ITS?

Just wondering..... and please remember these remarks originate in blissful ignorance http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif


------------------
Mike Spencer
NC Region
ITA/7 RX-7 #60
1990 RX-7 Convertible (street car)

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Mike Spencer:
Jake -

I will be competing in the South-East, I am in IT7. I don't (or "won't") race against CRXs anyway.

Is the "7" perceived as being no longer competitive in ITA, or is the CRX just cleaning up on everybody? If the problem is the CRX, why not consider moving it up when/if the IT2 class is created for all of the cars no longer competitive in ITS?



first of all mike welcome to our obsession. I think you made a good choice. the 1st gen is a great car to learn on. much development work has been done and there are many people to ask advise of.
currently the class is dominated by crx's acura integra's and nissan 200sx's. honda's are definately the most popular and there seem to be some in every part of the country. in the northeast we have acuras an a couple of nissans.
for next year a number of other 2 litre cars will be added to ITA. it looks as though there will be no new class in the near future. the ITAC and the RRB have apperently deceided to try to come up with fair classing with 4 classes. i think this is doable but there will be resitance from folks about having cars that could be fast moving into their class.

IT7 was developed because the rx7's were no longer competitive in ITA. I am curious what class the 7 driver will choose if they can race for a win in ITB. Racing against car that have different strenghts in different areas is cool.
dick

[Mike Spencer]

Originally posted by dickita15:
...IT7 was developed because the rx7's were no longer competitive in ITA...

Dick -

Thanks for the additional info. Up to this point the only times I've been paying attention to are for IT7. From the sound of it, Jake is probably taking the correct approach. Since the rules for IT7 are the same as ITA (where it is currently classed), the only real impact a move to ITB would have on me would be to force me to replace all 16 of my 7" rims! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif


Originally posted by dickita15:
...I am curious what class the 7 driver will choose if they can race for a win in ITB. Racing against car that have different strenghts in different areas is cool.
dick

I am probably at least a year away from making that decision intellegently. But, my seat-of-the-pants reaction right now would be "BRING ON THE OTHER CARS!". (As long as I have a snowball's chance.....)

------------------
Mike Spencer
NC Region
ITA/7 RX-7 #60
1990 RX-7 Convertible (street car)

[ITSRX7]

Mike,

Good stuff. Great to have you here.

One thing to also understand is that this thread is more of a 'global' discussion where as IT7 is only a 'regional' one. New England Region is the 2nd or 3rd largest in the country and we have no IT7. The drivers havn't demanded it yet.

I am predicting an Acura will take the ARRC this year in ITA.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[benracin]

We've got some neat stats so far. If someone ends up with a nice letter I'd like to be copied on that so I too can send a letter. ( I don't trust myself to come up with a convincing letter all alone! ). Seeing how the rx7 has been since I got one 2-3 years ago has made me kind of wonder why I didn't get something like a miata that has a chance of winning something. It would be so awesome knowing that the car I currently have is capable of winning the class it is in on a good day.

I know this may be a poo poo look at things, but in our level of club racing I don't feel a 'chance' at winning takes having a the worlds best driver, brand new hoosiers, a 12k motor that is tuned to perfection on that day, a perfect setup, a min weight car and perfect weather and some other things like good luck and magic fairy dust to boot. That sounds a lot more like pro racing to me. And I'm pretty sure those CRX's and what ever else is winning doesn't have all those items going for them (not trying to insult any drivers here), although I'm sure they have spent more on their engines then a lot of us rotory folk.

I may have been reading things out of context, but I think it's interesting that we compare the times of a fast driver with a fast car that has questionable legality and mention how close he was to winning an ITA race. Shouldn't that kind of situation result in winning not just getting close?

In my area I have seen a really well prep'd rx7. I'm pretty sure the driver is fast, I know his car SCREAMS and can rev to high heaven but I have yet to see him beat the top CRX's and usually, maybe as a result of this cars on the edge tip top shape, breaks before the weekend is over. Tweaking a car past it's boundries and coming home broke or 3rd is though too.

Maybe I'm wishing life was just too easy. But when I look around at cars that are fast in their classes it looks to me like being absolutly perfect with a great car isn't totally required to be close to the top. Our cars used to be like that. Now perfection in every way is what is needed to get an rx7 to maybe the top 3 with a time similar or slower than an ITB car? I guess that's the reason I'm on board for a move of some type.

Sorry, I'm usually not this cynical. It's been a long day at work. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

[joeracerx95]

Here's some information from the left coast.
Track records for ITA, ITB and Pro7. Pro7 is close to an IT RX7. A bit less tire and HP, but close.


Willow Springs: (HP track)
ITA ITB Pro7
1:34.7 1:37.6 1:38.2

California Speedway: (HP track)
ITA ITB Pro7
1:57.0 2:03.0 2:01.6

Buttonwillow: (Handling track)
Config 25 CCW
ITA ITB Pro7
2:09.1 2:11.4 2:11.1

Config 27CW
ITA ITB Pro7
1:17.4 1:19.4 1:20.0

So I think a IT RX7 in ITB would be close to ITB, may need a bit of extra weight.

-chuck-

[lateapex911]

Mike- Glad you stopped by...Dickita (I love writing that, thanks Kirk) is right, but I will go even further, ITA is going to be the BEST class going next year!

I keep mentioning the CRX becaue: It is similar in horsepower to the RX-7, so it is more of an apples to apples comparision, AND there a lot of them out there. BUT, it is by no means an "overdog". It was once, but since that time, the Integra, the 240 SX, and the Miata have been added to the class. The Miata continues to stump me. The Spec Miatas (which the SM guys are always saying could be so much better if...if...and so on) are usually faster than the ITA Miatas I have seen. Weird.

But anyway, it's currently a three car (minimum) front pack. But....next year...we add the NEON, the NX2000, and the SE-R. I don't know how many will make it to the grid, but I know most folks haven't bothered developing them for ITS because it was hopeless. They all have the potential to be fast. So ITA could see any of 6 cars at the front next year.

Since the RX gives up 240 pounds to the CRX, and we can't get more than 50 to 100 more out of the RXs, you'd think adding weight to the CRX would be the way to go. But no...it's only one of 6 cars...can't add it to ALL of them!

So, that leaves B as the alternative.

I did some dyno work last night, and the numbers are being corrected as I write....but while the HP looked fine, the Tq was, as expected, non existant.

That is a major factor in looking at how much weight to add to the car, should it be reclassed. More weight will hurt its handling..which will already be hurt by the wheel change. And more weight will have a much greater affect on this car than it would on a normal piston car becuse cars with weak torque suffer far more from increased weight. (Which is why results and times from different type of tracks are actually relatively similar)

We may find that a little goes a long way.

And while results don't tell the entire story, it is intersting to see that even now, (based on the above results, [good stuff guys, keep 'em coming]) as is, it won't be collecting a lot of ITB hardware.....

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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Mike,

....I am predicting an Acura will take the ARRC this year in ITA.

AB



O<, name names, dude! Is it the same one that set fast race lap last year??

What about Mr Stretch? His driving has never been suspect, and he's only gotten more stout in Speed Challenge!



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

[Quickshoe]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
The Miata continues to stump me. The Spec Miatas (which the SM guys are always saying could be so much better if...if...and so on) are usually faster than the ITA Miatas I have seen. Weird.


Here is my generalization/theory: [Wearing 4 layers of Nomex so flame away]

GENERALLY SPEAKING: The guys/gals who race an ITA Miata are racing in ITA rather than SM because the competition is tougher in SM and in SM they have no one to blame but the nut behind the wheel.

EXCEPTION: guys/gals who love the Miata, and find no appeal in a spec series. These people will develop the Miata to the extent they wish and have fun...some will be faster than a SM, some won't be. Despite its' shortcomings a SM package works. You start messing around with things experimenting in IT and you might take 2 steps forward and three steps back.

Back to the 1st gen Rx7--a race weight of 2280 is doable (not if the driver is 240#). I don't race a 1st gen rx7 any longer. IF, I got back into IT racing it would probably be an ITB car (not an RX7 even at its' current ITA weight). Put the Rx7 in B at its' current weight and make em run 6" max tires like everyone else in the class and they won't be an overdog.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Quickshoe:
Put the Rx7 in B at its' current weight and make em run 6" max tires like everyone else in the class and they won't be an overdog.

You guys make statements like that, and then a letter like this arrives in my inbox:



Hey Darin:

I'm getting tired of the boys up in the xxxxxxx saying the 1st gen needs to go to ITB. Even though we in the xxxxx have IT7 I still take it to those boys in ITA with my RX7 and believe me, we have some stout ITA cars down here.


We've reveived more than one comment like this (quite frankly, there has been more feedback on this topic than from many of our other requests, like pullies, etc... http://www.coloradoscca.org/prodcar/images/smiles/eusa_think.gif )

Basically, for every couple of you that says the car can't compete, we hear from one who is insistant that they can...

Who's telling the truth?? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 14, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Basically, for every couple of you that says the car can't compete, we hear from one who is insistant that they can...

Who's telling the truth?? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif



Well.....that's the same ole story, isn't it? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Let me ask you two groups of questions....

1-What do you (and the ITAC) use as your RX-7 IT power and torque at the wheels? And, what will the detractor from down in XXXX admit to having? How does that number match with the "convntional wisdom"?

(For the record, no engine builder I have discussed this with has indicated any legal 12A can make much more than 130 at the wheels with torque numbers just over 100, but who knows...I might not be talking to the right buliders! I can forward the names if you wish)

Once you have numbers, how does it stack up with a CRX? Which "truth" does the data suggest is closer to reality?

2- Who are the "stout" ITA cars? Have they run Road Atlanta? (Since your writer said "down here" I assume that they might be local to RA.) Why don't we see these results at the big events with a sampling of the best of the best, like the ARRCs?

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

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

[dyoungre]

Darin,
I don't believe we have 'cherrypicked' the lap time comparisons. The lbs/HP, vehicle weight, brake rotor weight/vehicle weight (all the 'objective') numbers add up to a competetent, but typical ITB car.

If someone is tired of spanking ITA cars, share the times - and share the times of the ITB classes that run at the same track. We truly are in a vacuum by racing in a region. This forum should help give us perspective, but only if those with contrary supporting data (in the form of lap times) share. I would really welcome that perspective!
Has there been any requests that regional results be made available on a single source website? Such access would help understand things of this nature.

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[Banzai240]

Just for the record, here are some RACE lap time comparisons from a number of tracks that vary WIDELY is track-type.

Seattle - Pacific Raceways - is a high-speed, long straight, high hp track.

Portland - PIR - You've all seen it on TV... Total momentum track with fast straights...

Mission, BC - Never been there, but I hear it's a shorter, tighter track

Spokane, Wa - Never been there, but I believe it's an airport track...

Anyhow, here are the results from this season from ICSCC, our local club that uses our SCCA IT rules...



Vancouver BC - Mission Raceway:

ITA
Honda CRX 1:23.715
Honda Civic 1:23.873
Honda CRX 1:24.695
Honda CRX 1:26.476
Mazda MX5 1:27.297
Mazda RX7 1:28.700


Portland - PIR

ITA
Honda CRX 1:25.766
Honda Civic 1:25.626
Acura Integra 1:25.447
Mazda Miata 1:25.926
Acura Integra 1:25.875
Honda CRX 1:26.304
Mazda Miata 1:25.879
Toyota Corolla 1:26.686
Mazda RX7 1:27.863
Mazda RX7 1:27.857
Toyota Celica 1:28.470
Mazda RX7 1:28.844


Seattle – Pacific Raceways

ITA
Honda Civic 1:43.272
Honda CRX 1:43.488
Nissan 240SX 1:42.862
Mazda Miata 1:44.851
Mazda Miata 1:44.595
Honda CRX 1:47.439
Mazda RX-7 1:46.801
Acura Integra 1:46.549
Mazda RX-7 1:48.093
Mazda RX-7 1:48.824
Mazda RX-7 1:48.772
Mazda Miata 1:51.882
Mazda Miata 1:43.410


Portland – PIR

ITA
Honda CRX 1:35.210
Mazda Miata 1:34.633
Honda CRX 1:34.329
Acura Integra 1:34.744
Toyota Corolla 1:36.415
Nissan 240SX 1:36.228
Mazda RX7 1:37.912
Mazda RX7 1:38.412
Honda CRX 1:39.339
Toyota Celica 1:39.512
Mazda RX7 1:39.620
Mazda RX7 1:41.126


Vancouver, BC - Mission Raceway

ITA
Honda CRX 1:25.136
Honda CRX 1:26.845
Honda CRX 1:26.542
Honda CRX si 1:29.566
Mazda RX7 1:31.193
Mazda MX5 1:31.916
Mazda RX7 1:32.790


Spokane Washington

ITA
Honda Civic. 01:51.217
Honda CRX 01:52.409
Honda CRX 01:52.841
Mazda MX5 01:53.621
Acura Integra 01:54.220
Nissan 240SX 01:54.050
Mazda RX7 01:55.737
Mazda Miata 01:56.948
Mazda RX7 01:56.958
Mazda Miata 01:57.262
Mazda RX7 01:57.289
Mazda RX7 01:57.397
Mazda Miata 02:00.044
Mazda Miata 01:53.469


Seattle Wa – Pacific Raceways

ITA
Honda Civic 1:42.763
Honda Civic 1:43.250
Honda CRX 1:43.272
Mazda Miata 1:44.208
Nissan 240SX 1:44.158
Mazda MX5 1:44.362
Mazda Miata 1:45.143
Mazda RX-7 1:48.809
Mazda RX-7 1:48.237
Mazda RX-7 1:49.063
Mazda Miata 1:49.109
Toyota Corolla 1:47.195
Mazda RX-7 1:49.084
Mazda RX-7 1:46.430


I find it difficult to argue, based both on pure specifications, mechanical properties, AND results from across the country, that the RX-7 is simply outclassed in ITA competition.

For comparison, here are the PRO7 times from the same events.



Vancouver BC - Mission Raceway:

Pro7
Mazda RX7 1:27.299
Mazda RX7 1:28.583
Mazda RX7 1:29.752
Mazda RX7 1:30.060


Portland - PIR

PRO7
Mazda RX7 1:28.111
Mazda RX7 1:29.440
Mazda RX7 1:29.054
Mazda RX7 1:28.909
Mazda RX7 1:30.266
Mazda RX7 1:29.610
Mazda RX7 1:27.796


Seattle – Pacific Raceways

PRO-7
Mazda RX-7 1:46.107
Mazda RX-7 1:47.511
Mazda RX-7 1:48.047
Mazda RX-7 1:48.502
Mazda RX-7 1:48.436
Mazda RX-7 1:49.679
Mazda RX-7 1:47.275
Mazda RX-7 1:49.977


Portland – PIR

PRO7
Mazda RX7 1:47.679
Mazda RX7 1:48.979
Mazda RX7 1:52.308
Mazda RX7 1:48.674
Mazda RX7 1:56.497
Mazda RX7 1:55.035


Vancouver, BC - Mission Raceway

Pro7
Mazda RX7 1:26.445
Mazda RX7 1:27.707
Mazda RX7 1:30.829


Spokane Washington

PRO7
Mazda RX7 01:54.410
Mazda RX7 01:54.923
Mazda RX7 01:55.938
Mazda RX7 01:57.549
Mazda RX7 01:56.177


Seattle Wa – Pacific Raceways

PRO7
Mazda RX-7 1:46.945
Mazda RX-7 1:45.996
Mazda RX-7 1:47.311
Mazda RX-7 1:48.334



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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 14, 2004).]

[ddewhurst]

Are the motor builders who use numbers like 130 hp/100 #ft. at the rear wheels National level builders. Share the builder names.

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

[ITSRX7]

I know Kirk isn't going to like this but:

These Regional results have some value, but it is so very limited. Each one of us thinks that the guy at the front of his class is a great driver with great equipment. The reality is that only very few out there actually know what to look for. Very few actually know what it takes in terms of $, car prep, driver skill and testing/tuning to go fast. That is why the AARC is such a valuable data point.

In theory, the best combinations of well-prepped cars and top drivers go and run up front. In addition, the tech-shed at this event is one of the toughest in the country all year based on the nature of the event.

Having said that, it is obvious that you can't take a single event and draw 100% of your conclusions, but this event is a great source of information given the facts.

Every bit of data must be scrubbed down and condidered for what it is in what context it came from.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Banzai240]

As you sift through LARGE quantities of data, patterns begin to emerge...

The results above reflect the results from the ARRC, which reflect the results from all over the country...

What I see in all of this data is simple... In the following order, here are the best cars in ITA:

Honda
Integra
240SX
Miata
...
...
RX-7
MR-2

One or two outliers doesn't change this pattern...

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 14, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
Are the motor builders who use numbers like 130 hp/100 #ft. at the rear wheels National level builders. Share the builder names.

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

Yes, they are nationally known builders/tuners/gurus from the SE and western parts of the country who are known for reliable and legal work.

As different dynos can produce different numbers on the same car, keep in mind that the numbers I mentioned have ranges to them.

I will call around and get permission before I start naming names!



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

[Boswoj]

Hi Darin -

The Hondas and Acuras have definitely changed the playing field here in the NW, although the lap times don't tell the whole story. One of the big unknowns in any comparison like this is the relative prep level of the cars and skill level of the drivers. There is a pretty healthy contingent of Pro-7 drivers in Conference (ICSCC) and almost all of them drive ITA as a second class. Even the most serious of those make no more modifications between races than switching to a larger tire and perhaps taking out a little weight so it's hard to equate true competitive potential from those particular times. Even with Rx-7s fully developed, I think some of the Honda/Acura packages are pretty serious overdogs in the class, which is to say nothing bad about the competitors. The Honda drivers seem to be a real tight knit group of good guys and it is really attracting some new young blood to the class. If an ITB spec line read something like a Pro-7 package then I'm sure it would attract lots of 1st gens out of the woodwork as it would represent an opportunity to actually be competitive and revitalize a class that has dwindled to nearly non-existant in the Northwest. Just as a reference point, the dominant Pro-7 driver in Conference made a vacation loop through Thunderhill and Sears Point last year and found a group of well developed ITB 2002's that were too fast for him, at least in Pro-7 trim.

Other comments:

1) ITA Miatas being guys who are basically afraid to judged as drivers if they drive SM?????!!!! - Wow! I don't claim to understand the motivation behind why any driver picks a certain class, but I'm guessing that is hardly ever the reaason. In my case, I bought a 1st gen Rx-7 which was puportedly a Pro-7 car. I was a rookie and didn't spend enough time with the rulebook first so I took it at face value. After I got it home I realized it was WAAAYYY illegal and the rest is history. Pro-7 to ITA to RS to EP for no other reason than I like to work on my car, I like to be legal, and I had targets that I wanted to race against so I made the car fast enough to do so. Probably unfair to label all of our Miata ITA friends as cowards and losers.

2) Even if there is some hairy chested, Honda beatin', he-man stud out there who doesn't want to be reclassified 'cuz he already has to hold his 1st gen back a bit so as to not embarrass his competition, the data stays the same. A 1st gen Rx-7 just doesn't have the competitive potential of some of it's newer contenders in the class, although it is still one of the most cost effective and educational cars available.

3) As far as the track descriptions - pretty accurate with a couple of added points. Mission Raceway - VERY tight in spots, like STOP/turn/accelerate at two places a lap - a place where torque is handy, and rotaries don't make much! Spokane Raceway Park - front straight is over 3/4 of a mile, so HP and aerodynamics pay large dividends. 2002's at a serious disadvantage, but nothing a pointy nose and a couple extra gears wouldn't fix. (Visions of a BMW 2002 "Superbird" hehe)

Anyway - interesting thread. Thanks to all who enjoy a civil and technical debate on things like this. There is far too much anger and name-calling on a lot of the boards these days.

Rick Bostrom
ICSCC #155 EP (EIP) & SPM 1st gen Rx-7

[This message has been edited by Boswoj (edited October 14, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Boswoj (edited October 14, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Boswoj:
[B]Hi Darin -

...... In my case, I bought a 1st gen Rx-7 which was puportedly a Pro-7 car. I was a rookie and didn't spend enough time with the rulebook first so I took it at face value. After I got it home I realized it was WAAAYYY illegal and the rest is history.

Rick Bostrom
ICSCC #155 EP (EIP) & SPM 1st gen Rx-7

B]

Thanks Rick. More insights are good.

Interesting comment regarding the legal condition of your carwhen you bought it. This is a story I hear a LOT. Scary...makes you wonder whats really running out there.....



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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Boswoj:
There is a pretty healthy contingent of Pro-7 drivers in Conference (ICSCC) and almost all of them drive ITA as a second class. Even the most serious of those make no more modifications between races than switching to a larger tire and perhaps taking out a little weight so it's hard to equate true competitive potential from those particular times.

This actually helps to shed more light on what I really wanted to show by including the PRO-7 times...

The cars CAN be slowed down with weight and smaller tires...

It doesn't look like ICSCC has much in the way of an ITB group, which is why I didn't include those times... I only found a couple of results sheets that even included an ITB car... apparently, not a real popular class this season...



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

[Mike Spencer]

Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Mike,

Good stuff. Great to have you here.

One thing to also understand is that this thread is more of a 'global' discussion where as IT7 is only a 'regional' one....

Andy,

Thanks! And FWIW, I *do* appreciate the "global" nature of this board, and racing in general. I mentioned IT7 only to give other a context in which to view my comments. Reclassed or not, I really don't have much to gain OR lose.

Having said that, I would like to reiterate what I posted a couple of days ago. If the "7" ends up in "B" and I have a shot at running up front there, I will change my class designation in a minute!

