Missing Horsepower...

[Banzai240]

I just read this in Grassroots Motorsports (Vol. 22, Number 8, December 2005) page 23:

"The Society of Automotive Engineers has revised their methods used to measure the net horsepower and torque numbers for new cars. As a result, these new J1349 (Rev 8/04) net calculations may cause 2006 models to appear to show a decrease in power output, even though the engine specifications have not changed. Honda, for example, has already adopted these new specifications; as a result, their new Ridgeline is now rated at 247 horsepower, even though the initial specification stated 255."


Obviously, we need to keep this kind of thing in mind in the future when it comes to classifying cars in IT...

[Ron Earp]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 28 2005, 03:18 PM
Obviously, we need to keep this kind of thing in mind in the future when it comes to classifying cars in IT...

63897


It won't matter, ant least not for a long while. IT hasn't adopted anything newer than about 2000 right? It'll be a long time before IT adopts any of these cars affected by the hp correction.

And if recent discussions on this board are any indication the newer cars will not be adopted because they make too much power. :( Maybe in the future the powers that be will realize hp is cheap and to breathe life into IT we'll need to class the pocket rockets the younger generations drive. The ITAC is doing a good job but this is the only area where I don't see a lot of movement - newer higher hp cars, ITT, etc.

R

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by rlearp@Oct 28 2005, 12:34 PM
It won't matter, ant least not for a long while. IT hasn't adopted anything newer than about 2000 right? It'll be a long time before IT adopts any of these cars affected by the hp correction.

And if recent discussions on this board are any indication the newer cars will not be adopted because they make too much power. :( Maybe in the future the powers that be will realize hp is cheap and to breathe life into IT we'll need to class the pocket rockets the younger generations drive. The ITAC is doing a good job but this is the only area where I don't see a lot of movement - newer higher hp cars, ITT, etc.

R

63899


So write in and ask the CRB to create a class above ITS! We have talked about it here in generalities - Darin has the groundwork laid...

We are trying to right this ship - and when we do, we can start to think a little more PROactively...proactive member input would be great!!!

[benspeed]

I say the new class should be ITGT - Let me run a Boxster. That would rock!

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by benspeed@Oct 28 2005, 06:47 PM
I say the new class should be ITGT - Let me run a Boxster. That would rock!

63912


How about ITU and ITO... Kind of like the old IMSA classes GTU and GTO...

Andy is right... I've already laid some groundwork for such a class... I think there is another thread here somewhere where I actually posted some ideas about this with a list of potential cars to consider...

Wouldn't be cheap, however...

[Knestis]

Some regions have already had - or still have, maybe? - ITGT. It was populated with ex-SSGT Camaros, Firebirds, and Mustangs.

I still like ITR, or ITX - Improved Touring Xtreme. :)

K

[charrbq]

How about ITWW for Warp Wagon or ITTFF for Too F*****g Fast! :lol:

[Andy Bettencourt]

I like ITR, ITGT but ITX maybe be it....

ITXpensive!

AB

[lateapex911]

ITR works for me...

Better leave ITX for the AWD class...

hee hee

[jhooten]

ITCVPI, you have to run a retired police Crown Vic with at least 100K miles while holding a cup of coffee in one hand, balancing a doughnut on your knee, and talking on the radio with a hand mic and have a cell phone perched on your shoulder.


But on a more serious note, What does happen to T1/2 cars when they exceed the maximun age? ITP/Q/R?

[Knestis]

Over beers one day a LONG time ago, we conceptualized ITTV - IT Tow Vehicle. The general guidelines were that you had to race your tow vehicle in the same condition in which you use it to actually drag a race car around the country. It's blurry for a lot of reasons but specifics included...

** Mandatory Big Gulp cups and fast food wrappers on the floor

** Large boxes of tools and other pointy, heavy, hard, or flammable stuff in the back

** Prohibition against actually bleeding brakes - you don't do it to tow, it would be wrong to do so to race

** A format that ran the track the conventional way for 10 minutes, then switched direction for 10, then split the field and ran half of the remaining entries clockwise while the other half raced counter-clockwise - until there was only one entrant still running...

K

[Ron Earp]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 29 2005, 04:31 AM
Over beers one day a LONG time ago, we conceptualized ITTV - IT Tow Vehicle. The general guidelines were that you had to race your tow vehicle in the same condition in which you use it to actually drag a race car around the country. It's blurry for a lot of reasons but specifics included...



63957


Damn, now that might be a class I can actually win in! Unless you guys have a tow truck that runs in 12s, and then I can always do better with more pulley!

R

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 29 2005, 12:31 AM
Over beers one day a LONG time ago, we conceptualized ITTV - IT Tow Vehicle. The general guidelines were that you had to race your tow vehicle in the same condition in which you use it to actually drag a race car around the country. It's blurry for a lot of reasons but specifics included...

