Concerned about IT's Future

[JeffYoung]

Guys, has anyone else noticed a drop in IT car counts the last few years? I didn't make the SIC (the equivalent of the NAARC runoffs in the Southeast) but we only had 9 ITS cars, 4 IT7 cars and 4 ITA cars. Pretty weak. We've had two events this year cancelled due to lack of workers as well (ALMS Labor Day and Roebling in November, admittedly both near holiday weekends).

We rarely get more than 4-5 ITA cars in the SEDiv. ITS fields rarely above 8-10 except for "special" events like the rare opportunity to run Barber, Daytona and SARRC/MARRS.

And, even though I'm an owner of a dinosaur ITS car (two actually), having ITS fields made up of 30+ year old 240zs, 20+ year old RX7s and 10+ year old BMWs is starting to look a little bit like production.

Do we need new blood? How healthy are the other regions? How are car counts?

[tom_sprecher]

I have seen car counts drop over the past few years across the board. The formula group was really bad this year. GT is suffering hence GT Lite.

But then you have the explosive growth of SM, and increases in FSCCA, CSR and SPO. I guess it depends on where the current interest and a good source of cars can be had. With what the auto makers are putting out these days (little or no RWD sports cars) it's no wonder we're racing old iron. Oh yeah, I forgot, $.02

[gsbaker]

There may be a natural ebb and flow at work. Some of the SM guys are getting fed up with the cost of running up front and switching to SRF. Some of the SRF guys are looking at the FSCCA car because it can be configured with and without the fenders. I guess people move in/out of IT for similar reasons.

Taking the cake is a big-bore ARRC winner I ran into at an oval racing school. He thought roundy-round looked fun and was going to try it for a while.

I'm not aware of any statistics; it's just casual observation. Does Topeka publish car counts?

[dickita15]

I too think there is some natural ebb and flow. in new england number have been on the rise for about 5 years led by sm, its and ita. we saw a little leveling off in 05 but it is hard to peg the cause. we have had some problems with one track including large cost increases.
you really need to look at a long time period. any decision to race by a driver does not usually create entries for a couple of years as they ready thier car and get licenced.
looking at different part of the country also yields big diffences. in the sw for example most competitors race in national classes while up here the regional classes are stronger.

[joeg]

Everyone has mentioned SM...and they are correct but should emphasize their comment.

Trust me, many IT folks have gone SM.

That being said, SCCA has their hands full with ITB and ITC because many of the popular cars in those classes are getting too "long-in-the-tooth". Not that they can't race well, but OEM NOS bits are getting tougher to find.

I race a relic, but not everyone coming into the sport is hooked on old cars (or likes using eBay as their part source).

Accordingly, the smaller IT car count is a valid observation.

[zracre]

I hate to say it but I think a large part of the problem is that not many potential new racers are being marketed. I run across enthusiasts that have no idea you can race a car for real...maybe more marketing to youth markets to show it can be done?? also it is our job to show off our cars at local businesses...helps ourseves with sponsor money, them with association in racing interest to draw in local enthusiasts/customers then its your job to show off a bit...we are all good at that :D. I have friends that leave road racing for roundy round because it is generally more local and more often. tracks are smaller and numbers are higher so they have the capacity to generate cash flow every weekend.
oh and in the SE we generally have at least 6 cars run seems to average 8 or 9 cars except of course daytona...22 or 23 ITA cars. The SIC saw 6 ITA cars, 10 ITS cars 4 IT7 cars and...I think that was because of the people not bother because of points and the inclement weather forecast for the weekend.

[Knestis]

Not surprisingly, this is the kind of policy question that a wonk like me loves. Problem is, while Topeka has participation data for Nationals, since that's where the (hah) participation rule (hah) gets applied, nobody seems to gather participant data in any meaningful way for 'regional only' classes. Some non-scientific thoughts...

** IT is considered by some to be a "gateway" class, from which one moves up if one is serious. Make the IT classes National-eligible and this will change a lot, at the expense of increased budgets at the pointy end of the field.

** The growth of SM is almost without question at the expense of IT participation numbers. This too shall change...

** The economy has been a little loopy. Some people have stopped racing this summer simply because of gas pump price shock. Can't do anything internally about this factor. IT is still arguably a good racing value.

** The classification process requires someone to actually make an effort to get a car listed. This is a fundamental barrier to entry for new participants - particularly young ones who don't want to know anything about a Datsun. (What's a Dot-sun, man?) Racers of currently-classified cars don't have any incentive to get new competition out there against them, and newbs just don't understand or are put off enough by the process to be reluctant to make the effort. Once the ITAC has the initial spec shuffle worked out, the next priority should be identifying and listing a bunch of new, appropriate, eligible cars in the IT classes, using the same processes being applied to re-classifications.

** The divisions or regions ought to do a better job of gathering data to understand their customer base.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Just to follow what Dick said here in the NE:

ITS and ITA have grown to large levels. 25 cars per race, each. ITB follows with about 15 and ITC with about 5.

We also have 2 Miata classes, SM and SSM. Both capture about 25 cars each. IT and the SM's represent almost 60% of our entries - and we run all the classes plus some Regional onlys - ITE, SPU, SPO, etc...we have actually had growing pains as we run on smallish tracks...

So to analyze...

It could be a Regional thing but I see ITC dying soon. ITB can't be too far behind. They are effectively vintage classes. Other then the NB in ITC, what the heck else is going there to refresh the class? Nothing.

A class (or 2?) above ITS is the solution IMHO. Everything filters down as you will have some actual choices in the 10-20 year range in every class.

ITR ~ 185-220 stock hp

AB

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 14 2005, 08:23 AM
...** The growth of SM is almost without question at the expense of IT participation numbers. This too shall change......

K

62640
Interesting. How do you believe this will change, and for what reason?

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by gsbaker@Oct 14 2005, 09:50 AM
Interesting. How do you believe this will change, and for what reason?

62654


Personally, Gregg, having dipped my toes into the waters of Spec Miata, I suspect a lot of folks will very quickly get turned off by the wreckless driving, whiney attitudes, and inexperience that the majority of the participants in the group express. Further, it's not as cheap to run at the pointy end as "they" would lead you to believe, and progression to National status will only inrease the depth of the field spending that money (plus, many are vehemently opposed ot SM getting National status). Participants that get turned off on SM will flip to the next logical option, Improved Touring.

Yeah, that'll piss off a bunch of SM drivers, and I *am* speaking generally, but that's why I immediately turned my back on the class after having spent a lot of coin building one. I wish I still had my Spec Miata, but solely as a basis to build an ITA car. - GA

[gsbaker]

Greg,

Ah, that makes sense. The money alone will make it happen. I'm hearing numbers like $40K for a National front runner.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by gsbaker@Oct 14 2005, 10:12 AM
Greg,

Ah, that makes sense. The money alone will make it happen. I'm hearing numbers like $40K for a National front runner.

62656


You can build a National front runner for $25K + your labor.

AB

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 14 2005, 01:03 PM
... I see ITC dying soon. ITB can't be too far behind. ...

Ack. Andy - it is troubling that your response is "I see [class] dying" rather than, "Here's what we can do to keep [class] from dying."

There are a huge number of perfectly reasonable ITB and ITC cars reaching the perfect "vintage" for IT - old enough that they are becoming yard queens, but not so old that parts are hard to find. We just need someone to make a concerted effort to get them listed: Not eligible? Nobody will build one.

Greg's got a good start on why SM popularlity might wain. Add to his list...

** Mazda's interest is subsidizing the boom. I've been involved in spec classes that lost their parts/promotion sugar daddy manufacturers. Mazda WILL change its priorities at some point and the deal will get less sweet. IT took years and a long-needed change in ITA for something like 100 tons of Spec NEONs to find a place to live. Until that change, those cars were selling for pennies on the dollar, having been The Great Opportunity just a decade ago.

** Whether they admit it or not, a portion of SM drivers think that running a class with a "pro" series is their ticket to the big show. This dynamic leads to overexten$ion and increased likelihood of dropping out. Particularly when the body bills start to grow.

** Many have bought into the "all the cars are equal" mythos and some are discovering that (1) they are NOT; (2) where they are, driver skill is a bigger issue - and they can't drive so well; or (3) both.

** The grass is always greener.

I talked to a guy I raced with at a couple of NASA events, who ran an orphan kind of car in PS3 (ITB/ITC). He's actually one of the few who I think might have a really GOOD reason for switching to SM - "No matter how fast I am, I'll probably have someone to race with."

K

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 14 2005, 10:19 AM
You can build a National front runner for $25K + your labor.

AB

62657


Thanks. I've been misinformed--or someone was throwing in labor.

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 14 2005, 09:03 AM
It could be a Regional thing but I see ITC dying soon. ITB can't be too far behind. They are effectively vintage classes. Other then the NB in ITC, what the heck else is going there to refresh the class? Nothing.

62645


And whose fault is it that there are no new cars in ITC and ITB?

I remember the multi-page diatribe about the NB in ITC and how it would most certainly kill the class b/c one driver was distraught that his 27 yr old car would no longer be competitive. His strong suggestion (as stupid as it was then and is now) was to add nothing to ITC so that he wouldn't have to change classes which absolutely floors me. TIMES ARE CHANGING, CARS ARE GETTING FASTER - if you have an "antique", er vintage race car and don't want to go Production, then either join a Vintage racing organization or hang up your drivers suit b/c you're holding up progress.

In the DC Region, ITA and ITB have been fairly static over the past 3-4 years although numbers are down perhaps 10%. ITC is a different story b/c they have been grouped with SRX7s locally. SRX7, like SM and SSM is a spec class which tends to mean a crash-fest b/c the cars are theoretically identically prepared. The ITC folks locally are tired of the weekly bloodbath and more than a few of them have decided to go Production.

From what I can see, SCCA is working to re-align IT so that it can and will grow in the future. :023: for their effort. I just hope the old guard comes to the realization that in order for the Club to grow that some cars will end up re-classed or otherwise classed where the car won't necessarily win without any effort.

Whew!! Rant off... :angry:

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 14 2005, 10:31 AM
...a portion of SM drivers think that running a class with a "pro" series is their ticket to the big show.
62658
...which brings up another downside to SM, if your goals are pro. Next year the Pro Spec Miata series is going to be with the brandy-new cars *only*; no more M1s or M2s allowed...

[mgyip]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Oct 14 2005, 11:18 AM
...which brings up another downside to SM, if your goals are pro. Next year the Pro Spec Miata series is going to be with the brandy-new cars *only*; no more M1s or M2s allowed...

62666


What's the downside - I forsee a bunch of cheap M1s that are primed and ready to turn into ITA cars ;)

[IPRESS]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Oct 14 2005, 02:02 PM
Personally, Gregg, having dipped my toes into the waters of Spec Miata, I suspect a lot of folks will very quickly get turned off by the wreckless driving, whiney attitudes, and inexperience that the majority of the participants in the group express. Further, it's not as cheap to run at the pointy end as "they" would lead you to believe, and progression to National status will only inrease the depth of the field spending that money (plus, many are vehemently opposed ot SM getting National status). Participants that get turned off on SM will flip to the next logical option, Improved Touring.

Yeah, that'll piss off a bunch of SM drivers, and I *am* speaking generally, but that's why I immediately turned my back on the class after having spent a lot of coin building one. I wish I still had my Spec Miata, but solely as a basis to build an ITA car. - GA

62655

Greg, Not pissed off, but the things you mention about SM are universal throughout any of the competitive classes. There are just bigger fields in SM and therefore it is magnafied. I know several regions where SM benefits IT with crossover doing two races. If regions would schedule where time is allowed between the groups I think many SM drivers would help pump up the ITA /ITS grid numbers. With any class (and especially one that has grown as large as SM) a few years in to it you will find some warts. Overall the class is a huge boost to SCCA & NASA. Remember one thing there are only three racers on the podium. There are a bunch more that were trying to get there. That second bunch is the lifeblood of the class. I see SM having two groups with both groups running in the same races. The "ALL OUTS" trying to make a maximum effort for national glory, and the "BUDGET GUYS" who will go for their personal victories. SM lets a guy know pretty quick if he is fast or not. In my case $25k or $40k won't make me an ALL OUTer. Hell $60K wouldn't either, other then in the money spending side. So I and many many SM drivers will be perfectly happy to run regionals, nationals, and crossover to IT races if the schedule permits.
I think trying to promote that crossover will be at least in the short term a fix to number drop offs in IT fields.
Mac

[Bill Miller]

I&#39;m with Kirk on this one. I&#39;m not realy comfortable w/ the idea of just writing off ITC and ITB. For quite a while now, I&#39;ve spoken about how the entire performance envelope of available cars has shifted up. Twenty years ago, the number of available 4 and 6 cyl cars that made 150+ hp was pretty thin. Now there everywhere, and there aren&#39;t many cars around, that are less than 5 years old, that make < 100 hp (essentially, ITC feeder stock). So, what do you do about it? Do you continue to class cars like the NB at really bloated weights, just so you can put more choices in ITC?

This is something that literally just came to me, as I was reading this thread. When I think about it, I&#39;m actually surprised that no one else has brought it up (or maybe I just missed it). It&#39;s a model that&#39;s shown to actually work in another category, so maybe it can be adapted to IT. It&#39;s the concept of running higher output cars in a lower class. It&#39;s the concept of limited prep. I know that one of the first things someone is going to say, is "IT already is limited prep, there&#39;s nothing else to reduce" or "It&#39;s too many levels of prep." But that&#39;s not true. Don&#39;t give them the .5 pt bump in compression, don&#39;t allow them to use thread body shocks/coilovers, don&#39;t give them an alternative R&P, etc. etc.

Thoughts?

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by mgyip@Oct 14 2005, 11:20 AM
What&#39;s the downside - I forsee a bunch of cheap M1s that are primed and ready to turn into ITA cars ;)

62667
Yeah, I was thinkin&#39; the same thing, Matt...hmmmm....no, what I meant was that if someone really wanted to race Pro, they&#39;d have to prep two different cars; not cheap. It&#39;s likely that those with their eyes on the prize may forego Spec Miata entirely and race Pro only.


There are just bigger fields in SM and therefore it is magnafied. Mac, that may very well be true, with the qualifier that the class tends to attract the less-experienced folks with those traits in the first place. We (the board) have bantered on this before; so as not to get off topic I was offering it as a reason - along with the others specified - why IT may be experiencing reduced numbers due to SM and why it may gain a lot of those back moving forward.

Funny thing: I just re-read my post and laughed out loud. I said SM drivers were guilty of "wreckless" driving when I truly meant the complete opposite! "Reckless", of course, is the correct word. Freudian slip, perhaps? Not bloody likely... ;) - GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 14 2005, 10:31 AM
Ack. Andy - it is troubling that your response is "I see [class] dying" rather than, "Here&#39;s what we can do to keep [class] from dying."