------------------
Mike Spencer
NC Region
ITA/7 RX-7 #60
1990 RX-7 Convertible (street car)

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Boswoj:
If an ITB spec line read something like a Pro-7 package then I'm sure it would attract lots of 1st gens out of the woodwork as it would represent an opportunity to actually be competitive and revitalize a class that has dwindled to nearly non-existant in the Northwest. B]

out of curiosity what are diferences with the pro-7 rules
dick

[Quickshoe]

I am from the "Rx7 can't compete in "A" and not certain that it needs more weight to go to "B" crowd.

However, when comparing lap times of ITA 7's with 'B' cars and other ITA cars all over the country please keep in mind that most of the 7's will not be fully prepared and driven by the best drivers. While the fastest B's probably will be. I am sure there are exceptions.

I make this generalization because if I were to make the commitment to fully develop an ITA car and had the skills neccessary to take it to the front...would I build an RX7? Heck no! Because of that you won't find many that are fully developed AND well driven.

[Quickshoe]

Originally posted by Boswoj:
1) ITA Miatas being guys who are basically afraid to judged as drivers if they drive SM?????!!!! - Wow! I don't claim to understand the motivation behind why any driver picks a certain class, but I'm guessing that is hardly ever the reaason

Not certain if this was in response to my comment or another elsewhere in the thread. I didn't mean to infer that they were afraid to be judged.

I wrote:GENERALLY SPEAKING: The guys/gals who race an ITA Miata are racing in ITA rather than SM because the competition is tougher in SM and in SM they have no one to blame but the nut behind the wheel.

What I meant is that if I build a MIATA and race in SM, come in 23rd of 25. Where do I look? Behind the wheel. If I don't want to face that reality...I go to ITA, race a Miata and finish mid pack where I beat people in lesser equipment and feel good about my accomplishment.

Important distinction. I am not saying that every ITA Miata driver is that way. There are people who find no appeal in Spec Classes, can race with the best of them, like the Miata and want to see how far they can carry one up the grid. That is why I stated it was a generalization.

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Quickshoe:
I am from the "Rx7 can't compete in "A" and not certain that it needs more weight to go to "B" crowd.


I make this generalization because if I were to make the commitment to fully develop an ITA car and had the skills neccessary to take it to the front...would I build an RX7? Heck no! Because of that you won't find many that are fully developed AND well driven.



Ahhhh...that may be true today, when it is obvious that the car is an old dog, bit just a year or two ago, on this board, when I would bring it up, I would get the "The RX-7 Dominates ITA" line.

You are right that the average RX-7 out there isn't well developed, and some are absolute rats nests, but with the large number of them out there, some have to be well driven and developed especially considering the amount of time the car has been around.



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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Mike Spencer:
Andy,

..... If the "7" ends up in "B" and I have a shot at running up front there, I will change my class designation in a minute!



Good attitude, Mike. Thats the other side of the coin. I hope others in IT-7 would agree and do the same. It's kind of a "If you build it, they will come" deal.

I hope.



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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
Jake, I need to ask you a question about your desire to have the 1st gen RX-7 reclassed in ITB. What is your gain in asking for the reclass of the 1st gen ? If you have a 1st gen will reclassing the car make you personaly a winner ?

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


This comment still has me scratching my head.....then, two nights ago, I met a fellow IT racer, and we were talking. He knew of me, and eventually it became apparent he was under the impression that I was part of the ITAC.

I'm not. Nor the CRB. Haven't in the past either. Would be happy to help if needed.

I just thought I'd mention it in case there were some mistaken beliefs out there.



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

[Scott Nutter]

I think that results can be misleading. At my local track there is both an ITA and an ITB driver that are extremely fast, in that they easily win the class by 1-3 seconds.

At first, when I read the classifications for next year I was depressed thinking that I would be pushed farther down the finishing order. But then I realized that this could potentialy mean more entries and that is a good thing. I want to race with someone, I don't care what class they are running in. If we find ourselves butt to nose five laps in, well then I say 'Let's get it on!'

This is just my 3rd year racing and I can undersand frustration with different strengths of different cars(closing on a car into a corner thru the apex into the exit, to be left on a straight). I view this as my problem, in that I think I can drive fairly fast, I just don't race that well.

For me at least, grouping of classes makes a difference (ITE,T2,ITS,ITA or ITA,SM,ITB,ITC) Now I don't win in either group, but I tend to race with more people in the latter.

For the record, I actually won a race in IT7 at my local track. Now while the field was average size there were only 2 Rx7s. So I had to weigh my car, 1st time ever. Now I am 185-190lbs naked in the morning (not very pretty), I run 13lb steel wheels, Autopower 1.5x.120 bolt in cage, still have undercoating, and the sound deadining stoof in the rear and I weighed in at 2380# no balast, didn't think I needed it!

#85 ITA Rx7
Get'n her out one more time this year this weekend.

[ddewhurst]

Jake, IIRC I responded to your first question of my post. Since I did my original post someone posted some of your lap times from someplace. It's fairly simple to figure out your motive for a reclass. We don't all think the same way. With a side e-mail please inform me of your racing accomplishments from over the years with the ITA RX-7. [email protected]

The Spec Miata nail has been hit on the head. Take the whole Atlantic Spec Miata tour& how many drivers have won a race. Or is that called how many divers have a prepared car that is capable of winning ? To those that think their that GREAT see if ya can keep up with the talent & win a Atlantic Tour Race. Not pi$$ing on anyone. Just stating some of what I beleive to be facts. There is only room at the top step for one person with driving talent & a well prepared car at each race. Same with IT this & that class.

Scott, I like you attitude about racing with somebody/whatever class. No matter how good the driver, all drivers can not win. Some drivers have the driving talent & minimal skills with preparation. Some are the oposite with minimal driving talent & a WELL prepared car. My only priority at each race session is to become faster each session & Have Fun http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif.

Oct 30th & 31st I will be racing at St. Louis Gateway Speedway for the first time ever with my partial converted from Spec-7 to ITA/7 car. I look at this weekend as learn the track & Have Fun. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif Over the weekend as I get my a$$ handed to me you need to look under the helmet shield & my eyes will say "Who Cares", I'm doing the best I can with "smilling eyes" & a large http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif on my face.

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

[ITSRX7]

David,

I don't get your points to Jake about his motives. He has the same motives that I would have or that 99% of the letters to the ITAC have: "please look at the classification of my car because i think it fits better here or better at xxxx weight. It would make for better racing if you did xxx."

You have issues with that? And if you do, why would you?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[RacerBowie]

"It was once, but since that time, the Integra, the 240 SX, and the Miata have been added to the class. The Miata continues to stump me. The Spec Miatas (which the SM guys are always saying could be so much better if...if...and so on) are usually faster than the ITA Miatas I have seen. Weird."

I know you have clarified your statement, but I will still use your post. No disrespect meant to anyone, I just can't freaking take it anymore. I am sick and tired of the obvious being ignored, and I have poured too much effort into the damn car to just sit and not say anything.

The Miata is not competitive in ITA??????????? Bull$#it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

3 of the last 4 years in the SE Div, one of the country's hotbeds for IT, miatas have won ITA for the season. I know, I won 2 of the 3 years. The car is practically unbeatable at a handling track. And I am trying to make it the same at horsepower tracks. I was running out of money, and looking for a new challenge, so I started running at Road Atlanta mostly, as it was 3 things: 1)A horsepower track, 2)where the "national championship" was held, and 3) where I usually got beaten.

Now, 2 years (and 3 completed races, told you I was out of money) later, I am gunning for a top 5 at the ARRC. I finished 7th last year, .015 out of 5th, before being DQ'ed for being over sound (damn old muffler) The car still needs some development, it is on single adjustable konis, doesn't have a good computer, etc. It is not quite optimized, and I can give almost anyone in the country a decent run. Sounds pretty competitive to me.

Here is the rub: If you wanted to race a miata, where would you go? To SM where the costs seem lower and the competition seems better. That is where most of the "Hot Shoes" go. When I built my car ITA was some of the best competition, and there was no SM. Frankly, I like playing with the car too much to go SM anyway.

/rant

Bowie
ITA Miata
2001 & 2002 SARRC ITA Champion

[lateapex911]

Bowie! You're back! No dis meant dude!

I thought about you when I wrote that statement, but I thought that your comments on this site were about how you were fighting an uphill battle. I waasn't aware of your successes, sorry!

But......you are just one guy.

I just haven't seen a lot of dominance in the Miata like I see in the CRX and the Integra. And the 240SX, to a lesser degree due to lesser car counts.

Tell me...at Road Atlanta, what were your times, compared to Daniels and Herr and those guys in SM?
Or at some other track if RA wasn't good to you! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



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

[ddewhurst]

***I don't get your points to Jake about his motives.***
***You have issues with that? And if you do, why would you?***

Andy, Jake is a big boy I would think & can finn for himself. He started a thread on reclassing the 1st gen RX-7 to ITB....... I questioned his reason/motive....... After someone posted some of his lap times at a track I acknowledged I viewed his track times....... I have now asked Jake to with a side e-mail (ya know PRIVATE e-mail between Jake & me.) provide me with his RX-7 accomplishments....... Pretty simple if you & he read the words & quit trying to make my words something other than what my words are....... When someone sends a letter to the ITAC do you read the words within the letter of do you strictly read between the lines ?

Andy, it's real simple for me. If the car is reclassed to ITB I will race a class other than ITB.

Bowie, good atitude with great comments.
---------------------------------------------

***But......you are just one guy.***
Jake, Bowie is just one guy, Steve Sargis is just one guy, Adam Mally is just one guy, Tom Feller is just one guy, shall I go on ? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

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

[Boswoj]

Dick -

The Pro-7 rules packages originated with NASA I believe, but quickly spread as a spec series that encouraged close competitive racing at a bargain price. It's basically completely stock 1st gen 12a drivetrains, with minimally stripped chassis, and upgraded suspensions. The tire is usually spec Toyos in the stock size, on stock 12a wheels. Carbs, manifolds, trannies, brakes, rear ends, etc - all stock. When 1st gens were available in every backyard for 300 bucks this was a fantastically affordable and competitive spec series. One of the reasons that you don't see that many 1st gens on the street anymore is that so many were "harvested" from the street to go racing! It's become a bit of a victim of it's own success really as parts are getting a lot harder to find these days, as I'm sure many of you racers know.

Rick

[RacerBowie]

At Rd. Atlanta at the ARRC: My best lap 1:45.491 (On old Kumhos) Chip Herr set fast SM lap time with a 1:46.607 (toyos or hoosiers?)

At roebling rd, my best qual. time was a 1.23.7xx (2001 SIC) SM lap record: 1.26.1 (Matthew Pombo, 4/25/04)

At CMP I hold the lap record with a 1:55.980 set in May of '01, but have done a 1:54.0xx in qualifying That is a real lame duck record, as it has been beaten A LOT, but not in a SARRC race. (Haven't run there since '02, haven't been fast there since '01, I feel confident I could get down into the 1:52's).

SM lap record there is Jim Daniels 1:53.984 set in feb of '02, about 50% of the lap records of the track were set that weekend.

So I must suck at CMP! I still think there is at least another second in the car/driver combo, I just need to finish finding it!

Bowie

[ITSRX7]

David,

I have NO IDEA what you are talking about. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif

I am asking you why you would 'question' Jake's motives as I would have the same motives if I had a car in that position.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[ITSRX7]

Double

[This message has been edited by ITSRX7 (edited October 15, 2004).]

[ddewhurst]

Andy, like I suggested Jake is a big boy & I'm sure he can handle his own affairs. If Jake sends me his accomplishments in his ITA RX-7 fine if he sends nothing I will continue to breath.

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

[Hotshoe]

Bowie:

I know how you are at CMP ..... LOL

[RacerBowie]

Rick: Yes, yes you do!

I beleive I still owe you an apology dinner from that time I brain-farted and tagged you going into 11. I have my head much farther removed from my ass these days than I did that one time!!! Although we did have some fun races there...

Bowie

[Hotshoe]

Bowie:

Sure have missed seeing you out there this year. I was side by side with P1 ITS one time this year at CMP at the finish.

Mike and I have had some fun races this year. Going to try on a SM at VIR for the 13hr. Should be fun. Are you going?

Can you see me in ITB ???? LOL

[This message has been edited by Hotshoe (edited October 15, 2004).]

[gran racing]

Maybe it's just because I'm a Honda guy, but I'm totally confused here. The "what does Jake have to gain" by the car being moved to ITB really threw me off. When I wrote my request to have the Prelude moved to ITB, guess what? I had something to gain. Why is that bad? Don't most people who write letters to the comp. board have something to gain? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif

Part II - why would anyone be opposed to having the car moved to a class where it could be more competitive? I heard of the same thing with the idea of the MR2 being moved to ITB. Someone that owns an MR2 didn't want the car moved to ITB. What?!? I've been thinking about these notions for a few days. As an outsider (not saying this is the case here) the only thing I can think of is that the competition in ITB is faster then in ITA.

Darin - you get many of these e-mails. Have you been able to figure out why people would resist these moves? (That is people against the move that drive the car as well) I can understand the weight / cage issue, but nothing more then that.

Do you really think going from a 7" wheel to a 6" wheel will have that much of an impact? Just curious, how much time do you think it change? Even on a handling track, I still don't think it will change things much at all. And on many tracks it may even cause times to decrease. Lime Rock Park, a handling track, may see a slight advantage for 7" rims. I have been told by several good resouces that have done testing at Watkins Glen, a longer course and more about HP, that a narrower tire is actually faster on this track.

Oh, 130 HP at the wheels? Is that supposed to be bad? I would kill for 130 HP at the wheels. I do understand the torque issue though.

The cars to have...often times this is created by one person racing a car and having success. Take the Integra here in the NER. Anthony built the car, everyone saw what it could do and followed his lead. Now if he built a miata, maybe that would be seen as the car to have.

I personally would like to see the RX7 (also the MR2 for that matter) moved to ITB. Do I think it needs some weight? Yes. How much? That's a tough one.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[This message has been edited by gran racing (edited October 15, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Bowie...good stuff! How many guys are there, to your knowledge in a Miata that have been able to make it work? Your times at Atlanta...do you see possible improvement there? I'm curious, obviously, because a lot of fast ITA guys have run that track, so the ITA times are very meaningful there.

I hadn't dismissed the Miata at all...actually I was watching it in the back of my mind as a possible option....IF it looked like it could hunt. So...I run against Serra (fastest race lap at the ARRCs last year), and some other guys who run right with him every race...can the Miata run in that crowd? Nice job BTW, thanks for bringing me up to speed.

Hotshoe....you've run at Atlanta? What are your times there?

David, Ok, i'll 'finn' myself...not sure exactly what that is...but hey, I'll go along.

First- I'm trying to get a global understanding of what a legal RX-7 cna be expected to do vis a vis the competition in A and B. Whch is different than what I, and MY RX-7 can do.

If the result of the question is that ITA isn't the right class, then I want to look at options. (Philosophically speaking, I perfer inter-marque classes.)

AS an owner of the car I want to have a shot, on a good day of a win against my competitors. If I want, I could go run in EP locally, win some trophies, and even beat some EP cars . But it isn't just about trophies. We have a broad inter-marque class structure in IT, and the RX-7 appears to not have a fair chance.

While I enjoy a good race with a car from any class, much as you do, I far prefer to be racing a car that is in my class, and I would prefer to be doing it on a "level" basis, in a class with more than 4 or 5 entries.

That is it for my motives.

I have no reason to hide my times etc, so here they are:

They are, of course, spotty! Lime Rock: I have seen the mid 1:04s. Road Atlanta..between breaking in a brand new engine, finding why the toe kept changing (idler arm) and testing the walls, and a stuck float in the carb, I think I saw the high 48s?? or maybe the 9s. Watkins Glen..too long ago to be relevant..or remember! Ask me next week! And NHIS..1:18s. Pocono....again, too long ago to recall.

As for positions..we often have ITA fields of of 20 -35, and I qualify in the upper half, and finish in the 5th -12th place generally. Each year it is worse as more new cars enter ITA. Often I am the lead RX-7 of about 3 - 8 of us. And yes, there was one win this year in a biblical downpoar. I started 9th on a field of 25. Second AND third overall were ITC cars!

Why is it that you will race another class if the car is put in B? Is it because you like the "marque" nature of IT-7? What if IT-7 were kept as an option in your area? Just trying to understand...

As an interesting contrast, I spoke with an ITA driver today who loves the idea of the car moving to B...he would sell his Acura and build an RX-7 if it happens and the weight is right....

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

[lateapex911]

By David Dewherst:
***But......you are just one guy.***
Jake, Bowie is just one guy, Steve Sargis is just one guy, Adam Mally is just one guy, Tom Feller is just one guy, shall I go on ?

My point, and I apologose that it wasn't as clear as it could have been, was that Bowies success is cool, but I am unaware of many others who can run at the front of a fast ITA field. Trying to learn here...

I am unfamiliar with the names you mention...perhaps it would be more illuminating if you added info...like what they drive and what they do that makes them relevant...

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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by gran racing:
Maybe it's just because I'm a Honda guy, but I'm totally confused here. yup..the Honda part is the problem! Sell it and the world will come into focus instantly! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif




Oh, 130 HP at the wheels? Is that supposed to be bad? I would kill for 130 HP at the wheels. I do understand the torque issue though.

Well, the thing about the rotary is the time it takes to get there! The torque numbers are often hovering around 100... ever watch an RX-7 on a start? Often it gets a small jump (driver reaction) then it gets swept up by cars with torque. Think of it as a bit of a wind up toy.




The cars to have...often times this is created by one person racing a car and having success. Take the Integra here in the NER. Anthony built the car, everyone saw what it could do and followed his lead. Now if he built a miata, maybe that would be seen as the car to have.


Very true...but not if he wasn't up front at the ARRCs!



I personally would like to see the RX7 (also the MR2 for that matter) moved to ITB.


And for the record Dave, you race against RX-7s all the time now...how do you do against them? (My 'motive' to the question is to show that Dave is being altruistic with his comments)

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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 16, 2004).]

[GEO46]

Why is it that you will race another class if the car is put in B? Is it because you like the "marque" nature of IT-7? What if IT-7 were kept as an option in your area? Just trying to understand...

As an interesting contrast, I spoke with an ITA driver today who loves the idea of the car moving to B...he would sell his Acura and build an RX-7 if it happens and the weight is right....

[/B]

Okay, good question there. As a former racer, soon to be current racer at WHRRI, where we do reconize IT-7, I just had this discussion with a fellow IT-7 racer.

What do we do if the SCCA re-classes the RX-7 to ITB? Well, we think that it would be best to keep the 7's a stand alone class. The reasoning is simple. Except for one or two "Volvo's from Hell", The 7's dominate the ITB/IT7 race. Granted, smaller wheels, and added weight would bring some of the other B's closer.

Keep in mind though that WHRRI is predominately a handling track. On a larger level, yes, I would like to see the 7's reclassified to B.

For comparitive lap times, you can go to www.waterfordhills.com (http://www.waterfordhills.com)
and look at the results yourself.

Just my puny little .02 cents worth.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by GEO46:
Except for one or two "Volvo's from Hell", The 7's dominate the ITB/IT7 race. Granted, smaller wheels, and added weight would bring some of the other B's closer.


And unless "Volvo's from Hell" implies that they are illegal - which I DO NOT think you are saying, then the RX-7 is still not the cream of the crop in ITB.

Right? Smells like an ITB car to me in todays environment.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by GEO46:
What do we do if the SCCA re-classes the RX-7 to ITB? Well, we think that it would be best to keep the 7's a stand alone class.

I'm curious as to how many out there think this would be a reasonable solution to this issue??? Just leave the 7's to run IT7... How acceptable would that be to those IT racers racing 7's???

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

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
I'm curious as to how many out there think this would be a reasonable solution to this issue??? Just leave the 7's to run IT7... How acceptable would that be to those IT racers racing 7's???



IMHO, not acceptable at all. If RX-7 counts in my area were not high enough to merit the IT7 separation, I would be SOL.

The IT7 class works great locally, this car needs help GLOBALLY.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited October 17, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Agreed. From a competitors view, I see it as an easy way out. I didn't choose IT to run in 2 or 4 car fields. (OK, occasionally as high as 6 or 8)

Also, IT-7 isn't available everywhere. Some regions shun extra classes.

I remember talking to someone about why IT-7 never got started in NER. He said..."why would anyone want a girlie class?"

Ouch....

Well, it's far from an ideal solution, thats for sure.



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

[ddewhurst]

Jake I looked at the 2003 ARRC ITA & IT7 qualifying & race times. I also viewed the times you posted of you own. Using ARRC numbers rounded to the whole second.
The fast ARRC ITA qualifying time was 5 seconds faster than the fast IT7 qualifying time. The fast ITA race time was 3 seconds faster than the fast IT7 race time. With those numbers in mind at what closeness of numbers would you be willing to stay in ITA. Within 1 sec, 2 sec, 3 sec, 4 sec of the ARRC ITA fast race times ?

***Also, IT-7 isn't available everywhere. Some regions shun extra classes.***

With transponders http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif my question to those that shun extra classes would be why do you shun extra classes.

***I remember talking to someone about why IT-7 never got started in NER. He said..."why would anyone want a girlie class?"***

Maybe you should be more selective in who you select to talk to. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif (Ya, on the internet also)

***I am unfamiliar with the names you mention...perhaps it would be more illuminating if you added info...like what they drive and what they do that makes them relevant...***

As you well know (I would suspect) all three of them run production, they have top prepared cars & they most times lead & leave their class.
---------------------------------------------
To all.......

