new weight for rx7 in ITS? [Archive] - Improved Touring Racing Forums

bodyshop

10-25-2005, 10:31 PM

Originally posted by mlytle@Oct 26 2005, 02:09 AM
soo, given all the track records set by rx7's this year, the final florida standings and the general dominance of these cars lately, what is the general concensus on how much extra weight the itac will recommend this overdog has to carry for next year?

63564

Since it is impossible to use lap times and results as a sole indicator of performance potential, I doubt that there will be any recommendation of an increase due to this "dominance".

<stepping up on the soapbox>
If you are refering to the final standings in CFR, look at the numbers of RX7's vs. the rest of the ITS field. Look at the number of times the BMW's and Integra's DNF'e dor DNS'ed. Also, if you will notice, the ITS regional Champion for CFR accomplished this goal with consistency, not outright wins. I don't think Rob had any wins this season. He was at every race, and was almost always near the front. After totalling his car at Daytona, he devoted every waking hour to building another car in three weeks. That is the type of Champion I respect-and NOT because he had a dominate car. That is not to even mention the other "battles" he has endured during this season and his life.

Instead, how about a congratulatory post for a man who won a championship this year? :happy204: :023: :smilie_pokal:
<soapbox mode OFF>

If you weren't refering to CFR, I apologize in advance if I seem defensive.

Bodyshop Fred...

its66

10-25-2005, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by TBreu007@Oct 26 2005, 02:15 AM
100lbs...150lbs for number 66 :)

63565

Hey Tim,
why all the hate?? Besides, I'm already 92 lbs overweight as it is. (yes, 2772 with 5 gallons). And leave the fat jokes at home skinny boy. :P

Are you bringing that cheater piston powered thing of yours to the Turkey trots? Wait till you see the new and improved 66. It may be slow, but she looks good.

email me with an update on the 240.

Catch22

10-25-2005, 10:47 PM

Lets wait until after the ARRC.
If a bunch of RX7s dominate there, we'll discuss...

JeffYoung

10-25-2005, 10:52 PM

Marshall, how about a trade:

1. Your BMW gets a restrictor that gives 170 rwhp and 130 rw tq.

2. The RX7s get 200 lbs.

Fair deal?

dickita15

10-26-2005, 06:40 AM

I was and still am in favor of PCAs in IT, even though ot has been decided by the ITAC that my particular car will not be able to benifit from them, but this conversation is the down side of that process. we sound like a bunch of Prod driver which was my greatest fear about PCAs.

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2005, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by mlytle@Oct 25 2005, 10:09 PM
soo, given all the track records set by rx7's this year, the final florida standings and the general dominance of these cars lately, what is the general concensus on how much extra weight the itac will recommend this overdog has to carry for next year?

63564

I would be glad to consider this a real point should you provide some real data. Seems as if your Florida example isn't so valid...no wins but a Championship through consistancy? THAT is so far from an overdog it isn't funny.

For every NER (where there are no killer BMW's), there is a WDCR (where there are no killer RX-7's). I truely believe that there are pockets of killer cars based around top prep shops. FOM in the NE, BimmerWorld in the VA area, and SpeedSource/ISC in the SE.

Chet gonna run the ARRC? Our best RX-7 is headed down.

AB

Ron Earp

10-26-2005, 07:32 AM

The RX7s are dominant in the SE, as long as the top running BMWs don't show up. And, the top running Z cars. And top running 240s. Throw in the big ITS BMWs from certain people and you can forget it, the BMWs win and win by a large margin.

I like Jeff's idea. That would make the weights equal and the power equal. Surely the BMW crowd won't mind that.

robits325is

10-26-2005, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by Catch22@Oct 25 2005, 10:47 PM
Lets wait until after the ARRC.
If a bunch of RX7s dominate there, we'll discuss...

63574

I thought results didn't matter?

lateapex911

10-26-2005, 09:33 AM

lets define "dominant"

dominant is NOT a championship won thru second place finishes....

dominant IS a car that, because of it's physical properties, can win over all others when it is well prepped and well driven..... over all other well prepped and well driven examples of other cars.

when it boils down to the cars properties, THAT is where it is considered dominant.

mlytle

10-26-2005, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 26 2005, 10:49 AM
I would be glad to consider this a real point should you provide some real data. Seems as if your Florida example isn't so valid...no wins but a Championship through consistancy? THAT is so far from an overdog it isn't funny.