** Mandatory Big Gulp cups and fast food wrappers on the floor

** Large boxes of tools and other pointy, heavy, hard, or flammable stuff in the back

** Prohibition against actually bleeding brakes - you don't do it to tow, it would be wrong to do so to race

** A format that ran the track the conventional way for 10 minutes, then switched direction for 10, then split the field and ran half of the remaining entries clockwise while the other half raced counter-clockwise - until there was only one entrant still running...

K

63957


You know Kirk, I knew there was a reason I liked you!!! :P

[dj10]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 28 2005, 01:55 PM
How about ITU and ITO... Kind of like the old IMSA classes GTU and GTO...

Andy is right... I've already laid some groundwork for such a class... I think there is another thread here somewhere where I actually posted some ideas about this with a list of potential cars to consider...

Wouldn't be cheap, however...

63913


Sounds, looks and smells alot like "ITE"? :blink:

[C. Ludwig]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 29 2005, 12:31 AM
Over beers one day a LONG time ago, we conceptualized ITTV - IT Tow Vehicle. The general guidelines were that you had to race your tow vehicle in the same condition in which you use it to actually drag a race car around the country. It's blurry for a lot of reasons but specifics included...

** Mandatory Big Gulp cups and fast food wrappers on the floor

** Large boxes of tools and other pointy, heavy, hard, or flammable stuff in the back

** Prohibition against actually bleeding brakes - you don't do it to tow, it would be wrong to do so to race

** A format that ran the track the conventional way for 10 minutes, then switched direction for 10, then split the field and ran half of the remaining entries clockwise while the other half raced counter-clockwise - until there was only one entrant still running...

K

63957



Reminds me...

A few years back we went to Gateway for the October race. We'd won the spring race and I had talked a bunch of crap to my guys about how we were going to kick tail that weekend. Well, we had car troubles and never turned a lap. We worked on the car all day Saturday in a cold drizzle to no avail. So to throw a bone to the guys I paid the $10 or whatever it was for the fund raiser the club was having to drive the track in your street car and took the guys for a lap in the big Dodge. I hammered it down the short back straight into the esses and WHOA!!! this thing is going way to fast! :bash_1_: Sqaulling tires on a 7000lb 4x4 isn't a whole lot of fun. The guys enjoyed it though. :D

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by dj10@Oct 29 2005, 03:44 PM
Sounds, looks and smells alot like "ITE"? :blink:

63967


Not really... No turbo Mustangs, BIG wings, or anything like that...

More like Boxters, M3 BMWs, 300Z Nissans, etc...

2.5-3.5 Litre engines, etc...

Maybe even the E36 at 2650lbs with no restrictor... ;)

[dj10]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 29 2005, 11:02 AM
Not really... No turbo Mustangs, BIG wings, or anything like that...

More like Boxters, M3 BMWs, 300Z Nissans, etc...

2.5-3.5 Litre engines, etc...

Maybe even the E36 at 2650lbs with no restrictor... ;)

63969


With the cars mentiones the class should be called IT2. :D
You or I couldn't get a e36 to 2650# with out lots of $$. Fot that kind of money just go buy a M3.
You would have to allow the e36 to have a .040 bore also. ;)

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by dj10@Oct 29 2005, 12:53 PM
With the cars mentiones the class should be called IT2. :D
You or I couldn't get a e36 to 2650# with out lots of $$. Fot that kind of money just go buy a M3.
You would have to allow the e36 to have a .040 bore also. ;)

63973


IT2 is taken, right Kirk? :)

Isn't the E36 already allowed a .040 overbore? :)

ITR
ITS
ITA
ITB
ITC

I like it.

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 29 2005, 11:16 PM
IT2 is taken, right Kirk? ...

IT2 is dead - long live ITA.

A has ended up being pretty much what we proposed - defined around the Integra and 240sx - but without leaving the 'tweeners a place to be competitive.

K

[philstireservice]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Oct 28 2005, 09:59 PM
ITR works for me...

Better leave ITX for the AWD class...

hee hee

63948



Being an Acura guy ...ITR refers to the Type R Integra...... How about..ITP...as in GTP??

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 29 2005, 08:45 PM
IT2 is dead - long live ITA.

A has ended up being pretty much what we proposed - defined around the Integra and 240sx - but without leaving the 'tweeners a place to be competitive.

K

63985



Don't put to much stock in that conclusion........not yet at least.....

[Geo]

I say call it ITA. Call the current ITS ITB. ITA becomes ITC, ITB becomes ITD, and ITC becomes ITE. Nice and simple and logical.

[Knestis]

If you're going to jack up the whole name structure, do something that doesn't include the old designations in new places and go IT1 (fastest), IT2, IT3, IT4, and IT5 (slowest). That also mimics the designations used for GT and Touring classes.

This is all pretty academic unless the strategic plan under consideration is ACTUALLY strategic, rather than simply nibbling around the edges of the current system.