With transponders if the ITAC reclasses the RX-7 to ITB why not leave the car classed in ITA parallel with the reclass to ITB. Let the driver decide which class she/he will run.

Someone previously posted using the 13B in the 1st gen. No comments. Why no comments ? Would the 13B (carb)be to fast for the current winners in ITA ? Andy ? Darin ? Geo ? Punter ?

Do you people who have a desire to be reclassed to ITB expect to be reclassed as winners out of the box ? If so, are the current ITB classed car drivers going to be disgruntled ? What are the current classed cars in ITB going to have to say ?

Maybe this thread should be opened up on a forum where ITB folks will be part of the dialog. I would bet they don't come looking on the Mazda forum. If they do look they are darn quite.

Do you folks notice That no one from the CenDiv area 4 IT7 group is talking. No one from the South East IT7 group is talking. No one from the MidWest IT7 group is talking. The SoPac has Spec-7 & Pro-7. Texas has Spec-7. Dose that make any of you think Hummmmmmmm, why are they being so quite. I would need to re-look at who the people posting on this thread are but my guess is they have no IT7 group. Because there are unhappy ITA 1st gens in the North East Division don't mean that all the 1st gen ITA owners in the SCCA are unhappy.

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

[miketrier]

I am from the Midwest Division and was one of the people who got IT7 adopted. We did it because a well-prepared and driven RX7 isn't close to being competitive in ITA against a similarly prepared and driven computer car. It moved to ITB, the IT7 class should go away. My car weighs in at about 2390 after a race with me weigning 195. I could drop a few pounds with an aluminum radiator but don't know where I could lose much more weight. With 6 inch rims, I don't think much more weight would be needed.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
Jake I looked at the 2003 ARRC ITA & IT7 qualifying & race times. I also viewed the times you posted of you own. Using ARRC numbers rounded to the whole second.
The fast ARRC ITA qualifying time was 5 seconds faster than the fast IT7 qualifying time. The fast ITA race time was 3 seconds faster than the fast IT7 race time. With those numbers in mind at what closeness of numbers would you be willing to stay in ITA. Within 1 sec, 2 sec, 3 sec, 4 sec of the ARRC ITA fast race times ?

***Also, IT-7 isn't available everywhere. Some regions shun extra classes.***

With transponders http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif my question to those that shun extra classes would be why do you shun extra classes.

***I remember talking to someone about why IT-7 never got started in NER. He said..."why would anyone want a girlie class?"***

Maybe you should be more selective in who you select to talk to. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif (Ya, on the internet also)

***I am unfamiliar with the names you mention...perhaps it would be more illuminating if you added info...like what they drive and what they do that makes them relevant...***

As you well know (I would suspect) all three of them run production, they have top prepared cars & they most times lead & leave their class.

David,

First off, on the Regional response thing: The Northeast posts here OVER 4X the next most active area. Why is that? I don't know.

If you are going to use the ARRC numbers, you will also notice that ITB and IT& are on top of each other. Draw any conclusions from that?

Transponders have nothing to do with it. I have a Sunbeam Tiger. I want my own class. You gonna create the infrastructure and pay me a trophy at every event and recongnize me at the banquest? NOPE. There first has to be demand and then there has to be a request, then action. If the 7 drivers in NER wanted IT7, I bet there could get it approved at the next Comp Board meeting.

The 1st gen 13B car is an FI car. It makes 135 stock HP. It is an EXCELLENT candidate for ITA IMHO. Putting all the 1st gen cars on the same spec line is a whole 'nother can of worms that would create an update/backdate nightmare.

I still fail to see where you are coming from with your posts or questions. Spit it out.

IMHO, the 1st gen 12A car, with 6" wheels at a heavier weight is a great fit for ITB. I think the SPECS and the DATA support this position fully.

Help us out. Stop talking cryptically and state your position and why. All the opinions help us form ours - and the ITAC is VERY split on this issue.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Andy Bettencourt]

Burping CPU...

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited October 17, 2004).]

[RSTPerformance]

In NER they do have a Mazda belt award.... almost more rewarding than winning hte race from what I hear.

I am in ITB and have responded with my thoughts. I think it should be added to ITB with a 100#-200# penalty. I am not knowledgable enough to make a better decision than that.

I also think that it should be allowed to stay in ITA at the current weight so drivers ahve the choice to run either or.

I also think that the RX-7 if moved to B should be winning races or at least in the top runnings "out of the box" they have been developed to teh max and run for several years. There can't be many more ideas out there to continuedevelopment to make them faster over time. so theoredically tehy dhould be as fast as they will ever be... unless rules/tires/and other things change that change for everyone so everyone gets faster.

Stephen

PS: they did create a "girlie" class in NER.... Hmmmm... al time "chic" cars over time..... VW Cabriolet then Miata's... Ok your right the miata might be more of a chick car than even the VW cabriolet. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

[RacerBowie]

"Bowie...good stuff! How many guys are there, to your knowledge in a Miata that have been able to make it work? Your times at Atlanta...do you see possible improvement there? ...I run against Serra (fastest race lap at the ARRCs last year), and some other guys who run right with him every race...can the Miata run in that crowd? Nice job BTW, thanks for bringing me up to speed."

To my personal knowledge, there have been 3 miatas built to this level. Mine, Mike VanSteenberg's, and Todd Reynolds'. The latter two are Florida cars, and Todd's was, I believe, sold to someone up north, or midwest, or something.

I feel that there is a minimum of a second left in the car exactly as it sits, with no further development. In about 3 weeks I will be able to give you an update, as I will have new Hoosiers for the ARRC (first set of new tires since July of '02) and will be running on a level field with the best. I think it would take 1:44s flat at least to run up front at the ARRC this year (look for a new lap record if the weather cooperates). I don't know that the car is there yet, but I am gunning for a top 5ish run.

The biggest handicap to the miata, in my view, is getting down the long straights (aero). In a draft, it is very competitive (duh). Pull out of the draft to drive by someone, and it is like throwing out the anchor. If I come out of 7 at Rd. Atlanta 100% even, side by side, with a top crx, we are absolutely equal up to about halfway through 4th gear. At that point the CRX will start to stretch it's legs, and by the end of the straight (5000 ish feet total) it will have about 1.5 carlengths on me, maybe more.

So, all development lately (and for a while to come) has been aero. I have some frontal area and drag comparisions of several ITA cars in stock configs, and the miata is a pig, almost as bad as the neon and the integra. Without having the bigger power numbers those two heavier cars have, it really hurts down the long straights. We will be playing with air dams over the next few races, trying to tease the air around the front tires. (the miata presents a large portion of the front tire to the wind, rather than hiding it behind the bumper like an integra or crx)

On top of all that, I have not driven enough lately to be on top form. I am taking the street miata to a DE next weekend to instruct/get some seat time, then running the whole test day for the ARRC. Just the test day will be more laps than I have turned in the race car in over a year. The goal, now made public for both people who have read this stupidly long diatribe to see, is 1:44.5's or thereabouts for the ARRC.

We shall see.

Bowie

[Banzai240]

To all... (well, except Andy and any other ITAC member...)

This conversation is all fine and dandy, but quite frankly, it isn't taking this subject anywhere. I don't say that to be a jerk, but rather to point out that decisions on this stuff don't get made here... they get made by the CRB, and the CRB doesn't likely read too much of this board... They read LETTERs...

As of this moment, we have ONE letter asking for the RX-7 to be moved... Hardly a swell of support for the request.

Nothing brings an issue to the forefront quite like a lot of input from the competitors. Especially if that input contains real and reasonable data highlighting how the mechanical aspects of the car compare to others in the class... (in other words, NOT results, but hp figures, weights, real numbers that aren't effected by talent, skill, or experience...)

To this point, I've heard the car isn't competitive, and that it is... I've heard that it doesn't make enough power, and that it does... I've heard the lap times aren't on the pace, and that they are... I've heard etc... and etc., etc....

I'm here to tell you that, even with VERY reasonable arguments and lots of discussion showing how the cars don't stack up on paper, most still don't agree, so there is a major uphill battle here.

The RX-7 was a real winner in ITA at one point, and the perception is that the cars just stopped being developed because they didn't have to be... they were/are cheap hp, where someone could throw together a car with the same suspension as so-and-so, put in a remanned or junkyard street motor with the same header that such-and-such runs, and go win races...

Those that seem to rise to the top, I suspect, have had a little more time spent making improvements....

That said, on paper, the car still doesn't appear to be competitive against the front runners of ITA... I think at around 2200lbs, however, it could be a lot closer, if that weight were possible to achieve.

One letter, however well it gets the ball rolling, hardly shows a huge demand for this move...

And, for the record, I'm one of the one's who think this move would work out fine... I would add weight to the car, as I don't believe that 6" wheels would make THAT big of a difference... so I'd recommend an additional 170lbs. or so...

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

[ddewhurst]

Bowie, Darin, good reading.

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

***With transponders if the ITAC reclasses the RX-7 to ITB why not leave the car classed in ITA parallel with the reclass to ITB. Let the driver decide which class she/he will run.***

Andy, I have nothing else to say about this subject. Is the previous statement reposted above simple enough for the ITAC to handle ? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

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

ps: & I will write a letter requesting the above.

[dickita15]

Darin, while I agree this thread degenerated I belive it was started with the intent of gathering information to support such requests. As to those who say that the rx7 is competitive in A now, no one on this thread will give specifics. I am curious as to where in the world of scca the rx7 is doing well in A and what the level of competition is.
As to the lack of continueing devlopment while i agree that there are many shoestring and novice efforts in Rx7's many of the IT7 cars i have looked at from cendiv and se seem to be very well turned out machines. If IT7 has acomplised one thing it has given members a reason to keep working the cars to make them better.

So a plea to those that feel the 1st gen in a fine ITA car where is this happening. what tracks, what regions, what competition.

if the car was judged solely on it's spec i think the move to be would be a slam dunk. low power to weight, very little torque, poor left to right weight distribution and live axel.

but i guess we have to look at on track performance because we hear claims that someplace legal rx7's are doing well. we just are not told where.
Dick Patullo

[Jim Susko]

Jake, to keep this simple I think you are right on. Move the car to ITB with a wheel change or even without it and the car will be competitive, but not an overdog. I did the stats myself several years ago at the ARRC and some of your responders did it for the last coudple races. This shows the car would be just right in B.

And the only data that means anything to me is the ARRC. You'll notice that some very fast regional cars never show up there since they took the cars out of ITA into their own class. That's because the fast ones now get torn down. And there the 7's run with the top B's. Narrower rims will slow them down even more.

When I went to the ARRC last year I posted fastest race lap by a couple tenths, though having my car stick in third at the start didn't help my finish. Yet here in Cendiv there USED to be a guy that was a couple seconds faster than the rest of us IT7 cars. Funny he never went to the ARRC. So forget regional comparisons. I'm not that bad a driver/preparer that I can't find two seconds I've misplaced.

Jim Susko

[dyoungre]

To all that compete with a 1st gen RX7,

If you agree that the RX7 belongs in ITB, but don't remember how to address an envelope, or put a stamp on an envelope, you can still write a letter.

EMAIL YOUR LETTER to [email protected]

It is the same as writing a paper letter to the board; supporting data can be included on the email (in a file, in the body of the email), and would surely be appreciated (if explained).

The more people who write, and the more objective data that is provided, the better chance we have. I wrote, and I received confirmation that my letter will get a response.

DO IT!

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
To all... (well, except Andy and any other ITAC member...)

As of this moment, we have ONE letter asking for the RX-7 to be moved... Hardly a swell of support for the request.



Generally speaking, you usually get letters when there is a request for input from the membership regarding an issue. There has been no request made that I am aware of regarding the 7... Until now. You will receive my hopefully logical letter! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



To this point, I've heard the car isn't competitive, and that it is... I've heard that it doesn't make enough power, and that it does... I've heard the lap times aren't on the pace, and that they are...

Here's what you (presumably) haven't heard. I know I sure haven't. Not one hard fact (or even reliable results!) that supprots the "Fine for A, too fast for B" arguement. IF so, where are the dyno numbers? What calculations are there supporting that? What legal RX-7 is whipping a Fowler CRX 9or equivilent)????

Every time someone mentions how they will clean up in B, or that they saw "a guy" run with a CRX, and I ask for supporting data, the silence is deafening.............



The RX-7 was a real winner in ITA at one point, and the perception is that the cars just stopped being developed because they didn't have to be...

Here's a perception that is not only illogical, but wrong. 'Because they didn't have to be??' Having your butt whipped around the track by a CRX indicates the need for more develepment as well as anything!

Jim Susko is a former GM chassis engineer. Say what you will about GM, but they aren't ones to hire morons! (properly utilizing their staff is another issue, but I digress) Jim has been developing suspension parts for this car and selling them quietly out of his G-Force business, for at least 7 years now, and most of his components have been revised and improved time and again. He's a top notch engineer, prep guy and driver. His runs at the ARRCs are to be heavily considered in any discussion.

Paul Yaw has been fine tuning and developing the intake side of the rotary for the past number of years as well, and is one of the, if not THE preeminant rotary carb gurus in the country. More reliable and tractable carburetion is available now for the RX-7 than there was 6 or so years ago.

Mike VanSteenburg in Florida runs a race shop, ISC, and continues to design and sell parts for the 1st gen, and up until recently campaigned one or two, before the obvious impossibility of the situation caused him to look to other Mazda models.

The RX-7 WAS once a winner, but was never THE car to have. It was as you point out, easy, cheap, fun and had lots of workable parts readily availble, and for those reasons, it was represented in great numbers. But the inclusion of the CRX, which went on to make more HP than was expected, then the addition of the Integra, the 240 SX, the Miata, and now the trickle downs from ITS moved the bar up

The RX-7s woes have most assuredly NOT been from a lack of trying!




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

[Mike Spencer]

Rather than put my "spin" on the data (or be perceived as doing so), I will just say that the results for the SAARC Invitational Challenge were posted over the weekend at the SouthEast Division website.

ITS, ITA and IT7 were all in Group 2.

http://www.sedivracing.org/SARRC/04sic_res...ults/G2RACE.pdf (http://www.sedivracing.org/SARRC/04sic_results/G2RACE.pdf)

From what I can see, the highest placing 1st gen (if it HAD been in ITA) would have been 8th. That same car holds track records (for IT7) at Roebling Road and VIR (and perhaps others).

Comparing the "7"s to ITB is a little tougher. ITB was Group 3. If you want to compare "fast laps", you can look here;

http://www.sedivracing.org/SARRC/04sic_res...ults/G3RACE.pdf (http://www.sedivracing.org/SARRC/04sic_results/G3RACE.pdf)


------------------
Mike Spencer
NC Region
ITA/7 RX-7 #60
1990 RX-7 Convertible (street car)

[Hotshoe]

Mike:

Before you go jumping to conclusions about the SIC. Remember it was a split start. And I did not have a clean lap until lap 14 and by then there was no need to push it.

I have outrun Miatas and CRXs at Savannah, CMP, Homestead, and VIR and I mean good ones. Bowie and Mike as far as the Miatas. And Greg Ginsberg and Tourigny in CRXs.

So just because some can't, doesn't mean all of us are slow.

Here is an example: http://www.buccaneerregion.org/club/result...7R14results.pdf (http://www.buccaneerregion.org/club/results/jimstark/G7R14results.pdf)

Results are from a race that was not a split start.

Rick Thompson # 99 IT7

[This message has been edited by Hotshoe (edited October 18, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

So Rick...you're going to the ARRCs I would think, right? Local for you isn't it?

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

[Hotshoe]

Jake:
I have no desire to go to the ARRC. Ever since the time "Fletch" made me push my car after running an ECR, by myself. And then gave me a hard time for parking my new wrecker next to my other truck, after I had already asked him if it would be okay. Go figure?????
I can get treated worse than that by a whole lot better people right here at home. So why drive 9 hours to race there?
VIR smokes that place. And you can't beat the North Carolina Region hospitality

I'm looking forward to the 13hr Race
..........Rick Thompson.............

[lateapex911]

Too bad, it would be great to have all the guys with a fast reputation in the same place at the same time.

What kind of times did you turn when you were there?

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

[Mike Spencer]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Mike:

Before you go jumping to conclusions about the SIC. Remember it was a split start...

Rick -

I wasn't there (and didn't realize it was a split-start), which is why I offered no opinions. (or tried not to)

I'll be attending the Roebling school in February, so I will look forward to having my butt kicked at March Memories!

BTW, I wasn't specifically looking for it but didn't notice your name on the 13-hour entry list. Which car are you with? Mine will be at the test day, and I am crewing for Heather on Saturday.

[EDIT: BTW]

------------------
Mike Spencer
NC Region
ITA/7 RX-7 #60
1990 RX-7 Convertible (street car)

[This message has been edited by Mike Spencer (edited October 19, 2004).]

[Hotshoe]

Mike:

I will be driving a Spec Miata along with four other guys. Hope we do well. They handle a little better than my car so the change should be pretty easy.
Big difference will be the power decrease on the straights.

........Hope to see you there.......
------------Rick Thompson-----------

[JeffYoung]

Rick, when you get to the straight, just hit that big switch in the middle of the dash Mark and I put in the car last weekend. It deploys the afterburners....or maybe turns on the lights....durn, I can't remember.

Mike, I ran the SIC two weekends ago. I started tail end Charlie on the ITA/ITS field due to transponder issues. I passed four cars on the first lap, and Rick and Jeff Ryan still caught me after the split start by the carousel.

Jake, I do wish we could get the "best of the best" IT7s down here to run with the fast ITA guys up North. Should be interesting to watch. From my seat, it sure looks like RX7s can be competitive in A, but we've been down this road before....lol.

Rick, see you Saturday. Looking forward to it.

[Mike Guenther]

If the first gens were competitive in ITA, then IT-7 would never have been started. The IT-7 is exactly the same as ITA, unlike Spec 7 which is a bit more restrictive to keep costs down. The IT-7 sub-group was started because the first gens were no longer competitive with the rest of the ITA fields. That's what I was told 4 - 5 years ago. Seems to me that its still that way. Still a lot of fun racing them.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Mike Guenther:
The IT-7 sub-group was started because the first gens were no longer competitive with the rest of the ITA fields.

OR, was IT-7 created because you had to actually start spending MONEY on the 7 to be competitive in ITA???

No offense intended, but 1st gens have always been known for their cheap performance... Could it be that when those guys/gals driving them saw that they'd have to actually start putting some development time into them, and try something other than what everyone else was doing, that they decided it was easier to just start their own class???

I ask this, becuase for every few of you that say the car can't compete, there is a credible source that comes out and says, YES, they can...



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

[tdw6974]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
OR, was IT-7 created because you had to actually start spending MONEY on the 7 to be competitive in ITA???

No offense intended, but 1st gens have always been known for their cheap performance... Could it be that when those guys/gals driving them saw that they'd have to actually start putting some development time into them, and try something other than what everyone else was doing, that they decided it was easier to just start their own class???

I ask this, becuase for every few of you that say the car can't compete, there is a credible source that comes out and says, YES, they can...


Is the 240sx Fuel injected or carb?

[lateapex911]

Darin, I'm very curious.

Who are these "credible sources" that keep coming up? The way you say it, it's a 3 to 1 ratio of "no", to "yes". Thats a few credible sources!

Why do I never see their name or comment? Who are these credible sources? What real world data have they provided? What dyno numbers have they provided?

I don't mean to sound critical, I am just confused. From a purely empirical basis, it's easy to see that the RX-7 is a mid packer at best, but I'm using numbers I've seen with my own eyes and numbers from four nationaly respected experts.

If there is more power out there, I want to know!

And why is it that we have never, in recent years, seen an RX-7 anywhere near the front of an ITA field in an event where post race teardowns were likely, such as the ARRC?

Frankly, there is a contradiction in your comments. On one hand you say that the RX-7 guys haven't done proper developing, but on the other you say that there IS evidence that says the car is competitive...which implies that the development HAS been done...

Give me a hint...like "call the guy in...." or something...I'm really curious what the flipside of the coin is.

Heres how it boils down for me. The CRX, for example, (which might, or might not win the ARRCs) has roughly the same HP at the wheels in IT trim, but a bunch more torque. IF the suspension were the same, AND the weight was the same, AND the brakes were equivilent, wouldn't it be reasonable to say that it would still be an uphill battle for a car with a large torque deficiency to compete?

Keep in mind that the RX-7 is still considered to be a bit dodgy in the handling department, and not up to the CRX in braking either, but the latter is partly due to weight.

However, EVEN if those factors were equal, AND the weight the same, it's still an uphill battle, as far as I can tell.

But, lets say we say, OK, they are close enough at the same weight to call it a draw......how do we get 240 pounds out of an RX-7???

We don't. (I'm pretty light at 2165 or so dry...there is no way to get any where near the needed amount out. A compromise would work, of course, IF these were the only two cars we cared about. But there are at least two or three others right with the CRX that would need adjustment too. I doubt that we'll ever see weight added to all the front runners...they aren't really the issue!

So, where am I wrong? What numbers of mine are incorrect?? I know the weights are right...so you must have different chassis dyno results...

Just trying to understand....

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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 20, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by tdw6974:
[quote]
Is the 240sx Fuel injected or carb?


Correct me if I'm wrong Darin, but some of the pertinant data on the 240SX is fuel injection, 150hp or so, IRS at the rear, good torque, but not light.

Following Strech around RA though, it looked like the car got through the corners nicely.

Can't comment on how it looked down the straight...it was kinda small for me to tell by the end!