K

62658


Let me re-phrase...

I see the cars that currently make up ITC and ITB becoming extinct through evolution, age, and availability - not by SCCA forces.

I think the classes need to stay alive - if they can run some numbers, and additional classes needed above ITS to accomodate new blood.

AB

[cherokee]

Originally posted by mgyip@Oct 14 2005, 03:02 PM
then either join a Vintage racing organization or hang up your drivers suit b/c you&#39;re holding up progress.
win without any effort.

Whew!! Rant off... :angry:

62663


Nothing ticks me off more then someone telling me to go race some where else in my car that is already classed. I do not have a problem with newer cars coming down the pike. I do have a problem in moving just "popular" cars around, that ain&#39;t right. My suggestion years ago was to put B&C into the same class, add weight here take it away there and shuffle cars around a bit. But you will not see me get to angry about new cars coming into the class....I may whine about it a little but as long an you let my dinosuar run I will be happy. And if you do change stuff around to it for the entire class not just the "popular" cars.

[bg43wex]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 14 2005, 04:45 PM
Let me re-phrase...

I see the cars that currently make up ITC and ITB becoming extinct through evolution, age, and availability - not by SCCA forces.

I think the classes need to stay alive - if they can run some numbers, and additional classes needed above ITS to accomodate new blood.

AB

62675


Andy,

when I read your remarks I paused for a second and tried to remember were I had heard the very same comments?

then it hit me, the Production class meeting in Ohio, they were complaining that there were no more parts available for the 1960? british blah blah blah, while listening all I could think was "well I guess you need a new car".

the solution that was propposed was to allow limited prep motors from different cars, this may or may not happen, it also seems wrong if you broke ever last 947cc block you should not be allowed to ask for a 1175cc in limited form, you should be out Sorry, next time dial that build back a couple of thousandths.

one think for sure it sure doesn&#39;t sound like the SCCA will allow any car to be cast asside. even if the natural elimanation of a car would help freshen up some classes.

My vote is for the ITAC after they complete the review of all classes and cars currently running, then review and place as many newer cars in IT even if no one is requesting them, there are far to many cars that can be classified that are not because competitors don&#39;t know how to do it.

brian m

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 14 2005, 04:20 PM
... Don&#39;t give them the .5 pt bump in compression, don&#39;t allow them to use thread body shocks/coilovers, don&#39;t give them an alternative R&P, etc. etc.

Thoughts?


Thoughts?

How about, AACK!

Things are bad enough without throwing multiple prep levels into the mix. WHen conversations focus just on the top of the IT food chain, like the need for "ITR," it seems to me like a general bias toward higher performance cars. There are a buttload of perfectly reasonable, cheap econoboxes out there - some of which are still in production - that should fit the B and C parameters without resorting to massive gross weights or different prep levels.

Eventually? Yes - the auto market arms race might catch up with the lower IT class but we are a long way from that.

K

EDIT - now, it MIGHT be that nobody wants to build these cars but there&#39;s sure a disincentive to even thinking about doing so, if none of them are in the rulebook.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Some guidance will be nice...I will start another thread...

One issue is that a VTS sheet needs to be filled out for a new car to be classed - and it&#39;s a decent amount of work for potentially no reward as you don&#39;t know if anyone will build one.

AB

[ITAMiata]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Oct 14 2005, 04:41 PM
Yeah, I was thinkin&#39; the same thing, Matt...hmmmm....no, what I meant was that if someone really wanted to race Pro, they&#39;d have to prep two different cars; not cheap. It&#39;s likely that those with their eyes on the prize may forego Spec Miata entirely and race Pro only.

Mac, that may very well be true, with the qualifier that the class tends to attract the less-experienced folks with those traits in the first place. We (the board) have bantered on this before; so as not to get off topic I was offering it as a reason - along with the others specified - why IT may be experiencing reduced numbers due to SM and why it may gain a lot of those back moving forward.

Funny thing: I just re-read my post and laughed out loud. I said SM drivers were guilty of "wreckless" driving when I truly meant the complete opposite! "Reckless", of course, is the correct word. Freudian slip, perhaps? Not bloody likely... ;) - GA

62674



My first two years racing was in SM. I usually managed a top ten placing and am a better driver now then I was then. I left SM because I didn&#39;t like all the metal to metal banging and was tired of fixing the car (or making a new one). At the time I just thought that those guys were so driven to win that they didn&#39;t care about hitting someone else. I switched to ITA thinking it would be different, and have been in ITA with my Miata for two years.

The real difference isn&#39;t attitude. I&#39;m building a new ITA Miata :( because a friend and I came together in MARRS V and went into the trees. We COULD have avoided the contact, but the desire to win was higher then the desire to avoid contact. Having had the last half of the season to sit on the sidelines I&#39;ve come to realize the difference in SM and ITA is the cars, not so much the drivers. In SM when there were a bunch of us running withing a 10th of a second, or two 10ths of a second per lap of each other, there was no clear cut place to make a pass. All the cars were basically the same and the only way to make a pass was usually to bump another car out of the way, or off the track (the same is true I suspect of SRX7). In ITA I know my Miata isn&#39;t as fast on the straight as the CRX or the 240, but I know I can out break them and I know I&#39;m faster through the corners. There ARE places to make a clean pass in a class with a variety of cars that simply don&#39;t exist in spec classes. Just something to think about when calling all the SM drivers crazy and reckless. ;)

Different types of cars in a single class allow for better racing in my mind. Aside from the fact that I think the Miata in ITA trim is SOOOOOO much more fun to drive then in SM trim, I wouldn&#39;t go back to SM simply because I really like pitting my Miata against cars with different strengths.

Hopefully I&#39;ll be able to scrape the cash together to finish the Miata during the winter and see everyone in MARRS again next season. :023:

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Kirk,

It&#39;s one additional prep level. Take Pablo for example. Ex-SSC car, runs ITB in IT trim, or ITC in SS trim (or something similar). The concept seems to have worked in Prod, and I thought that it might be an alternative method for filling classes, or giving people prep options.

[ITAMiata]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 14 2005, 04:20 PM
I&#39;m with Kirk on this one. I&#39;m not realy comfortable w/ the idea of just writing off ITC and ITB. For quite a while now, I&#39;ve spoken about how the entire performance envelope of available cars has shifted up. Twenty years ago, the number of available 4 and 6 cyl cars that made 150+ hp was pretty thin. Now there everywhere, and there aren&#39;t many cars around, that are less than 5 years old, that make < 100 hp (essentially, ITC feeder stock). So, what do you do about it? Do you continue to class cars like the NB at really bloated weights, just so you can put more choices in ITC?

This is something that literally just came to me, as I was reading this thread. When I think about it, I&#39;m actually surprised that no one else has brought it up (or maybe I just missed it). It&#39;s a model that&#39;s shown to actually work in another category, so maybe it can be adapted to IT. It&#39;s the concept of running higher output cars in a lower class. It&#39;s the concept of limited prep. I know that one of the first things someone is going to say, is "IT already is limited prep, there&#39;s nothing else to reduce" or "It&#39;s too many levels of prep." But that&#39;s not true. Don&#39;t give them the .5 pt bump in compression, don&#39;t allow them to use thread body shocks/coilovers, don&#39;t give them an alternative R&P, etc. etc.

Thoughts?

62672


What about the Scion XA and XBs? Aren&#39;t they less then 100 hp?

Bill

[mgyip]

Originally posted by cherokee@Oct 14 2005, 12:53 PM
Nothing ticks me off more then someone telling me to go race some where else in my car that is already classed. I do not have a problem with newer cars coming down the pike. I do have a problem in moving just "popular" cars around, that ain&#39;t right.

62680


My point is that I&#39;m tired of hearing "but my antique won&#39;t be competitive if SCCA allows newer cars into the class". That&#39;s progress. I don&#39;t have a problem running my so-to-be antique in ITA while the newer, faster cars show up and make me look (key word there, LOOK) even slower. I&#39;m not hung up on the concept that in order for cars to to be classed, they must become a front runner.

I&#39;m unclear about the "popular" cars comments however. Most of the changes in ITB and ITC have been to less popular cars - the FX16 comes to mind as do some odd variations of VW Sloroccos.

[Bill Miller]

Speaking of FX16&#39;s, I know where there&#39;s an &#39;88 for sale, if anyone is looking for a donor car to build into an ITB car.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by ITAMiata@Oct 14 2005, 03:08 PM
What about the Scion XA and XBs? Aren&#39;t they less then 100 hp?

Bill

62691


Doesn&#39;t the xB qualify as a station wagon?

Oh, and to answer your question, they&#39;re rated at 108hp/105lb-ft

[spnkzss]

Originally posted by mgyip@Oct 14 2005, 03:13 PM
My point is that I&#39;m tired of hearing "but my antique won&#39;t be competitive if SCCA allows newer cars into the class". That&#39;s progress. I don&#39;t have a problem running my so-to-be antique in ITA while the newer, faster cars show up and make me look (key word there, LOOK) even slower. I&#39;m not hung up on the concept that in order for cars to to be classed, they must become a front runner.

I&#39;m unclear about the "popular" cars comments however. Most of the changes in ITB and ITC have been to less popular cars - the FX16 comes to mind as do some odd variations of VW Sloroccos.

62692


There is also something else to think about. The SCCA&#39;s goal is to give people/cars a place to race. Nothing is said about all cars being setup competitively. Yes popular cars maybe faster than some of the vintage cars. It happens. It also happens in the reverse. I race a 1990 Honda Civic. I have the handling and I have the brakes. A VW will ALWAYS out power me. That is the advantage to IT. Different cars with different strengths and different weaknesses so that it is somewhat "competitive". The problem is someone wants to come in with a Yogo and run 1st everytime out. It just ain&#39;t gonna happen. Personally I am thinking about moving from ITC to ITB. Not because my car is slow, not because they haven&#39;t classed any new cars in C, I personally want to go faster, and I want to race with more than 10 other cars in my class and 30 SRX7s. There have been some interesting things happening in our reagion with SRX7s. That doesn&#39;t bother me as much. What bothers me about the SRX7s is their weaknesses are my strengths and my weaknesses are their strengths. That always leads to getting in each others way. I&#39;m not saying that ITC cars shouldn&#39;t run with SRX7, I don&#39;t want any part of the decision of who runs with who. I feal bad for the people that do hav eto decide that. I would just like to run with cars in my own class and atleast 15 of them.

I don&#39;t have a logical solution for any of this. I will be more than happy to help come up with a solution, but people need to get over the idea that every car SHOULD be able to win.

Rant and a half done for the year. Let&#39;s start Bench racing for 2006. O wait, I promised my wife I would not talk about racing for a little while :)

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 14 2005, 12:45 PM
Doesn&#39;t the xB qualify as a station wagon?

Oh, and to answer your question, they&#39;re rated at 108hp/105lb-ft

62695


Auto trans only I do believe. However, how about the Chevy Alero?

James

[Despr8dave]

Well, here&#39;s my $.02 worth and my delema......do I yank the OLD 510 out of the weeds and do a complete over all and run ITC again, or do I go buy a very used Super Late Model stock car with dry sump, quick change rear, etc. etc. for what I could buy a fair ITS or ITGT or AS.......400-500 hp is a blast on slicks that I can buy new and mounted for $100 each. Set up on a full race tube chassis, I can convert to road racing fairly inexpensive(in race terms) and can freshen up the 355 Chevy for no more than my 1600 DATSUN.... used and new Chevy race parts are everywhere, I&#39;d miss the enduros, and as much as I loved my IT racing, it never compared to the weekend I spent racing a stock car (truck) we spent one evening converting the chassis from oval to road course set up, which turned out to run second fastest of all the "closed" fender cars there and on used tires we paid $35 each for.......I went through this when racing stock cars and when compared, racing Chevy v-8&#39;s cost little more than 2300 Fords.....now I&#39;m not talking IMSA or Nextel Cup engines, but ones with more power than I will ever need......life is tuffff....
David
Go in deeper, come out harder

[ITAMiata]

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Oct 14 2005, 08:42 PM
Auto trans only I do believe. However, how about the Chevy Alero?

James

62699



A friend bought one and it did have an option for either manual or auto trans.

Bill

[DavidM]

I like the idea of pre-classing some of the more popular, newer cars that would fit in IT. I&#39;ll have to admit that I didn&#39;t know you COULD ask for a car to be classified until I started reading this board. I would suspect any person new to the SCCA would just look at the cars classified and figure that&#39;s what you have to choose from if you&#39;re going to build something.

Having said that, I don&#39;t know that having more cars classed would entice more people into IT. Conventional wisdom says to buy an already prepped car your first time around. My guess is that it&#39;s usually people that already own a race car or have previously owned one that are building new cars. They probably have a good idea of what car they want to use and know how to get it classed if it isn&#39;t already.

I&#39;m not sure how IT gets new recruits. Racing isn&#39;t cheap. IT is cheaper than other forms, but still takes a decent amount of money. I&#39;m guessing the market of people that want to race with sufficient funds to race is relatively small. So it would seem that the idea would be to market the strengths of IT to entice people to race in IT over other categories. I thought the post about the differences between racing in SM and IT was interesting. The number of different makes in IT seems to lend itself to better racing in a way since each car has different strengths and weaknesses. I don&#39;t think that&#39;s something people would think about if they were comparing a spec series to IT. Things like that could sway a person one way or another.

That&#39;s my $.01 anyways. I&#39;m not sure it was worth a whole $.02.

David

[Knestis]

Originally posted by DavidM@Oct 14 2005, 10:31 PM
... I&#39;ll have to admit that I didn&#39;t know you COULD ask for a car to be classified until I started reading this board. I would suspect any person new to the SCCA would just look at the cars classified and figure that&#39;s what you have to choose from if you&#39;re going to build something.


Exactly!

I started a couple of threads for suggestions re: additions to ITC and ITB. It strikes me that these are going to be great races at the ARRC, with several chassis capable of running up front, but they could suffer from neglect if attention gets focused upward.

K

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by ITAMiata@Oct 14 2005, 03:01 PM
A friend bought one and it did have an option for either manual or auto trans.

Bill

62706


Thanks for the correction Bill. I was looking at the Xa for my wife, edmunds said auto trans was standard. Here are some other ITC possibles Toyota Echo. I&#39;m not sure if it&#39;s classed but the Geo Metro. I can see it now, "Penelty Box Racing!" It came to me after I asked a friend about the Metro as a rental downgrade :) He was going to be charged for a mid-sized in a Cavalier. He said he&#39;d take it if they had anything smaller. Ford Aspire, "Aspiring to be a race car!"

James

[KevSC1]

Originally posted by ITAMiata@Oct 14 2005, 10:01 PM
A friend bought one and it did have an option for either manual or auto trans.