Hmm...

K

[snowmann]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 29 2005, 04:02 PM
Maybe even the E36 at 2650lbs with no restrictor... ;)

63969




hahahahahhahahaha :happy204:

sad that i enjoy this even though i race a bmw

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 29 2005, 09:02 AM
Not really... No turbo Mustangs, BIG wings, or anything like that...

More like Boxters, M3 BMWs, 300Z Nissans, etc...

2.5-3.5 Litre engines, etc...

Maybe even the E36 at 2650lbs with no restrictor... ;)

63969


How about the Z3 2.8l, it's 4 cylinder brother's been classed for a couple of years now and the 2.8 came out only a year after the four.

Then we could class the first gen S-2000 while we're at it I see quiet a few of those at DE's. The IS-300 that was mentioned a few theads ago, would be a good addition. Any more to add to this list??

James

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Geo@Oct 30 2005, 10:43 AM
I say call it ITA. Call the current ITS ITB. ITA becomes ITC, ITB becomes ITD, and ITC becomes ITE. Nice and simple and logical.

64012


You're kidding, right George?

I don't really like the numerical designations, kinda hoses things up if you ever do insert a class, mid-stream.

I actually like ITR.

Here's my take:

ITGT
ITR
ITS
IT2
ITA
ITB
ITC

If we can only get one, lop off ITGT and IT2.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 30 2005, 12:45 AM
...defined around the Integra and 240sx - but without leaving the 'tweeners a place to be competitive.

K

63985


Just for the record... ITA is NOT defined around the Integra or the 240SX... If we did that, it wouldn't leave the "tweeners a place to be competitive."... ;)

[Ron Earp]

ITR and ITGT sound good to me. As far at "Type R", there weren't enough real ones of those around to worry about people thinking it is for "Type R" cars. Whatever Type R means. Sure are a lot of Hondas with fart cans running around with Type R badges though.

R

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Oct 31 2005, 06:49 PM
Just for the record... ITA is NOT defined around the Integra or the 240SX... If we did that, it wouldn't leave the "tweeners a place to be competitive."... ;)

64124

just out of curiosity what cars are spot on as it stands in ITA. I know it has been said the the rx7 and 240z are almost perfect in ITS

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by dickita15@Oct 31 2005, 07:16 PM
just out of curiosity what cars are spot on as it stands in ITA. I know it has been said the the rx7 and 240z are almost perfect in ITS

64131


I'll let the senior members field that one.....

Darin? Andy? George?

MY answer would be that it is currewntly in process, stay tuned....

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by dickita15@Oct 31 2005, 07:16 PM
just out of curiosity what cars are spot on as it stands in ITA. I know it has been said the the rx7 and 240z are almost perfect in ITS

64131


Anything that has been recently classified:

SE-R
Neons
NX2000
2.0 16V GTI
etc.

AB

[JeffYoung]

How about IT0 for British IT cars that don't actually race?

[Hotshoe]

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Oct 30 2005, 09:59 PM
How about the Z3 2.8l, it's 4 cylinder brother's been classed for a couple of years now and the 2.8 came out only a year after the four.

Then we could class the first gen S-2000 while we're at it I see quiet a few of those at DE's. The IS-300 that was mentioned a few theads ago, would be a good addition. Any more to add to this list??

James

64038


James,
....I'm with you on this one. I am building a 98 Z3 2.8 to run in T2 next year. Sure would be nice to have a place to go in 2008.
....I have retired my RX7 from IT7 ( except for the ARRC) and I'm going to run ITA in 2006. So far I have one win at VIR. So, as long as I stay away from Road Atlanta I should have a chance. I'm a little down on HP compared to the Acura Integra but I think I have some room for improvement in a few areas. So it's time to step up and try.
....Have you been doing anything with your BMW? I really like the Z3 body style. It has the Classic Sports Car Appeal.

....Rick Thompson
ITA ....84 RX7
SM .....93 & 97 Miata
T2 ......98 BMW Z3 2.8

[JeffYoung]

A helluva a drive by Rick v. two fast Acuras. ITA had a great race on Sunday morning. Top 5 were two Acuras, Rick (winning) and two Hondas. Fun to watch.

[Hotshoe]

Thanks Jeff,

...It was definitely a good race to watch, The Acura's of Mark Carpenter and Tim Dejoris were the class of the field. I saved my car for the last two laps and it sure got interesting real quick when it came time to try to move to the front.

...Mark was holding his own out front coming through "Hog Pen" turn when he slipped and went wide on exit and ended up doing some agricultural racing down towards the trees then found his way back to the front straight.