For every NER (where there are no killer BMW's), there is a WDCR (where there are no killer RX-7's). I truely believe that there are pockets of killer cars based around top prep shops. FOM in the NE, BimmerWorld in the VA area, and SpeedSource/ISC in the SE.

Chet gonna run the ARRC? Our best RX-7 is headed down.

AB

63591

what, you want a list of all the track records? look them up...well you don't have to, you know them all. how about the oct 15 race at nelson ledges. guy shows up with an rx7 and drops the track record by 1.5seconds, without ever having been at the track before. he also won both races with 10sec+ margins. the previous track record holder was in the race and this was against at least two very good bmw's who had raced there before. one of those bmw's was the car that finished second in the marrs series. the other bmw will be at the arrc.

what is not so valid about the florida example? rx7's dominate the series. consistency is part of the equation. bruce runs in that group and apparently he isn't keeping up with the rx7's.

and apparently you guys have no sense of humor. i started this thread as kind of a half joke to offset the "add weight to the e36" thread.... :P

looking forward to watching the arrc its race. i'll be racing an rx7...srx7 though.. :023:

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2005, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by mlytle@Oct 26 2005, 09:08 PM
what, you want a list of all the track records? look them up...well you don't have to, you know them all. how about the oct 15 race at nelson ledges. guy shows up with an rx7 and drops the track record by 1.5seconds, without ever having been at the track before. he also won both races with 10sec+ margins. the previous track record holder was in the race and this was against at least two very good bmw's who had raced there before. one of those bmw's was the car that finished second in the marrs series. the other bmw will be at the arrc.

what is not so valid about the florida example? rx7's dominate the series. consistency is part of the equation. bruce runs in that group and apparently he isn't keeping up with the rx7's.

and apparently you guys have no sense of humor. i started this thread as kind of a half joke to offset the "add weight to the e36" thread.... :P

looking forward to watching the arrc its race. i'll be racing an rx7...srx7 though.. :023:

63738

That Nelson example is a good one. Now let's make sure it's a legal car. We have the same issue right now with another Make/Model in ITB - a car crushing competition lately has us looking hard but many question it's legality. You can't base a decision on one illegal car. May not be in this case, but the point had to be made.

The Florida example is not valid at all. Consistancy has NOTHING to do with dominance. If a different E36 won every race and this RX-7 finished 2nd at each race, it would still win the Championship. It's totally Apples to Oranges. The best RACER and/or race program (for that year) won that Championship - it wasn't dominated by a car.

I have no sense of humor on topics like this - especially when you don't use a smiley. We have received letters basically accusing us of inappropriate actions, bias and the like - on this topic - all from E36 owners. Nobody else.

It's simple MATH people, with results and data to back it up. :bash_1_:

AB

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2005, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by robits325is@Oct 26 2005, 09:22 AM
I thought results didn't matter?

63609

Of course they do. BUT:

1. You have to understand the results (context and trending)
2. They are just SUPPORTING data, not primary influencers.

If we ran 10 cars through our process for a given class, and one started to dominate, we would...

1. Verify the numbers
2. Look for some factor we missed
3. Talk to competitors
4. Seek trends
5. Learn as much as we could about extenuating circumstances

...and hopefully do nothing. It isn't about penalizing winners. It's about making sure there are no inequities. If our proposal gets accepted at the BoD level, you will see weight come off some cars and weight go on some cars - and some cars get reclassed...all in an effort to run cars through the 'process' and start with a new, clean, level slate.

AB

mlytle

10-26-2005, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 27 2005, 01:28 AM
We have received letters basically accusing us of inappropriate actions, bias and the like - on this topic - all from E36 owners. Nobody else.

AB

63741

and this is in any way surprising? the e36 is the one being attacked. do you think owners of other cars are going to complain?

lateapex911

10-26-2005, 09:48 PM

Well, lets talk math....

keeping things simple,, lets start with some basic facts...

a LEGAL RX-7 (Speedsouce prepped) can make 180 and 130tq at the wheels....

to the E36 guys, what does a LEGAL full tilt Bimmerworld or (insert the best shop name you know here) make at the wheels, hp and tq?

Then we can do some math.

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2005, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by mlytle@Oct 26 2005, 09:41 PM
and this is in any way surprising? the e36 is the one being attacked. do you think owners of other cars are going to complain?