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

[pgipson]

I sent my e-mail to the CRB last night. You may not agree with my logic, but I made my opinion known.

=============================================
With recent changes to car classifications moving more cars from IT-S to IT-A, there remains one glaring issue that the Club Racing Board should correct. The classification of the first generation Mazda RX7 (12A power). This car was for years the mainstay of IT-A, but the inclusion of cars with either more horsepower, lighter weight, (or both) as well as electronic fuel injection has long ago relegated this car to “also ran” status. This is evidenced by the numbers of regions that adopted some form of (often restricted) RX7 class, such as IT7, Pro-7, or Spec RX7. There are still lots of these cars being raced, just outside the IT class structure. And often, outside SCCA.



One solution would be to allow modifications to the RX7 to increase its competitiveness in IT-A. But that is probably not a realistic option. The alternative would be re-classifying the RX7 to IT-B, along with other cars that were recently moved from IT-A to IT-B. The RX7, with a weight increase of 100 pounds to the current weight, and the retention of the current 7” wide wheel will prove to be better suited to the IT-B class. Why retain the 7” wheels? The RX7, as you may be aware, has a unique wheel bolt pattern, used on only a few cars. Wheels of any type are often hard to find. Many racers have significant sums of money already invested in their wheel inventory. Obsolescing that investment by requiring the use of 6” wide wheels would defeat the purpose of moving the car to IT-B, which is to provide a stable class inside the IT structure for these cars and racers.



I urge you to take action to move the first generation RX7 with the 12A engine to IT-B as soon as possible.



Sincerely



Paul Gipson



AZ Region



Member # 131424

Spec RX7 class

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by tdw6974:
Is the 240sx Fuel injected or carb?

Not sure what difference it makes in this conversation, but it's Fuel-Injected... For what it's worth, my RX-3SP ran a carb, First a "tricked-out" Nikki, then a 48IDA when I put in the "real" motor...

Since I race in ITS with the 240SX, I don't see the relevence of this question in this conversation...

As I've told people before, rather than beating around the bush, just say what's on your mind. If you have something to say or some accusation to make, sack up and spit it out...

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 21, 2004).]

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Just trying to understand....



Jake,

That's all I'm trying to do as well...

We have these same conversations on our ITAC group site as well, and we are going through this same, exact, back-and-forth bantering... Believe it or not, our committee members actually do go out and talk with racers at the track, and these they report back what they hear. Many are involved with bigger racing operations, some with car prep shops, etc... Heck, one of the members RACES and ITA RX-7...

My point is, as it has been all along, that there are really mixed signals floating around with this one.

It's generally accepted that the cars are capable of 135+ whp (about 150hp at the flywheel) in full IT-prep... That's basically the value we use...



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

[tdw6974]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Not sure what difference it makes in this conversation, but it's Fuel-Injected... For what it's worth, my RX-3SP ran a carb, First a "tricked-out" Nikki, then a 48IDA when I put in the "real" motor...

Since I race in ITS with the 240SX, I don't see the relevence of this question in this conversation...

As I've told people before, rather than beating around the bush, just say what's on your mind. If you have something to say or some accusation to make, sack up and spit it out...

[tdw6974]

Darin, She above. Nothing subversive was meant by MY question about your car. I did not notice you ran in ITS. On occasion I had suggested that perhaps in IT classes a ITA-c for carb cars and ITA-FI for the injected cars might be an uncomplicated way to have more fun, I try to look at the results as how we did against the Carb equipped cars instead of the FI cars, with Ignition Fuel management systems and I think maybe even oversize pistons( Not sure about that one) rmember I'm just the truck driver( I do the entry paper work make sure the car and trailer get to and from the track) so maybe I'm out of line to even offer a comment. Of course I think it would be nice to slip a 13B in and still run in ITA http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

------------------
Tom Weaver: Logistics & Technical Support Manager IE truck driver for 1980 RX-7 ITA #63
"Hemi Haulin' Rotary"

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by tdw6974:
...remember I'm just the truck driver( I do the entry paper work make sure the car and trailer get to and from the track) so maybe I'm out of line to even offer a comment.

No... Tom and all... I appologize for my above overreaction... I woke from a dead sleep just now (3:42AM... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif ) realizing that you never mentioned "my" car, and figured you might have simply been asking about the 240SX in ITA... My BAD!

Anyhow, while, in an ideal world, it would be nice to package everything up nice and neat like you mention... It just seems so unneccesary. There is no reason the cars can't co-exist, at least that's my opinion...

That being said, trying to determine how to mix and match them is where you run into issues... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif


Originally posted by tdw6974:
Of course I think it would be nice to slip a 13B in and still run in ITA http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



While this seems like an easy solution, it violates one basic ITCS rule... You can't "create" a model. Allowing a 13B in the '79-'83 RX-7 would be doing just that... You'd have to update EVERYTHING to '84-'85 standards... Not sure how difficult or easy that would be, but I believe it involves more than just the motor and a set of brakes...

Those with '84-'85 cars, however, would be able to immediately take advantage, but of course the 13B was FI and the 12A isn't so things like wiring, etc., could also be an issue...

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 21, 2004).]

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Banzai240:

I ask this, becuase for every few of you that say the car can't compete, there is a credible source that comes out and says, YES, they can...


darin, seeing you do not want to answer jake's question for what I am sure are good reasons can you tell me at least regarding the above quote, is that there are people who say the rx7 is competitive or just that they think in could be in their mind if the work was done.
dick patullo

[Andy Bettencourt]

Dick,

From my perspective, there are at least as many people who say the RX-7's are competitive as who think they are B cars in the current structure. Of those, 1/2 again drive them. It isn't conjecture, it seems to be opinion based on real results.

This is what confuses me. IMHO, the car should be in B with some weight and 6" wheels, BUT - I am just one opinion. Some smart and resonable people on the ITAC disagree.

So, when I form my opinion with the data that is coming in (slowly), I have to wonder about the cars that can run with ITA, OR think that the car is 'more than the sum of it's parts' like some. Typically, that statement is reserved for Honda's and BMW's due to superior suspension design and powerplants that wake up when built well. But how can that apply to the 1st gen RX-7 with a crazy rear suspension, live rear axle and efectively only bolt-on engine mods being legal?

So I begin to wonder about two things - the legality of the fast RX-7's and the depth of the ITA classes that they are compared too. Adding to that are a few of the fastest IT7 cars not running them at the ARRC. I know NOTHING but it DOES make me wonder.

I also find it interesting that the people who think they are competitive DON'T run them in ITA. Hmmm.

Bottom line? The feedback is SPLIT and the ITAC is SPLIT. How can a recommendation be made either way? Our findings can be presented to the CRB and they can take them for what they are worth.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited October 21, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited October 21, 2004).]

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by dickita15:
...is that there are people who say the rx7 is competitive or just that they think in could be in their mind if the work was done.
dick patullo

As many of you might imagine, when people confide in "us" privately, we can't go around splashing their names or information all over the place, otherwise, they will no longer confide... As Andy said, these are credible sources, drivers, etc... Not just speculation... Heck, we've heard from drivers HERE who don't want the cars moved... Don't quite understand that, but it's happened none-the-less...

Andy summed it up perfectly, and I don't think there is anything I could add to what he said...


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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 21, 2004).]

[ddewhurst]

***Heck, we've heard from drivers HERE who don't want the cars moved... Don't quite understand that, but it's happened none-the-less...***

Some of us understand that 75% plus of the people racing will never be first to see the checkered flag fall. If drivers raced only to be first to get the checkered flag the fields would be VERY SMALL. IMHJ http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

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

[Boswoj]

Interesting thread, and even more interesting the conclusion it seems to be coming to. There are so many "intangibles" that must come into deccisions like this! From my limited perspective as a guy who passed through ITA, but continues to monitor it fairly closely is that if similar cars, with similar prep levels and drivers, are competing on the same track on the same day, the result is that the Rx-7 is no longer a front-line competitive ITA car. On tracks that favor the Mazda the gap may not be very big, but it is definitely there. Some would like to compare only top level programs to equate the competitive potential of a given model, but I think that gives a statistically misleading result. It stands to reason that larger samples are absolutely REQUIRED for any real conclusions to be drawn. Unless you believe that ALL Hondas are prepared 10% better than ALL Mazdas, then the larger the sample - the better the data (within certain guidlines of course!). If someone had access to data that contained lap times and finishing positions for every race that pitted a race prepared Honda against a race prepared Mazda on the same track at the same time then a "mean competitive potential" value could be obtained. The more data the better as it would tend to smooth out any anomalies caused by extraneous data caused by sandbagging, cheating, accidents, over or under-prepared cars, etc. I'm only using Honda and Mazda as examples here, by the way. It seems like car classification is based a bit too much on a few performance parameters that don't really tell the whole story. Do I have a better formula? Well, no. I'm sure it is a very difficult chore no matter how you slice it. I think the Mazda community (myself included) liked having a very affordable car that was capable of winning in ITA. I think the balance was tipped when some of the new ITA cars were put in the class, but it's kind of an evolutionary thing that's bound to happen. CARS JUST KEEP GETTING BETTER. The most important thing is to look what kind of move will put the most cars on the track in as competitive a situation as possible without bankrupting either the club or it's members. We don't want to scare away new OR old members do we? There are lots of organizations running Spec-7 or Pro-7 type classes and a competitive Rx-7 package in ITB could "re-collect" those cars into the SCCA fold. Even if it turns out to be a no-go, it's a good question to ask.

[Hotshoe]

[quote]Originally posted by pgipson:
the retention of the current 7” wide wheel will prove to be better suited to the IT-B class. Why retain the 7” wheels? The RX7, as you may be aware, has a unique wheel bolt pattern, used on only a few cars. Wheels of any type are often hard to find. Many racers have significant sums of money already invested in their wheel inventory. Obsolescing that investment by requiring the use of 6” wide wheels would defeat the purpose of moving the car to IT-B, which is to provide a stable class inside the IT structure for these cars and racers.

Paul Gipson


To everyone,

This is probably my biggest concern. If I could retain my wheels and run with more weight I would not mind the move to ITB but, I don't see that happening.

...Good Point Paul,thanks for bringing it up.

[Hotshoe]

[quote]Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Just to give you a clue:
So I begin to wonder about two things - the legality of the fast RX-7's and the depth of the ITA classes that they are compared too. Adding to that are a few of the fastest IT7 cars not running them at the ARRC. I know NOTHING but it DOES make me wonder.

I also find it interesting that the people who think they are competitive DON'T run them in ITA. Hmmm.

Andy,

....The shoe doesn't fit but, bring your ITS car down to Carolina Motorsports Park sometime or even Savannah. And let me help you form another opinion.

....Some of us have been driving an 1st Gen RX7 for a long time (11years) and have gone to the tenth degree to get the most out of them. I have driven a couple of cars that are even faster than mine so the CAR is not the only part of the equation.

So when you are ready let me know, I wouldn't want to miss it.

Something to keep in mind: Just because someone doesn't want to go to the ARRC doesn't mean they have a suspicious reason. (I already gave mine)
And, just because I spend hundreds of hours developing my car and my talent doesn't mean that a person with half as much time invested should go as fast.

I'm ready....car is in the trailer.....

Rick Thompson #99
2000,01,02,04 IT7 SARRC Champion

[Banzai240]

Rick Thompson #99
2000,01,02,04 IT7 SARRC Champion



Rick,

I'm not sure you are getting what he said... You are a prime example of what he's talking about...

Put in the form of a direct question... If your car is "competitive" in ITA... why are you running in IT7 instead??? Running IT-7 only proves that your Mazda is faster than the other Mazdas...


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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 21, 2004).]

[Hotshoe]

Darin:

...I get the jest of the comment but, since we run with ITA and I outrun most if not all of them doesn't that prove a point!

...I've had some people think I was in ITS. (even though that is the class my car started in)

...I ran ITA for almost six seasons and chose to run IT7 for about the same reason a Miata driver chooses SM over ITA. Plus that is where my friends run.

...Running in ITA would only change one thing for me... The decal on the side of my car....The drivers race me just as hard now in ITA as they would if I was to change.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Rick,

I am not sure what you are challenging me too...an ITS RX-7 against your IT7? Huh?

Anyway, Darin is right. I am trying to figure out why guys run in IT7 when they (the top cars/drivers) say the car is competitive in ITA.

IT7 was created because they were not.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
As Andy said, these are credible sources, drivers, etc... Not just speculation...


Darin, i am not trying to get you to give up sources but I would like to know if you can tell me of any regions, tracks or divisions where rx7s are competitive against well preped ita cars.
my frustration is in trying to deal in facts it is easier if you know what you are trying to overcome.
dick

[dyoungre]

Hotshoe,
Please help us with data.

What tracks do you run?
Can you share lap times - ITA, as well as IT7 and ITB at each of these tracks?

Can you share what types and how many ITA cars you are beating in your region?

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[Quickshoe]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
So I begin to wonder about two things - the legality of the fast RX-7's and the depth of the ITA classes that they are compared too. Adding to that are a few of the fastest IT7 cars not running them at the ARRC. I know NOTHING but it DOES make me wonder.

I also find it interesting that the people who think they are competitive DON'T run them in ITA. Hmmm.


Bingo!! That speaks volumes.



------------------
Daryl DeArman

[Dano77]

Greetings to all. I probably should not be posting as a current RX7 driver,but I will. The 7 is probably one of the most over developed cars in ITA right know, so the statement of not wanting to spend money dosent wash. Is the car competitive in A? Good question,at this time Jake has the best example in our division,(Mines a roach) and its pretty gross to watch as the Honda brigade spools up on lap 3 & slowly inches away. Will the car fit in B? again good question, 200# isnt going to change the balance to bad, & the wheels will help,We proved it at LRP. Thin tires= Less drag & more momentum. You just need to believe the car will stick.
As for mis leading statement of competitveness,please dont make stuff up, you know who you are. Prove im wrong & I wont be upset. Show us real results, or ccome north & we'll show you some fast 7's getting beat...
Dan
77 ITA RX7(Fast car)
77 ITA Miata(Slow Car)

[GEO46]

[quote]Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
[B] And unless "Volvo's from Hell" implies that they are illegal - which I DO NOT think you are saying, then the RX-7 is still not the cream of the crop in ITB.

Right? Smells like an ITB car to me in todays environment.

AB
[quote]

No, I certainly wasn't implying that the "Volvo's from Hell" were cheating.

Better Driver's, or better prepped car's. I don't know where the difference was. Except that as far as I am concerned, My car was prepped to the Nth degree. Hientz engine, custom cold air intake, Yaw carb. dialed in correctely on the dyno. Custom exhast also tweaked on the dyno. MSD ignition. G-ForceEngineering suspnsion. Yea, maybe could have done a "little" more with springs and shocks.

So I think I had a really well developed RX7. But usually couldn't run with two of the Volvo's.

Unfortuanatly, there was also an equal, or greater gap back to the rest of the "B" cars. This year however, a couple of the "other B cars" have stepped it up a notch, and are running quite close to the IT7 cars.

My opinion is still that the RX7 doesn't belong in ITA, perhaps in "b", I don't think that it would be an overdog. At Whrri though, I would still like to see it as a stand alone class.

Due to economics, we aren't seeing the turn out for IT7 as we have in the past couple of years, (myself included), but that's the same for all classes at WHRRI. Heck, ITA, and ITC are almost non-existant with only one or two cars per class.

Also, I am not a current SCCA member, so me sending something to them would be meaningless.

[GEO46]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
IMHO, not acceptable at all. If RX-7 counts in my area were not high enough to merit the IT7 separation, I would be SOL.

The IT7 class works great locally, this car needs help GLOBALLY.

AB



I agree, it's a great local solution. BUT, what to do about the underlying problem? Do we move the 12A 1st gen to iTB, or, do we petition the SCCA to reconize IT7 as a class for all 12A rotories as we do at WHRRI, or reconize IT7 as a 1st gen 12A only class? BTW, I forgot to mentention that WHRRI also reconizes rx2's and rx3's running a 12A as an IT7.

[Hotshoe]

Okay Dan. Here you go. I'll let the results speak for themselves. (I did not make these up)

Roebling Road ...... ITA 3rd

http://www.buccaneerregion.org/club/result...G7R7results.pdf (http://www.buccaneerregion.org/club/results/jimstark/G7R7results.pdf)

Roebling Road ..... ITA 1st

http://www.buccaneerregion.org/club/result...7R14results.pdf (http://www.buccaneerregion.org/club/results/jimstark/G7R14results.pdf)

VIR ........ITA would have been 3rd but I moved over and let two cars have there own race
http://www.ncrscca.com/Pdf/2004%20Results/...S/race3_sat.pdf (http://www.ncrscca.com/Pdf/2004%20Results/SARRCMARRS/race3_sat.pdf)

VIR ........ ITA 3rd was keeping pace with the leader but staying out of the race in ITA
http://www.ncrscca.com/Pdf/2004%20Results/...S/race3_sun.pdf (http://www.ncrscca.com/Pdf/2004%20Results/SARRCMARRS/race3_sun.pdf)

VIR .......ECR ...ITA 2nd .......started last I started and Don Vincini finished.

http://www.sedivracing.org/ECR/04Results/040321.pdf

VIR .........ITA 1st

http://www.ncrscca.com/Pdf/2004%20Results/...ies/MM04_G2.pdf (http://www.ncrscca.com/Pdf/2004%20Results/March%20Memories/MM04_G2.pdf)

CMP........ITA 1st

http://www.ccrsolo2.org/forms/mm2004/results/529_4.pdf

CMP .......ITA 2nd Was side by side with P1 ITS at the line

http://www.ccrsolo2.org/forms/mm2004/results/530_4.pdf

Lowes ..... ITA 2nd Results are from Jeff Ryan another fast IT7

http://www.ccrsolo2.org/forms/jj2004/results/final.htm

Rick Thompson # 99 IT7

[JeffYoung]

Guys, I'm a slow ITS driver in the SEDiv, in my second season. Maybe I can offer a bit of objectivity here, at least as to my perception of the relative speeds/prep levels/driver talent (careful there I know) of the ITA and IT7 cars here. Note that:

1. I run with a run group of ITS/ITA/IT7. I race against the midpack ITA/IT7 cars, and the slow ITS cars.

2. I run VIR, Roebling, and CMP regularly. I have been to Barber, Road Atlanta and Lowe's (Charlotte Motor Speedway).

Running against the 7s and the ITAs, I can say the following:

1. Andy, NO ONE in the SEDiv that I know of, other than Charlie Taylor from Tennessee, runs an RX7 in ITA anymore. For whatever reason, the culture here is to run in IT7. As Rick says, he runs against ITA anyway, the only difference is the decal.

2. Rick T. and OTHERS (Don Vincini, Paul Perez, Grover McNair) routinely beat fast ITA cars here in the SEDiv. Rick's car is legal and overweight -- others have made sure of the legality in the past. I think there is a good body of knowledge on how to make RX7s fast in the SEDiv, and good driving talent.

3. I get the feeling that the CRXs and Acuras down here are not as well prepped as up North, although I don't want to be unfair to the fast ITA guys here. We do have OPM and Tom Fowler, and David Rhoades won the AARC a few years ago in an NC Region CRX.

4. So, and no offense to Jake et. al., I just think that because of Speedsource, Van Steenburg and others, and the number of years of seat time some guys have down here, the 1st Gen RX7s in my neck of the woods are faster than most. What does that tell me? That perhaps, and this is just a perhaps, with time intensive development and seat time, the car can still run up front in ITA anywhere in the country.

I don't think ITA/IT7s is broken and I really enjoy the racing against the CRXs and IT7s. From my vantage point, in this neck of the woods, moving the 7s to B would create a B overdog (Rick's track record at VIR is SEVEN SECONDS faster than the ITB record) and would remove a legitimate contender from my run group.

In fact, if some of the above is true and the IT7s really do have 150 crank hp, then my car at MAYBE 170 hp at the crank and 2560 should be in ITB....lol...yeah right, a V8 in ITB.

I'd hate to see a "nationwide fix" of a problem that only exists due to regional disparities.

[Banzai240]

Gotta LOVE these NO-WIN decisions we get to make! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif

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

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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by JeffYoung:
In fact, if some of the above is true and the IT7s really do have 150 crank hp, then my car at MAYBE 170 hp at the crank and 2560 should be in ITB....lol...yeah right, a V8 in ITB.

Jeff... Hardly apples to apples... If you've ever driven with a "beer-keg" under the hood, you'd know that 150hp at the flywheel, but only 105lb/ft of torque, isn't exactly the same as 150hp on just about any other car...

By the way... I found this site when looking for this torque figure... (not sure what a 150hp 12A makes for torque, but I'm guessing it doesn't gain much over the stock figures...) Kind of an interesting history of the 12A...

A Tribute to Mazda: Past, Present, and Future (http://me.a-spec.ca:6001/)

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 22, 2004).]

[dickita15]

Rick,
Thank you for providing the links to your results. It is very helpful in understanding your perspective. It is so hard for all of us to get a handle on actual performance of different cars at different prep level when we see only the actual results in our limited world. I can see from trying to sift thru this how easy it becomes in national racing for the RRB to rely heavily on runoffs result when evaluating performance.

In my case all I have for first hand knowledge is what I see here in the northeast and what I see at the ARRC. I will assume that in your world as in mine very few of the cars at a given race have both the car prep and driver talent to reach their full potential.

From the results you provided I see you sometimes race against Attila Luckacs and Jeff Ryan and your performance is on a par with them. Both of them raced IT7 at the ARRC and are very good. I think it would be safe to assume if you came to the ARRC you would be competitive with these two.