... Tim took over the lead and I took the opportunity to move in and try to find a way around. I felt that my best chance was the left hand turn after the uphill esses. I closed within a car length by turn 5, right where I wanted to be. We started down the short straight under the bridge and I saw a puff of smoke come out from under Tim's car (missed shift). Then he slowed, so I moved to pass on the right. He did not see me and moved over into my line. I grazed the back bumper on his car and spun to avoid the collision. I did my best to keep the car on the black stuff and did a complete 360 and aimed her into Oak Tree just as Mark was catching back up. Unfortunately for Tim his problems were terminal (dropped valve)

....That set up a drag race between me and Mark with him spotting me about six car lengths. I'm just glad that was the last lap. Mark and Tim both drove a good race. I hope to race with Mark again sometime.

....To bad I didn't have a tape in the camera ...........arrrggghhhhhhhhh

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by dickita15@Nov 1 2005, 09:25 PM
thanks andy but I was really looking for some cars that have been campaigned for a while. while the additions may be a good fit i was really looking for a car that had well developed examples. your examples have not really reached thier potential yet because they were so outclassed in ITS

64215


Good Point...

But, the idea with ITA, just like ITS, is to bring cars toward a "middle"... In the case of ITA, I can't really give you a concrete example right now (I'm at work and my spreadsheet is at home) of cars that already fit the target, but suffice it to say that the target is somewhere between the top cars in the class and the bottom cars in the class... Adjustments need to be made accordingly to bring the two more toward each other...

The cars Andy mentioned were classified using the target parameters...

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 31 2005, 08:58 PM
Anything that has been recently classified:

SE-R
Neons
NX2000
2.0 16V GTI
etc.

AB

64138


thanks andy but I was really looking for some cars that have been campaigned for a while. while the additions may be a good fit i was really looking for a car that had well developed examples. your examples have not really reached thier potential yet because they were so outclassed in ITS

[dickita15]

thanks Darin
if you get a chance to look it up I wold still like to get a better feel for the target.

[JeffYoung]

Dick, just by eyeballing it sure seems like that the middle of the road ITA car would weigh 2200-2300 lbs and have 120-150 hp stock, with an IT potential of maybe 15-20 above that.

But I am guessing.

The class leaders are obviously the Integra, the CRX and the 240SX, with the ITA RX7 right there as well in some divisions and farther behind in others. There are fast 325es around as well. I think most agree that the ITA MR2 is outclassed.

[Bill Miller]

I know, I know! Pick me! Pick me!

It's the AMC Spirt!!! :023: :P :happy204:

Seriously, given that the ITAC folks have stated that the Acura/Nissan/CRX are above the target, I'm somewhat at a loss as to what the existing examples are. My best guess is the 1st gen. RX7.

[dickita15]

well jeff, and bill we can all speculate on where the center is based on results but PCAs are not calculated by results so I am looking to get a feel of cars that are right on target by the calculations used by the ITAC.

[Jake]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 1 2005, 12:58 AM
Anything that has been recently classified:

SE-R
Neons
NX2000
2.0 16V GTI
etc.

AB

64138


Wow - I didn't think from the title this thread was going to go here again! But here we go...

NX 2515lb 140hp
SER 2490lb 140hp
Neon 2650lb 150hp
GTI 2475lb 135hp

17.7-18.3 lbs/hp

MR2 2370lb 112hp (If I could make weight)
Corolla GTS 2410lb 112hp

21.2 - 21.5 lb/hp

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by dickita15@Nov 2 2005, 12:22 PM
well jeff, and bill we can all speculate on where the center is based on results but PCAs are not calculated by results so I am looking to get a feel of cars that are right on target by the calculations used by the ITAC.

64272



Dick,

As I indicated previously, for ITA, there wasn't really a "bogey" car per-se... The RX-7 and MR-2 were TOO outclassed to make it feasible to target them, and the CRX/240SX/Integra were TOO overclassed to use them... It's safe to say that the target falls in the middle somewhere...

So, if you look at the classifications that Andy listed, you'll see what we are aiming at for this class...

[Knestis]

This did indeed seem to be the case - what Darin describes - back when we started doing what was referred to as "Miller Ratio" math. That was the first year I was back in school (so 5 years ago?), and the CRX was emerging a the apple-cart-upsetter. It's a little shocking to me as I sit here that we've actually gotten to a point where the ITAC is using a derivation of those same scribblings.

It's not likely that the archives have survived but it would be fun to resurrect all of those "a formula just WON'T WORK" strands. :D

There's no question one end of the A continuum has been defined by newly listed S orphans but the top of B is pretty much where it's been for a long time. This leaves a lot of options awash at the bottom of A and - I'll say this for Jake's benefit - there is NO question that the MR2 and its cousins are included there.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 2 2005, 09:23 AM

It's not likely that the archives have survived but it would be fun to resurrect all of those "a formula just WON'T WORK" strands. :D


64277


I stand by the sentiment that you can't use a pure formula WITHOUT taking into account the intangeibles. Those factors can't be locked into a formula that is the same for every car...