63744

It's surprising because it's all being done on the up and up - using the same process and factors we use for EVERY OTHER CLASS and CAR. Some of these letter writers simply can't see outside their own back yard.

All I ask for is a full understanding of the subject matter before anyone ACCUSES me of inpropriety.

Oh, and your use of the word "attacked" is a prime example. You aren't being attacked in ANY WAY. If you can't see that, we have to agree to disagree.

AB

lateapex911

10-26-2005, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 26 2005, 09:35 PM
........ If our proposal gets accepted at the BoD level, you will see weight come off some cars and weight go on some cars -
AB

63743

If the proposal goes through, it will be interesting to see the rections of other, "attacked" owners....

Oh...Andy...I almost forgot....did the E36 actually make that list????

Catch22

10-26-2005, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by robits325is@Oct 26 2005, 01:22 PM
I thought results didn't matter?

63609

As a "final determination?"
No. The ITAC says results don't matter and I believe them.

But, I do find it interesting when stuff happens like one of those "dominant" RX7s comes up against one of those "dominant" 325s. So far, every time I've seen this happen, the RX7 ended up far less than dominant.

Both Chet and Larry are preregistered for the ARRC. Along with John Williams (and I'm assuming he'll be in his 240, but it was wrecked earlier this year so I really don't know) and several other really good cars.
Basically, what we've seen for a few years. Nothing has beaten an orange BMW yet unless it just plain broke. Maybe this year's ARRC will be different, but given that Chet ran a 40 flat in July, when it was about 95 degrees, I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

As mentioned, "Dominant" is relative.
If you try to just use the word "dominant" in terms of track records and performances at the ARRC or the NARRC, the results often change over those just in a particular region.
Example... The ITC car that will easily win the SEDIV Enduro championship lost to my car 4 out of 5 races head to head. So how did they win? Well, they did more races and we had one DNF in that 5th head to head race.
Now... Which car was "dominant?"
Well?
Certainly it isn't the car that didn't win the championship and certainly it isn't the car that lost 4 of 5 times.
Then answer is... When your criteria is that narrow, you can't get an answer.

Scott, who points out that the "dominant" performer in any given region can change with something as simple as a company transfer. ;)

Knestis

10-26-2005, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by dickita15@Oct 26 2005, 10:40 AM
I was and still am in favor of PCAs in IT, even though ot has been decided by the ITAC that my particular car will not be able to benifit from them, but this conversation is the down side of that process. we sound like a bunch of Prod driver which was my greatest fear about PCAs.

63589

Amen, Senor Dickita (cha, cha, cha!)

In all seriousness, the ITAC has so far been able to resist this but we need to be VERY worried about this situation. As long as PCAs are applied based on physical attributes of the cars, we are OK but the very first time someone petitions for, and gets, an allowance simply because there's a perception that they can't compete, we are doomed.

Similarly, to the extent that superior attributes translate into better lap times, more wins, etc., on-track performance may be an INDICATOR of potential inequities but PCAs should NEVER be applied based on "competitiveness" or a lack thereof.

K

PS - Touche, by the way, Marshall. A couple of folks were effectively pronged by the irony here, even if I understand how their senses of humor are pretty battered at this point. It's never a bad idea to lighten up, even if the humor's a little pointed.

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2005, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 26 2005, 11:14 PM

PS - Touche, by the way, Marshall. A couple of folks were effectively pronged by the irony here, even if I understand how their senses of humor are pretty battered at this point. It's never a bad idea to lighten up, even if the humor's a little pointed.

63763

All I ask for is a smiley!!!

Seriously, there are BMW drivers on this BB who have suggested that the top 2 or 3 models in ITS get 'adjusted'. We have received letters from BMW drivers suggesting that RP's be placed on any car that beats a BMW, on any given weekend...it is getting crazy.

I'll ask again, how about some non-ITAC/Bimmer opinions.

AB

Knestis

10-27-2005, 07:59 AM

No ITAC secret decoder ring? Check.

No Bimmer logo? Check.

For about the thousandth time, the conversation MUST shift off of who beats whom, where, when, and with what car.

It is absolutely impossible to separate the influence of the make/model of car from other factors, several of which have arguably WAY more influence on competitiveness - tire budget, engineering skill, or DRIVER TALENT.

Pro-325-increase people - Don't use cases of dominant on-track performance by BMWs as evidence of the problem. Every time you do, you contribute to that problem rather than solving it. Stay on message and MAYBE people will start to understand how things are supposed to work.