At the ARRC last year the top 8 ITA cars were within 1.5 seconds. 5 of these drivers are from the SE division. Unfortunately none of these know top-level cars were in the races you provided results for. Jeff and Attila were 2.1 to 3.7 seconds slower than these SE ITA cars at Atlanta.

From what I can determine Rick if you came to the ARRC with the performance you have demonstrated you would be in a great battle for the lead in IT7 but would be racing for 10th in ITA.

Dick Patullo

[Hotshoe]

Dick:

...You may be right about an RX7's performance at Road Atlanta. Because of all of the elevation changes it is at a great disadvantage to any car with more torque.

...I have only run Atlanta four times and my best lap was a mid 1:48. With some work (on my part) I could probably get down to a low 1:47 or high 1:46 with (drafting) help.

...I always see everyone doing comparisons to cars and lap times at Road Atlanta. Is that only because of the ARRC? Why not use Virginia International Raceway? We run a dual sanctioned race once a year (SARRC/MARRS) that draws a pretty big crowd of different cars and drivers. So why not use the times from those two races? The cars are on a level playing field as far as performance.

______ Rick _____

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
...I have only run Atlanta four times and my best lap was a mid 1:48. With some work (on my part) I could probably get down to a low 1:47 or high 1:46 with (drafting) help.

Rick that does not sound very far off. Jeff and Attila did 1:47.9 and 1:47.7 in their IT7 cars. But Serra did a 1:43.9 in a Integra.


Originally posted by Hotshoe:
...I always see everyone doing comparisons to cars and lap times at Road Atlanta. Is that only because of the ARRC? Why not use Virginia International Raceway?


Yes the ARRC guarentees that some of the best cars will be there for compairison. I would love to have data from other tracks but we need events where we are comparing know well prepped well driven cars. It looks to me that you, Jeff Ryan and Attila Lukacs are great examples in the SE of good IT7 cars but we need to compare you Tom Fowler, Alex Mureson, Adam Richman, Bowie Gray or Ken Mersereau. All SE guys who are proven quick at the ARRC in ITA.
dick

[Quickshoe]

Rick,

So even with drafting you 'might' be 2 seconds a lap off of the fastest of the ITA cars! That is HUGE! See, you need to come on the "Rx7 needs to be in B" side of the fence--no matter how successful you are with the A cars in your area.

To re-emphasize the variation in regional results it was earlier posted that Rick runs 7 seconds faster than the ITB lap record...no wonder the B guys there wouldn't want him. Nor would it be logical for him to think he belongs in B. However, out here, at WSIR running 7 seconds faster than the B record would be faster than the ASedan, T1 and GT4 records! So when I hear 7 seconds faster than B...I think no way. Just as when you (rick) hear "can't keep up in A...belongs in B" it is logical for you to think that everyone else must suck and/or their cars aren't prepared.

The majority of the regions will find that a 7 in B won't upset the apple cart. For those regions where it will, hopefully the 7's will stay in IT7! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

[Hotshoe]

Dick:

....I fail to see where Road Atlanta should set the standard. I gave you race results from CMP where I was almost first in ITS right beside the current ITS Champion.

...I've seen it mentioned in this forum time and time again where some cars do better than others at certain tracks. And I know this to be very true.

...Road Atlanta is probably the worst track for my car as far as corner exit speed because of turn 1 turn 5 and the last turn before the bridge. Two of those turns are so slow that it is hard for me to get enough traction to get in the throttle hard enough to get a good run off the corner. These two corners are a piece of cake for a front wheel drive car like a CRX,

...So if you want to compare apples to apples you need to use more than just one tracks results.

......Rick......

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
....I fail to see where Road Atlanta should set the standard.
...So if you want to compare apples to apples you need to use more than just one tracks results...

I could not agree more. the more tracks we look at the better, but I need to compare the best rx7's with the best Ita cars. The 5 SE guys I listed are know fast ITA cars.
I would love any data that show what you 3 fast IT7 cars can do against these 5 fast ITA cars and every track.

and rick thanks again for being so open. most of those who disagree with me are being very criptic.
dick patullo

[lateapex911]

And while Road Atlanta serves the purpose of this discussion by providing a common ground for the best drivers and the best cars, it adds an element of legitimacy to the results due to the fact that if you run at the front, you are LIKELY to be looked over in the tech shed. (Agreed, even that is no guarantee of legality, but it does have an effect on who shows and what they bring).

Also, RA does hurt the 7 to be sure, but then so does Watkins Glen, Lime Rock,
Road America, Mosport, Beaver Run, Sears Point and Laguna Seca. (All could be considered "classic road courses" and draw drivers regardless, due to their enjoyable layouts.)

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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by JeffYoung:
4. So, and no offense to Jake et. al., I just think that because of Speedsource, Van Steenburg and others, and the number of years of seat time some guys have down here, the 1st Gen RX7s in my neck of the woods are faster than most. What does that tell me? That perhaps, and this is just a perhaps, with time intensive development and seat time, the car can still run up front in ITA anywhere in the country.



Jeff, I appreciate your points, but this one strikes ma as contradictive.

Correct, you have a lot of RX-7 driving and develpoment talent in the SE. And the RX-7s are probably faster than most.

But...even in the "hotbed" of RX-7 speed and talent, do we see them getting whipped in a track right in the middle of the SE?

The fastest race lap last year was actually set by Jim Susko, from Ohio. He was nearly 4 seconds a lap back.

I agree that if this IS a regional issue, then it is a case of the slow(er) RX-7 guys getting on the stick and getting the job done. But I'm trying to convince myself that it is only a regional issue, and so far, the results are not convincing, and the empirical data is in total support of the known credible results that have common elements.



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

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Quickshoe:

The majority of the regions will find that a 7 in B won't upset the apple cart. For those regions where it will, hopefully the 7's will stay in IT7! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif



This I disagree with. If the car *should* be in ITB, then it should. Upsetting the apple cart in a specific Region doesn't bother me IF the cars *should* be together.

Let me explain. Take a mid-pack ITS car. It ISN'T OK to class that car in ITA just beacuse it can't run upfront - or upset the apple cart. Wrong is wrong.

Conversly, reclassing the fastest ITC car into a 'slow' ITB region is wrong, even it it could win. Wrong is still wrong.

On the track that the IT7 record is 7 seconds better than the ITB record. Tell me about that. From someone who thinks that the 12A RX-7 is an ITB car with weight and 6" wheels, what defines this disparity?

Tell me the records for ITS, ITA, ITC and SM for comparison. The fastest RX-7 on the planet or an average ITB field - or a legitimate case of a track REALLY favoring a car?

Help me understand 7 seconds..

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[dickita15]

class its ita itb it7 sm
5/11/02 2:17 2:21 2:23 2:17 2:23
11/2/02 2:15 2:21 2:25 2:22 2:23
5/10/03 2:15 2:20 2:26 2:22 2:24
5/11/03 2:16 2:19 2:26 2:22 2:23
3/22/03 2:16 2:23 2:26 2:21 2:22
3/21/04 2:15 2:20 2:27 2:21 2:21
5/8/04 2:14 2:20 2:25 2:21 2:22
5/9/04 2:12 2:21 2:26 2:21 2:21

Well I went thru the ncrscca websight to look at times from VIR. I learned a few things from this exercise.
First this is very hard to look at data from all kinds of places and try do draw conclusions. I can see why decisions such as this are not easy for the ITAC.
Second that VIR is a very good track for Rx7’s I guess I need to make a trip next year.
Next Rick you have got this track down pat. I am impressed. I think all the fast time in IT7 are yours.
There are names I recognize in Its and Itb. Kip set some of the times in S and Sam Moore set some in B. I do not know any of the ITA cars.

Well I have to admit that VIR is very good to Rx7’s and with 6” wheels and weight the still probably win there in Itb.

Dick Patullo


[This message has been edited by dickita15 (edited October 24, 2004).]

[moto62]

Originally posted by dickita15:
....I guess I need to make a trip next year....Well I have to admit that VIR is very good to Rx7’s and with 6” wheels and weight the still probably win there in Itb.

Dick Patullo

So what do you say Dick. A trip to VIR in the schedule for next season! I'm in.
I say move the 7 to B, 6" wheels, add a hundred lbs(educated guess) and have at it. It won't be an overdog by any means but at least it would have a shot for a win. Get rid of IT7 since it was merely added to give the 7 somewhere to race. ITB could be the new home of the 7 where it should nicely fit in. Let's say the move did happen. There is a slight chance that I could be lured back from the dark side and back into a wonderful 7. Going head to head with Volvos from hell and Opel GT's, whoooo hoooo. Could be a hoot.
Ray

[lateapex911]

So to distill the results from VIR, I get:

In ITA Adam Richman was there once, but it rained, still he was 8 seconds faster than IT7, which is opposite my experiences...my best runs are always in the wet/slimy.

Anyway:
ITA 2:19.1 by James Evans in CRX, some 2:20s and 2:21s as well.
ITB 2:23.8 by Sam Moore in a Volvo, and some 2:24s and 2:25s
IT7 there was one 2:17.6 by Thompson, but the same day Vincini, who is ussually just tenths behind Thompson was 3 seconds back. In addition, it is the only time Thompson has broken 2:20 that I could find. It's almost 3 seconds in front of all times he has before or since, and I wonder what the circumstances were behind that time.

Other than that, the IT7 time is 2:21.0 by Thompson, and Vicini with others (Lukas) tenths behind.

So, ITA is 2 seconds clear of IT7 (if you consider the record an abberation), and IT7 is 2.7 seconds clear of ITB, on lap times of almost 2.5 minutes

Adjusted to a shorter track of course, those differences would close.

I also looked at Barber results as well, although the track hasn't seen much action yet. No "players" in B have run there yet as I can tell.

ITA: 1:46.7 by Reynolds in a CRX
ITB: 1:50.0 by Deathmontarge (sp?) in a Swift
IT7: 1:48.9 by Lukas in an RX-7

SO ITA is 2.2 seconds clear of IT7, which is 1.1. seconds clear of ITB.

Tough to draw any super solid conclusions from these two tracks, as the ITA "names" have been in short supply at both, and ITB hasn't been well represented at Barber.

It does appear that the RX-7 is favored at VIR, but I wonder if it is really as far ahead of B as the the numbers indicate. Throw out the one RX-7 time, and the difference is a more reasonable 2.7 seconds ahead, on a long track.


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

[Hotshoe]

Jake:

...Your analogy is amusing. By your standard fastest lap wins the race? I always thought it was consistency.

[lateapex911]

Sorry Rick...not sure of the analogy you're refering to...

Of course you're right, consistency and some racing luck, or lack of bad luck are the keys.

But what I'm trying to see here is potential , and the relative differences between cars in different classes.

Are the conclusions a fair indication of the relative potentials of the cars at VIR?

(I think the sample, and the players, so far, aren't going to lead to a true picture of the situation at Barber unless there are more results that I haven't found)

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

[Hotshoe]

Jake:

...If the information that Dick compiled about VIR was to be averaged, it would have the RX7 at a slight disadvantage but, those numbers are for fastest lap not race lap averages. Some cars are better in traffic, draft better, and a host of other variables not taken into consideration.

... I would rather see a performance adjustment made to the RX7 to help make it more competitive for those with less than expected results.

...Now this is just my opinion so don't burn me at the stake for saying this. Especially you ITB guys.

...1. I consider an RX7 to be a good ITA class car but it needs less restrictions on the motor.

...2. Adding weight (to a car that is already stressing the brakes) does not make sense to me.

...3. Having those of us that have spent thousands of dollars on wheels that will fit nothing else, just to loose an inch and go to 6" wheels is not very cost effective. (You can street port a motor cheaper)

...4.I have had experience running with the ITB group and it was a feeling of hostility to say the least. They put our group, IT7, in with them for a whole season and they did not like us then and they sure will not like us if they put us in ITB. Believe me, been there done that.......

.....I have several other reasons but these are the most important to me. I can see the biggest disadvantage is power related so, it would be nice to have some more.

....Fire Away....

Rick Thompson

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Jake:

... Some cars are better in traffic, draft better, and a host of other variables not taken into consideration.

... I would rather see a performance adjustment made to the RX7 to help make it more competitive for those with less than expected results.

...1. I consider an RX7 to be a good ITA class car but it needs less restrictions on the motor.

...2. Adding weight (to a car that is already stressing the brakes) does not make sense to me.

...3. Having those of us that have spent thousands of dollars on wheels that will fit nothing else, just to loose an inch and go to 6" wheels is not very cost effective. (You can street port a motor cheaper)

...4.I have had experience running with the ITB group and it was a feeling of hostility to say the least. They put our group, IT7, in with them for a whole season and they did not like us then and they sure will not like us if they put us in ITB. Believe me, been there done that.......


....Fire Away....

Rick Thompson



A long time ago, on this forum, we were discussing PCAs, and it was getting heated. I commented that while it appeared we were miles apart, that a table, a few beers and an hour or so would have us agreeing that we all had good points and we were closer than we think. I think this is similar.....

First, I agree that staying in A is by far the better option....IF it were an option.

Do you agree that, in A, the RX-7 is one of those cars that has some "race disadvantages"? I think it has a couple issues:

A- Throttle response- Due to the rotary's relative lack torque, and the carbs use of vacuum secondaries, even when I get a jump at the start, and move a few feet on the other guys, they hit the throttle, and poof! So much for my jump. Of course, the right revs, and some loading help, but during a race, the response difference is often apparent.

B- Torque. Or lack of. Some tracks just don't work with our transmission ratios, and the lack of toque is a hurdle. Hills can be excruciating.

So...you like the idea of "enhancements" to the car and staying in the class?

1- Less restrictions? Such as?? How much HP do you think would be needed? (Lets say, just for the sake of the debate, that we need to run 1:44.0 at RA to be 'in the game' at a national level....I'd use other tracks if we had the same data base of known top line ITA drivers results ....)

So, what torque/hp do you think would do the trick?

How do you suggest it be attained?

2- Extra weight & the affect on the brakes. I am unsure if 100 pounds would make a black and white difference. Besides, IF the car needs to be slowed down to move to B, weight will affect all parameters. Braking included, by design.

3- Agreed....buying new wheels, (lets say 3 sets) sucks. This is clearly a personal issue. You see no need to do it becasue you are running in IT7 and have plenty of races with plenty of other IT7 guys. Those with no IT7 class, (and therefor less RX-7s showing up), would obviously rather suck it up, spend the bucks and actually have a chance.
I have no idea what street porting costs.

4- I guess the acceptance of the car in B is going to vary from region to region and from driver to driver. Those that I have talked to in ITB welcome the concept if it is done fairly. But I imagine all are not as secure and big picture oriented. I am surprised you sensed hostility when running in the same group with the B guys...you weren't stealing trophies..whats up with that?

So...if we were to stay in A, how can we best accomplish competitive parity, and follow the philisophical base of the IT category??




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

[ddewhurst]

Jake, maybe you as one of the people who has all this knowledge of WHY the 1st gen RX-7 can not be fast enough (unless it's illegal)in ITA should figure out what amount of Street Porting (what the shape would be) would keep the 7 capable of racing with the newer model cars within ITA. You know, talk to your Pro motor builders (no names required) & get some numbers & post the numbers for conversation. If I was good at searching I would retreive the info from the Production site. A couple builders posted some 12A info there.

[Hotshoe]

Jake:

...I'm not familiar with the numbers but, some of the guys around here that use to drag race RX7s have told me that a basic street port picked up their 1/8 mile times by .5

...I imagine Mike at ISC Racing could probably provide us with some good TESTED results as far as porting and the gains that can be achieved.

...I think this would be the most economical performance gain. Almost all of us go through our motors, so porting would not cost much more.

....Rick....

[lateapex911]

This is an intersting concept.

The equivilent parts in a piston engine are the valve sizes, and the cam, as the port size and location change the amount of intake and exhaust charge, as well as the timing. There are no provisions in IT to change cams nor valve sizes. I am very doubtful that the ITAC, and the CRB would consider such a concept.

The other issue would be the regulation of the port, and the enforcement of it.

Also, I would imagine competitors would cry "foul" much faster and louder than if the car were moved down a class. The word "porting" conjures up big time fear in all those who must compete.

We discussed other options in previous threads, such as intake port matching, weight loss, beveled rotors, and alternate carbs, but there seemed to be no solution that was physically possible, produced the appropriate power, and met the philosophical needs of the category. But, perhaps there are other ideas.

Which is why I am looking at other solutions...such as reclassing with a rim change and weight adjustment.



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

[Banzai240]

Street Porting???

Guys, I can all but assure you that no such allowance is going to be granted this car under the current ITAC or CRBs watch... Talk about opening up Pandora's box...

If the car is to be made to fit, it needs to be made to fit under current IT rules, without any special allowances, or at least that's my personal perspective on it... (here come the arguments about the "port-matching rule for rotaries... a special "non-allowance"... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif )

Con-Call tomorrow night... This one's going to be interesting!


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

[dickita15]

guys darin is right. there is a huge worry that porting would get out of hand. we all know that a dremel tool can make huge power. You might make a case for port matching the intake manifold only but I would guess it eould not do much. The only thought I have is a alternate carb. the concept of alternate carbs is acceptable in IT. does anyone have any experience with a holly with a non ported motor. how much power could you make with a non ported motor and a stock intake. I would love a solution that would save my 13 wheels, I just don't know what it is
dick patullo

[Hotshoe]

Darin:

...I only suggested porting as a "cheaper than buying new wheels" comparison.

...Are there any acceptable power gains that could be approved?

...I understand that "porting" can get out of hand. But so can a lot of things if they are not properly implemented.

____Rick Thompson

[JeffYoung]

Darin, been out for a few days running the 13 hour Enduro at VIR...great fun. Just saw your post above, totally agree, my car is an S car if not for torque alone (175 ft lbs. stock) and my comments were tongue in cheek.

Some of us -- 944 drivers, TR8 drivers (and there are more than you think out there, at least 3 still running and 2 more prepped cars but "retired" that I know of), 190E drivers, etc. -- belong in S even though we don't win (although tell that to the Doyles in the TR8s out in the MidWest, or Flynn in the 190E from Florida, or Camadella in the 944 up North).

I guess here is the point that I am driving at. Certain car choices have significant disadvantages. It is much easier to make a 325i or a 2nd Gen RX7 or a CRX go fast than a 944 or a TR8 or even a 1st Gen RX7. If you make that car choice, you are "stuck" with being held to the performance of the fastest guys in that car who may have (a) more time to develop it; (B) more knowledge about racing the car and even © more driving talent.

Guys, I know I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I see this (moving the 1st Gen RX7 to B because a portion of them are not competitive in A) as a potentially big problem for IT. If we started moving cars based on averages as opposed to what the best cars and the best drivers in those cars can do, we are opening a hellacious can of worms.

At the three tracks I visit regularly (VIR, Roebling and CMP), IT7 cars run with and BEAT ITS and ITA cars. I really think it has something do with the prep levels and driver talent in IT7 here in the SEDiv, NCR, CCR and Buccaneer regions.

It is really hard for me to see moving those cars to B when, as I think was mentioned above, an IT7 car competed with an ITS 2nd Gen RX7 for the win at CMP this year.

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by JeffYoung:

It is really hard for me to see moving those cars to B when, as I think was mentioned above, an IT7 car competed with an ITS 2nd Gen RX7 for the win at CMP this year.



Yeah, but I lap ITS cars all the time too! Using that as proof is like trying to prove a negative...

As far As I can tell the fast IT7 guys you run with will get creamed at all the classic road circuits in America if the best talent in ITA shows up. Even at VIR, the IT7 is 2 seconds of the ITA pace, and the ITA class isn't strong there.

Relevent and credible results are the important ones....and by credible I mean results where known class leaders are setting the marks, and the confidence in the legal state is high.



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

[JeffYoung]

Jake, I can't wait to meet you, I think we would really get along, but I strongly, strongly disagree with the idea that the IT7 guys from my region would get creamed at any track if they had time to learn it.

At three tracks in this region they typically run in front of the fast A cars. Why, with sufficient seat time, that wouldn't traslate into similar results at other tracks I don't understand. I know Road Atlanta may be a special case because of the the long straight and the ups and downs, but for momentum tracks and "mixed" tracks like VIR, I'll put that group up against anyone.

Roebling is a good example. It's a 1:25 or so "momentum" track. RX7s routinely run in the top 5 there (not just Rick, but Jeff Ryan as well). Why would that not, with sufficient seat team, translate into similar results at say Lime Rock.

I'm sorry Jake, I just see this one as one of those instances where the average should not dictate the result. There are a LOT of of 1st gen RX7s out there, some fast, many slow. Using the average to place the car in class is dangerous in my view.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Jef,

I can tell you that you and Jake would definately get along. Two quality guys always do.

Here is my issue. You seem to have the top IT7 guys in the country in your backyard. The point I, along with Jake is trying to make is that we don't think the ITA talent they race against regularly is representative of the 'best of the best' that you agree we need to use.

I would love to have Rick T. run in ITA at the ARRC to see where a prime example of a car/driver stacks up against the ITA crop that will be there. The fastest Acura's in the Northeast will be there...and trust me, they are FAST.

As for Rick running with an ITS car at a year-end event...it's just simply not an apples to apples comparison. Rick is either out-driving and/or out preparing the ITS car (I suspect both). The ITA/7 is NO MATCH for an equally prepared and driven 2nd gen. This can NOT be debated.

All we want to see is the best against the best - and the best ITA drivers will be at the ARRC (BTW: is Stretch running?)