:)

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 2 2005, 09:23 AM

There's no question one end of the A continuum has been defined by newly listed S orphans but the top of B is pretty much where it's been for a long time. This leaves a lot of options awash at the bottom of A and - I'll say this for Jake's benefit - there is NO question that the MR2 and its cousins are included there.

K

64277


I will debate the fact that the newly listed A orphans define the top side. I think they define the 'meat' of the target as we have defined it.

There are cars above that (that we hope to bring back) and cars below that (that we hope to bring up).

The MR2 is a good example of a car that IMHO falls into 'tweener' status. It is seemingly outclassed in ITA (because it can't get light enough to fall into the meat of the class) but may be too much for ITB. So, do you make it weigh what it needs to in ITB with complaints of unsafe ballast and brake issues and additional investment in wheels, etc...?

I say ITB but differing opinions exist. Anbody race one in ITB on 6" wheels at 2500lbs? Is that better than a "corrected" ITA?

AB

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 2 2005, 02:31 PM

I say ITB but differing opinions exist. Anbody race one in ITB on 6" wheels at 2500lbs? Is that better than a "corrected" ITA?

AB

64285


There is still the cage issue to deal with on this one... :blink:

[JeffYoung]

Doesn't it seem to you guys that right now A is probably one of the most balanced, "best" classes there is? High car counts, well-developed cars but not to the extreme of $50,000 ITS cars, good racing, several makes that can win?

I agree that the issue is two popular underdogs have a hard time keeping up (the MR2 and the RX7), but other than that, it really appears to me the class works and that someone looking to get into it has a number of good options -- NX200/SE-R, 1.8 Miata, 240sx, Integra, and CRX. All seem to be able to compete and win and have different strengths and weaknesses.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 2 2005, 09:23 AM
This did indeed seem to be the case - what Darin describes - back when we started doing what was referred to as "Miller Ratio" math. That was the first year I was back in school (so 5 years ago?), and the CRX was emerging a the apple-cart-upsetter. It's a little shocking to me as I sit here that we've actually gotten to a point where the ITAC is using a derivation of those same scribblings.

It's not likely that the archives have survived but it would be fun to resurrect all of those "a formula just WON'T WORK" strands. :D

There's no question one end of the A continuum has been defined by newly listed S orphans but the top of B is pretty much where it's been for a long time. This leaves a lot of options awash at the bottom of A and - I'll say this for Jake's benefit - there is NO question that the MR2 and its cousins are included there.

K

64277



Damn Kirk, that actually brought a tear to my eye!!! :lol: :P And don't for a minute, don't think that I don't chuckly a bit, every time I think about it. :bash_1_: :lol:

Andy,

Please don't throw the 'wheel investment' red herring out there. I was under the impression that the general concensus was that people would gladly get new wheels, to move from A to B. And IIRC (but it's probably lost in the above-mentioned archives), that was actually your position. And you're talking about adding 130# to the MR2 (2370 -> 2500). Even if you make it 2550# (only 180# more), that's still less than the 2.0 16v VWs got by going from ITS to ITA (2220 -> 2475, + 245#). What's the process say for the AW11 MR2 in ITB trim? I'd say, if it's 2550# or less, MOVE IT!

Oh, and as far as the cage thing goes, people can either re-cage the cars when they move, or they can stay where they're at w/ the understanding that the car will never, ever, be considered for any kind of adjustments, in the future. I have no problem w/ having the same car classed in multiple classes, at different specs. Leave the AW11 MR2 in ITA @ 2370# _AND_ list it in ITB @ 2550# (or whatever the process predicts), w/ 6" wheels. The ITB configuration would be eligible for future PCAs, were the found to be warranted, but the ITA version would be pretty much locked in.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Bill,

- I am just asking MR2 guys what their preference is.
- I would buy new 6" wheels...gladly.
- I am a proponent of the MR2 in ITB.
- I would move it if I were King.
- I am not King.
- There is no King - only Knights at a round table.
- Knights at this round table disagree on wenches, kingdoms, RX-7's and MR2's.

:D

Jeff,

I think ITA is the best class we have.

AB

[Ron Earp]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 2 2005, 07:12 PM
I think ITA is the best class we have.

AB

64328


I agree. Let's move my Jensen Healey down there.

Ron

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 2 2005, 07:12 PM
Bill,

- I am just asking MR2 guys what their preference is.
- I would buy new 6" wheels...gladly.
- I am a proponent of the MR2 in ITB.
- I would move it if I were King.
- I am not King.
- There is no King - only Knights at a round table.
- Knights at this round table disagree on wenches, kingdoms, RX-7's and MR2's.