Bill

62706


I have a friend with an xA, and it has a 5 speed. Don&#39;t see her racing it...

[Catch22]

In the Southeast I think it is Spec Miata.

I&#39;d be willing to bet that if you look at OVERALL entries for a regional weekend from 5 years ago compared to today the number would be very similar.

The thing is, now there are 5 to 10 fewer cars in each of the IT classes and 40 cars in SM.

This is what bothers me about people constantly saying that SM is GRRRREAT for SCCA. "Look at how popular it is!" "Look at how its caused entries to go up!"
Well, no it hasn&#39;t. Its just stolen entrants from other classes.
Just my opinion of course.

But I&#39;m not worried. At some point these guys will get sick of spending $25K on a friggin Miata to run in 15th place and repair body damage nearly every weekend. This SM craze won&#39;t last forever. The big dogs will go national, and regionally the class will likely lose some of its lustre.
Or... They&#39;ll simply eventually crash every Miata ever made and we&#39;ll just run out of cars.
Just joking... Sort of.
:rolleyes:

[specialtyautomo]

[quote]
In the Southeast I think it is Spec Miata.

I&#39;d be willing to bet that if you look at OVERALL entries for a regional weekend from 5 years ago compared to today the number would be very similar.

The thing is, now there are 5 to 10 fewer cars in each of the IT classes and 40 cars in SM.

This is what bothers me about people constantly saying that SM is GRRRREAT for SCCA. "Look at how popular it is!" "Look at how its caused entries to go up!"
Well, no it hasn&#39;t. Its just stolen entrants from other classes.
Just my opinion of course.

But I&#39;m not worried. At some point these guys will get sick of spending $25K on a friggin Miata to run in 15th place and repair body damage nearly every weekend. This SM craze won&#39;t last forever. The big dogs will go national, and regionally the class will likely lose some of its lustre.

I have to agree with Scott. I havent raced my Suzuki Swift in a year now. I will next season since the run group has changed in the sediv. I spent the past year vintage racing instead of SCCA and vintage. Got tired of a shrinking field and qualifying second or third and having to pass 12 sm&#39;s to gain a position in class. I think the different run group will help itb and itc grow. I know alot of b and c drivers that had to do bodywork that normally would not have had to. Not saying it was the sm groups fault, but the b and c cars were in the way of their feild. We are racing too but with 4or5 b and c cars, we were in their way. I also see alot of b and c drivers piloting sm thinking it would be cheaper. I also see some of their cars for sale after a year or two. The numbers will go back up, it will just take a year or two. Maybe three with the rising fuel cost. There are still good b and c canidates in my eyes. We just have to think of lesser econo boxes like Suzuki, Kia , Dawoo LOL

[OTLimit]

In Midiv we have 42 drivers signed up in SM. In the IT Tour (so it&#39;s misnomer for this class; it&#39;s the Sunday regional support race with the national races), 54 different Midiv drivers have participated. That&#39;s a lot. But I can only pick out 8-10 names that I easily remember having driven in other classes.

It will be interesting to see how many try to go national next year.

[Catch22]

And gas prices are hurting. Its hurting in terms or workers and racers.

A trip to VIR right now would cost us about $400 in gas. No, we&#39;re not going to VIR any time soon.

Our car has been parked since July strictly due to budget (lack of).

[zooracer]

Hey! Another suzuki swift in the mix! Post up when you start racing it. Be neat to have two on track at the same time.

The beauty of IT is the variety of cars in the field and the relatively cheap level of prep (so long as we stop any more "rules creep")

Let the newer cars in and lets see how they do. SCCA needs to cut out some of the red tape on getting a new car classified. Be more flexible and reactive. It is just good business sense.

The more cars classed, the better off IT will be. Gives younger generations more choices. Then just adjust with weight.

This isnt any more complicated then you want to make it :rolleyes:

[specialtyautomo]

Been racing it since 2000. Finished 10 in sarrc points 2002 with only 5 races. I also own Talor Robertsons old swift after he crashed it at the arrc 03. Had some good races with that car @ road atlanta when it wans&#39;t on its roof.

[zracre]

The new beetle is classed, doesnt that make the same platform golf with the same engine classed as well?? I have raced all the IT classes at one time or another as well as a race in a SM...the appeal to build a low budget racer is appealing to anyone wanting to get into road racing...I think it would be great for Grassroots Motorsports, or Sportscar Magazine to do an article on building a bare bones safe legal ITC car to boost numbers...I am always toying with ideas for new race cars as donors are cheap and easy to find in south florida.

[Catch22]

You don&#39;t even have to go "bare bones" to build a cheap ITC car.

You can build a safe front runner easily for less than $10K.

[Geo]

Originally posted by zooracer@Oct 16 2005, 10:36 PM

Let the newer cars in and lets see how they do. SCCA needs to cut out some of the red tape on getting a new car classified. Be more flexible and reactive. It is just good business sense.


62764


What red tape?

[zracre]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 16 2005, 08:06 PM
You don&#39;t even have to go "bare bones" to build a cheap ITC car.

You can build a safe front runner easily for less than $10K.

62772


I was thinking less than that...obviously start with a Honda Civic std :119: as they are really inexpensive on ebay and relatively easy to find and do a basic build up w/o rebuilding the motor initially...

[zooracer]

"One issue is that a VTS sheet needs to be filled out for a new car to be classed - and it&#39;s a decent amount of work for potentially no reward as you don&#39;t know if anyone will build one."

I said red tape after reading this...

anyhoo, I thinks its obvious that the larger the pool of eligible cars, the better the chances of someone new to SCCA seeing something they want to race. I mean, imagine my surprise when I saw Suzuki Swift GTI&#39;s (which are really rare) in the ITB section of the GCR. My dad just happened to have two with blown motors in his backyard. I had autocrossed one several years back, and thougt it would make a fun ITB car.
A lot of young guys getting in this will maybe have a specific car they like, or happen to own, and will want to campaign it. If it isnt classed, or is way outclassed, then they may go to NASA or something.
Classing is really pretty simple I think. And you can always adjust with weight later if need be...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by zooracer@Oct 16 2005, 10:35 PM
"One issue is that a VTS sheet needs to be filled out for a new car to be classed - and it&#39;s a decent amount of work for potentially no reward as you don&#39;t know if anyone will build one."

I said red tape after reading this...

anyhoo, I thinks its obvious that the larger the pool of eligible cars, the better the chances of someone new to SCCA seeing something they want to race. I mean, imagine my surprise when I saw Suzuki Swift GTI&#39;s (which are really rare) in the ITB section of the GCR. My dad just happened to have two with blown motors in his backyard. I had autocrossed one several years back, and thougt it would make a fun ITB car.
A lot of young guys getting in this will maybe have a specific car they like, or happen to own, and will want to campaign it. If it isnt classed, or is way outclassed, then they may go to NASA or something.
Classing is really pretty simple I think. And you can always adjust with weight later if need be...

62784


Ahhh. that ASSUME word...

It would be a lot of work for US to do it, PROACTIVELY. Members who are interested in getting a car classed typically are ready to build one and have the info available to complete the forms. We would have to:

Pick the cars
Fill out the forms
Class the cars
Hope for subscription

When a member goes through the process on thier own, it&#39;s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

AB

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by zracre@Oct 16 2005, 07:28 PM
The new beetle is classed, doesnt that make the same platform golf with the same engine classed as well??
62769


Unfortunately not.

[JLawton]

I also think it would help if there was an easy transition from T 3/4 to IT. I think you would also see the touring classes get bigger as well. That 10 year limit with nowhere to go after would make me think twice. I don&#39;t have the money to buy a brand new car then build it into a touring car. I would consider a 5-8 year old car if I new it would have a home after.

But come up to the Northeast, plenty of IT cars up here!!

[Bill Miller]

I agree with you Jeff, there should almost be a defined IT class, for the new T/SS cars that get classed. While T/SS cars have a maximum ten-year lifespan, you can race some of them in IT, when they are only five years old. I&#39;ll have to go back and look at the cars classed in T3, but from what I remember, there were several that were probably outside the performance envelope of ITS. And once SSB/C become T3/4, I&#39;d like to see T5 added. Be a place to race the Scion xA&#39;s of the world, not to mention, be a natural feeder for ITB. To me, these are the kinds of things that the SCCA&#39;s strategic plan, for Club Racing, should address. BTW, anybody have any idea what the status of the Strategic Plan is? Been over 2 years now, and we haven&#39;t really seen much of anything, except the original PowerPoint presentation.

[Geo]

Originally posted by zooracer@Oct 17 2005, 02:35 AM
"One issue is that a VTS sheet needs to be filled out for a new car to be classed - and it&#39;s a decent amount of work for potentially no reward as you don&#39;t know if anyone will build one."

I said red tape after reading this...

62784


That is red tape?

You&#39;ve got to be kidding.

Do you just expect the ITAC/CRB/BOD to know everything about every car? Some of this information is vital to get a car classed/weighted properly. Not always, but sometimes. The VTS is not terribly complicated and anyone with an FSM should be able to fill one out reasonably quickly.

[cherokee]

[quote]
In the Southeast I think it is Spec Miata.

I know alot of b and c drivers that had to do bodywork that normally would not have had to.
62746


That would be me, the SM that hit me ran over 3 other cars in the same race, two IT cars and one other SM. The only reason that I am putting the Opel back on the track next year is I will not have to run with those.....people. I personally think they should have run the SM with AS, let them bounce of a 4000 pound Firebird a couple times and their driving habits would change. It also does not matter how fast you are, when I ran my MR2 I had more then one close call with a Miata, started at my school when 2 went into the wall and 4 had a big get to gether at the start of our sunday race. Someone please explain the thinking of these people when they get behind the wheel, it almost looks like road rage to me.


But I think FWIW, class new cars, I know that my old 1972 car will not be top dog forever, but as long as I can get it out there and the car is legal let the car run. But I think that the old B&C cars are going to be out classed by any thing made in the last few years, just the way it is.

[zooracer]

From everything I&#39;ve read on here, it is difficult to get a new car classed, or classed competitively, No?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by zooracer@Oct 17 2005, 11:12 AM
From everything I&#39;ve read on here, it is difficult to get a new car classed, or classed competitively, No?

62808


No.

AB

[Knestis]

Having done a classification request in recent memory - two years ago - I can say that the process is OK. I had to get permission from Topeka (J. Thoennes) to leave a bunch of the VTS slots blank, since I didn&#39;t have/couldn&#39;t find the necessary info (windshield layback angle???) but, not too bad.

Once the forms were in, it got reviewed and approved in a resonable time.

The problem is NOT there, however. It&#39;s simply that CURRENT racers are not likely to go to a bunch of trouble to attract more competition against themselves in different (and perhaps newer, higher-tech, more threatening) makes and models. NEW potential racers don&#39;t know how to go about it, or even that they are allowed to request new listings.

There are disincentives to growth of the classes here, in terms of getting new cars - and therefore new people? - into the IT classes. In the name of "being reponsive" or being "member driven," a big piece of what should be strategic thinking for the future of the category is neglected.

I know that the ITAC won&#39;t know everything about every car but isn&#39;t it possible that someone should be looking at the big picture?

K

[Catch22]

Originally posted by zracre@Oct 17 2005, 01:55 AM
I was thinking less than that...obviously start with a Honda Civic std :119: as they are really inexpensive on ebay and relatively easy to find and do a basic build up w/o rebuilding the motor initially...

62782



Don&#39;t assume that.
I love my car, but I spent a good bit more than I&#39;d planned to make it competitive. The tranny in this thing is just A W F U L. If you want to be competitive, you MUST do a final drive ($900) and LSD ($650 and up) and get as much power as you can out of the motor in order to overcome the horrendous gearing ($$$$$$). A really good suspension (I have custom valved Konis) also helps as it gets you more corner speed.
Basically, its a two speed car. We drive it using nothing but 3rd and 4th gear. Yes, thats a real challenge.

You can go just as fast in a 85 to 87 CRX/Civic for alot less money and effort. If I had to do it all over again thats what I&#39;d build.

Scott, who bit off more than he&#39;d planned to chew when he chose the Standard.

PS - There IS a cheap way to run up front in a Standard. All you have to do is bolt up a stock transmission from a CRX Si. That&#39;ll only cost you about $200... If you choose to do things that way (and some people do :bash_1_: )

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 17 2005, 12:28 PM

I know that the ITAC won&#39;t know everything about every car but isn&#39;t it possible that someone should be looking at the big picture?

K

62813


Well, lets talk about this. I think the "Big picture" needs to be agreed upon before we can move forward. I think half the people I talk to want us to do anything we can to keep ITB/ITC alive (from full revamps of weights to allowing lexan winshields and aftermarket parts due to availability) while the other half wants to invoke some sort of age rule killing cars off.

I like the on-the-fence approach. I think we can do our best to class and reclass cars into these classes keeping things SORT of fresh, while creating a class above ITS for the newer stuff. We have a list of cars, have a target performance envelope and are ready to continue moving forward...but we also need to &#39;fix&#39; what is here first. If that happens, we can move forward with a vision in a proactive manner instead of being reactionary all the time.

AB

[zooracer]

well I have read pages and pages of discussion on the difficulty in getting a new car classed competitively. But no need to bring that pile back up...
I think having new cars competing against older cars would be pretty cool. What is the problem with that? Why would anyone want to phase out older cars?
SCCA should class the cars, not wait for some 19 yr old, who doesnt know anything about the club, to request a new car for classification.
Start with the most popular ones out there and make it so.

When looking at the other ITB cars in the GCR it took me about 30 minutes to figure out that the swift would be competitive. This isnt rocket science.
I mean, the SCCA doesnt have to buy and build the car. They just have to write it down in the GCR as eligible in whichever class.

[Knestis]

...half the people I talk to want us to do anything we can to keep ITB/ITC alive (from full revamps of weights to allowing lexan winshields and aftermarket parts due to availability) while the other half wants to invoke some sort of age rule killing cars off.

I have a sneaking suspicion that both of those extreme positions are the product of individual racers protecting - or trying to bolster - their relative competitive advantage. One camp argues to have allowances for their old cars, while the other wants to make room for faster cars at the top of the class - both arguing disingenuously for "the good of the category." Bah.

Instead, some possible *strategic* first principles for helping ITB and ITC survive:

** It is desireable to offer options to potential entrants, to the degree that those options are attractive to them

** Current (relatively) low nation-wide participation suggests that the current options are not attractive enough

** Therefore, it seems like it would be helpful to list some additional cars


Along another train of thought...

