IT going National - your opinion

[Andy Bettencourt]

I think there are valid arguments for any choice. Just wanted to get as many opinions as possible.

[tnord]

i would rather see it stay regional for my own personal benefit, so i voted that way. but really, i don't have a firm stance on this because i don't yet understand how it would affect the majority of drivers outside of the midwest.

[charrbq]

My opinion on this issue is drawn from my understanding of the history of the subject. It was, unlike other classes, designed as a regional class only. It was a place to run your old SS car when it was too old to run nationally, and you either didn't want to buy a new car to compete in the "car of the year" class or you thought it would be a cool idea to modify what you had to make it faster. Later, the opportunity to move from IT to Production was offered as several of the National Production classes were dying from poor subscription. That process, IMHO is a good one.

The only exception to that was American Sedan. That was a class developed, like the ITR concept, for people that had a need for more speed. It existed for a couple of years as a regional only class built under the standards as those for all of IT. The problem was that the cars were too fast for stock brakes and suspensions. Since the old A Sedan was now a part of GT1, there was an opening, and by going to National status, the rules could be modified for safety and performance. My buddy that drives AS told me once that he was glad to see the class go national, until he found out how much it cost. His is no cheap effort. He's sat on the pole of the Runoffs more than once and finished on the podium a couple of times. He no longer runs Regionals as his emphasis and money are now focused on National competition.

Even though the national ranks are full of old cars, my sense is that the emphasis in National racing is toward the newer, flashier cars. I won't say that the direction for National racing is towards a professional series, as others have, but it was only one president back that it seemed like that was where it was headed.

Spec Miata was embraced by National racing so that it wouldn't get left out in the cold. I don't believe anyone ever thought that it would take off like it did, but I feel that Mazda is pretty tickled about it. Even though the cars aren't all alike, to the average spectator eye, they are. SRF puts on just as good a race, but you can't drive one home.

There is a chance that ITR might go National...maybe ITS and ITA, too. But I doubt it. People talk about the price of racing going up. It won't. But if you want to run your ITA Miata at the pointy end of a national class, it will.

My question is, why? Why would you want to change theaters when the play is doing great where it's at? Having the national office and it's rules makers and changers put us at the end of the supper table isn't all that bad a deal.

[pgipson]

I voted "Regional Only Forever". I have seen too many national classes that are divided into "haves" and "have nots". It's why you see people in prod cars, formula cars, and sports racers that don't run nationals. There is nothing wrong with having a group of classes that are for local-level racing. We need that entry point and racers need a place to grow in the sport.

There are plenty of places for people that have the aspiration for that level of competition to compete already. Altering the basic concepts on which IT was established and adding to the turmoil that already exists in national racing does nothing for the racer or the club.

[Speed Raycer]

IMO, let the lower end of the alphabet go national and keep A-E as regional only.

[Knestis]

It's not really an option in the poll but I'd advocate for a broader re-examination of the National-Regional distinction. It an artifice based on history and internal politiking, rather than a strategic position.

K

[tnord]

i'm with you kirk, i think the whole thing needs re-examination. but i'm torn in how to handle it. i think the top 24 classes in participation #'s should get to go. but i really don't think that F500 is a good entry point for new drivers. production based cars with limited modifications is the perfect point of entry (which currently means IT).

having ITR/ITS/ITA going national and leaving the lower cost B/C to regional is an interesting idea, but i don't think i would support it. if i was a new driver, i sure as heck wouldn't be very excited about racing 100whp fwd 15yr old econo cars in B/C.

given their recent track history, i trust the ITAC/CRB to make the right decision on this and i will react accordingly.

[Ron Earp]

i'm with you kirk, i think the whole thing needs re-examination. but i'm torn in how to handle it. i think the top 24 classes in participation #'s should get to go.
[/b]

Anyone have some specs on what classes would have gone for 2005 had this rule been in effect?

I think a lot of The Establishment is going to get shook up if that happens - bye bye lots of old Prod cars at the runoffs as well as other undersubscribed classes.