:D

AB

64328


What Andy said! He and I are "eye to eye" on this one... (Knights, fighting side-by-side for the just... the adjusted... the adjustable... hopeless... and the overestimated... :blink: )

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 2 2005, 12:33 PM
There is still the cage issue to deal with on this one... :blink:

64306

of course in the pole i did of cages in the mazda section half had bigger cages.

and I agree that ITA in our area is the best class there is but with the first rate guys we have running in acuras and 240s the rx7's and mr2s have to settle for 8th being a good day.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 2 2005, 03:12 PM
Bill,

- I am just asking MR2 guys what their preference is.
- I would buy new 6" wheels...gladly.
- I am a proponent of the MR2 in ITB.
- I would move it if I were King.
- I am not King.
- There is no King - only Knights at a round table.
- Knights at this round table disagree on wenches, kingdoms RX-7's and MR2's.

:D

Jeff,

I think ITA is the best class we have.

AB

64328


Wenches? You guys have wenches? Damn!!! :lol:

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 2 2005, 07:22 AM
I know, I know! Pick me! Pick me!

It's the AMC Spirt!!! :023: :P :happy204:

Seriously, given that the ITAC folks have stated that the Acura/Nissan/CRX are above the target, I'm somewhat at a loss as to what the existing examples are. My best guess is the 1st gen. RX7.

64262



Guess again, LOL!

Dickita is making a point...in the 'negative space' way, ;)

[Jake]

Wow - this is a first, I think we're all in agreement. For the record, I was unable to find more than 1 ITA Toyota in the country that would have a cage problem. Plus it would be much cheaper to buy 6" wheels than to purchase the unobtainium that would be required to bring my 87 MR2 down to even the current spec weight. Lowering the current minimum would be an insult. Ironically, if current MR2's were to get below the spec weight most of them would have to put in a new cage of the smaller tubing diameter to get there.

On a personal note, ITA in NER is AWESOME! Great racers with good attitudes, big fields, and close racing. While, I believe that putting the Toyotas in B is the right thing to do because it intruduces a cheap to run and fun car that might be competitive - It would be a little sad leaving my buds in ITA.

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 2 2005, 12:33 PM
There is still the cage issue to deal with on this one... :blink:

64306

I know it's a not new idea, but I SERIOUSLY think we/you should consider optional classing for "tweener" cars and those who may/may not either wish to change wheels and/or cages. Class these tweeners cars in BOTH classes with different weights and cage requirements, and let "the market" decide where they work best. This solves two issues:

- does not obsolete those cars with the "wrong" wheels and/or tires
- gives the competitor the choice if they DO want to move

There's nothing in the rules against it, it's VERY easy to police (you can easily see the wheels and the cage construction), and it fits very nicely in the philosophy of the class. - GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 2 2005, 05:34 PM
Wenches? You guys have wenches? Damn!!! :lol:

64365


You think we do this for FREE???

:D

AB

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Nov 3 2005, 09:37 AM
I know it's a not new idea, but I SERIOUSLY think we/you should consider optional classing for "tweener" cars and those who may/may not either wish to change wheels and/or cages. Class these tweeners cars in BOTH classes with different weights and cage requirements, and let "the market" decide where they work best. This solves two issues:

- does not obsolete those cars with the "wrong" wheels and/or tires
- gives the competitor the choice if they DO want to move

There's nothing in the rules against it, it's VERY easy to police (you can easily see the wheels and the cage construction), and it fits very nicely in the philosophy of the class. - GA

64461


Greg,

I am down. How many 'tweeners' do we have?

ITA RX-7 12A?
ITA MK2 MK1?

AB

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Nov 3 2005, 06:37 AM
I know it's a not new idea, but I SERIOUSLY think we/you should consider optional classing for "tweener" cars and those who may/may not either wish to change wheels and/or cages. Class these tweeners cars in BOTH classes with different weights and cage requirements, and let "the market" decide where they work best. This solves two issues:

- does not obsolete those cars with the "wrong" wheels and/or tires
- gives the competitor the choice if they DO want to move

There's nothing in the rules against it, it's VERY easy to police (you can easily see the wheels and the cage construction), and it fits very nicely in the philosophy of the class. - GA

64461


I agree with Greg on this one. Class the tweener cars 2 ways. This will allow new cars to be built were they may actually be competitive. These would be new investment folk rather than reinvestments. I think you would find that over time the cars would move where they could compete.

[Greg Amy]

Andy, those two are the ones that immediately jump to mind, but you guys (ITAC) should have better experience with this issue. Think of the ones that give you fits, where you really can't seem to make a good choice of where to put them, or ones that beguile you due to cage and/or wheel issues.

I'm not talking about making EVERY car (or even a high number of cars) class-optional, only ones that don't seem to fit now. How many cars do you want to move into ITB from ITA (for example) but can't or won't because of cage and/or wheel issues? Those are the ones to focus on initially.

Once the idea is accepted, it could also be used to improve classification options for those cars on the extremes, regardless of wheels/cage. You guys are trying to tighten up the bell curves within each class, so you could consider making the outer 7.5% on the top and bottom tails of each class class-optional. This gives you the ability to focus the bell curves around 85% of the cars within each class. - GA

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 3 2005, 10:00 AM
Greg,

I am down. How many 'tweeners' do we have?