** Many currently listed cars are getting old and parts are becoming scarce

** Absent this reality, there is no real reason to "unlist" a particular make/model of car

** Unless, that is, it has been available as an option for years and nobody has run one

** Given the above, it doesn&#39;t make any sense to keep an old car on the list, if nobody is currently running one and allowing someone to do so now will only create an entrant with a parts supply problem

** In itself, that is a problem because, in an effort to avoid alienating people who are already commited to older cars, it is often suggested that special allowances be made to mitigate parts scarcity - many of which are contrary to the evident first principles of the IT category in the first place (e.g., plastic body panels, different engines, Lexan windshields)

** It should be taken as a given that, if a rule needs to be addressed for the entire category, it should be based on the needs of the entire category - as opposed to the needs of owners of a specific car or group of cars

** Therefore, while it should not be a goal, in and of itself, to obsolete old IT cars, efforts to preserve the eligibility/competitiveness/whatever should equally not compromise other first principles of the category


Combining the above...

** It would therefore seem likely that the additional cars listed be as new as possible (ie. just within the eligibility age window), to allow them maximum life in the IT category before the age/parts availability problem sets in

** However, since those cars - particularly if they are popular with the driving public - may retain their resale value too well to make them attractive $$ options for racing.

** This suggests that there is a theoretical "sweet spot" age, at which point the cars are not too new to be expensive, but still a useful racing life away from looking "vintage"


On makes and models...

** It is NOT good for the category for new cars to be substantially better than already listed cars - creating a car-of-the-year is a bad thing

** It WOULD be good if the new cars listed were perceived as being close enough in potential that they are worth developing

** New cars listed should make some sense, in terms of dealer and aftermarket OE parts support, availability of donor chassis and parts, and popularity in the aftermarket perfomance sector

** Further, since people sometimes make their race car choices for irrational reasons, they should have some intangible attractiveness, to the extent possible, catering to brand loyalty, coolness, or other emotional factor


Note here that arguments for or against particular cars being listed are by definition NOT strategic. Nor are cases presented to allow individual models particular allowances.

Discuss.

K

Edit (to zooracer) - I didnt&#39; get that out of this strand at all, by the way.

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 17 2005, 12:28 PM

There are disincentives to growth of the classes here, in terms of getting new cars - and therefore new people? - into the IT classes. In the name of "being reponsive" or being "member driven," a big piece of what should be strategic thinking for the future of the category is neglected.

I know that the ITAC won&#39;t know everything about every car but isn&#39;t it possible that someone should be looking at the big picture?

K

62813



It&#39;s a good point...

I&#39;m not sure the ITAC should be trying to fill the classes, but perhaps some of the obvious choices could be done, but not a whole bunch.

A better idea is to try to open the process up. I think that streamlining the processes could go a long way. Perhaps the web site could have a section dedicated to the wanna be racer where things like the breakdown of classes was explained, and as a sub point, how anyone can request a car be added to the IT ranks.

That is a section the ITAC would be happy to write, I am sure.

[Knestis]

If nothing else, revisit the VTS form. It clearly has more info than is really necessary - that makes it into the ITCS - and may not have all of the info needed by the ITAC to classify under the new system?

K

[Geo]

Originally posted by zooracer@Oct 17 2005, 03:12 PM
From everything I&#39;ve read on here, it is difficult to get a new car classed, or classed competitively, No?

62808


Don&#39;t take all the stuff here as gospel. The only requests we have turned down are cars that either slushbox only, AWD, or clearly too powerful for classification (Z32). We have NOT turned down a car that even remotely fits IT.

[Geo]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 17 2005, 04:28 PM
The problem is NOT there, however. It&#39;s simply that CURRENT racers are not likely to go to a bunch of trouble to attract more competition against themselves in different (and perhaps newer, higher-tech, more threatening) makes and models. NEW potential racers don&#39;t know how to go about it, or even that they are allowed to request new listings.

62813


Hogwash. First of all, we&#39;ve received requests for classifications from pure newbies and have classified the cars. If we did not have enough info, we&#39;ve asked for more. If necessary we have pretty much guided folks thorugh the process.

Secondly, are there really that many cars out there that would be a fit for IT that someone might actually build that are not classified? Perhaps they are not classified because nobody wants to build one. I&#39;m sorry Kirk, but this is totally a tempest in a teapot claiming something on a "what if." Doesn&#39;t wash.


Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 17 2005, 04:28 PM
There are disincentives to growth of the classes here, in terms of getting new cars - and therefore new people? - into the IT classes. In the name of "being reponsive" or being "member driven," a big piece of what should be strategic thinking for the future of the category is neglected.

I know that the ITAC won&#39;t know everything about every car but isn&#39;t it possible that someone should be looking at the big picture?

K

62813


See above.

If you want to build a unclassified Cyclops Special, send in the request. But until then, don&#39;t suggest that we&#39;re clueless or that there is some conspiracy to keep out the young hotshoes in their Cyclops Specials.

[Geo]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 18 2005, 01:18 AM
If nothing else, revisit the VTS form. It clearly has more info than is really necessary - that makes it into the ITCS - and may not have all of the info needed by the ITAC to classify under the new system?

K

62860


I am in 100% in agreement.

[Geo]

Originally posted by zooracer+Oct 17 2005, 06:07 PM-->
well I have read pages and pages of discussion on the difficulty in getting a new car classed competitively. But no need to bring that pile back up...
62824
[/b]

Steamy and smelly that it may be. It&#39;s a canard.


Originally posted by zooracer@Oct 17 2005, 06:07 PM
I think having new cars competing against older cars would be pretty cool. What is the problem with that?
62824


Once again, there is no real issue there. Last year at the ARRC a 240Z was running up front with the E36s in ITS. There were early VWs racing with late model Honduhs in ITC. ITB was a bit vintage, but no more so than my car. ITA is a hell of a class these days although it mostly favors the newer cars. I&#39;d love to see the RX-7 catch a break there.

<!--QuoteBegin-zooracer@Oct 17 2005, 06:07 PM
Why would anyone want to phase out older cars?
SCCA should class the cars, not wait for some 19 yr old, who doesnt know anything about the club, to request a new car for classification.
Start with the most popular ones out there and make it so.

62824


I think the most popular cars get classified by the members pretty regularly by definition.

[Geo]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 18 2005, 12:15 AM

Instead, some possible *strategic* first principles for helping ITB and ITC survive:

** It is desireable to offer options to potential entrants, to the degree that those options are attractive to them

** Current (relatively) low nation-wide participation suggests that the current options are not attractive enough

62851


Not to diss anyone in ITB/ITC, but most of the youngsters drive street cars WAY faster than ITB/ITC cars. I&#39;d suggest this is more of an issue with getting the youngsters to run these classes. I&#39;m NOT anti-ITB/ITC, but this is a very real issue. It&#39;s the same sort of reason I wouldn&#39;t in a million years consider buying/building a car for HP for instance.

[Knestis]

Ooch. Geo came back cranky. :)

I&#39;m afraid that someone&#39;s taken my suggestion to hyperbole level, turning "disincentive" into "conspiracy." That is NOT what I said. This isn&#39;t black helicopter talk but instead is about organizational motivation for doing - or not doing - things.

I&#39;ve had people at races - and not just "kids" - ask me if they can race their...

** Mid-90s Geo Prizm - in a parking lot here in Greensboro
** Toyota Tercel of about the same vintage - at a rallycross in Southern VA
** Mitsubishi Mirage, also probably a &#39;93 or so - VIR paddock, son of a turn worker I think

I don&#39;t know the specs of all of these, obviously they are all either B or C cars, but these three people all had the same WTF look on their face when I explained that they couldn&#39;t race anything that wasn&#39;t in the rules, and that someone would have to request that they be listed.

I&#39;m afaid that it&#39;s too easy to equate "nobody has asked to list them" with "nobody will race them" but I might be completely wrong. It might be that nobody wants to race something that doesn&#39;t have a turbo and AWD, or that isn&#39;t a Miata. And suggesting that these were just random people off the street and not "serious" about going racing really sells short the possibility that we could reach out to some people who aren&#39;t already members. There was a time for each of us when we weren&#39;t.

K

EDIT - Can anyone tell me how many new cars were classified for 2005? Over the last three years? I know of one for sure.

EDIT EDIT - If I filled out requests and VTS forms for four of these common econoboxes a month for the next three months, would they all get listed? They all come with 5-speed &#39;boxes, are all 2wd, and clearly - none is too powerful for IT. Hmm?

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 17 2005, 08:35 PM

It might be that nobody wants to race something that doesn&#39;t have a turbo and AWD, or that isn&#39;t a Miata.

K

EDIT EDIT - If I filled out requests and VTS forms for four of these common econoboxes a month for the next three months, would they all get listed? They all come with 5-speed &#39;boxes, are all 2wd, and clearly - none is too powerful for IT. Hmm?

62876


I might be just the crazy one; but, I have no desire to:

1) Race a turbo car

2) Race an AWD car and

3) Race a Miata.

It&#39;d be neat if the 2.5l Z3 could get classed, I can think of a couple of track-a-holics that might want to race theirs and may pave the way for the 2.5l Z4 first introduced in &#39;03. Where the 2.8l BMW&#39;s have all been bypassed. Then what about the 3litre camp who&#39;ll want to race with 231hp from the factory? There&#39;ll be a few Performance Pack guys to join in. BTW, sign up as many eco-box 5 speed cars as you can think of :023: Toyota Tercel/Echo, Mitsu Mirage, Chevy Cavalier....

James

[Geo]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 18 2005, 03:35 AM
Ooch. Geo came back cranky. :)

62876


Sorry Kirk, didn&#39;t mean to be cranky. But, I do get a little cranky about the talk of red tape and how difficult it is to get a car classified. THIS is pure hyperbole. The reality is it&#39;s pretty easy as long as the car is a pretty reasonable fit in IT.

Now, to turn things around a bit on you, I&#39;ll bet when the folks with the Prizm, Tercel, Mirage had the WTF look you didn&#39;t say "don&#39;t worry, all you have to do is fill out a simple form and submit it with a request." That sort of response would help put at ease the mind of someone who really wanted to come play.

I agree that there are things on the VTS that are not needed, but we take incomplete VTS all the time. If they are complete enough we take action on the request. If they are missing data we need, we contact the person making the request. Truly no big deal.

Too many people make this process out to be dark and mysterious and too many others with no direct knowledge of the subject believe it and repeat it and it becomes a "pit legend" (as oppossed to urgan legend ;) ).

As for how many new classifications in the last couple of years it&#39;s been a handful. But I can say the only requests I remember turning down are for cars with slushboxes or too powerful for ITS.

[Bill Miller]

George,

What&#39;s the status of my request to classify the Mk IV VW 2.0 Golf/Jetta in IT? I sent this in several months ago, followed up by a VTS. Haven&#39;t heard anything since. BTW, this is the same chassis/engine/driveline as the New Beetle.

[1stGenBoy]

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Oct 18 2005, 04:58 AM
I might be just the crazy one; but, I have no desire to:

1) Race a turbo car

2) Race an AWD car and

3) Race a Miata.

It&#39;d be neat if the 2.5l Z3 could get classed, I can think of a couple of track-a-holics that might want to race theirs and may pave the way for the 2.5l Z4 first introduced in &#39;03. Where the 2.8l BMW&#39;s have all been bypassed. Then what about the 3litre camp who&#39;ll want to race with 231hp from the factory? There&#39;ll be a few Performance Pack guys to join in. BTW, sign up as many eco-box 5 speed cars as you can think of :023: Toyota Tercel/Echo, Mitsu Mirage, Chevy Cavalier....

James

62881

The Z3 is classified in ITA with the 1.9l. If you want the 2.5l classed you have to write in and request it. Is it a Z3 with a 2.5l or a Z4 with a 2.5l?
Don&#39;t forget the car has to be 5years or older to be considered for IT

[Geo]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 18 2005, 11:18 AM
George,

What&#39;s the status of my request to classify the Mk IV VW 2.0 Golf/Jetta in IT? I sent this in several months ago, followed up by a VTS. Haven&#39;t heard anything since. BTW, this is the same chassis/engine/driveline as the New Beetle.

62887


No record of it. Did you use the Twilightzone Zip Code?

Seriously, John Bauer has no record of it. Can you resubmit it?

Sorry about that Bill.

[Knestis]

Uh, oh.

:o

K

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 18 2005, 11:17 PM
Uh, oh.

:o

K

62961



We drew straws to see who would break the news...Geo lost, LOL ;)

[Geo]

Hey, I didn&#39;t lose it. I even asked that it be resent. My sincere apologizes though.

That&#39;s just a human error. Things get lost all the time. I&#39;ve been looking for my mind for a few years.

[Bill Miller]

Dear Bill,

We received your letter on March 7, 2005, and forwarded it to the Club
Racing Board and the appropriate advisory committee for their
consideration.

Your input will be placed on the next available Club Racing Board
agenda. The CRB generally meets once a month, however some issues
require additional consideration that may include a request for more
information from you, the advisory committee, a manufacturer, and/or
the
membership at large. An official response to your inquiry will be
published in Fastrack News, which you receive with your SportsCar
magazine. A PDF version of the Fastrack News is also posted on
www.scca.com for your convenience.

As a member-driven organization, we appreciate your interest and
involvement.

Sincerely,

John


-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Miller [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 5:37 PM
To: Club Racing Board
Subject: New car classification request


Please classify the &#39;99 - &#39;00 VW Golf 2.0 in Improved
Touring

Bill Miller
279608


There&#39;s the letter and the acknowledgement guys (and it looks like I only asked for the Golf, not the Golf and the Jetta). I got an acknowledgement from John. I guess I can resend it. One of the things that bothers me about this, is that the Mk IV Golf and Jetta 2.0 8v came up in the conversation about classing the New Bettle in ITC. I had asked if they were going to be classified, since they were the same chassis/engine/driveline as the NB. IIRC, someone made the comment to &#39;write the letter&#39;.

[Bill Miller]

Latest info I have, is that they got the requests (I actually sent two, one for the Golf, and one for the Jetta), but they didn&#39;t get the VTS sheets (which I sent later). I&#39;ll have to go back and dig them up

[Andy Bettencourt]

Would this be an opportunity for an excersize in &#39;class jumping&#39;?

What I mean is that lets say the Golf/Jetta/NB are all identical other than the bodies. In theory, they would be in the same class.

What if we put the Golf/Jetta in ITB at a lower weight while the NB runs parallel in ITC at the higher weight. Would this give the membership an interesting choice without actually having to &#39;dual-class&#39; them?

Just an idea. Thoughts?

AB

[zracre]

As ong as they are built with roll cage thickness in mind.....

[gran racing]

Not to pick on you George, but…


Not to diss anyone in ITB/ITC, but most of the youngsters drive street cars WAY faster than ITB/ITC cars. I&#39;d suggest this is more of an issue with getting the youngsters to run these classes. I&#39;m NOT anti-ITB/ITC, but this is a very real issue. It&#39;s the same sort of reason I wouldn&#39;t in a million years consider buying/building a car for HP for instance.