325 weight increase opponents - Grasp the reality here that ANYTHING you say is going to sound like whining and protectionism. There is NO position that you can take that doesn't seem selfish. Nobody really cares if someone who seems to be strictly in it for himself goes somewhere else.

ITAC members, of whatever ilk - Whatever you do, do NOT even CONSIDER specific adjustments requested by individual members for individual cars. Write the policy so that changes are initiated transparently, by the ITAC and put a clause in there that allows any request "not within these guidelines" to be dismissed without consideration. Even saying, "No, we aren't going to decrease your spec weight" encourages people to try again - hearing "yet" on the end of that sentence. Instead, put a clause in there that allows members to ask "that their car be reviewed to determine the degree to which it is within the defined parameters for the class," stipulate that any spec-line car will be considered only once every two years, and make findings binding over that time period.

On-track peformance, good or bad, is an indicator that specs should be addressed but NOT evidence unto themselves to support a change in specifications. Actual adjustments should be based only on physical attributes, to the greatest extent possible. At that point, +/-100 pounds is less of a factor on lap times than is the amount of sleep a driver got the night before, the number of beers he or she consumed, or whether they had a good morning dump before qualifying. Set it the hell free.

Don't get all starry-eyed, ITAC guys, thinking that I'm not still worried that this could go WAY wrong. It's a huge step in the right direction but there still exists the opportunity for IT to get swallowed up by the "Peterson Syndrome," where single good performances turn into rationale for ever-changing specs.

FWIW,

K

PS - retroactive :) for AB.

Banzai240

10-27-2005, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 27 2005, 11:59 AM
Don't get all starry-eyed, ITAC guys, thinking that I'm not still worried that this could go WAY wrong. It's a huge step in the right direction but there still exists the opportunity for IT to get swallowed up by the "Peterson Syndrome," where single good performances turn into rationale for ever-changing specs.

63780

It's handled, Dude... :023: We know what we are doing... we know what the goal is... we know how we want to execute the plan... and we KNOW that we'd REALLY like to only do this once...

Those of you expecting to see yearly "Production" style adjustments are in the wrong class... This ENTIRE plan is an attempt to RE-BALANCE the classes after having seen many years of classifications that don't quite fit. We strongly feel that, once we execute this, we will have a valid set of classifications that are MUCH closer to correct (heck, on some of these, as you've seen over the last two years, we'll at LEAST have the cars in the correct CLASS!), and will allow us to classify cars in the future under a common process.

Call it an "alignment correction", a "class balance adjustment", or whatever... but the idea is that this is a "one-time" adjustment to get "everyone" classified correctly, based on a defined process, with the intent of more accurately assessing the performance potential of the cars in question...

Will we get them all 100% correct??? What do you think? BUT, will we get EVERYONE of them a lot closer to correct? You bet your a$$ we will... And, either way, this time around, everyone will have been classified under a consistent process, and everyone will have had the same considerations, etc...

It's all about the potential of the car... How much of that potential you guys are able to wring out, well... that's up to you once the specs are laid down... Once this is all in place, I think most will see that it's a step in the right direction... a VERY big step that will increase the viability of IT and should make for some GREAT competition in the future!

Bill Miller

10-27-2005, 09:15 AM

Call it an "alignment correction", a "class balance adjustment", or whatever... but the idea is that this is a "one-time" adjustment to get "everyone" classified correctly, based on a defined process, with the intent of more accurately assessing the performance potential of the cars in question...

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the single biggest advance that IT has taken in quite a few years. A big round of applause :happy204: as well as a round of :beer:

Way to go guys! :023: :smilie_pokal:

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2005, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 27 2005, 09:15 AM

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the single biggest advance that IT has taken in quite a few years. A big round of applause :happy204: as well as a round of :beer:

Way to go guys! :023: :smilie_pokal:

63791
[/b]

http://www.txroadrunners.com/images/pics/funny/hellfrozeover.jpg

:D

AB

Bill Miller

10-27-2005, 12:28 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 27 2005, 09:33 AM
http://www.txroadrunners.com/images/pics/funny/hellfrozeover.jpg
:D

AB

63794

:D :happy204:

dj10

10-27-2005, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 27 2005, 03:42 AM
All I ask for is a smiley!!!