I'll start a "Rick to the ARRC" fund to make it happen. $50 is the first pledge. Who is in?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[JeffYoung]

Andy, good post. I think I included it in my first post that started this, but I agree, it appears (and no offense to the A drivers in the SEDiv, who routinely beat me) that relatively speaking the A drivers in the NEDiv are faster in comparision in the IT7 drivers.

I fully understand that is the background you and Jake come from, and what drives the belief (and it has logical and empirical support) that the 7 belongs in B. I think you guys understand that I come from a different background, where IT7s fit in well, and run well with the ITS/ITA/IT7 crowd.

One word on Rick running with the frontrunning ITS car at CMP (by the way, the winner was an ITA Miata). That S car is the series champ, and runs fast times at all the tracks he shows up at. The car is prepped and driven very well.

I just think that after 11 years in the car, Rick gets more out of a 1st Gen RX7 than anyone can rightfully expect, and he is a hell of a driver. He ran a Spec Miata for the first time at VIR at the enduro, and turned a lap less than 1.5 seconds of the track record. Pretty impressive.

So, Rick, maybe it is time to go back to the AARC and show everyone what a 7 can do.....or maybe we in the NCR kick in $50 to get some of the fast guys from A in the NEDiv down to VIR for SARRC/MARRS in May?

[Quickshoe]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
If the car *should* be in ITB, then it should. Upsetting the apple cart in a specific Region doesn't bother me IF the cars *should* be together.


Andy,

My question is "HOW do you determine whether or not it belongs in ITB?"

If you look at results one could argue that one known legal example shows what the cars' full potential is. If one legal ITS BMW can turn laps of "x" then all legal same model cars have at least that same potential when equally prepared and driven.

So then comes the question as to what results do we look at? Many regions will show that the 7 is a good fit in B. Do you then throw it in B and further frustrate those B drivers in the few regions where the 7 would dominate B without much effort? Or do you look at a region where it would clearly dominate and therfore say "it doesn't fit in B" so it stays in A, and many 7's continue to race in IT7...

This is an example of why many cried "be careful what you hope for" when the posibility of future adjustments where first talked about on this site.

You've got to look at the cars' potential on paper. If you were classing the car today where would you put it? If you think the 7 is greater than the sum of its parts than the formula is wrong. Certain adjustments either carry too much weight, or not enough and there lies the rub...how do you know how much to tweak the formula if you don't look at results....

We will never be able to conclusively prove it with hard facts, too many variables, too many unknowns. Too many different types of tracks, prep levels, and levels of competition.

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:

I would love to have Rick T. run in ITA at the ARRC to see where a prime example of a car/driver stacks up against the ITA crop that will be there.


actually we already know this. it was discussed above. according to the results rick gave us he is very close to two other it7 drivers Jeff Ryan and Attila Luckas (sp?) and they ran top 3 at the arrc and got creamed by the ITA cars.
Rick did not dispute this but said that road atlanta should not be the standard.


and jeff there are great ITA cars in the SE. There were 5 within 1.5 seconds of the fast lap at the arrc last year. it is just none of them raced against Rick in the results he provided.

please anyone show me where any of these 3 great IT7 cars are beating up any of these five great ITA cars in the SE. I can not find any proof of that anywhere.

dick

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Quickshoe:
Andy,

My question is "HOW do you determine whether or not it belongs in ITB?"

If you look at results one could argue that one known legal example shows what the cars' full potential is. If one legal ITS BMW can turn laps of "x" then all legal same model cars have at least that same potential when equally prepared and driven.

So then comes the question as to what results do we look at? Many regions will show that the 7 is a good fit in B. Do you then throw it in B and further frustrate those B drivers in the few regions where the 7 would dominate B without much effort? Or do you look at a region where it would clearly dominate and therfore say "it doesn't fit in B" so it stays in A, and many 7's continue to race in IT7...

This is an example of why many cried "be careful what you hope for" when the posibility of future adjustments where first talked about on this site.

You've got to look at the cars' potential on paper. If you were classing the car today where would you put it? If you think the 7 is greater than the sum of its parts than the formula is wrong. Certain adjustments either carry too much weight, or not enough and there lies the rub...how do you know how much to tweak the formula if you don't look at results....

We will never be able to conclusively prove it with hard facts, too many variables, too many unknowns. Too many different types of tracks, prep levels, and levels of competition.



IF we were classing this car right now, *I* would vote for it in ITB. IMHO, the stats all point to B. I also don't think the car is greater than the sum of it's parts. The stock HP is lower than the top ITB cars, the suspension is inferior and the engine, while able to rev, makes little torque.

Looking at the cream of the crop is the MOST important thing. It has been said here time and time again that Regional results must be scrubbed down to really know what they mean. Just because the IT7 leader can run with the ITS leader on a given weekend DOES NOT mean anything except the ITS driver was outclassed. I said it earlier - EVERYTHING BEING EQUAL - driver AND equipment, an IT7 car is NO MATCH for a 2nd gen RX-7. Simple - no debate.

The issue is that we are getting requests with solid data that shows the car should be in ITB, yet there are people who are running them that say it can run in ITA - yet those people don't run in ITA, they run in IT7 - which is a class born out of the frustration of being comeptitive in ITA...Confusing to me at least. But you have to take into account those that run them that say they can be there in ITA. Why? Because it HURTS the cause, not helps it. It's a confusing position, maybe a brutally honest one - and that is great.

The results we need to find are the apples to apples versions. The best against the best. But guess what? The best IT7 that is being used as the barometer for debate doesn't run against the fastest ITA cars in the country...

...so we have to continue to research and examine our members letters and available data to try and figure this out.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Quickshoe]

We seem to agree...maybe my post that you debated was poorly written.

As far as the motives of those with 7's who "believe" it should be in A. I'd agree that they are just being brutally honest, not looking for any breaks, if they were currently racing it in A. Perhaps their motives are that they don't want to be marked "whiner" by lobbying for the move. If/when it happens, it will be a little easier on them since they weren't for the change.

I haven't written a letter for/against the move because I no longer own a 1st gen nor an IT car. So, while I have an opinion, the outcome doesn't affect me so I don't feel I have the right to weigh in officially.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Quickshoe:

I haven't written a letter for/against the move because I no longer own a 1st gen nor an IT car. So, while I have an opinion, the outcome doesn't affect me so I don't feel I have the right to weigh in officially.



Actually, the opinions of people WITHOUT dogs in the fight are refreshing. It's nice to have an opinion of someone who doesn't stand to benefit either way.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[gran racing]

I'm still in favor of the slow the RX7 down a bit and move it to B idea. Just an estimate from what I have seen on a limited number of tracks, but it would probably be necessary to add ~ 150 lbs. This wouldn't mean that the other spec rx7 class has to be eliminated. Keep it there - eventually it will die out of natural causes.

Some have mentioned the acceptance into B issue. This should have no impact on the decision being made. When the proposal was being made for my car to be moved to B, a few people told me that I won't be accepted in that class. You know what, if that's true so be it. Of course everyone wants to be liked especially in the club racing level. But I'd rather be in a class where I can be competitive. And if people don't like me because of the car I drive, well then... Besides, things and attitudes can change. Part of this responsibilty falls on the shoulder of the person being moved into the new class. It can take some effort to gain peoples respect.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[lateapex911]

Hey Dave....isn't your signature line a few months early???

Shouldn't it read ITA Prelude until January first 2005??

Kidding...I had a great time at the Glen this weekend and REALLY appreciate the help you gave. (How many guys will actually help walk the track with you looking for those custom bolts and spacers that hold your axle in??)

PS, I made it home on the tire...I stopped every hour and a half and put 50 cents in the machine and pumped it up to 50 or 60psi.....but every time I stopped it was down to 26lbs! Exactly 26 ..how weird! Two hours after I got home, it was ......f l a t!


I agree on the acceptance issue. Maybe this won't be a popular comment, but anyone who has an issue needs to explain to me why, because I just don't see it as being a problem. As long as it is placed in the class fairly, it should bring nothing but even more racing enjoyment and challenges to the class.

And while the empirical data suggests this is a reasonable move, it is certainly a controversial one, so IF the ITAC recommends it, I would bet they will err on the conservative side, and the car will have to fight hard for every position.

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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 25, 2004).]

[Eagle7]

Originally posted by JeffYoung:
...One word on Rick running with the frontrunning ITS car at CMP (by the way, the winner was an ITA Miata). That S car is the series champ, and runs fast times at all the tracks he shows up at. The car is prepped and driven very well...
At most of the events I've competed in the A cars are faster then the S cars - Grattan, Mid-Ohio, close at Gingerman. The A track record at Grattan is nearly a second faster than the S record. I suspect it's a combination of very good A competition and tracks that favor them. So what does it prove? Probably nothing. ( Frustrates me though http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif )

------------------
Marty Doane
ITS RX-7 #13
CenDiv WMR

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by JeffYoung:

One word on Rick running with the frontrunning ITS car at CMP (by the way, the winner was an ITA Miata). That S car is the series champ, and runs fast times at all the tracks he shows up at. The car is prepped and driven very well.



Hey Jeff, no worries, you are top notch in my book.
I admire your efforts with the 8. Doubly so due to its British heritage. OR is that BritishAmerican? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Interesting quote on the ITA Miata that won the race. It's Mike VanSteenburg. Mike and Bowie are pretty close in times from what I can see. Bowie has run the ARRCs before in the Miata, and has so far, been not quite in the hunt. So it serves to reinforce the opinion that Rick T would do very well indeed at the ARRCs, but would be well off the leaders pace.

From what i can see, he drives the wheels off the car and is perhaps the best example of an IT-7 car in the country. Or perhaps the quiet but very effective Mr. Susko, who was the fastest race lap last year.

At tracks like Atlanta, (all the classic great tracks..natuaral road circuits with elevation changes, challenging corners and long straights) that require the most complete package (power, handling and brakes) it will an uphill battle for a 7 to even keep the leaders in sight for more than a few laps if the leaders are top notch.

Wish you were coming down to the ARRCs.... I am looking forward to putting some faces to names, and shooting the breeze in person about stuff like this.


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

[dickita15]

on the matter of acceptance in a new class, when the ITAC made the decision when asking for PCA'a that a religning of the classes in IT could be done with the current 4 classes and not be adding a 5th class, I felt it was the right decision but not the easy one. chopping it into 5 classes would have made it much easier to sort the deck without offending anyone in a current class. by decideing to try to make cars fit into 4 classes change becomes neccesary. that means B cars moving to C in order to repopulate that class and slow a cars movung to B.
people resist change thats only natural.
dick patullo

[Tom Donnelly]

Jake,

I'm late posting this and I also don't know if this will help or not but..

I'm not so sure the ARRC is a good benchmark for laptimes. Road Atlanta is my home track and I'm familiar with a good many of the local drivers. ARRC lap times tend to be several seconds faster than others throughout the year. You could post a 1:44 or even a 1:45 at mid season and take first in ITS (before BMW's). But the same car, same driver, same level of prep would post a 1:42 at the ARRC.
Track conditions at Road Atlanta in November are different enough to partially skew the data, IMHO.

Tom

[dickita15]

That is good to know but I do not think it changes the data. the better track conditions should help all cars and up to now we have not been compareing RA ARRC time to other RA events.
dick

[Tak]

Let me chip in with a left coast perspective. We don't have competitive Hondas in the SFR. As a result, Rx-7's rule in A (1st, 2nd, 3rd in season points last year and this year). But again, we don't have competitive Honda's running. Last time we had a competitive Honda was 01 (Nick Thoroux in an acura).

At Thunder Hill, Nicks 01 race record (2:08.88)was finally broken this year (thanks, new Hoosiers!)by Bob Bradfield (Rx-7) with a 2:08.13.
For comparison Thunder Hill SRF race record is from 01 by Kevin Rogers at a 2:02.69

At Sears Point raceway, Steve Borlick (rx-7) has the ITA race lap record at a 1:54.74, finally beating Eduardo Martinez (CRX from SoCal) 02 record of 1:56.12. Again for comparison, the SRF record at Sears is Chris Jackson's 1:51.25 from 2002.

The Laguna Seca track record is still held by Bob Strecth (240sx) from 97 at a 1:46.6.
Current best Rx-7 time at Laguna is a 1:47.3 by Borlick. SRF track record at Laguna is from 03 by Flemming at 1:43.84.

Note that I use SRF as comparisons because I believe that group is better policed and uses the same (dot) tire accross the country.

[Tak]

I forgot to add my thoughts on competiveness and reclassing the Rx-7 to B.

Fundamentally, the problem is that there is too big of a performance gap between ITS and ITA. I really believe the only real solution is to add a 5th class between S and A, or completely re-class A thru C, which will make all the current C cars non-competitive... A second fundamental problem is that FI cars are recognizing greater gains from stock to race trim than carburated cars--something not taken into consideration by "the formula".

I do not like the idea of adding 100 to 300 lbs to the rx-7. I already replace brake rotors every 3-4 races. With more weight, this will only get worse. The Rx-7 also has a fragile transmission--again, more weight will hurt reliability. Better to limit it's performance by mandating the stock exhaust manifold for B. Leave the weight alone. Use 6" rims. Beyond less contact patch, this will also raise the car 1" because the 45 and 50 series tires won't mount on 6" rims...

Bones to thow us to improve competitiveness in ITA: 1) allow port matching of the manifold only ( 3 to 4 HP at the wheels). 2) allow us to run a miata gear box (closer ratios, bolts right in)--although this is quite inconsistent with IT rules... Nothing else is easy or cost effective. I highly discourage porting (it's an enforcement nightmare).

Weight-I'm a 170 lb driver. My car weighs in at 2390 (2220 with out me) with 4 gallons in the fuel cell. I also carry 25 lbs of ballast, a passenger seat, and several (heavy) stock components on the right side of the car. If push came to shove, I think I could pull an extra 50 lbs out of the car (including ballast) my chassis is an 84 with a good (not great) cage.

Power: I've heard of Drummond ITA motors making 150-155 crank HP perfectly tuned on the dyno. Allowing 15% driveline losses, this translates to 127-131 at the wheels.
With a professionally built carb, custom exhaust, and a properly built motor (lapped housings, new seals, carefully fitted seals, and fully balanced), I have 122 at the wheels measured on a Dynojet. I can get 125 with a peaky power curve, but have found the car is faster with a broader power curve.
With a junkyard motor, bolt on exhaust, and simple rebuilt carb, I would not expect more than 110 at the wheels--on a good day.

Last year I was 3rd in the A championship with an ill-handling car. This year I only ran half the races, and still havn't cured the handling (but it's getting better). When I get the thing handling right, I expect to run with Bradfield and Borlick (1st and 2nd in A in Rx-7 past two years), but I also expect to get smoked if a good driver brings out a good honda (CRX or Acura), neon, 240 sx, etc.
"Tak"
Tachi Callas
#29 ITA Rx-7
SFR SCCA

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Tak:
Fundamentally, the problem is that there is too big of a performance gap between ITS and ITA. I really believe the only real solution is to add a 5th class between S and A, or completely re-class A thru C, which will make all the current C cars non-competitive...

However... What is causing this "gap" in performance? It's not the 2nd RX-7, 240Z, or Integra... It's the newer, higher hp cars like the E36, 944S, etc... 170+ STOCK hp cars that have more recently been added to ITS.

I contend that the "solution" is a class ABOVE ITS for these types of cars. THEN, they wouldn't have to be classified so heavy. This would relieve some of the pressure on ITS, and would leave the class more balanced with cars in the 150-170hp range (stock)...

ITA would be something to the effect of a 110-150hp class, ITB up to 120hp, ITC up to 100hp...

Additionally, popular cars like the 300Z Z32, etc., would have a place in IT to run without upsetting the apple cart too much...



Originally posted by Tak:
A second fundamental problem is that FI cars are recognizing greater gains from stock to race trim than carburated cars--something not taken into consideration by "the formula".


I'm curious as to what makes you think THAT???

First off, we've said all along that we "estimate" the IT-Prepped output of the car in question... Wouldn't you suspect that we'd take ECUs, FI vs. Carb, etc., into consideration???

Second, it's not always true that an FI car has "greater gain" with IT prep... Often, they are better optimized from the factory, i.e.: small engines making more hp, and don't have that much to gain with IT prep...

All of these things are considered as much as we have the information to consider them...

Then again... when is the last time we've had to deal with a car that had a carb??? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



Originally posted by Tak:
Nothing else is easy or cost effective.


Not that this is a serious consideration or being considered at all, but for the sake of conversation and tossing out thoughts... what about allowing lighter flywheels? My RX-3SP was considerably better with a 14lbs flywheel... (Japan market stock flywheel from a 12A...) This would take care of the "sluggish" accelleration, help the car spool up, and generally get it revving quicker...

Thanks for posting your thoughts... This kind of information and perspective is most helpful...

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

[Hotshoe]

Darin:

....I think you hit the nail on the head. I like the idea of a "Faster" class. (BMW Z3 in the works for T2) Like you said, the HP is on the rise.

.... A lighter flywheel would give the RX7 some more power and would cost less than 1/2 the amount of a set of wheels. Count me in.

....Rick Thompson
____84 RX7 ITA/7
____98 BMW Z3 2.8 (future T2 maybe IT?)

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Not that this is a serious consideration or being considered at all, but for the sake of conversation and tossing out thoughts... what about allowing lighter flywheels? My RX-3SP was considerably better with a 14lbs flywheel... (Japan market stock flywheel from a 12A...) This would take care of the "sluggish" accelleration, help the car spool up, and generally get it revving quicker...



Keep in mind that the early RX-3, RX-3SP and the RX-2 allhad larger ports as well. Even when the RX-7 was "dominant" in ITA, an RX-3-SP could draft by on the straight. Of couse, slowing down at the END was another story!

Also, as long as we are "what if-ing" allowing the secondaries to be mechanical like every other carb in the world might be worth looking into.



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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Also, as long as we are "what if-ing" allowing the secondaries to be mechanical like every other carb in the world might be worth looking into.


Are there any aftermarket replacement carbs available, or modifications to the stock Nikki, that would work on this car? For example, is there an adapter made for a Holley 4-bbl that will fit the stock, legal intake manifold?

What does it take to make the Nikki have mechanical secondaries??

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 28, 2004).]

[Speed Raycer]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Are there any aftermarket replacement carbs available, or modifications to the stock Nikki, that would work on this car? For example, is there an adapter made for a Holley 4-bbl that will fit the stock, legal intake manifold?

What does it take to make the Nikki have mechanical secondaries??


Technically... some safety wire. It's not hard to do and is a very common practice on street RX's.

Carl at PB&J Racing would be a good guy for you to talk with. He built my carb and knows quite a bit about the Nikki's. I'll dig up his email...

IIRC, the holleys take a bit of reworking to get them to physically work correctly on the RX.

{edit} carl(at)pbandjracing.com

www.pbandjracing.com (http://www.pbandjracing.com)


------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it
http://www.izzyscustomcages.com/images/IzysLgoSm.jpg (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)
Izzy's Custom Cages (http://www.izzyscustomcages.com)

[This message has been edited by Speed Raycer (edited October 28, 2004).]

[ddewhurst]

While we are "what if-ing" what things may be "FOR REAL" if a person was to get info from a motor builder or two. Let's make a for "FOR REAL" list.

A. Light flywheel/clutch

B. Mechanical secondarys

C. Alternate carb

D. ???????

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

[dickita15]

d. port matching on intake manifold side only.

[mustanghammer]

e. 626 or Miata Gear box

f. GSLSE Brakes

------------------
Scott Peterson
KC Region
IT7 #17

[Speed Raycer]

Most of what seems to be suggested seems to me to go against the basis of the IT ruleset. What other car is allowed alternative gear boxes (even though they ARE very similar), lightweight flywheels, or induction/exhaust timing changes, etc?

If the RX was thrown any of those bones, the rest of the pack would be screaming, although I never hear them say how it sucks we can't port match our motors and they can http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif.

Since other vehicles are already allowed to port their manifolds, allow porting of the complete 12a manifold, but factory manifold only. According to Carl at PB&J Racing (see above), the factory manifold is a huge waste of a casting and doesn't flow very well at all in factory form.

Manifold porting combined with Mechanical secondaries might just be part of the ticket. And while they're at it, allow Mechanical Secondaries on all 4 bbl carbed cars http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Speed Raycer:
Most of what seems to be suggested seems to me to go against the basis of the IT ruleset.


Originally posted by Speed Raycer:
...allow porting of the complete 12a manifold,


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

Ummm..... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif


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

[Speed Raycer]

Originally posted by Banzai240:

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

Ummm..... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif




Ok... not the compete manifold. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

The thought behind it was that if "they" can make a rule to disallow porting of any kind for rotaries and everyone in the boinger world is fine with it, then "they" can make a rule allowing only the rotaries to port the intake manifold. Maybe the entire manifold was asking too much...

how about 2"'s in???? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif



[This message has been edited by Speed Raycer (edited October 29, 2004).]

[ddewhurst]

Folks, while we are "what if-ing" lets continue the brainstorming "FOR REAL list. During brainstorming nothing gets thrown out. Who is the SCCA in place for ? The workers or the owners/drivers. Darin, I appreciate your work with the ITAC but PLEASE don't put dampers on some of these things. (& I am not taking the attitude that I run or have control of anything. But at the same time I beleive that WE the owners & drivers should have more control over our destiny.) Let the good times (ideas) roll.

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

ps: At completion I'll (or someone like Jake http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif can grab the bull.) do a common list & request responses from several rotor motor builders. We need to start someplace other than B.