This is an interesting statement. For IT, what age group is SCCA’s target market? My guess is that it begins at people in their late twenties. Do you think that the biggest factor more young people do not become involved in IT (other forms of SCCA’s road racing program) is due to the cars available to choose from? I really don’t think so. I’ll grant you that when I was first introduced into SCCA the idea of racing a 90 hp car was not that appealing to me. But as I learned more, ITC and ITB (and ITA for that matter) made sense due to the cost factors. The faster you go the more expensive racing gets. My opinion is that SCCA needs to focus on keeping IT as affordable as it can be to attract new customers, revamp its marketing strategy because it has really sucked in the past, as well as continue building a bridge from autocross to road racing. I’d just hate for the club to focus on the wrong things without really identifying what can be done to attract new racers to SCCA. Not that it really matters, but even ITA’s fast cars only have 140 hp stock. One of the other top cars only has 110. It is all about how things are marketed and educating people.


Sorry Kirk, didn&#39;t mean to be cranky. But, I do get a little cranky about the talk of red tape and how difficult it is to get a car classified. THIS is pure hyperbole. The reality is it&#39;s pretty easy as long as the car is a pretty reasonable fit in IT.

The perception of things changes as one gains more experience with SCCA and racing in general. To a brand new person racing, getting a car classed can be intimidating. Speaking as a person who did this (I had the Prelude that I’m racing now classed – it was my first racing experience with SCCA) it was a bit difficult. I understand that there is simply no way around the need to obtain much of the information, but to say it is easy really is inaccurate. I also agree that I did this to myself and I could have chosen a different route. Heck, when I went to the Honda dealerships (yes, multiple) to try and obtain some of the necessary information the just looked at me and said they have no idea where in the world one would get that. I wasn’t asking the new guy either; some of the guys at the shop thought it was really cool what I was trying to do and took the VTS sheets and did some research but still couldn’t locate some of the required info.


I agree that there are things on the VTS that are not needed, but we take incomplete VTS all the time. If they are complete enough we take action on the request.

Well then we need to work to get rid of any of the unnecessary information that is not easy to obtain. When people get a VTS sheet and it asks for X, then the person believes they need to really do the research even if not easy to find out what X is. Anything that can be done to make the process easier should be done.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 19 2005, 12:53 PM
Would this be an opportunity for an excersize in &#39;class jumping&#39;?

What I mean is that lets say the Golf/Jetta/NB are all identical other than the bodies. In theory, they would be in the same class.

What if we put the Golf/Jetta in ITB at a lower weight while the NB runs parallel in ITC at the higher weight. Would this give the membership an interesting choice without actually having to &#39;dual-class&#39; them?

Just an idea. Thoughts?

AB

63006


Andy,

This was one of the reasons behind my request to classify the Mk IV Golf/Jetta, to see where they would land. As you stated, they&#39;re the same as the NB, with the exception of the bodywork. Not sure what that means in terms of curb weight. I actually did look it up, back when we were talking about the NB, but I don&#39;t have it handy. From what I recall, the weights were all pretty close, w/ the Jetta being slightly heavier than the NB. I&#39;ll look it up again though.

Just pulled it up. The following data are for 2000 m/y cars

New Bettle GL - 2769#
Jetta 4dr GL - 2884#
Golf 2dr GL - 2767#
Golf 4dr GLS* - 2864#

* Golf 4dr only offered in GLS trim level, not the GL trim level.

If there was concern about getting the NB down to the process-generated weight, I suspect that the others would have a hard time getting there as well. Sure does create an interesting situation. Can anyone else think of a case where you&#39;ve got the same engine/driveline, but in two different generations of car, running in two different IT classes? I was think the 4AGE Toyotas, but the FX16 is FWD, and the AW11 MR2 and AE86 Corolla are both RWD (w/ the MR2 being mid-engine).

[Geo]

All very fair questions....


Originally posted by gran racing+Oct 19 2005, 06:44 PM-->
Not to pick on you George, but…
This is an interesting statement. For IT, what age group is SCCA’s target market? My guess is that it begins at people in their late twenties. Do you think that the biggest factor more young people do not become involved in IT (other forms of SCCA’s road racing program) is due to the cars available to choose from? I really don’t think so.

63012
[/b]

I agree with you. If you go back to the discussion, IIRC Kirk was talking about lack of choices being an issue with ITB/ITC. My response was to suggest that it has more to do with the power of those cars and that most of the younger set today have road cars that are significantly faster and they aren&#39;t interested in racing slower cars than their road car. Please keep in mind that I&#39;m not dissing those classes nor am I suggesting speeding them up. I&#39;m just repeating comments I&#39;ve heard from potential new racers about ITB/ITC.


Originally posted by gran racing@Oct 19 2005, 06:44 PM
My opinion is that SCCA needs to focus on keeping IT as affordable as it can be to attract new customers...

63012


We are not customers. We are members. There is a difference. That said, I agree that we need to keep affordable racing to attract new members.


Originally posted by gran racing@Oct 19 2005, 06:44 PM
Heck, when I went to the Honda dealerships (yes, multiple) to try and obtain some of the necessary information the just looked at me and said they have no idea where in the world one would get that. I wasn’t asking the new guy either; some of the guys at the shop thought it was really cool what I was trying to do and took the VTS sheets and did some research but still couldn’t locate some of the required info.

63012


Did the FSM not have most of the info required?

<!--QuoteBegin-gran racing@Oct 19 2005, 06:44 PM
Well then we need to work to get rid of any of the unnecessary information that is not easy to obtain. When people get a VTS sheet and it asks for X, then the person believes they need to really do the research even if not easy to find out what X is. Anything that can be done to make the process easier should be done.

63012


I agree. Perhaps the VTS could use some updating. I&#39;m sure it&#39;s used for multiple classes, but perhaps certain items could be indicated not necessary for certain classes?

[gran racing]

We are not customers. We are members.

From a standpoint of attracting an increase in customer/member base, reminds me of how a bank (customers) and a credit union (members) look at things or supposidly do. I certainly don&#39;t want SCCA to start making all of our decisions based upon what would make sense for a greedy business. What I&#39;m really trying to get at is there could be more proactive methods being used to get new members (got it! :D ).

What you said about the ITB/ITC does make sense and I was one of those people, race a 110 hp car? How fun can that be?

Kinda related; I&#39;ll never forget when I told one of my sponsors that I was moving down a class from ITA to ITB and how excited I was. His response was why in the world would you be happy they moved you down? Almost like it was a big demotion and it was because I wasn&#39;t ready for the faster drivers. Looking at it from his perspective it made sense and I couldn&#39;t help but chuckle.

[Catch22]

I think what will get younger people involved in IT is an understanding that you CAN go out and race competitively in a $5000 car. Thats where the club misses the marketing boat for ITB and ITC in my opinion.

Run a series of articles in Super Street or Honda Tuner about building and racing a 87 CRX Si in ITB for $7000 and see if it doesn&#39;t grab some interest.

NASA has done this with the Honda Challenge, but they&#39;ve focused on the fastest, pimpyest class (H1). While it gets plenty of interest with the younger crowd (brightly painted Civics with Acura powerplants are all the rage) 95% of these guys can&#39;t remotely drop $25 to $50K to build a race car. Thats what they&#39;d LIKE to do, but they can&#39;t.

When I was 24 years old, I could have been racing an ITB or ITC car. Easily. Problem was that I just didn&#39;t even know it existed.

Scott, who thinks we need to get some newer VWs, Mazdas, Fords and Hondas in ITB/C and get the word out.

Has anybody with SCCA considered sending a photog and writer to the ARRC race to cover the ITC race? Maybe to later try to publish in some of the "tuner" magazines? It promises to be a real showdown, but if nobody covers it and sends it to the automotive public... Well... Only those people who already know about it are going to know about it.
Just a suggestion.
B)

[gran racing]

Exactly!! When I was growing up going to races, I saw the skippy schools and thought that was the only way to go. A $3,500 bill for a school weekend? Guess what they say is true; racing is only for the rich. But that is not true.

Scott, did you just make a typo? Weird because the B & C aren&#39;t even that close. ;)

[Geo]

Originally posted by Catch22+Oct 21 2005, 04:22 PM-->
I think what will get younger people involved in IT is an understanding that you CAN go out and race competitively in a $5000 car. Thats where the club misses the marketing boat for ITB and ITC in my opinion.

Run a series of articles in Super Street or Honda Tuner about building and racing a 87 CRX Si in ITB for $7000 and see if it doesn&#39;t grab some interest.
63193
[/b]

Agreed.

<!--QuoteBegin-Catch22@Oct 21 2005, 04:22 PM
Has anybody with SCCA considered sending a photog and writer to the ARRC race to cover the ITC race? Maybe to later try to publish in some of the "tuner" magazines? It promises to be a real showdown, but if nobody covers it and sends it to the automotive public... Well... Only those people who already know about it are going to know about it.
Just a suggestion.
B)

63193


I have some contacts at Sport Compact Car and have written an article for them in the past. I think it&#39;s too late this year to do a viable proposal. I may work on it for next year though.

[zracre]

[quote]


What you said about the ITB/ITC does make sense and I was one of those people, race a 110 hp car? How fun can that be?

I moved back to ITB from ITS because of a cost/competitiveness standpoint...now im in A because I love the Acuras in general...many people say how can you move back? just look at SM 110hp average, and people flocking.....equal playing fields (or as close as we can get) lower cost than many IT efforts, contingencies, now national...and HUGE competitive fields...

[Catch22]

Originally posted by Geo@Oct 22 2005, 01:41 AM

I have some contacts at Sport Compact Car and have written an article for them in the past. I think it&#39;s too late this year to do a viable proposal. I may work on it for next year though.

63210


Give them a call George. You never know, they may be desperately looking for stuff to fill the pages RIGHT NOW.
Last year, Kirk sent out press releases to the local newspapers of all the drivers that were running his car in the VIR 13 Hour. THE NEXT DAY my local paper contacted us wanting to do a story. They needed to fill space and had nothing going on. Not only did I get in the local sports page, I got on the FRONT PAGE of the local sports page complete with color picture.
For that entire week, everywhere I went somebody said "Hey, aren&#39;t you that racer guy that was in the paper?"

We NEVER expected that.
So... Call SCC. It can&#39;t hurt. They can crawl all over my car and take pictures at the ARRC (its a pretty ITC car. some say the nicest C car they&#39;ve ever seen B) ).

Again, when those twenty somethings that see World Challenge and Grand Am Cup on Speed find out that they can do that for about $5000, I think the results will be good.

Scott, who says "folks don&#39;t know what they don&#39;t know."

[Catch22]

OH, and I know somebody who is building an ITB CRX right now in Atlanta. If SCC wants them to track the build with pictures I&#39;m sure they&#39;ll do it.
These guys are pretty serious though, so they will probably be going over the $7000 mark :blink:

[Geo]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 22 2005, 10:53 AM
OH, and I know somebody who is building an ITB CRX right now in Atlanta. If SCC wants them to track the build with pictures I&#39;m sure they&#39;ll do it.
These guys are pretty serious though, so they will probably be going over the $7000 mark :blink:

63231


Covering a build would be ideal. I&#39;ll talk with my contacts. I think it could be done right by pointing out how to take advantage of the rules and that the rule book is not a terrible thing. They key is to get the kids to realize that "OK, IT cars aren&#39;t bling, but they do have some cool stuff."

[hare_ITC]

IMO driver age has nothing to do with the declines in ITC and ITB. Take me for an example. I am a 20 year old college student. I ran a EP rx7 in high speed autox this past year, through a student organization here. I now have a ITC rabbit that my friend and I bought, and will be doing w2w next year. Maybe I&#39;m just an exception but isn&#39;t half the fun of racing, being able to run with someone else in your run group. To me it doesn&#39;t matter if my car has 300 hp or a measley 80 or whatever the rabbit has, so long as I can run with someone it will be fun. I thought that was the way amateur racing was supposed to be. My .02

Ron Davis
#22 ITC rabbit

[ITC69]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 21 2005, 04:22 PM
I think what will get younger people involved in IT is an understanding that you CAN go out and race competitively in a $5000 car. Thats where the club misses the marketing boat for ITB and ITC in my opinion.

Run a series of articles in Super Street or Honda Tuner about building and racing a 87 CRX Si in ITB for $7000 and see if it doesn&#39;t grab some interest.

NASA has done this with the Honda Challenge, but they&#39;ve focused on the fastest, pimpyest class (H1). While it gets plenty of interest with the younger crowd (brightly painted Civics with Acura powerplants are all the rage) 95% of these guys can&#39;t remotely drop $25 to $50K to build a race car. Thats what they&#39;d LIKE to do, but they can&#39;t.

When I was 24 years old, I could have been racing an ITB or ITC car. Easily. Problem was that I just didn&#39;t even know it existed.

Scott, who thinks we need to get some newer VWs, Mazdas, Fords and Hondas in ITB/C and get the word out.

Has anybody with SCCA considered sending a photog and writer to the ARRC race to cover the ITC race? Maybe to later try to publish in some of the "tuner" magazines? It promises to be a real showdown, but if nobody covers it and sends it to the automotive public... Well... Only those people who already know about it are going to know about it.
Just a suggestion.
B)

63193

[ITC69]

Hey Gang, Racecar building ain&#39;t cheap, but it can be done on a budget, just requries time and patience. Observed my son, Mike Fine build his first (then ITB CRX)on the part of the month plan. Campaigned it for several years in ECR&#39;s with a co-driver to share week-end expenses. Original car was lost to a Crash at Road Atlanta, where it lost an argument with a Large Pine Tree!!!(ouch) Replacement car took less time to build, and was faster, better car, due to lessons learned on first one and his increased car prep skills. Best finish in car as an ITB Car was at ARRC , 2000, when car finished 2d in ITB Enduro, a result of smart planning, good drivers, and sheer luck. I know, I was crew-chief for that one. All of the other ITB Hot shoes broke early and we soldiered on. Car did eventually get reclassified to ITC with a 50# weight add and has proved very competitive in ITC.

[dickita15]

hmmm
"The most fun you can have with 100 horsepower"

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Geo@Oct 23 2005, 02:22 AM
Covering a build would be ideal. ...


Ooh, ooh - over here! Hello?!

http://it2.evaluand.com/gti/build4.php

K

[Geo]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 23 2005, 08:54 AM
Ooh, ooh - over here! Hello?!

http://it2.evaluand.com/gti/build4.php

K

63275


Nice job, but you&#39;re WAY too far along in the process. The other thing when doing something like this for a magazine article, the going is 2-3x as slow. Why? Because you can only get so far before you have to stop and take pictures. When I did my tech article for Sport Compact Car it was almost torture. They are VERY fussy about photography (and the new editor is a fantastic photographer so it will be even more so) so just a quick shot in the middle of doing something will not be up to magazine standards.