R

[tnord]

it's posted up somewhere on SM.com i think. i think F500 would've actually made it, i think it was something like HP and GTL that woulda been dropped.

[charrbq]

Actually, the production classes are in pretty good shape, thanks to the influx of former IT cars. There is still a possibility of the combination of G and H production, but E and F are stronger than ever. There are even plans for the future of A-D production as former pro series cars start looking for a home (just like former SS cars found a home in IT). The classes that are showing suffering signs are some of the more exotic classes like CSR and S2000. Side bar...those who desire to build a F1000 car should recall the days of the Shelby Can Am.

There is no mystery about the top 24 classes running (changed to 25 just in time). The schedule will allow for 24 classes which is coincidental with the current class structure. TV time can be adjusted as can race schedules. The bright spot is that they are looking at participation deciding the show. Maybe they'll start eliminating some of the poorly subscribed classes and make national racing a truly premier group. National racing is designed as the showcase for future pro racers or those who have the capability of being pro. Regional racing is for the guy who just wants to race.

I've seen IT cars and drivers who rival some of the best National and even professional efforts running. I've also seen some of the biggest POS running National 'cause they can. The guy driving a $20,000-$50,000 IT car does it because he wants to, not because he'd rather run National races. If we give IT Carte Blanche to Nationals, the process will only continue with the different levels of preparation. Even if we give only a few classes that opportunity and drop a couple, you'll see the same discrepancy in car preparation within a short while. There will always be the guys who spend the money getting to the races that should've gone into the car...and it will show.

[gprodracer]

Lets not forget the manufacturer and Topeka created T3 class, for which Topeka created this years exemption for. Jim Julow has already stated that if T3 wasn't the worst suscribed class, then no exemption would have been made, and GTL would have stayed home this year.

There is your example of the politics of National racing classes, and manufacturers influence on the televised Runoffs. Its this type of stuff that has me worried about IT. You work on your program for years, and the manufacturers come up with a new class to promote their cars. The CRB creates it, and gives it exemptions until the numbers build. As soon as your class doesn't make the numbers, no more exemptions, and your class stays home.

I'm not a black helicopter guy by any means, but that is the message that is being sent out. We all have different ideas about what is best for the club (or our own situations), so we must get all the facts we can before making up our minds. Then we must vote for who we feel is following the direction we want our club to go.
(steps down off soapbox)

Mark

[CaptainWho]

How about a choice for "I couldn't possibly care less ... I'll run what I run regardless."?

[dickita15]

I am with Doug, I honestly do not believe it would have any effect on me. I race because I enjoy it and it is hard to do well. If I beat the guys that I think have similar equipment I am happy. If I have good dices I am happy. If IT went national I am sure there would be more well prepped cars around but I doubt there would be more of them running with me at most regionals. With Greg and Andy off running Nationals I might actually move up a couple of spots. If IT went National my $5000 Rx7 would still be a $5000 car.

[Bill Miller]

I am with Doug, I honestly do not believe it would have any effect on me. I race because I enjoy it and it is hard to do well. If I beat the guys that I think have similar equipment I am happy. If I have good dices I am happy. If IT went national I am sure there would be more well prepped cars around but I doubt there would be more of them running with me at most regionals. With Greg and Andy off running Nationals I might actually move up a couple of spots. If IT went National my $5000 Rx7 would still be a $5000 car.
[/b]

Pretty much sums it up Dick, nice post! Interesting that we have a pretty high response / comment ratio. And Travis' comment pretty much says it all, and I suspect is the same position that a lot of the folks that voted 'Regional forever' come from. They look at it from what's best for them, not what's best for the Club.

Chris (Harris), IIRC, AS was born out of SSGT/ITGT. And you just reinforced my position. Your friend doesn't run Regionals in his AS car anymore, as he's focused on National racing.

Kirk has pretty much touched on what I've been saying for a while. Get rid of the Regional/National destinction on classes, and let the members speak w/ the cars that they bring to the track.