Seriously, there are BMW drivers on this BB who have suggested that the top 2 or 3 models in ITS get 'adjusted'. We have received letters from BMW drivers suggesting that RP's be placed on any car that beats a BMW, on any given weekend...it is getting crazy.

I'll ask again, how about some non-ITAC/Bimmer opinions.

AB

63765

You must admit if you had a restrictor plate on and a RX7 blows by you in a straight away, assuming you both had equal exit speed, or close to it, what whould your thought be? I'll tell you, it would be why the hell do I have a RP???

This is my 1st year in ITS and am having a blast. No matter what happeneds with this class I can't dump my BMW or would want to just because of some rule changes. I can only hope the ITAC and the CRB uses good judgement knowing they will effect so many in all the classes. Don't rule from bias or prejudice. Rule with knowledge and conscience. The ITAC & CRB are part of all of our teams because of their effect, we can only hope the show us the class we hope they have because we will have to live by their rulings.
Cheaters suck.....you know who you are.
dj

Banzai240

10-27-2005, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by dj10@Oct 27 2005, 08:06 PM
Don't rule from bias or prejudice. Rule with knowledge and conscience.
63840

I honestly find it VERY hard to understand how anyone could think that the ITAC is recommending ANYTHING based on "bias or prejudice"??.. :blink:

We've gathered more data, discussed more of this out in the open, and have been WAY MORE open to hearing all sides of the issue than ANY GROUP IN SCCA HISTORY!

What's more, we've been honest and open about what we think, why we think it, and what the expected results would be...

What I keep hearing over and over, mostly from BMW drivers, is this...

"we admit that the BMW has a horsepower advantage..."

"we don't want you to do anything about it..."

Guys... this isn't the ONLY car that is effected by our proposal... there are about 39 cars in IT that are being recommended for an adjustment of some kind, ALL with the same goal in mind... to get this right... It would be completely wrong for us NOT to try to get the BMW "right" as well...

And, to reiterate, we NEVER make a recommendation based on "bias or predjeduce", or any other no-objective term you might be able to come up with...

Even your (BMW driver's) OWN DATA shows that these cars have an "underestimated performance potential", as far as the current spec line is concerned... and these cars are straight-up, non-"cheater" examples...

AND, one more thing... If we had NO DATA at all... Just a new classification request with only a VTS sheet to go by, this car would be classified EXACTLY as we are recommending it be classified... THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT HERE!

This but ONE of the things we need to fix... and, it is our recommendation to the CRB to do so...

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2005, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by dj10@Oct 27 2005, 04:06 PM
You must admit if you had a restrictor plate on and a RX7 blows by you in a straight away, assuming you both had equal exit speed, or close to it, what whould your thought be? I'll tell you, it would be why the hell do I have a RP???

This is my 1st year in ITS and am having a blast. No matter what happeneds with this class I can't dump my BMW or would want to just because of some rule changes. I can only hope the ITAC and the CRB uses good judgement knowing they will effect so many in all the classes. Don't rule from bias or prejudice. Rule with knowledge and conscience. The ITAC & CRB are part of all of our teams because of their effect, we can only hope the show us the class we hope they have because we will have to live by their rulings.
Cheaters suck.....you know who you are.
dj

63840

I will ask you this:

Is that RX-7 built to the MAX? Is your BMW built to the max? What are the potential reasons for the RX-7 to have more power than your BMW? I would wonder as well, but I would look INWARD, not OUTWARD for the issue. Let me know your answers. I have seen stock 325's with bolt-on performance goodies hang with 175whp RX-7's. If you think it's a cheater car, this is a moot discussion.

We don't and never will rule from bias or prejudice. We must ask you all to look at the big picture and see that all we are trying to do is use a repeatable, defendable process for everyone, including you.

When you read back through th thread and you see the numbers I have posted, how can anyone argue with the simple math?

AB

dj10

10-27-2005, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 27 2005, 03:38 PM
I will ask you this:

Is that RX-7 built to the MAX? Is your BMW built to the max? What are the potential reasons for the RX-7 to have more power than your BMW? I would wonder as well, but I would look INWARD, not OUTWARD for the issue. Let me know your answers. I have seen stock 325's with bolt-on performance goodies hang with 175whp RX-7's. If you think it's a cheater car, this is a moot discussion.

We don't and never will rule from bias or prejudice. We must ask you all to look at the big picture and see that all we are trying to do is use a repeatable, defendable process for everyone, including you.