To do a magazine article on a subject like this, the person must be very dedicated to the article as well and communicating the tech stuff very well, including the illustrations (photos). Anyway, I&#39;m just saying there is more that goes into this than may seem.

[Catch22]

Originally posted by hare_ITC@Oct 23 2005, 02:45 AM
To me it doesn&#39;t matter if my car has 300 hp or a measley 80 or whatever the rabbit has, so long as I can run with someone it will be fun. I thought that was the way amateur racing was supposed to be. My .02

Ron Davis
#22 ITC rabbit

63260


That is absolutely 100% correct. I have driven alot of cars, and I say without hesitation that my ITC Civic is the most fun of the bunch.
And the guys I race against in ITC are first rate. Anyone who saw the race we had at Road Atlanta in July of this year won&#39;t soon forget it, and none of us ever so much as touched each other (well, except to bump draft). The most fun I&#39;ve EVER had in a vehicle, and it has wayyyyy LESS than 100hp B) .

The problem is that the average joe doesn&#39;t understand this. When a non-racer type asks me what kind of motor I have in the car, the looks on their faces are always ones of disbelief when I tell them its the original wheezing 1.5 liter. When they ask for power numbers, I tell them "less than 100."
Most of the time I think they think I&#39;m joking with them. In an age of NASCAR, F1, and 400hp turbo drift cars, the idea of a race car with a two digit power number is almost unfathomable to those that aren&#39;t "in the know."

But at the end of the day, my car hits the apex of turn 1 at Road Atlanta just as fast as those cars with 3 to 4 times its power. Faster than some of them :happy204:, and it does it for a whole lot less money.
This is where we need to get more folks "in the know"

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 23 2005, 11:41 AM
The most fun I&#39;ve EVER had in a vehicle, and it has wayyyyy LESS than 100hp B) .

63280
I hope you are excluding certain back seat activities. :D

[Geo]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 23 2005, 10:41 AM
When a non-racer type asks me what kind of motor I have in the car, the looks on their faces are always ones of disbelief when I tell them its the original wheezing 1.5 liter. When they ask for power numbers, I tell them "less than 100."
Most of the time I think they think I&#39;m joking with them. In an age of NASCAR, F1, and 400hp turbo drift cars, the idea of a race car with a two digit power number is almost unfathomable to those that aren&#39;t "in the know."

63280


Peter Egan wrote a column about this very thing about 20 years ago about people asking him the top speed of his HP Spridget.

[Catch22]

I get that all the time. Mostly in places like gas stations and roadside eat stops.

"Whats it got in it? Type R motor?"
"What&#39;ll it do in the 1/4?"
"How fast will it go?"

I love answering these questions. Because the answers are...

"The 1.5 it was born with."
"I dunno. Probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 17 to 18 seconds."
"It hit 118 once at Daytona. With a draft and a tailwind."

Its usually at this point that the person walks away. But if they are genuinely interested I try to explain things. Mostly I think they think I&#39;m being a smartass.
[shrugs]

Hey Baker...
That ARRC ITC race from last year made a hard case for "better than sex."
B)

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 23 2005, 11:41 AM
...the idea of a race car with a two digit power number is almost unfathomable...
63280


It&#39;s a hell of a lot more fun to make a slow car go fast than to make a fast car go fast.

Unfortunately, far too many people have an instinctive knack for making just about any car go slow, so they try to make up for it with a faster car... - GA

[charrbq]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 23 2005, 11:31 PM
I get that all the time. Mostly in places like gas stations and roadside eat stops.

"Whats it got in it? Type R motor?"
"What&#39;ll it do in the 1/4?"
"How fast will it go?"

I love answering these questions. Because the answers are...

"The 1.5 it was born with."
"I dunno. Probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 17 to 18 seconds."
"It hit 118 once at Daytona. With a draft and a tailwind."

Its usually at this point that the person walks away. But if they are genuinely interested I try to explain things. Mostly I think they think I&#39;m being a smartass.
[shrugs]

Hey Baker...
That ARRC ITC race from last year made a hard case for "better than sex."
B)

63300
The first question I get is, "Is that a race car?" That&#39;s followed by, "That ain&#39;t now race car, that&#39;s a station wagon!"

When they ask engine size, I tell then and admit it&#39;s pretty much stock...with a few modifications. But when they ask me such things as quarter mile, horsepower, and top speed...I tell them what they want to hear. They go away with a smile and wonderment. We will never meet again, but the tails they will tell.

I was asked once why it had slicks on all four wheels. The guy wondered if it would boil all four in the quarter. To him, I shook my head and walk away. :P

[Knestis]

When I used to commute in the Renault Cup Alliance in college to the U of Washington, and drive it to work and on errands in Seattle, I tried for a long time to explain to people what it was. They were never very happy...

Then on a date to the zoo in Tacoma, a guy at an ice cream place snared me in the parking lot and I discovered that people were WAY more satisfied if I just lied:

"Dude - how fast is that thing?"

"One-sixty or so, depending on which track we&#39;re at."

"Coooool."

BUT, come an IMSA race weekend, people would stand for every lap of that race - at a top speed of barely more than half of my fib figure. A 55-hp Renault makes a "modern" ITC car look really fast.

K

[Catch22]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Oct 24 2005, 12:06 AM
It&#39;s a hell of a lot more fun to make a slow car go fast than to make a fast car go fast.

Unfortunately, far too many people have an instinctive knack for making just about any car go slow, so they try to make up for it with a faster car... - GA

63302


Funny you should mention that.
Have you seen the in car video of the guy in the 450hp Mitsu EVO at Laguna Seca? Its... Uhhh... Awful. I&#39;ve had Novice DE students do a better job.
But of course, he had 450hp, so he won. He&#39;s apparently all proud of that. :smilie_pokal:

You should see the ass spanking he&#39;s laying on the ITA cars. He&#39;s awesome!!!

Scott, who is motivated to go down to the local Jr. High tomorrow and whip some 7th grade asses on the playground.

PS - This guy was turning laps at right around the track record for T1, which sounds great until you consider that he was basically driving a World Challenge GT car. Then he&#39;s about 10 seconds a lap off the pace.
But those are just silly old numbers. Whats important is the way he smacked down that ITA RX7 entering the corkscrew. He sure taught that guy!

(yes, I&#39;ve had a motorsports lifetime of shitty drivers in fast cars and yes it annoys the shit out of me)
:bash_1_:

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 23 2005, 10:14 PM

"Dude - how fast is that thing?"

"One-sixty or so, depending on which track we&#39;re at."

63321
My favorite response: "I&#39;ve never had it over 185."

[planet6racing]

Originally posted by gsbaker@Oct 24 2005, 05:17 AM
My favorite response: "I&#39;ve never had it over 185."

63329



I&#39;ve just started converting to kilometers per hour. It sounds so much better (120 mph = 193 kph) and you&#39;re not lying! Just don&#39;t tell them the units and let them ASSume...

[JamesB]

I was at a friday track day to shake down the ITB golf. I had a lot of the same questions about the motor and its power. but the only nice part about it was once I got out on the track most relized that sure I dont hit 130 down the front strait but I was actually being held back in the technical portions and got a pass from both of those asking me about the car that day.

Also I found that many kids take the idea of racing and think the entry fees are double track day fees. When I finally explain what I would spend on a typical race weekend (unless the fees double next season.) they where amazed.

But I think you get a better reaction at a track day then you do at the mall.

[RacerBowie]

Originally posted by planet6racing@Oct 24 2005, 09:03 AM
I&#39;ve just started converting to kilometers per hour. It sounds so much better (120 mph = 193 kph) and you&#39;re not lying! Just don&#39;t tell them the units and let them ASSume...

63338


I tell them that 5th gear runs out at about 135 or so at 8000 rpm.

That is a true statement. Just because my car won&#39;t get there doesn&#39;t mean 5th gear at 8000 doesn&#39;t equal 135.

[gran racing]

I always tell them about 90 mph, but that&#39;s in a 90 degree turn with another car less then 1 foot away from me.

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 23 2005, 11:31 PM
I get that all the time. Mostly in places like gas stations and roadside eat stops.

"What&#39;ll it do in the 1/4?"
"How fast will it go?"

I get the same type of questions as well. Latest was this year when my family and I came out of the restaurant where we stopped on the way home. A women and her son had parked next to our rig and were out looking at the race car when we approached.

" Nice car" - "thanks"

" Do you race Nascar?" - "eh, no"

" Do you race on tv?" - "um, no"

" Where DO you race?" - "road racing, on a road course"

" A what?" - "road course, closed circuit, paved, about a mile to three mile in length, elevation changes, etc"

" What?" - repeat above

" So, you don&#39;t race nascar?" - "no"

" How fast will it go in the quarter mile?" - "have no idea"

"You don&#39;t know, why not?" - I don&#39;t drag race, I road race"

"Road Race?" - "Sigh, I have to go now"

" How come the door opens like that?" - "I&#39;ve really got to go now..."

" Is that red pull handle (fire suppression) for the nitrous?" - "Have a nice evening, gotta go"

The severe let-down these people experience almost makes me feel bad.

The only solace from this last encounter was that the womens teenage son had leaned up against my left front wheel in an attempt to see into the cockpit better. He had a nice brake-dust outline of my wheel on his tan docker shorts...

Wayne

[Wayne]

Originally posted by JamesB@Oct 24 2005, 02:13 PM
Also I found that many kids take the idea of racing and think the entry fees are double track day fees.
Most people have a coronary when I tell them how much it costs to race. I&#39;ve found the best way to discourage most potential newbies is to simply hand them a copy of the GCR (I keep a couple old copies on hand for those that are interested).

me: "here is a copy of the rule book for our organization"
newbie: "holy crap, look at how thick that thing is!?!?"

me: "you can have that copy if you want, it details the licensing procedures and car rules etc"
newbie: thumbing through the book, "licensing procedures?, you have to have a license?"

me: "yup, go to school, pass a test etc"
newbie: hands GCR back, "eh, ok, thanks anyway"

I did have one guy keep the book and email me the next day with some very detailed questions. It was evident he had read the whole thing that day. I asked him if he was related to Kirk... :D

Wayne

[Bill Miller]

Had a guy and a friend of his come by my house to by some VW parts once. They wanted to see the race car, so I showed it to them. Got the standard "how fast is in the 1/4 mile", and "why doesn&#39;t it have a turbo" questions. When I told them that I road race, not drag race, the one guy said "Oh, you mean like in "The Fast and the Furious"? I was really kind of speachless. It&#39;s really a shame that so few people understand what we do. Not sure what to do about it though. I guess our only hope is to try and educate them.

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 24 2005, 01:15 PM
I guess our only hope is to try and educate them.
63368


Bear in mind that much of the non-racing community&#39;s "education" comes from popular entertainment and media coverage. Road Racing, just by it&#39;s very name evokes thoughts of FNF scenes b/c it uses the words "road" and "race" together - what most folks hear when we say Road Racing is actually Street Racing. What a different in just one word, eh? :bash_1_:

It&#39;s very difficult to explain road racing to anyone and especially the younger crowd, most of whom can&#39;t be bothered with rules and regulations which are for us old f**kers. The vast majority of the Tuner Kids were raised on the Playstation and want instant gratification - in other words, all this "going to racing school" and "building a legal car" is just a waste of time when they can go "race" their buddies on the Interstate at 1 am. Lastly, we all accept that our racecars are expendable b/c s**t happens - the Tuner Kids are driving their "baby" and while they have a desire to race, they aren&#39;t willing to accept or even understand that their "baby" can go from Creampuff to Scrap pile in a matter of seconds.

[gran racing]

From road racers’ perspective, my friend and I had an interesting conversation with one of the local roundy round track club members. Two years ago we went to Race-a-rama. One of those events where vendors get together, but it turned out 99% of it is geared to oval track racers. Anyway. Out of curiosity we went up to one of the booths. So, how much does it cost to enter a race with your club? $15. Oh, that’s not bad. But how much does it cost to actually race, not just watch. $15. Huh? How much? $15. Seriously? :119: Well, what are the other costs someone has to pay to the club? What do you mean, he says. There have to be some hidden costs. Nope, pay $15 to race or $15 to watch. What about licensing annual fee costs? As he laughed…you pay $15 to enter a race and that’s it. Needless to say both of our faces were on the ground while thinking why do we spend $280 for one single race weekend? Now all we need to do is get them to start racing at some road circuit courses like the NASCAR boys and still have it cost $15 to race.

[Wayne]

Originally posted by gran racing@Oct 24 2005, 06:51 PM
So, how much does it cost to enter a race with your club? $15. Oh, that’s not bad. But how much does it cost to actually race, not just watch. $15. Huh? How much? $15. Seriously?
Isn&#39;t that the truth. I spent 6 years in and around the local circle track scene before coming to road racing 5 years ago. The cost structure and mindset is completely different. Their trophies are huge, the trophy girls are hot, and their sponsors and the track actually PAY THEM money to run.

We have local beater small car classes with very minimal build requirements that pay $300-$500 to win at some of the enduros. These guys have all of $600 or so into these little things (at most), and pay a $20 gate fee to race each night against full fields!

The sponsor mindset is completely different as well. The circle track guys EXPECT to have sponsors in order to even get on the track. Many of them simply will not race if they don&#39;t have sponsors to foot a good portion of the bill (if not all of it). When I tell these guys that I don&#39;t have any sponsors (at least what they think of as a sponsor $$$$$) in road racing, they look at me like I&#39;m a complete idiot... wait, ok nevermind.. The thought of an individual footing almost the entire cost to go racing is just not in their mindset.

Having said all that, you won&#39;t find me bad mouthing circle track racing, as I miss many aspects of it. While I usually had more car repair/maintenance on my circle track car then I do on my road race car, road racing has been far, far more stressful on my family then circle track racing ever was.

Wayne

[JLawton]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 23 2005, 09:14 PM
Then on a date to the zoo in Tacoma,
63321



Hmmmm, did you actually get a second date??



I did circle track for a season. $20 to get in and last place paid $40!!! Of course, you had to dodge the fights and flying beer bottles.........


Quastion I get the most: Do you race at Stafford (local circle track), as if that&#39;s the only track in the state........ :angry:

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Wayne@Oct 24 2005, 06:56 PM
Isn&#39;t that the truth. I spent 6 years in and around the local circle track scene before coming to road racing 5 years ago. The cost structure and mindset is completely different. Their trophies are huge, the trophy girls are hot, and their sponsors and the track actually PAY THEM money to run.

We have local beater small car classes with very minimal build requirements that pay $300-$500 to win at some of the enduros. These guys have all of $600 or so into these little things (at most), and pay a $20 gate fee to race each night against full fields!