ITA RX-7 12A?
ITA MK2 MK1?

AB

64467


I am sure there are a bunch of them, just skim the itcs and you see cars that most likely have no chance in Ita. bmw 2002, some civics, capri ect. But I believe in the itac process. if the group runs the number on them I would guess a lot of cars could be identified that have no chance in A but might add to the dwindleing car counts in B. now some of the cars on this list are rare and old so maybe I would not spend lots of time on all of them.

[Jake]

I see absolutely no downside of this.

[RacerBill]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 2 2005, 05:34 PM
Wenches? You guys have wenches? Damn!!! :lol:

64365


How do you think they turn the nits and bilts? :119:

[Hotshoe]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 3 2005, 02:00 PM
Greg,

I am down. How many 'tweeners' do we have?

ITA RX-7 12A?
ITA MK2 MK1?

AB

64467


Andy,

.... I know this is an attempt to make things better. But please remember that not all RX7s are "tweeners" IMHO :angry: . The option to stay or switch sounds good to me.
.... What about the 94-95 GSLSE ? Will it be dropped from ITS and put in ITA? Seems only fair. I have one that just sits and collects dust because it is not competitive in ITS. But then again my 1st gen Rx7 can hold it's own in ITA.

..Far from being a "Tweener"
... Rick Thompson

[Bill Miller]

I'm not talking about making EVERY car (or even a high number of cars) class-optional, only ones that don't seem to fit now. How many cars do you want to move into ITB from ITA (for example) but can't or won't because of cage and/or wheel issues? Those are the ones to focus on initially.


I'm not trying to sound like a broken record on this, but if a car does or does not have to buy new wheels (7" -> 6") should have no bearing on moving the car from ITA to ITB. I support the concpet of class cross-over for tweeners with limitations (see my earlier comments), but the wheel issue is a personal choice. Don't muddy things up by including it in the discussion.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Hotshoe@Nov 3 2005, 02:14 PM
Andy,

.... I know this is an attempt to make things better. But please remember that not all RX7s are "tweeners" IMHO :angry: . The option to stay or switch sounds good to me.
.... What about the 94-95 GSLSE ? Will it be dropped from ITS and put in ITA? Seems only fair. I have one that just sits and collects dust because it is not competitive in ITS. But then again my 1st gen Rx7 can hold it's own in ITA.

..Far from being a "Tweener"
... Rick Thompson

64521


Rick,

Let's not get into this again. It is the ITAC's position that the 12A RX-7 is not in the same league as the current top cars in ITA (240SX, CRX, Integra). With all respect to your program and your outstanding success, we believe the data supports our position. I hope you attend the ARRC this year because it is my opinion that you and your program represent the best there is in ITA RX-7's.

Having said that, we could use your expertise on the 84-85 13B. What kind of power can it make? Estimates would put it in the 175 crank - 140/145whp range. That is 2550 weight territory without consideration for any other factors.
Thoughts?

AB

[JeffYoung]

2550 for ITA? That would be a good fit I think, give Mazda a car at the front of A.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 3 2005, 03:57 PM
Rick,

Let's not get into this again. It is the ITAC's position that the 12A RX-7 is not in the same league as the current top cars in ITA (240SX, CRX, Integra). With all respect to your program and your outstanding success, we believe the data supports our position. I hope you attend the ARRC this year because it is my opinion that you and your program represent the best there is in ITA RX-7's.

Having said that, we could use your expertise on the 84-85 13B. What kind of power can it make? Estimates would put it in the 175 crank - 140/145whp range. That is 2550 weight territory without consideration for any other factors.
Thoughts?

AB

64541


Andy,

From what I've been hearing you and Darin say, I'm under the impression that the top ITA cars may be getting some lead X-mas presents this year. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you guys talking about bringing cars closer to the middle? You've said that the ITA top-dogs (240, CRX, Integra) are not the benchmarks.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 3 2005, 04:26 PM
Andy,

From what I've been hearing you and Darin say, I'm under the impression that the top ITA cars may be getting some lead X-mas presents this year. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you guys talking about bringing cars closer to the middle? You've said that the ITA top-dogs (240, CRX, Integra) are not the benchmarks.

64546


It's all pie-in-the-sky until the BoD approves it.

AB

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 3 2005, 08:26 PM
It's all pie-in-the-sky until the BoD approves it.

AB

64574



Then it becomes lead-under-the-tree.......

or the passenger seat...

sorry, couldn't resist a bad joke..

[Hotshoe]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 3 2005, 07:57 PM
Rick,

Let's not get into this again. It is the ITAC's position that the 12A RX-7 is not in the same league as the current top cars in ITA (240SX, CRX, Integra). With all respect to your program and your outstanding success, we believe the data supports our position. I hope you attend the ARRC this year because it is my opinion that you and your program represent the best there is in ITA RX-7's.