[Andy Bettencourt]

David,

While brainstorming is good, we relaly need to stick with ideas that COULD get implemented. Suggesting RX-specific mods to speed cars up, ala Production is, is simply not consistant with the class philosophy, not supported by the current ITAC or the CRB.

While I am the classic 'big-picture' guy and I think the CRB needs to do something to get this large pocket of cars back out there filling up grids and Regional revenue streams, there is a limit.

It's not that anyone wants to hold back your free-flowing ideas, it's that we can direct the ideas to an acceptable area so you don't waste your time.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[dyoungre]

If we want to avoid specific rules, ala prod, then why don't we ELIMINATE the specific rule for the rotary engine, which makes intake manifold port matching illegal only for us.

This change would not make us instant winners - I still firmly believe ITB is the right place for this car.

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[ddewhurst]

Andy, at one time there were people that thought the world was flat. Take your we (ITAC) can't do nothing attitude & place it where it's dark.

Nuff said

[Andy Bettencourt]

David,

While your post doesn't deserve a reply, I will give you one anyway:

Write your ideas down and send them in. We get them all, they all end up on an agenda, we debate the merits of each one and we pass along a recommendation to the CRB.

We would rather have more letters than less.

Take the high road once in a while, the view is better.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Tak]

Darrin-
Thanks for the well thought response. I never thought of a faster than S class--that's quite a good idea, as it solves the problem of where do we put T2 cars in 3(?) years.

What makes me think an FI car responds better to race prep than a carb car? --I've seen what a bunch of the showroom "stock" guys are achieving (no names to protect the ...). Of course, with no more carbureated cars, it is kind of a mute point. I suppose we could ask all the FI cars to retain the stock exhaust manifold!

Regarding flywheels, those aren't just bolt on accessories. Done right, it requires an alternate front balance weight and the engine must be disassembled and the enitire rotating assembly re-balanced. AND a light flywheel wont help me down the long 4th gear straights.

Alternate carburators? Why? The Nikki was fine on the Rx-3SP that makes 165-170 at the crank. Properly built, the secondaries open very quickly--I see mine open ~half way in the time it takes the motor to rev from idle 5k with no load. A webber DCOE could work (and the manifolds are available. But have you heard how they run on the Formula Mazda's? Not well, as they don't have good transition circuits...

Tak
ITA # 29 SFR SCCA

[ddewhurst]

Andy, if you are on the high road (know it all with all the answers) please post some numbers that represent the number of different IT cars that enter events per year & the number of different Production cars that enter events per year & tell me why WE in IT don't deserve more attention from the CRB than the Production cars.

In short, who pays more to the Regions & who pays more to Topeka. Squeaky wheel deal....

If after Andy posts the numbers & his numbers show me I am wrong I will apologize to all.

David

[Andy Bettencourt]

David,

As usual, I HAVE NO IDEA what you are getting at. Since when did a thread on the ITA RX-7 become one about attendance numbers?

IT has a dedicated Advisory Board, all the appropriate CRB liasons and is working just fine. We have had great feedback on the new 'direction' of the class (some would call it a correction), and we still feel like we have a lot of work to do. I feel like we are supported VERY well at the National level.

Sorry if you are so offended that I tried to help you out by steering you away from a suggestion that NONE of the current administration wants to entertain.

Maybe you should start here - take a poll on this BB and ask if anyone is interested in MODEL-SPECIFIC engine/performance allowances to speed up individual cars. If there is even an incling of unbiased support, I will personally walk your letter through the process.

Sorry you feel the way you do about me and/or the ITAC, but your perceptions are 180 degrees from reality.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[dyoungre]

Andy and Darin,
I for one feel the need to voice my support for both your efforts AND your accomplishments over the past few years. Changes for safety (batteries), changes for cost containment (opening up wheel choices) are welcomed changes in the spirit of IT: giving people a place to race on a moderate budget. I certainly agree with avoiding model specific changes, and consider the new weight corrections the way to go, as it can be applied to any model.
I believe there was effort from the beginning to 'control' rotary engine potential, and that some of the rules, such as the intake porting, have gone overboard. I'd like to see the rotary specific rules reviewed, and where appropriate, eliminated.
The limiting factor to 12A rotary horsepower is the intake port area, plain and simple. The Nikki, as TAK stated, doesn't have the driveability of a well calibrated FI system (There is some black art to getting a consistent air/fuel ratio from 4K to 8K) and spark timing can never be optimized as it can with ECU control.
I'm rambling, but my point is this: without intake-side porting, such as street porting (DSR has a required template, I believe) we will not be able to increase the engine performance of a 12A to make the RX7 competitive on tracks where HP/lbs is important.
Therefore, the best way to correctly class the 12A RX7 is the method that you've instituted: add some weight, and put it in B, applying the B specific rules (wheel size). Even if too much weight is added initially, it could be corrected at a later date. In 'A', it can never be classed correctly with methods that are in the spirit of the rules.

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by dyoungre:
Andy and Darin,
I for one feel the need to voice my support for both your efforts AND your accomplishments over the past few years. Changes for safety (batteries), changes for cost containment (opening up wheel choices) are welcomed changes in the spirit of IT: giving people a place to race on a moderate budget. I certainly agree with avoiding model specific changes, and consider the new weight corrections the way to go, as it can be applied to any model.
I believe there was effort from the beginning to 'control' rotary engine potential, and that some of the rules, such as the intake porting, have gone overboard. I'd like to see the rotary specific rules reviewed, and where appropriate, eliminated.
The limiting factor to 12A rotary horsepower is the intake port area, plain and simple. The Nikki, as TAK stated, doesn't have the driveability of a well calibrated FI system (There is some black art to getting a consistent air/fuel ratio from 4K to 8K) and spark timing can never be optimized as it can with ECU control.
I'm rambling, but my point is this: without intake-side porting, such as street porting (DSR has a required template, I believe) we will not be able to increase the engine performance of a 12A to make the RX7 competitive on tracks where HP/lbs is important.
Therefore, the best way to correctly class the 12A RX7 is the method that you've instituted: add some weight, and put it in B, applying the B specific rules (wheel size). Even if too much weight is added initially, it could be corrected at a later date. In 'A', it can never be classed correctly with methods that are in the spirit of the rules.



So it seems that Dave Y. somehow snuck onto my hard drive and lifted my thoughts. Nicely said and summed up.

I DO like the blue sky brainstorming approach though....but I am resigned that there isn't smoething out there that has been "missed" that is in the spirit of the rules, and that would make enough difference to put the car on a par with cars that put down 140~150 plus at the wheels. Not to mention the torque figures which can be almost 30 to 40% higher.

Ok, back to the shop, gotta pack for the ARRCs.

(Nice to see so many ITAC guys going, BTW, AND CRB Chairman Kurt Weiss as well! Thanks....)



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

[ddewhurst]

Deleated http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

David

[This message has been edited by ddewhurst (edited November 02, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by ddewhurst (edited November 02, 2004).]

[ddewhurst]

***Since when did a thread on the ITA RX-7 become one about attendance numbers?***

Since I asked the question.

Andy's answer is:

A. Events IT cars entered during year 2004.
Answer:____________________________________

B. Events Production cars entered during year 2004.
Answer:____________________________________

If you don't fill in the blanks above I will presume you don't have or can't find the information.

Have a nice day :)
David

[dickita15]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
If you don't fill in the blanks above I will presume you don't have or can't find the information.


or c: does not see where it is relevant to the thread

dick patullo

[gran racing]

Is there any other answer other then c? Certainly not in this thread.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[lateapex911]

David,....just curious here....did you teach at one time?? Or perhaps serve as an officer somewhere?

oooops...sorry not on topic!

His point is that IT pays the club bills, and that Prod gets more attention and it's an unfair situation. Andy will remind him of the PPI, and David will come back with a reminder that we've added PCAs, so whats the difference between Prod and IT?

The answers are, yes, IT does pay it's way, maybe more, but the PPI is greater than the PCA concept, the category doesn't need to follow prod, but searching for ideas with an open mind IS good.

I do like the removal of the "only the rotary can't...." rules, but they just aren't enough to make it work in A.

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

[ddewhurst]

Jake, off topic the answer is NO to both. & your correct Jake paying the bills is what I'm getting to. We pay the bills therefore the red headed step child syndrome needs to be put aside & we in IT should get an appropriate amount of attention to the bills we in IT pay.

Dick, your as paranoid as Andy & your both to the level suited for the CRB. O-shit your both from the NorthEast. Is that where paranoia comes natural. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif Maybe answer D. because the original topic has been exhausted per Andy.

I highly dought Andy or anyone else will get the information I requested fron Andy simply because the SCCA has no such information. I have asked the SCCA in the past for said information & all they could say was naw we don't have that kind of information. To which I said what kind of information do you use to make SCCA business decisions. Duhh http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif

[Andy Bettencourt]

David,

The information you ask for is in hard copy and not tallied. Our CRB liason gets results from every Regional race in the country. It COULD be tallied if someone wanted to do so - or saw value in it.

You must have ignored my post above. IT is not the 'step-child' you say it is. We have the same support and infrastucture as all the other classes. Frankly, I think the CRB is excited about the direction and freshening of the class. In the Northeast, IT participation is as a record high.

If you are simply asking why isn't IT a National class, then there are a ton of different opinions on that.

Sorry to the 13 private e-mailers who said I should have simply stated "C".

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[dickita15]

david
while my answer was certainly flippant i do not think it was paranoid. to me at least the point you were trying to make that IT is important to scca is obvious but i do not see how it relates to andy's comment that it might not be of much use to seriously consider modifications that would require such a large change in the philosophy IT.
by the way in the northeast IT is over a third of entries and the is not including SM or ITE.
dick patullo
sitting around in the rain at Atlanta

[Hotshoe]

Andy and Jake:

....I wonder how Jake's lap times compare to Brain Dobson's? That would give me a good idea if the RX7s in his area run comparable lap times to cars in the SEDiv.
....If his times are off then how can he be a good example? Should we add in the difference to his lap times elsewhere? Example: If Brian is 1.5 seconds faster than the fastest NER RX7 (Jake?) then you should add 1.5 seconds to his lap times at other tracks to get a true comparison. But that sounds just about as smart as comparing a RX7 to a CRX at Atlanta... Doesn't it.
....Maybe it is time to do your homework. There is a big difference between tracks, cars, and drivers. Looking at things and portraying them to suit your purpose sure makes it look one sided.
....Andy took something I said totally out of text and tried to make me look like an idiot. Well, maybe I am, so be it. But I'm not stupid. My comment was directed toward Jake. I did not say anything about a IT7-ITA comparison at Road Atlanta. Why would I? I know that an RX7 is at a disadvantage at THAT track. BUT NOT AT ALL OF THEM.
....My comment was directed toward Jake so he would compare his Level with Brian Dobson's. I consider Brian to be a good example of what a top level RX7 is capable of. To compare him to an ITA car at Road Atlanta is not at all what I meant.

....Quit Beating a Dead Horse and try to help both sides. Staying in ITA is just as important (with comp adjustments) to some of us as, you wanting us to move to ITB.

[tdw6974]

In the Northeast there are several series within the groups. NARRC, NYSRRC,NESCCA & a bit to the south MARRS. I think if you compare the top 6-8 cars in each series that is more meanifull than trying to compare individual times at different tracks. In the NYSRRC series we ended up 5th. Everyhing ahead are the Integra/Honda based cars. I'm sure there must be some similar type series in other division or perhaps they have IT7 pro 7 or Spec 7 that they run the first Gen in.

------------------
Tom Weaver: Logistics & Technical Support Manager IE truck driver for 1980 RX-7 ITA #63
"Hemi Haulin' Rotary"

[Andy Bettencourt]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">Quit Beating a Dead Horse and try to help both sides. Staying in ITA is just as important (with comp adjustments) to some of us as, you wanting us to move to ITB.</font>

This is an important statement to me. Tell me why it's important to stay in ITA. It will help me understand your position a WHOLE lot better. Seriously.

Understand that we aren't taking one car at a couple of tracks to draw conclusions. Jake is a "10,000 foot view" kind of thinker as are the members of the ITAC.

The point is that the WHOLE issue here is whether or not the 1st gen RX-7 is more suited to ITB or ITA. I contest that the data shows it is MUCH more an ITB car. The raw stats of the car and the data from tracks where top drivers compete against each other supports that. I really believe it.

I didn't try and make you look dumb. You pointed out who a top driver was andused his performance to make my point that the ITA RX-7 was no match for a top ITA car. There is NO WAY that the RX-7 is handicapped that much at RA because other 'torqeless' cars are at least in the same stratusphere.

Other than your local Region where IT7 beats ITA, what other data do you have to disprove the 7 is more a B car than an A?

In the end, this car may just be a 'tweener' that has to either die a slow death in ITA or utilize regional resources to create IT7. It happens, but I think it can be prevented - especially for a car with such a large following.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Hotshoe]

Andy:

....I am going to attempt to give you my perspective, BUT, I know this will only give you more incentive to disprove my reasons.

....1. We spend more time replacing brake rotors than most other classes. Why? Because we are trying to do more than what they are designed for.

So why should we want to add weight?

....2. Most of us have spent close to two thousand dollars on wheels that will be of no use to anyone if we move to ITB.

So why would we want 6" wheels?

....3. We have spent countless hours trying to get our cars competitive but are being judged by the majority that do not.

I always hear them complaining while I'm working on my car.

....4. A car with a carburetor cannot compete against a "no holds barred" ECU car without help no matter where you put it.

....5. We will be a hard fit wherever we go. A rotary engine has a personality that does not mix well with piston engines. (No Torque)

So we always get treated different.

....Review. I have been racing an RX7 for eleven years. I enjoy racing with the ITS/ITA cars. I spend more money, and work on my brakes more than other cars in other classes do. And I know for a fact that more weight with narrower wheels will only compound that problem.

.....Jake: I know my car is legal. If you are unsure, come to Savannah next weekend. And I'll let you (and anybody else that wants to) take a look. My car has been teched and checked so many times that I have lost count.

.....Andy: Since you will not bring your ITS car down to CMP I guess you will have to take my word for it. What gets me is, you do not have a first gen RX7 so where do YOU get your opinion? I hope you do go ITA with your Miata. Then you will see just how much disparity there is. Of course you may have already seen it in your ITS car. HUH

.....I have always tried to enjoy my racing as a hobby. The personal satisfaction of having built my own car and driving it at the limit gives me great pleasure. To me that is what SCCA CLUB RACING is all about. Trying to group cars together in CLASSES I know is an insurmountable task, but, no matter how hard you try you will not get them all competitive

.....I have tried and tried to get my car as fast as it can be. Now you want me (along with several others) to slow my car down. If the other people that are for the change had half as much time invested as I do they wouldn't want to make the move either.

..Okay Andy, There you go chop away, But remember, At least I'm not afraid to state my HONEST opinion.

....Rick Thompson # 99


[This message has been edited by Hotshoe (edited November 10, 2004).]

[Quickshoe]

Rick,

I might be speaking out of turn here, but here it goes anyway.

IF the 1st gen Rx7 were to be moved to B on 6" wheels with another 100-200# added AND your region kept IT7 with its' current rules and run group, would you then support the move?

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:

....4. A car with a carburetor cannot compete against a "no holds barred" ECU car without help no matter where you put it.


That's simply NOT true... The 240Z has carbs, and it can compete with all but the BMW in ITS if properely prepared... This is a completely unqualified statement. It's your opinion, and that's fine, but you'd be hard pressed to find evidence to back this up.

Some of the ECU cars may be over classified, and perhaps that is where you get your opinion, but if properely classified, there is nothing keeping a carb'd car from competing with an ECU car...


As for moving the car to B and your opinion on that, you bring up some very valid points... Points that are all being considered at length...


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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Andy:

....1. We spend more time replacing brake rotors than most other classes. Why? Because we are trying to do more than what they are designed for.

So why should we want to add weight?

....2. Most of us have spent close to two thousand dollars on wheels that will be of no use to anyone if we move to ITB.

So why would we want 6" wheels?

....3. We have spent countless hours trying to get our cars competitive but are being judged by the majority that do not.

I always hear them complaining while I'm working on my car.

....4. A car with a carburetor cannot compete against a "no holds barred" ECU car without help no matter where you put it.

....5. We will be a hard fit wherever we go. A rotary engine has a personality that does not mix well with piston engines. (No Torque)

So we always get treated different.

....Review. I have been racing an RX7 for eleven years. I enjoy racing with the ITS/ITA cars. I spend more money, and work on my brakes more than other cars in other classes do. And I know for a fact that more weight with narrower wheels will only compound that problem.

.....Jake: I know my car is legal. If you are unsure, come to Savannah next weekend. And I'll let you (and anybody else that wants to) take a look. My car has been teched and checked so many times that I have lost count.

.....Andy: Since you will not bring your ITS car down to CMP I guess you will have to take my word for it. What gets me is, you do not have a first gen RX7 so where do YOU get your opinion? I hope you do go ITA with your Miata. Then you will see just how much disparity there is. Of course you may have already seen it in your ITS car. HUH


.....I have tried and tried to get my car as fast as it can be. Now you want me (along with several others) to slow my car down. If the other people that are for the change had half as much time invested as I do they wouldn't want to make the move either.
....Rick Thompson # 99


Rick- I agree with you on several points.

First, thanks for the invite to Savanna...but after the long tow to Atlanta, I'm hanging around here for a weekend and doing yardwork!

I hope you didn't think I was accusing you of running an illegal car in my comments...I was merely recanting the thread for Mr. Dewherst, and mentioning the lack of a data point. I have no reason to make a judgement of your legality.

OK, I agree with your points #1 and #2. It would suck to have to replace the wheel inventory and to increase the brake replacement expenses. Of course, at the prices of rotors and pads, even doubling that part of the budget is a drop in the overall budget.

I take issue with your #3 statement...you really don't know that the judgement is ignoring your standard, nor have you any idea of the work or expense invested by others....just because others haven't found the magic formula doesn't mean they haven't tried as hard (or harder). Regardless, the proper decision should be based on the cars that stretch the potential, and I think that you guys are the "bogey".

I'll lump #4 and #5 together. I find your comment regarding ECUs interesting, as the discussion is about moving the car to ITB where the relative amount of ECU cars is much LESS than ITA! yes the rotary is a different fish, but it will be as different in ITB, just as it is in ITA, where you enjoy your racing.

Am I correct in saying that your reasons for not wanting the move are:

1-added expense, both in wheels and extra brake wear
2-you enjoy the run group you are currently in, and...
3-that the rotary won't mix well with piston engined and ECU'ed cars?



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

[Brad]

Moving the Rx7 down to ITB or giving it comp adjustments to make it a podium placer in ITA both have it's merits and flaws. But I for one would rather have my car made faster than slower. Here's some quick ideas that would not take much $$ or time to implement:

I. Port match the intake manifold like the piston cars can do.

II. Mechanical Secondaries. All it takes is saftey wire and a drill.

III. Enlarge all 4 venturi's by 2mm each max

IV. Drop 50 lbs

--------------------------------------

Alternatively as Andy B said:

"The 1st gen 13B car is an FI car. It makes 135 stock HP. It is an EXCELLENT candidate for ITA IMHO. Putting all the 1st gen cars on the same spec line is a whole 'nother can of worms that would create an update/backdate nightmare."

That says a lot. The GSL-SE was never a contender in ITS but now that EFI and better braking cars are in ITA, it would make sense to class it in ITA. Allowing a S, GS, or GSL car to pick and choose to use the 13B or EFI or brakes or 14" wheels would be another story. And GSL-SE's are getting scarce.

But could a package be put together, say allow the 13b with 12a carb, manifold, and 12a -> 13b adaptor for the intake manifold?

-----------------------------------

Or alternatively allow 2bbl Weber DCOE/Dellorto DHLA manifolds and carbs and just try to increase 12a HP and see how it goes? Different manifold and velocity stack combinations can help torque too. Packages can be bought for $350-550 used depending on options and spares. I have LOTS of experience with the 48 dellorto DHLA with Racing Beat and Lake Cities intake manifolds. On stock ports, street ports, and full J-Bridgeport.

Everyone I've talked to say the best set of carbs can't compete with EFI so..............

Too radical?

------------------
--Brad--

[lateapex911]

Brad, I like the ideaas, but I can see two issues:

1- The Purpose, Philosophy and Intent statement that IT lives with places us in a position of rather tight inflexibility when it comes to individual car modifications. In other words, the CRB just won't buy any alternative carb, porting or carb secondary changes. The comment will be "if you want to do that, go to Prod".

One item you mentioned though, port matching has a precedence as it IS allowed, as you pointed out, for the rest of the non-rotary world. As such it runs counter to the IT PP&I. It rightfully could be looked at.....but......how much of a difference would it really make??

2- Using the recent ARRC event as an example, the best IT-7s in the country were almost 5 seconds off the ITA pace. As you mention you have a lot of experience with alternative carbs/intakes. etc, what kind of power is available ...5 seconds worth? Remember, we still have a clunky old live axle, and the CRXs brake with 240 pounds less weight...

Trust me...if someone could find a way to make the cars significantly faster AND meet the Clubs requrements (PP&I), he would have 110% of my attention...

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

[Tak]

Alternate carburators are not "against the spirit" of IT. The Webber 32/36 DGV has been an alternate carburator (for carb'd and FI cars) for well over 10 years. Problem is, it will not flow enough for an ITA or ITS car. Perhaps adding an alternate carburator suitable for ITA or ITS is appropriate--it could save a lot of money compared to fully customized FI "in the stock housing". I would nominate a single Webber 48 DCOE or dual 38 DCOE's. Maybe different venturies for A and S? That would go a long way to make a GSL-SE a contender in ITA and solve availability issues. I don't think it would do much for the 12A though...the Nikki already flows well.