The sponsor mindset is completely different as well. The circle track guys EXPECT to have sponsors in order to even get on the track. Many of them simply will not race if they don&#39;t have sponsors to foot a good portion of the bill (if not all of it). When I tell these guys that I don&#39;t have any sponsors (at least what they think of as a sponsor $$$$$) in road racing, they look at me like I&#39;m a complete idiot... wait, ok nevermind.. The thought of an individual footing almost the entire cost to go racing is just not in their mindset.

Having said all that, you won&#39;t find me bad mouthing circle track racing, as I miss many aspects of it. While I usually had more car repair/maintenance on my circle track car then I do on my road race car, road racing has been far, far more stressful on my family then circle track racing ever was.

Wayne

63412


Don&#39;t kid yourself about this Wayne.

I spent 6 years crewing for a friend&#39;s circle-track car. This was an asphalt Late Model. We weren&#39;t the cheapest class (Street Stocks were below us), but we werent&#39; the Modified or the Sportsman either. We didn&#39;t have any of the really low-budget or 4-cyl classes. But don&#39;t kid yourself, even those cars weren&#39;t cheap to race. Unless there is some kind of spec parts rule, or a claiming rule, don&#39;t expect to see a $600 car run at the front.

Our class were all tube-frame cars w/ fiberglass bodies. There were limits on the motors, but a top motor was still $8k - $10k (and this was an iron head, flat-top piston, 2bbl carb motor). All the crew had to pay to get in, and we had to buy NASCAR crew licenses. IIRC, it was $50 for the license for the year, and $20/wk to get in. Mutiply that by 5 or 6 each week, every week. It was a new set of tires each week, if you wanted any chance of running at the front ($400).

The race paid $600 or $800 to win (I forget the exact amount), and $80- to take the green flag. I think that purse money (anything above the $80) went back to 5th place, which was $100 instead of $80. One of the reasons that the tracks can afford to pay prize money, is that they&#39;re putting several hundred (a couple thousand) butts in the seats @ $15 - $25/each.

I know part of the reason for the fan appeal is that it&#39;s local. Most of the fans know at least one driver personally. They neighbors, co-workers, local business owners, etc. So they are people that they know. That, and they can see the entire race. The track we raced at was a 5/8th mile "D", and you could pretty much see the whole track from any seat in the house. And then there&#39;s the crash factor. This is just a part of short track racing, and it&#39;s one of the things that puts butts in the seats.

Ah yes, the crash factor. The times we brought the car home w/o having fix some crash damage were far less than the times we did. Maybe one weekend out of every 4 or 5. And those Five-Star fiberglass bodies don&#39;t hold up all that well. And while we had some sponsorship (sure as hell not very much), most of the money came out of the owner/driver&#39;s pocket. IIRC, he told me that he had spent well over $50k of his own money, over the course of 6 years of racing. Some people may not see that as all that much, over that period of time. But, he also got almost $20k worth of sponsorship during that same time period.

Oh, and let&#39;s talk about track time value (amount of track time for your $$$). Typical weekend was as follows:

3-5 min. warmup period
8 lap heat race (~20 seconds/lap)
12 lap consolation race
20 lap feature

Granted, yellow-flag laps (which there were plenty of) didn&#39;t count towards the lap total, but you also weren&#39;t at speed.

So, that&#39;s 40 laps @ ~20 seconds/lap for ~ 12-13 min. along w/ the warmups, worked out to about 15 min. of track time per weekend. And pretty much the only way to break even was to finish 1st or 2nd, and 2nd was real close.

Don&#39;t get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for good short-track drivers, but I just never found it all that appealing.


It&#39;s very difficult to explain road racing to anyone and especially the younger crowd, most of whom can&#39;t be bothered with rules and regulations which are for us old f**kers. The vast majority of the Tuner Kids were raised on the Playstation and want instant gratification - in other words, all this "going to racing school" and "building a legal car" is just a waste of time when they can go "race" their buddies on the Interstate at 1 am. Lastly, we all accept that our racecars are expendable b/c s**t happens - the Tuner Kids are driving their "baby" and while they have a desire to race, they aren&#39;t willing to accept or even understand that their "baby" can go from Creampuff to Scrap pile in a matter of seconds.


Matt, you&#39;ve hit the nail on the head! These kids will spend TONS of money on their cars, but there are a couple of key factors. For the most part, these kids think that just throwing money at the car (in terms of motor, turbo, suspension, etc.) will make the car faster. Very few of these kids EVER focus on driver development. This will be born out by going to just about any HPDE/lapping day, where a racer shows up w/ an IT car. You will quite often see ITC/B/A cars turning quicker lap times than cars w/ 2x-3x more horsepower.

Most of these kids have no idea about car setup and are of the attitude that "hey, I&#39;ve got coilovers on my car, so it handles like a race car". I have to laugh when these kids ask about what springs are best, and they talk about brand names, rather than spring rates. I&#39;d be willing to bet that if you walk up to 10 kids at one of these HPDE events, all of which have coilover setups on their cars, that 9 of them will have no idea what spring rate, or free length their springs are. You&#39;ll get answers like "It&#39;s a Weitec Cup Kit" or "They&#39;re H&R race springs". Most of these kids don&#39;t have a clue, and get most of their information for magazines.

A second key factor that Matt touched on, is the fact that these cars are their &#39;baby&#39;. Most can&#39;t afford to write them off (as they&#39;re still paying for them), nor do they want to think about having to fix the bodywork. They also need something they can drive down to the local Pizza Hut with, and do burnout contests in the parking lot, w/ the rest of their wanker Tuner Kid buddies.

And because these kids think that they way to make a car faster is to just throw more money at it, they just don&#39;t get the concept of running w/ in a defined set of rules (e.g. "But why can&#39;t I can&#39;t I put a T4 turbo on my JDM B16A?" or "What do you mean I can&#39;t run a VR6 in my &#39;78 Rabbit?" or "You&#39;ve got to be kidding, I have to run 15x6 wheels instead of the 17x8&#39;s that I have?"

Sorry to say, but the vast majority of these kids will never &#39;get&#39; road racing. They&#39;d much rather go to Hot Import Nights, have burnout contests, and take pictures w/ NOPI skanks.

[x-ring]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 25 2005, 06:54 AM
Sorry to say, but the vast majority of these kids will never &#39;get&#39; road racing. They&#39;d much rather go to Hot Import Nights, have burnout contests, and take pictures w/ NOPI skanks.

63445


Gee Bill, I hate it when you hold back. Come on dude, say what&#39;s on your mind. :D :D

[mgyip]

Another reason why Tuner Kids gravitate towards Drag Racing is simply b/c that&#39;s what they do on the public roads, it&#39;s cheap and requires a minimum of preparation or safety equipment. Unlike wheel-to-wheel racing, there is a lesser perceived risk in drag racing as well which heightens the appeal. Furthermore, I can take my F350 with no mods (at least no safety mods :D ) to the drag strip tonight and for under $30, I could bracket-race it against my homies so we could determine who has the larger pee-pee.

It&#39;s not just the Tuner Kids who throw lots of money at their cars with the expectation of going faster. The majority of the owners in a VW-based car Club of America do the same thing and buy whatever the "racers" use, knowing that it will make their street 9xx as fast (if not faster) than the race versions seen at Le Mans. Granted these folks spend countless hours on-track but while their instructors are generally good, they are teaching their students to drive fast, NOT to race. As we all know, HPDE and Racing are very different animals - they both involve driving fast and car dymanics but beyond that, the two disciplines don&#39;t share much in common.

There is no simply solution to attracting more racers to Club Racing of any flavor. The costs are certainly higher than Drag Racing which is a financially limiting factor. Add into the equation that the cars must be prepared to rules rather than all out racecars (whatever that may be) and couple that with forcing the driver to be the dominant factor in how well the car performs and most folks will run away screaming.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by x-ring@Oct 25 2005, 09:06 AM
Gee Bill, I hate it when you hold back. Come on dude, say what&#39;s on your mind. :D :D

63447



Aw Ty, now you&#39;re going to make me blush!!! :P

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 25 2005, 12:54 PM
We didn&#39;t have any of the really low-budget or 4-cyl classes. But don&#39;t kid yourself, even those cars weren&#39;t cheap to race. Unless there is some kind of spec parts rule, or a claiming rule, don&#39;t expect to see a $600 car run at the front.

Oh, I&#39;m well aware of the costs for both the 4-cyl. class and the tube framed "limited sportsman" classes (which is what I raced).

My neighbor runs at the front of the "hornets" class with a $600 fiesta (actually he has three fiestas which he uses parts from) The rules are extremely restrictive for modifications allowed. "Safety requirements" are a helmet and a single vertical pipe behind the driver - stock radio must be retained and be functional. :) He won $300 for winning a 3 hour enduro. Those little fiestas must be tuff... not sure I could race a fiesta for 3 hours in a circle though.

Limited sportsman was a bit expensive I admit, but even that wasn&#39;t too bad considering.
- Spec tires, strictly controlled on how many you are allowed to purchase. We most definitely were not buying new tires every week.

- nascar license not required for crew with this outfit.

- Stock small v8 w/ small carbs, right down to the stock cast iron exhaust manifolds.

- Many popular stock-car parts are really inexpensive off the shelf (because they sell so many of them)

- Working on a purpose built race car is a joy compared to a converted street car. Super easy access, quick component replacement etc.

- I never had a problem finding hard working crew members who wanted to be there (this alone went a long way towards making the experience enjoyable). These guys not only would show up at the track but at my shop during the week if needed as well.

- Had sponsors every year I raced that provided real $$value&& and help off-set some of the cost.

- Track was 20minutes away.

- There was a race EVERY Friday or Saturday night. This meant I could miss a race during a month and not have to wait another month to race again.

- I would leave the house around 2:30pm Saturday afternoon with the car, and my wife and family would not have to leave the house until 6pm to get in the stands to watch the race.

- We would be home by 1am Sunday morning at the latest, usually closer to 11:30 pm Sat. night. I&#39;d be able to race and be home for Church or lawn mowing every Sunday morning. Then repeat the next weekend. Contrast this with having to be at the road course with the family from Friday night to Sunday night.

- Family, friends, fans, and sponsors were far more "connected" to the sport and felt like a part of the experience as opposed to just watching "Wayne" do "his" thing in the road racer as he comes by you for one more lap and then disappears around the next corner... In circle track racing the stands bring everyone to together in one location, and as you mention they can share in the experience by seeing the entire goings-on of the race. The actual race is much more of a community event.

- Tons of very close competition for almost every single race.

I like road racing alright, but there are many positive things about circle track racing as well. My dad raced figure eights for awhile also, and that&#39;s yet another racing discipline I want to try before my time is up on this earth.

Wayne

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Wayne@Oct 25 2005, 12:17 PM
Oh, I&#39;m well aware of the costs for both the 4-cyl. class and the tube framed "limited sportsman" classes (which is what I raced).

My neighbor runs at the front of the "hornets" class with a $600 fiesta (actually he has three fiestas which he uses parts from) The rules are extremely restrictive for modifications allowed. "Safety requirements" are a helmet and a single vertical pipe behind the driver - stock radio must be retained and be functional. :) He won $300 for winning a 3 hour enduro. Those little fiestas must be tuff... not sure I could race a fiesta for 3 hours in a circle though.


63473



Wayne,

No roll cage in that Fiesta??? :o

Honestly surprised that they let them race that way

[benracin]

I actually just did my first "Hornet" race here in Minnesota and it sounds like the rules here are even less. There&#39;s a $200 claim rule. You don&#39;t need a cage of any type. Can&#39;t have a racing seat. All you do is bust out the windows (except the front) chain the bumpers on and chain the doors shut, and that&#39;s it! I raced my friends $50 hyundai accent parts car. He just got it for parts for his other hornet car. No testing, no trying out the track, didn&#39;t even get to drive the car actually! Just hit the track and hope it holds together.

There are some parts of that sport that really do appeal. You&#39;ve got all your friends and family there, the track is 30 minutes away, and you pay $25 and you&#39;re in for the whole night. Your car gets totalled you go out and find another piece of crap. So no camping, no driving 7 hours, blah blah blah.

One thing for sure though is 1/2 the guys don&#39;t have a clue how to drive and a 1/4 of those really don&#39;t care. Meaning they are out there to hit people if they get in the way. Driver etiqutte (sp?) just doesn&#39;t compute.

Driving in a circle just didn&#39;t seem to cover all the bases for me though. Sure it&#39;s a MUCH slower car then most circle cars, but for this type of racing if you drive in to fast, just slow down a bunch and you&#39;re fine. You can&#39;t really screw up to bad so it kind of lacks that rush I get by holding out for the last possible breaking spot or trying not to enter the corner to fast so I can stay on the track.

So for attracting today&#39;s youth our style of road racing is really beyond most of them. They love road racing if they know what it is but they have no way of getting a car for it and they can&#39;t use their lowered spoilered "type R" whatever. I was racing some guys on the Xbox telling them about road racing and all they wanted to know was how much I crash, hit people, have to fix the damage on my car. They weren&#39;t sure what kind of guy I was since I said "so far, never!". Seems like if it&#39;s not drag racing your turbo blah blah blah with a bunch of bolt on crappy parts, talking a bunch of trash and not hitting people, it must be nascar where you do hit people.

The price or road racing is sky high for the young as well. Especially when you throw in a trailer, a tow vehical and your "local" track is in the next state. That fact alone is making me really consider if I&#39;m able to do this any longer. In Minnesota our nearest track is on the far side of Wisconsin 7 hours away. Good luck getting your friends to drive that far to watch a race. Now if only Brainerd would get their stuff together...

The thought of kart racing has been sneaking into my head as well. (sorry for any and all spelling errors, it&#39;s alls I knows hows to does!)

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by benracin@Oct 25 2005, 04:12 PM
...You don&#39;t need a cage of any type. Can&#39;t have a racing seat. All you do is bust out the windows (except the front) chain the bumpers on and chain the doors shut, and that&#39;s it! ...

63503
Those guys are really safety conscious, with the chains and all. A local oval has "Strictly Stock" class which requires street tires, a helmet and no glass. It&#39;s not unusual to see some guy tow in a POS and proceed to take a hammer to the windows.

Racing is cheap when the track owner produces the event, and then makes a show. An owner once told me, "I can&#39;t sell them hot dogs if they aren&#39;t here." He is motivated to keep entry costs as low as possible to get as many drivers as possible, to make as good a show as possible, to get as many spectators as possible, to sell as many hot dogs as possible.

SCCA doesn&#39;t own the tracks at which it races (except one, right?), so there are no hot dog profits to subsidize entry fees.

[ddewhurst]

***SCCA doesn&#39;t own the tracks at which it races (except one, right?), so there are no hot dog profits to subsidize entry fees.***

Greg, which track do they own ?