Having said that, we could use your expertise on the 84-85 13B. What kind of power can it make? Estimates would put it in the 175 crank - 140/145whp range. That is 2550 weight territory without consideration for any other factors.
Thoughts?

AB

64541

Andy,

.....I'm not trying to "Stir the Pot". I hope I can be part of the solution.

......I am going to the ARRC this year. I have planned on it all season, and have run a few races there this year trying to get some track time.

......Do you know Mark Carpenter? He drives an Acura Integra in ITA in the NARRC . I met him this past weekend @ VIR. We ran the race together and I was able to get a good feel for the difference between the two cars.

......So now he will be at the ARRC and I hope to get some track time with him so I can compare the two courses with the same cars and drivers. See, at VIR we were within a second of each other the entire race. But I don't think that will be the outcome at Road Atlanta.

......I do not know what the numbers are for the 13B but I can find out from my engine builder.

[Turfer]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 3 2005, 08:26 PM
Andy,

From what I've been hearing you and Darin say, I'm under the impression that the top ITA cars may be getting some lead X-mas presents this year. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you guys talking about bringing cars closer to the middle? You've said that the ITA top-dogs (240, CRX, Integra) are not the benchmarks.

64546



Popular rumor coming out of Oregon is look for 200+ pounds added to the CRX/Civic. 225 is the number I heard put forth for a race weight of 2375/2410. It seems excessive to me. Especially considering the new additions have not had a proper chance to show what they can accomplish with a top build and a good driver.

I hear similar gains for the Integra and 240sx putting them in the field at racing weights around 2700lbs.

If any of the rumors I am hearing come to bear fruit then ITA will quickly become dominated by the Miata. Which, if I throw on my tin foil hat, would suit SCCA corporate just fine.

Rick--Who hopes that the whatever changes come along that it does not upset the great ITA fields and racing.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Turfer@Nov 12 2005, 03:02 PM
Popular rumor coming out of Oregon is look for 200+ pounds added to the CRX/Civic. 225 is the number I heard put forth for a race weight of 2375/2410. It seems excessive to me. Especially considering the new additions have not had a proper chance to show what they can accomplish with a top build and a good driver.

I hear similar gains for the Integra and 240sx putting them in the field at racing weights around 2700lbs.

If any of the rumors I am hearing come to bear fruit then ITA will quickly become dominated by the Miata. Which, if I throw on my tin foil hat, would suit SCCA corporate just fine.

Rick--Who hopes that the whatever changes come along that it does not upset the great ITA fields and racing.

65249


Well, those are just what you said they were - RUMORS. I have the recommendations in front of me, and you are off by 125 pounds in some cases. All the moves are backed by the 'process' and will make sense. Let's not get crazy over stupid - and unfounded rumors.

BTW: The 1.6 Miata is on the list to gain weight as well. Go paint your black helicopter a different color. :bash_1_:

AB

[Turfer]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 12 2005, 08:14 PM
Well, those are just what you said they were - RUMORS. I have the recommendations in front of me, and you are off by 125 pounds in some cases. All the moves are backed by the 'process' and will make sense. Let's not get crazy over stupid - and unfounded rumors.

BTW: The 1.6 Miata is on the list to gain weight as well. Go paint your black helicopter a different color. :bash_1_:

AB

65250



Thanks Andy. A 100 pounds seems pretty reasonable to me. Especially, since my driving suits keep shrinking each winter. :o

I am glad to hear some weight gain for the Miata as well. I have been left wondering how much faster a SM can go with a proper .040 over IT motor, ECU tuning, and Hooisers.

I am an ITA guy. We can only afford tin foil for hats. It's the ITS guys that have all the helcopters. :P

Rick

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Turfer@Nov 12 2005, 04:02 PM
Thanks Andy. A 100 pounds seems pretty reasonable to me. Especially, since my driving suits keep shrinking each winter. :o

I am glad to hear some weight gain for the Miata as well. I have been left wondering how much faster a SM can go with a proper .040 over IT motor, ECU tuning, and Hooisers.

I am an ITA guy. We can only afford tin foil for hats. It's the ITS guys that have all the helcopters. :P

Rick

65251


I hear this fear a lot on the Miata. Here are a few issues to chew on:

In SM, they run in packs. They bump draft, they take advantage of the fact that they don't slow each other down because there is enough of them to have their own run group. Their times are there peak.

When you see guys cross over an SM into ITA, they typically go slower in that race than they do in theor own run group. That is because they get held up in corners and don't have the power to make it up...it's a total momentum car.

In IT, you won't see them bump drafting another make of car. They may qualify well when given a clear track, but when you have a faster car on the straight, it has a terrible time getting by. They don't race well. ONly a 10/10th example will have a shot - and that is how it should be.

AB