When you read back through th thread and you see the numbers I have posted, how can anyone argue with the simple math?

AB

63844

AB, if you (ITAC) are being as honest as you say you are, thats good enought for me, that is all anyone can ask of you. End of discussion. :023:

I know my car is legal. I don't know what max is, I should have some numbers next week. I can't say if the RX7's were maxed or legal. Just being honest. There is simple math then there is applied math. :)
dj

mlytle

10-27-2005, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 27 2005, 08:22 PM

Guys... this isn't the ONLY car that is effected by our proposal... there are about 39 cars in IT that are being recommended for an adjustment of some kind, ALL with the same goal in mind... to get this right... It would be completely wrong for us NOT to try to get the BMW "right" as well...

63842

herin lies part of the problem. perception. the only car that seems to be talked about for adjustment is the bmw. why do the itac members repeatedly bring it up? why aren't any of the other 38 cars mentioned? where is this list? why is the rest of the list so secret, but somehow "leaks" about the bmw keep coming out?

either talk about ALL the changes or don't talk about any of them. by only mentioning the one, repeatedly, the appearance continues to be a witch hunt.

mlytle

10-27-2005, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 27 2005, 03:42 AM
All I ask for is a smiley!!!

63765

:D

we good?

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2005, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by mlytle@Oct 27 2005, 09:26 PM
:D

we good?

63868

You bet!

:OLA:

Banzai240

10-27-2005, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by mlytle@Oct 28 2005, 01:21 AM
why do the itac members repeatedly bring it up?.... by only mentioning the one, repeatedly, the appearance continues to be a witch hunt.

63867

Ummmm.... WE (The ITAC) didn't start this thread! YOU GUYS DID...

Also, this ONE car has been a major thorn in our side for the entire two years we've been a group... We can't adjust much in ITS and make it fit as long as this car has the advantage it does...

The list??? It's with the CRB and going to be discussed on November 1st when I meet with them (via con-call...)... and it's not simply a "list"... it's an entire strategic plan for IT, including a formalized classification process, explanations of said process, explanations as to WHY the ITAC feels these changes are necessary and what impact we expect them to have, and, of course, a list of cars being recommended for ad-hoc (i.e.: one-time) classification alignments. It's not out because it's JUST A RECOMMENDATION... it still requires CRB and BoD approval for anything to actually happen... Therefore, it wouldn't be PRUDENT to put it out yet... You guys will see it soon enough if the CRB approves...

Why does the BMW get talked about and our recommendations "leaked"... again, BECAUSE YOU GUYS ASKED! I'm fine just keeping quiet about all of this until it is appropriate to release the information, but we are here to serve the membership and we want to be honest with you...

So, if you don't want it to be talked about, then STOP talking about it! :blink:

mlytle

10-28-2005, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 28 2005, 03:04 AM
Ummmm.... WE (The ITAC) didn't start this thread! YOU GUYS DID...

Why does the BMW get talked about and our recommendations "leaked"... again, BECAUSE YOU GUYS ASKED! I'm fine just keeping quiet about all of this until it is appropriate to release the information, but we are here to serve the membership and we want to be honest with you...

So, if you don't want it to be talked about, then STOP talking about it! :blink:

63873

i'll stop when you stop...no, i'll stop when YOU stop... :D

we have asked for the rest of the list and specifics about other cars too, but that doesn't get responded to with the detail that the bmw stuff does..

we do agree though..if it ain't appropriate to release the whole list, then the itac shouldn't be talking about any of the cars specifically. i hear all the talk of mass releveling, but..

ok, i'll stop now...but only if you stop.... :023:

is it time for a beer yet?

22timber

10-28-2005, 06:19 PM

Marshall,

I saw your original post and assumed it was tongue-in-cheek. Then I checked back today and saw that you sure got some excitement going!!

Mark Lapos
NOT dominant ITS RX7 #23

mlytle

10-28-2005, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by 22timber@Oct 28 2005, 10:19 PM
Marshall,

I saw your original post and assumed it was tongue-in-cheek. Then I checked back today and saw that you sure got some excitement going!!

Mark Lapos
NOT dominant ITS RX7 #23

63932

hi mark!
yeah, b ut as andy pointed out, i failed to make it more obvious with a smiley...

this crowd is so easy to get spun up... :D :D :D

wish i could make it to the comp school this weekend, but it is season payback weekend...off to a resort with the better half.

marshall