[Quickshoe]

Hotshoe wrote:

....4. A car with a carburetor cannot compete against an (snip) ECU car without help



Originally posted by Banzai240:
...but if properely classified, there is nothing keeping a carb'd car from competing with an ECU car...

Emphasis mine. You guys really don't seem to disagree. I am ASSuming that by properly classified you (Darin) also are speaking to the weight at which it is classed, not just the class.

Give that same Z, FI and an open ECU and it will have an advantage over the carbed version.

[Brad]

Hi Jake,

5 seconds is a lot to make up for. Implementing items I. - IV would be a step in the right direction with minimal cost and I do see your legitimate concerns. Would it be asking too much to try something out in one region, and if deemed appropriate, roll it out to the rest of the regions?

Port matching is good for a few horses but nothing earth-shattering!

A good 2bbl carb with big chokes would take a few seconds off times and really help the motor rev. But what would also make a big improvement is dropping a lot of weight which is tough to do within IT rules as they stand today.

It seems that the Improved Touring Comp board is very limited in what it will allow for competetion adjustments; making comp adjustments extremely limited. Kinda ironic that SCCA Speed Challenge can make twin turbo Audi's compete with Cadillac CTS V6. Mabye it's time to re-evaluate the way competition adjustments are done in IT, or is that a big can of worms? For comparison Speed Touring cars are adjusted by changing air restrictor, rev limiter, or weight. And can make the 4 cyl Proteges run with inline 6 BMW's and V6 Mazda6.

Mabye we're looking at this the wrong way. What *does* the Comp Board use to make competition adjustments? Besides weight? If we get a list of what could be done mabye we could come up with a legal package.

Alternatively, if the Weber 32/36 DGV is allowed as an alternative carb, what are your thoughts on running DUAL DGV's on the rotary?

I think it would be a lot easier to just class GSL-SE in ITA and let the 12a guys update and backdate as needed. The B motor, bigger brakes and EFI would help out.

Last but not least, what other 20 year old carburettored cars are in ITA, and how do they fare? Are they as concerned about being out of date and technologically behind as we are?

------------------
--Brad--

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited November 10, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited November 10, 2004).]

[tdw6974]

To can write/email the comp board directly at [email protected] to express your opinion on the move to ITB. My email 1 of 4 received so far!!!!!!! encouraged the move retaining 7 in wheels (allowing current ITB to have the option of going to 7 in wheels) add some weight to the 1st gen. I would suggest including your membership # and info on your car. TW

------------------
Tom Weaver: Logistics & Technical Support Manager IE truck driver for 1980 RX-7 ITA #63
"Hemi Haulin' Rotary"

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Andy:

....I am going to attempt to give you my perspective, BUT, I know this will only give you more incentive to disprove my reasons.

....1. We spend more time replacing brake rotors than most other classes. Why? Because we are trying to do more than what they are designed for.

So why should we want to add weight?

....2. Most of us have spent close to two thousand dollars on wheels that will be of no use to anyone if we move to ITB.

So why would we want 6" wheels?

....3. We have spent countless hours trying to get our cars competitive but are being judged by the majority that do not.

I always hear them complaining while I'm working on my car.

....4. A car with a carburetor cannot compete against a "no holds barred" ECU car without help no matter where you put it.

....5. We will be a hard fit wherever we go. A rotary engine has a personality that does not mix well with piston engines. (No Torque)

So we always get treated different.

....Review. I have been racing an RX7 for eleven years. I enjoy racing with the ITS/ITA cars. I spend more money, and work on my brakes more than other cars in other classes do. And I know for a fact that more weight with narrower wheels will only compound that problem.

.....Jake: I know my car is legal. If you are unsure, come to Savannah next weekend. And I'll let you (and anybody else that wants to) take a look. My car has been teched and checked so many times that I have lost count.

.....Andy: Since you will not bring your ITS car down to CMP I guess you will have to take my word for it. What gets me is, you do not have a first gen RX7 so where do YOU get your opinion? I hope you do go ITA with your Miata. Then you will see just how much disparity there is. Of course you may have already seen it in your ITS car. HUH

.....I have always tried to enjoy my racing as a hobby. The personal satisfaction of having built my own car and driving it at the limit gives me great pleasure. To me that is what SCCA CLUB RACING is all about. Trying to group cars together in CLASSES I know is an insurmountable task, but, no matter how hard you try you will not get them all competitive

.....I have tried and tried to get my car as fast as it can be. Now you want me (along with several others) to slow my car down. If the other people that are for the change had half as much time invested as I do they wouldn't want to make the move either.

..Okay Andy, There you go chop away, But remember, At least I'm not afraid to state my HONEST opinion.

....Rick Thompson # 99


[This message has been edited by Hotshoe (edited November 10, 2004).]

1st off Rick, I am sorry you feel my sole purpose in life is to disprove your ideas. Just becasue we disagree doesn't make it true. You have a very firm opinion on this subject, and as one of the faster guys in the country - your opinion is important to me - however, I asked you some specifics because I haven't seen any as of yet. I'm not sure why you made the honesty comment, I have been nothing but.

#'s 1 and 2 are just facts that go with a move to ITB. The question remains, would the car be better off classed in ITB. These comments don't address the question at hand.

#5 to me is hogwash. Do you perceive some sort of prejudice because you drive a rotory? If you do, it's your region - the ITS guys aren't saying the same thing.

#3 is the meat of the post. You say that the car is competitive, but all anyone can find for data to back it up is your Regional results that show ITA is not as strong as it is on other parts of the country. IT7 and ITA track records were set at the ARRC, is the RX-7 at such a big disadvantage there that is what defines the 4+ second delta? I just can't see it. The ITS RX-7's are just as down on torque as you guys are and it's about the total pacakge.

I respect your opinion Rick, but you have yet to give us ANY data that supports your position from a philisophical perspective. I am still confused about your 'challenge' for me to come down to CMP with an ITS car. If you beat me, it won't be because your car was better, TRUST ME - and THAT is what we are talking about here, car vs. car. It's rediculous to challenge someone from a faster class knowing nothing about their driving talent unless you think you can outdrive them or out'car' them - either way, you know nothing about the total package so the challenge remains just plain dumb. If you think I can drive with you and you STILL think you can hang, then maybe we should be talking about the 1st gen RX-7 moving to ITS... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

I am really just trying to understand WHY you think the car isn't better in ITB - and I think that you are saying that you have done your homework, developed a great car, drive the wheels off of it and the results speak for themselves. Well, from a Regional point of view, I can understand that. But when you DEFINE for us a top car and a top driver, and they get SMOKED by the same talent and prep in an ITA CRX/Acura/240SX, I have to disagree.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited November 14, 2004).]

[Hotshoe]

Andy, Jake,& Darin:
...I'm going to address these questions and comments directly so there will be no confusion.
[quote]Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
[B] 1st off Rick, I am sorry you feel my sole purpose in life is to disprove your ideas.
#'s 1 and 2 are just facts that go with a move to ITB. The question remains, would the car be better off classed in ITB. These comments don't address the question at hand.

.. 1&2 refers to Brakes & Wheels. I have a problem already with brakes. The rotor and hub are a complete assembly. So every time one cracks you have to toss it all. Poor design but here is the concern on my part.
...I have a failure about three times a season. So far none have developed into an accident but I did have a "lock up" at high speed this year. And like I stated: adding weight and 6" rims will only compound that problem. So I fail to see your SAFETY concerns.

#5 to me is hogwash. Do you perceive some sort of prejudice because you drive a rotory? If you do, it's your region - the ITS guys aren't saying the same thing.

...I guess if I had EFI with an ECU I could hold my own a little better. But the rule of "no port matching" only points at the 1st gen ROTARY doesn't it. So let us not drag a 2nd gen into this. They do match.

#3 is the meat of the post. You say that the car is competitive, but all anyone can find for data to back it up is your Regional results that show ITA is not as strong as it is on other parts of the country. IT7 and ITA track records were set at the ARRC, is the RX-7 at such a big disadvantage there that is what defines the 4+ second delta? I just can't see it. The ITS RX-7's are just as down on torque as you guys are and it's about the total pacakge.

....There you go with the 2nd gen car again. Not part of this topic, but, like I said: Give me EFI and ECU and I could do better than I am now.
....I gave you results from all the tracks I run. And even though the SEDiv does not have as many ITA cars as other regions. We do have some very fast ones.
..Mike Vansteenburg in my opinion is one of the best drivers in the South East. I judge myself by how well I compete against him when we are both on top. And so far I am pleased with how we both have done.
...So given my standard to compare my RX7 to I feel that it is adequate.

I respect your opinion Rick, but you have yet to give us ANY data that supports your position from a philisophical perspective. I am still confused about your 'challenge' for me to come down to CMP with an ITS car. If you beat me, it won't be because your car was better, TRUST ME - and THAT is what we are talking about here, car vs. car. It's rediculous to challenge someone from a faster class knowing nothing about their driving talent unless you think you can outdrive them or out'car' them - either way, you know nothing about the total package so the challenge remains just plain dumb. If you think I can drive with you and you STILL think you can hang, then maybe we should be talking about the 1st gen RX-7 moving to ITS... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

...As far as the last part of this, This is the second time that you have referred to something I have said as being "dumb". I was taught to have better respect for others, especially in a public place such as this. So what is the problem ?????

Jake:

1-added expense, both in wheels and extra brake wear
2-you enjoy the run group you are currently in, and...
3-that the rotary won't mix well with piston engined and ECU'ed cars?

....1. Safety concerns. I have enough failures already. Added weight and narrower tires will only increase this problem. To you this may only be an expense, but what kind? My budget does not have any lack of Safety. The cost of the rotors and pads is not even significant with me. Is that all that concerns you?

....2. I enjoy the run group because it is faster. Goals are harder to reach, but, still a challenge. I'm sorry, but, I do not see any challenges in ITB.

....3. Is only a true statement. Despite what Darin says, a carb is no match for EFI w/ECU. I could get the exact figures but from what I have gathered from some drag racing guys it's around a 7 percent increase in power. So it makes the car hard to match up. Look at what they had to do with the RX8 in the Touring class.

...So the question still remains...To B or not to B ....??? LOL
.....I'm happy where I am. I have worked to long and to hard to speed my car up.
.....I do not want to slow it down in a SLOWER CLASS..... No Thanks.

---Rick Thompson # 99

[lateapex911]

Interesting...yours is the first that I have heard of RX-7 hubs blowing apart on a regular basis. I do see small checks in mine but it's not that often. I wonder what the nationwide average is? Of course, it's dependant on the type of track, the weight of the car, the pads used, the balance of the system, and of course, the talent.

I would imagine that the harder the car is driven, the worse the problem. But I also know a LOT of RX-7s are already running at weights we'd see if it were moved to ITB. Lets say the new weight is 2480. About a 4% increase. Is that the difference between business as usual and a real safety issue?

Anyway....looks like you've got a good thing going where you are, and that's cool. From my angle, I'd gladly do some fresh development to accept the narrow wheels and increased weight in order to have a fair shot... It would be better than having my ass handed to me weekly.

(and hey...we're only talking a second a lap here! How much slower is that?)


And it would be better for the category as a whole. As it is, ITC, and to a lesser degree, ITB are withering on the vine. We have 4 classes, lets use 'em.

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

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Look at what they had to do with the RX8 in the Touring class.

Not sure what you mean by this... the RX-8 SUCKS in T2, compared to the 350Z, etc...

Again, the 240Z has carbs, and the Integra and 2nd gen RX-7 have EFI and ECUs... We have at least two 240Zs out here that I'd put up against any 2nd gen or ITS Integra in the country... The point is that if the ECU, etc., is taken into consideration at the time of classification, the cars will end up being competitive...

To say otherwise only shows that the cars weren't classified at the correct specs to start with... ECU and EFI have little to do with that...

Oh, and as for hub failures... I'd be interested to know how many of these happen with aftermarket rotors for the RX-7? Have you tried Brembos, or other brands that have them for the 7??? Was the result the same???

I have to say... Have you ever considered that you may be pushing the brakes too far?? Sounds condescending I know, but ANY one of our brakes is going to suffer from these kinds of failures if we push them beyond their limits... Kind of defines the "limits", I'd say...



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

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
Not sure what you mean by this... the RX-8 SUCKS in T2, compared to the 350Z, etc...


yes. this threw me off too...didn't it get reclassed to T3? Either way, comparing "stock" to IT is a tough call...


Again, the 240Z has carbs, and the Integra and 2nd gen RX-7 have EFI and ECUs... We have at least two 240Zs out here that I'd put up against any 2nd gen or ITS Integra in the country... The point is that if the ECU, etc., is taken into consideration at the time of classification, the cars will end up being competitive...



Whooohoo! YeeeeeHA! He gets it! Finally someone knows the deal!!!! Man how good is it to have somebody who understands the basics in charge?? And since he understands that fact, he also "gets" why the whole ECU thing was dumb, as it came post classification ....




Oh, and as for hub failures... I'd be interested to know how many of these happen with aftermarket rotors for the RX-7? Have you tried Brembos, or other brands that have them for the 7??? Was the result the same???




Aftermarket hubs/discs?? Not legal yet, are they? (I have a set of Brembos on the shelf that will go on the car January 1!)



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

[dickita15]

rick i am not sure how the narrower tires will make the brakes worse. i would have thought that the poorer braking of the the narrower tires required to run in B would be easier on the brakes. i agree that the weight would add some heat. my car runs heavy, well yea the driver is to heavy too, and i agree that the front rotors are a weak link. I crack a set a year in a 8 or 9 race season.
dick patullo

[Andy Bettencourt]

Rick,

I will just agree to disagree with you. And I am sorry if you take offense to me calling your ITS vs. ITA RX-7 challenge dumb. How about absurd? Seriously, it was a weird thing to do.

You have obviously done a great job making your RX-7 one of the fastest ITA cars in your patch. The fact remains that it, nor you could compete on the fastest stage, against the fastest drivers - and that is the issue. I mean jeez, Mike V. in his Miata is already beating you by 2.5 seconds per lap at RR. (or was the Invitaional an anomoly? Could have been as I just looked at the numbers, not the circumstances..)

Pride and effort aside, is the car more A or B? IMHO, I have seen nothing to date, here or in letters, that show it's an A car anymore. Should something be done? Now that is the tough call.

I respect your stance, I just don't understand.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited November 15, 2004).]

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by dickita15:
I crack a set a year in a 8 or 9 race season.
dick patullo

I believe it was Chris Albin that mentioned once that replacing the hubs on his VW every so-many races was all part of the maintanence of the car... If you went so-many races plus one, they'd fail...

A set of rotors over an 8-9 race season doesn't sound that bad to me, especially with the brake compounds we run... I don't think I'd get much more than that from the 240 rotors...

These are wear items, after all... and they aren't THAT expensive to replace... Cheaper than the pads!



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

[JeffYoung]

Andy, the SIC Invitational was an anomaly. It was a split start, the 7s all started a few hundred yards behind the S and A cars and had to work their way through traffic.

Mike V.'s Miata and Rick's 7 are both incredibly well-prepped, and incredibly well-driven and typically run nearly identical times at VIR, Roebling and CMP.

I guess that's the one thing that's really making this a hard discussion to have. Because those three tracks (and Lowe's) are all within a 4-5 hour two of most of the SEDiv, that group of tracks sees the same group of drivers over and over (probably like Homestead-Sebring-Moroso....or Limerock-NHIS-WGI). In that group of drivers, on those tracks (throwing out Road Atlanta, which we consider to be an anomaly), the 7s sure look like a good A car to me...although I have a far better understanding of the data to the contrary now from this thread, and agree it is strong.

The strongest piece of data is that the fast A cars came down south for the ARRC and did really well. But again, we consider RA to be different than any other track here in teh Southeast (Jake, I hear you on the "classic" road course idea, but isn't VIR as well? and it is far less torque dependent). I would really like to see Anthony Serra run a three race series against Rick at CMP, VIR and Roebling, and then another at WGI, Limerock and NHIS. I think that would clear up a lot of gray area.
.....and it will probably never happen...lol.

In any event, I for one and glad to see teh debate out in the open and don't envy the decision makers.

Thanks again guys.

Jeff

[Hotshoe]

Andy:

...It's amusing to me how you think my challenge is absurd. If you only knew. LOL
I'm not the one questioning my motives. Like I told you....My car is in the trailer.

...And the results from Roebling Road at the SIC are from a Split Start race. I was in traffic every lap.( So I guess you can call that an anomaly )

...Earlier this year I passed Mike V. at Roebling Road and finished the race at the front. Our score between us is 3 to 2 in Mike's favor. (And we do keep score)

...I can see where this is going, and despite what I say, you will only see the side of this that suits your cause.

...I would prefer to be in a class where my car has to be at the limit. Because I know what will happen if the car is put in ITB. I can hear it already.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Andy:

...It's amusing to me how you think my challenge is absurd. If you only knew. LOL
I'm not the one questioning my motives. Like I told you....My car is in the trailer.

If I only knew what? How great you are? Listen, a top 1st gen is no match for a top second gen. PERIOD. If your point is to embarrass me on your home track, I don't see how that is AT ALL relevant to the topic at hand. I just don't get it. Shall I invite you up to one of my tracks? If you want to bring a knife to a gun-fight, you are more than welcome.


...And the results from Roebling Road at the SIC are from a Split Start race. I was in traffic every lap.( So I guess you can call that an anomaly )

...Earlier this year I passed Mike V. at Roebling Road and finished the race at the front. Our score between us is 3 to 2 in Mike's favor. (And we do keep score)

...I can see where this is going, and despite what I say, you will only see the side of this that suits your cause.

Not at all. This is LITERALLY the first bit of imperical data you have provided. I respect how quick Mike is as a driver and how the development of the car is coming. If you and he are even in wins, it gives me a much better idea of the perfromance envelope you are playing inside rather than just saying you can win in ITA. It would be great to see you and Mike run against Stretch and Serra to see how the cars actually stack up. My guess is not well yet (for Mike) and not well for the 7.


<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">...I would prefer to be in a class where my car has to be at the limit. Because I know what will happen if the car is put in ITB. I can hear it already.</font>

I respect this statement wholehardedly. It would NOT be the right move IF the cars could compete at a less than 100% development level. The point would be to make car a contender, not a dominator. Can it be done with 6" wheels and more weight? Many think so - you don't? If you don't, that is more than fine. I hear you.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited November 15, 2004).]

[Hotshoe]

Andy:

....Before you get your lug nuts to tight let me explain something that I have been trying to get you to see.

....Tracks favor different cars and drivers. CMP is a good track for my car. Road Atlanta is not. A 2nd Gen RX7 has to be pretty much "Game On" to do well at CMP so I figure I might have a chance of proving my point.

....On the other hand..... take me to Lowes and I will only see you at the start.

....The way I see it, The 1st gen RX7 is a hard car to class. Any track that has it climbing an elevation kills it. And a flat track like CMP gives it a chance. So it is not only the car, it is where you race it that also needs to be considered into the equation.

[Quickshoe]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
The way I see it, The 1st gen RX7 is a hard car to class. Any track that has it climbing an elevation kills it. And a flat track like CMP gives it a chance. So it is not only the car, it is where you race it that also needs to be considered into the equation.

Rick, so what would you do if you were king? You can't have it in "A" some regions and "B" others, can you?

In an earlier post, I asked:

IF the 1st gen Rx7 were to be moved to B on 6" wheels with another 100-200# added AND your region kept IT7 with its' current rules and run group, would you then support the move and continue to race in IT7?

[Hotshoe]

Quick:

....Sorry about not answering your question I was trying to calm the waters a little.

...Now as far as being King....No thanks... I'm not diverse enough, to much of a gear head...LOL

...The answer to your question is: Not going to happen. The SEDiv gave us IT7 on the condition that we ran under ITA rules because "That is where the car is classed" If it were moved to ITB then we (IT7) would be moved also.
...The Atlanta Region would just as soon do away with the group all together. So to say the least, we are messing with a loaded gun down here.
...We enjoy our class and have a lot of cars that show up for most of the events but, this would give some of the stink makers a good excuse to do their dirty work.

...So now I'm back to where I started.. ITB ... No Thanks ... Been there, done that. Not a good run group down here. I've done my body work and paid my dues already.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Andy:

....Before you get your lug nuts to tight let me explain something that I have been trying to get you to see.

....Tracks favor different cars and drivers. CMP is a good track for my car. Road Atlanta is not. A 2nd Gen RX7 has to be pretty much "Game On" to do well at CMP so I figure I might have a chance of proving my point.

....On the other hand..... take me to Lowes and I will only see you at the start.

....The way I see it, The 1st gen RX7 is a hard car to class. Any track that has it climbing an elevation kills it. And a flat track like CMP gives it a chance. So it is not only the car, it is where you race it that also needs to be considered into the equation.



Good information. We haven't had any real letters stating how course-dependent the 1st gen car is.

What is it about CMP that 'limits' a 2nd gen car but favors a 1st gen?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Hotshoe]

Andy:

...CMP is a slower than normal (Sort of like Homestead) technical track. Rotating the car under hard braking and getting a good run off the corner is the key to fast times. Running wide and trying to keep entry speeds up (like the 2nd gen usually does) is the "long way around".

....That gives the tighter cornering 1st gen the advantage. And since I can use 3rd gear more, the car has better power off the corners due to better gearing and lighter weight.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Interesting. Sounds very much like NHIS up here in NE. It's all about the set-up!

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com