Why would the SCCA have a desire to own a track when they get the slice off the top with the Regions doing all the work & posting all the track money ?

[dickita15]

Originally posted by gsbaker@Oct 25 2005, 04:42 PM
SCCA doesn&#39;t own the tracks at which it races (except one, right?), so there are no hot dog profits to subsidize entry fees.

63507


three :D

[gran racing]

Stating all of these reasons why young people won&#39;t participate in road racing is the easy way out. I&#39;m not saying I don&#39;t agree with SOME of the things being said here, but there needs to be a better focus from SCCA&#39;s stand point on how can we get them involved? It is expensive; kids don&#39;t care; too many rules; blah, blah, blah. Fine, forget those kids. There are many kids that would have interest.

I realize it is not as simple as this but we should look for some creative ideas on how to get more younger people involved. When I was younger, I would have loved to go to more races but simply couldn&#39;t get to the track as often as I wanted to. Just some silly ideas off the top of my head. A field trip for high school (maybe better yet vocational school) students to the track. Get them interested in volunteering. Figure out a way to get them rides to the track. Maybe that means pairing them up with some of us who drive to the track with our race cars. Have a mentor program that gets young people involved in racing even if they can&#39;t afford it for a few years. Have a SCCA open house at local schools - colleges and high schools. If kids go to the track, offer track rides like some tracks already do. Now that there are SCCA "HPDEs," send out invitations for people to go for track rides in a real race car. Many instructors currently are willing to take people out in the instructor run session, use this as a publicity opportunity. Maybe each region should have a recruiting committie where that is all they are out to accomplish; some may already have this? All I&#39;m saying is that I wish more emphasis was placed on how it can be done versus why it just doesn&#39;t work. (Don&#39;t get me wrong here, reading these stories are entertaining.)

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by benracin@Oct 25 2005, 04:12 PM
I actually just did my first "Hornet" race here in Minnesota and it sounds like the rules here are even less. There&#39;s a $200 claim rule. You don&#39;t need a cage of any type. Can&#39;t have a racing seat. All you do is bust out the windows (except the front) chain the bumpers on and chain the doors shut, and that&#39;s it! I raced my friends $50 hyundai accent parts car. He just got it for parts for his other hornet car. No testing, no trying out the track, didn&#39;t even get to drive the car actually! Just hit the track and hope it holds together.

There are some parts of that sport that really do appeal. You&#39;ve got all your friends and family there, the track is 30 minutes away, and you pay $25 and you&#39;re in for the whole night. Your car gets totalled you go out and find another piece of crap. So no camping, no driving 7 hours, blah blah blah.

One thing for sure though is 1/2 the guys don&#39;t have a clue how to drive and a 1/4 of those really don&#39;t care. Meaning they are out there to hit people if they get in the way. Driver etiqutte (sp?) just doesn&#39;t compute.

Driving in a circle just didn&#39;t seem to cover all the bases for me though. Sure it&#39;s a MUCH slower car then most circle cars, but for this type of racing if you drive in to fast, just slow down a bunch and you&#39;re fine. You can&#39;t really screw up to bad so it kind of lacks that rush I get by holding out for the last possible breaking spot or trying not to enter the corner to fast so I can stay on the track.

So for attracting today&#39;s youth our style of road racing is really beyond most of them. They love road racing if they know what it is but they have no way of getting a car for it and they can&#39;t use their lowered spoilered "type R" whatever. I was racing some guys on the Xbox telling them about road racing and all they wanted to know was how much I crash, hit people, have to fix the damage on my car. They weren&#39;t sure what kind of guy I was since I said "so far, never!". Seems like if it&#39;s not drag racing your turbo blah blah blah with a bunch of bolt on crappy parts, talking a bunch of trash and not hitting people, it must be nascar where you do hit people.

The price or road racing is sky high for the young as well. Especially when you throw in a trailer, a tow vehical and your "local" track is in the next state. That fact alone is making me really consider if I&#39;m able to do this any longer. In Minnesota our nearest track is on the far side of Wisconsin 7 hours away. Good luck getting your friends to drive that far to watch a race. Now if only Brainerd would get their stuff together...

The thought of kart racing has been sneaking into my head as well. (sorry for any and all spelling errors, it&#39;s alls I knows hows to does!)

63503


Yeah Ben, that&#39;s what I want to do. Be on a race track w/ a bunch of guys TRYING to crash, when I don&#39;t have a cage/race seat/window net/5-pt harness/etc. Next thing you&#39;re going to say, is that they allow them to drink in the pits!

On that subject, funny story. A few years ago, a bunch of us built some beater cars to go run in a junk car race. It was a charity fund raiser, put on by a car/mc club in Pa. They had like an 1/8th mile track, that the turned into a very large mud slick. Goal was to be the last car running. They had heat races to qualify for the feature. Rules were that you HAD to hit cars. If you avoided contact, they&#39;d black flag you. What was even funnier, was that you could have a passenger, and that you could drink alcohol!!! Was actually a lot of fun.

[m glassburner]

Did you have cup holders ?? ;) And a cooler bolted down in back? :023:

[ddewhurst]

Dick, a little information please on the three....... ;)

[x-ring]

Originally posted by ddewhurst@Oct 26 2005, 07:08 AM
Dick, a little information please on the three....... ;)

63606


Thunderhill, owned by SFR?

[dickita15]

Originally posted by ddewhurst@Oct 26 2005, 09:08 AM
Dick, a little information please on the three....... ;)

63606

thunder hill SFR
butonwillow cal club
roebling road buconeer (Georgia)

[Jay_Taylor]

I would be interested to see if the SCCA has a plan or even wants to market road racing to the younger import croud.Or how SCCA plans to rid it self of the
Secret Car Club of America(or other less flatering acronym)

[lateapex911]

Some thoughts on oval track stuff.

I visited a local oval to pick up some Hoosier tires during the UPS strike and was amused at how close to the track I was allowed to be during a race. Right outside turn 2, the cars were literally 10 feet or less from me at one point. I was peppered with the marbles. I didn&#39;t think I was going to die immediately, but.....

What kind of insurance coverage does the snactioning body provide?

From the above posts, "safety" isn&#39;t a prime directive....

Aren&#39;t the doors chained shut so they don&#39;t open and get in the way during competition?

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Oct 26 2005, 07:39 PM
Some thoughts on oval track stuff.

I visited a local oval to pick up some Hoosier tires during the UPS strike and was amused at how close to the track I was allowed to be during a race. Right outside turn 2, the cars were literally 10 feet or less from me at one point. I was peppered with the marbles. I didn&#39;t think I was going to die immediately, but.....

What kind of insurance coverage does the snactioning body provide?

From the above posts, "safety" isn&#39;t a prime directive....

Aren&#39;t the doors chained shut so they don&#39;t open and get in the way during competition?

63756


Part of our Vehical dynamics class was a field trip to Placerville and the local red dirt speed way, it&#39;s a real 1/8th mile bull ring bowl. Getting dirt marbles in your beer is part of the fun :D My Professor wanted us to see, "Unstable behavior" actually it was quite a fun outing. But I also know it can be dangerous too. I know of a crew guy killed by a flying tire, bounced over the baracade after comming off a wreck and into the pits. It doesn&#39;t matter the type of racing... I heard this from a SouthWest Tour guy:

How to make a Million dollars in racing?

Start with Two Million! :023:

James

[JamesB]

I spent a LOT of time around the typical VW tuner crowd. Mainly I just hang out with them because I enjoy the shows with kids. My jetta never saw much of the typical tuner stuff. I got back into solo2 long before I was brainwashed by the tuner masses.

But this summer I blew up the motor in the jetta at the track. the problem turned out to be a very small vacuum leak and a cracked wire caused detonation on my 1.8T. The car is modified but mostly due to the fact that I chose to go SM in solo2 because I wanted the TT225 turbo (much more useable power.)

Anyway, the first reaction was everyone thought I blew it up drag racing. that soon faded as those that didnt know my just stopped asking. But next I told the local group I hang out with that I chose to go road racing. They looked at me with scorn. I got ever comment you can think of from "did you mortgage your house to buy the racecar" to "why would you want to race a slow golf"

I think that over time many who had this massive misinformation are understanding my biggest cost thus far has been buying a suitable tow vehical.

I do like the idea of a mentor program. I been doing a lot of that with this exact crowd. I have told many, if you want to come down for the weekend let me know and they can even hitch a ride with me friday night or saturday morning.

Cost was a big thing, they buying even on a built car and all my gear was enough to make some turn pale. but when I reflect what they have spent on their street cars to make them pretty and fast, they shrink back.

But I think more of the serious HPDE guys are more likely to move onto racing in the comming years then the average tuner or solo kids.

I remember an article in the WDCR Straitpipe publication about a solo2 driver that could never grasp why we like road racing so much. He talked about the cost of racing and all, but then as he said, diffrent strokes. His biggest complaint was SCCA developing a better route for a solo2 enthusiest to make their way to club racing a little at a time. I though what they did was great. Now we just need to see if that program can actually foster the younger crowd into club racing.

(BTW I stopped calling it road racing as everyone things its 1/4 mile illegal street racing. Calling it club racing they ask better questions and understand quickly.)

[joeg]

I do a fair amount of crewing at the local oval tracks but have noticed a decided down-turn in participation figures in the mid to upper levels (late models up to mods). This is a sign of the economy and that kind of racing makes little economic sense regardless of sponsorship.

Given the fact that they try to get out weekly (even more with traveling to other local tracks), the expenses add up pretty quickly despite low entry fee and less travel. Afterall, tires and fuel cost the same wherever you race. Very expensive racing.

Forget the bomber, Hornet, Queen Bee Figure-8 classes. That is simply crash-o-rama or disgused high budget and not even real oval track racing. Any class that mandates "Roll Posts" instead of Roll Bars or cages is pretty ridiculous.

Fun but dangerous.

The tracks have insurance, probably from the same sources as SCCA. Any serious claims at the local oval impact all of us.

[Geo]

Originally posted by joeg@Oct 27 2005, 01:15 PM
I do a fair amount of crewing at the local oval tracks


Do you know Dan Schum? He&#39;s owned a few tour modifieds and a few modifieds that ran (run?) at Lancaster.

[Geo]

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Oct 27 2005, 02:05 AM
Part of our Vehical dynamics class was a field trip to Placerville and the local red dirt speed way, it&#39;s a real 1/8th mile bull ring bowl. Getting dirt marbles in your beer is part of the fun :D My Professor wanted us to see, "Unstable behavior..."


Was that the cars, the fans, or the drivers? ;)

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 25 2005, 06:21 PM
Wayne,

No roll cage in that Fiesta??? :o

Honestly surprised that they let them race that way

No cage, just a vertical tube behind the driver and one tube angling down off the vertical to the floor (such that it is). I don&#39;t recall for sure but I think they have to run a c-channel across the outside of the door/fenders as well.

I believe a lot of these guys think the small cars (hornets) are "less dangerous" because they are slower. The ridiculously lax safety standards are a big reason the costs are so low, and by extension the participation is so high.

Thunder cars and hornets, bump to pass = no cage, no gloves, levis, long sleeve shirt, etc etc
Bombers and street stocks = partial cage
Late models, super stocks, limited sportsman = full cage/frames
Figure 8&#39;s = Serious full cage and then some

I&#39;m a big safety advocate and have top dollar gear well beyond the minimum required by scca in my road race car. Heck, I would wear my issac when I race riding lawnmowers if I could hook it up, but there are no belts on the mower.

Having said that, part of me yearns for the days of personal responsibility, where the drivers accepted the risk they were taking and every little bit of our racing life did not need to have a bunch of rules/requirements...

My dad raced figure 8 in jeans and a t-shirt back in the day. Those days are long gone to be sure. Now we have to sue everybody when we get hurt doing a high risk activity... despite the fact that there is only one person responsible for making the decision to participate.

Wayne

[Wayne]

I have to watch myself as I tend to throw all the kids into the wannabe racer/tuner category automatically. As someone else posted there are some kids out there who are serious about racing and performance. A couple of these kids that I have met are really sharp studies and would make good racers in the SCCA.

Beyond the Acquisition costs and rules being a big barrier to entry, there are two other things I hear on a regular basis from the youngsters.

First and foremost is, "why don&#39;t they race "modern" cars?" The natural tendency is for people to want to race the type of cars they grew up with driving on the street. When a kid goes to a regional scca race around here all they mostly see is a bunch of old cars running around the track. Old cars that have absolutely zero appeal to them. Yes I know, there are "some" available classes for these type of cars but the turn out is sparse at best... see item #2 below.

Second thing out of their mouth is, "why so few cars on the track, why are they so spread out, why is the racing not much closer, why is there nobody in the stands?"

So, now you have got a double downer - The club is racing cars the kids are not interested in, and there is a decided lack of close competition, passing etc (in their view). Add to this the cost of entry and 3" thick rule book and you&#39;ve got 4 strikes you&#39;re out. I think part of their disappointment comes from the instant gratification, short attention span, materialistic society we have these days. They are "conditioned" to expect excitement in every aspect of their lives 24/7.

I&#39;ll probably get flamed for saying this on the board, but part of me agrees with them. Watching "most" road races at the track is about as exciting as watching grass grow. Most of the field is spread out, you can only see one or two corners from your spectating position. There he goes! Look at that rx7 (a what?) go by us again!!... and again.... and again.... and again...

Your average Joe wants to see close, almost wheel to wheel racing with position changes, and very close racing. They don&#39;t care that you just turned the latest apex at turn three ever and lowered you best lap-time by .03 seconds. Hate to break to you but that just is not exciting for anyone else. Watching "some" road races on tv is almost tolerable as at least you get some different views of the action... if there is any. Yes I&#39;m aware that racing like world challenge and such are exciting at times, but I&#39;m mostly talking about local regional road racing stuff here.

I&#39;ve have tried and tried to get youngsters involved, and the most successful has been to set them up at a corner flag station during race day. If they don&#39;t get wood standing right at track-side when that ground pounding GT1 car comes hauling ass through, or when that WRX (the same WRX they drove to the track btw) flies through the corner then they are not likely to turn out to be interested in the long term.

Racing is, or should be, a total assault on the senses. When you are standing on that corner with the cars flying by a few feet from you. You need to see the blur of colors, smell the smells of burnt rubber and race fuel, see the flames come out the GT1 pipe as unburnt fuel is expelled at corner entry, hear the ear numbing roar of a race engine, and litterly feel the ground beneath your feet shake with vibration from all the horsepower blowing by you! If this kind of thing doesn&#39;t inspire them to get in a race car and drive themselves, they might as well take up golf because I doubt they even have a pulse.

Wayne

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by Geo@Oct 28 2005, 09:53 AM
Was that the cars, the fans, or the drivers? ;)

63902


All of the above :rolleyes:

James