Andy,

I think this is an important topic to discuss, and gather feedback on, but your third option is pretty bogus. If IT goes National, IT goes National. You want to race your IT car at a Regional, that's your choice. You want to race it at a National, that's your choice too. Don't hang the guys that happend to run ITB/C cars out to dry, just because the cars in those classes are older/slower/not as popular.

[StephenB]

Not to hijack the thread since it wasn't really a thread and more of a vote but...

Does anyone know why we still have National events Vs. Regional events? Other than the points and theoption to run at the kohler runnoffs is there really a reason? I have always wondered why we don't get everyone together. Regionals and Nationals are like 2 totally different clubs...

Thanks for your thoughts

[HOOSER 99]

Here's some interesting numbers http://www.scca.org/_FileLibrary/File/2006...allFinal-06.pdf (http://www.scca.org/_FileLibrary/File/2006ClassPartallFinal-06.pdf)

Only two classes in double digits...SM and SRF. Outside of C, the rest of IT would probably be in the top ten and would put on a better show than guys just showing up to get their four starts to qualify for the runoffs.
Just lose the regional/national distinction and let the top 24 classes go. As previously stated there are IT programs that are the equal of top national class programs.
On a personal level I think I'll pass on the opportunity to spend 7-10 days in scenic Topeka in the fall.

jerry

[charrbq]

Does anyone know why we still have National events Vs. Regional events?
[/b]
The only reason I've ever gotten out of a steward, race chairman, etc., was that it was done for economic reasons. The inspiration behind having the Double Nationals was to get more than the normal entry of national drivers to a particular event for the double points, thereby increasing income for the host regions.

In the SOWDIV for 2007, they are going to at least three two day nationals and three two day regionals. The reason I've heard is a worker problem (an explanation I don't yet understand), and a schedule problem. National races take too much time to run, as they are 45 miles rather than the 20 miles for regional.

It's an experiment that I'm curious to see if it will work. I might run some more races there if I can get a double weekend like they used to do. But I imagine I'll go where I can find some competition.

[RacerBill]

I voted for IT to stay Regional. That also implies that I believe that there should be two divisions in amateur racing.

I voted for IT to stay Regional for a couple of reasons. It is a good place for new racers to start. The competition is good. For the most part, the participation numbers are strong. Etc. Etc.

I voted for two divisions for a couple of reasons. I like the idea of two levels of racing, and along with that, a choice of which level I wish to participate at. National races are longer. I might like that later, but the regional races are fine for now. The shorter Regional races allow for double race weekends (in most areas of the country) and I like that format.

I would like to see more crossover of cars from IT to the National classes. I believe that this would be better for the club as a whole rather than more classes (however, I feel that ITR is a very good move). Not to claim that my car would be a front runner in any class, but as an example, the Dodge Shelby is classed in ITA, FP (limited prep) EP (full prep) and GT3. Choices! Someone once had a spreadsheet that showed all the cars that were classed in SCCA road racing and what classes they ran in. I think that with the new classes, it would be interesting to see that again. It would also be a good tool to help a new racer decide where he wanted to start.

One last thought. Somewhere in the last month, I thought I read where Topeka was thinking about gatherind statistics on Regional class participation. I hope that happens, for better or worse.

[shwah]

No selection there for my vote, so here is my write-in.

I don't care much either way. If it goes National I might consider staying in IT when I decide to race National. If it does not, I will move to Production and have fun doing it - even if everyone thinks they are a bunch of whiners.

My vote is: I don't think the IT classes should be split. Make them all eligible, or none eligible. If they are eligible let participation be the deciding factor for each IT classification (and all other classes).

I still get a kick out of the cost to race that everyone has in thier heads. No a national contending effort is not cheap, but apparently most of us here pay for all of our parts and services at list price, and don't come up with any good ideas, or do any fab/design/test/build ourselves. There are podium runoffs cars running on less budget than some reported IT 'norms'. I think you will find that many racers would do a fine job of stepping up to higher competition levels without taking out 2nd mortgages.

[planet6racing]

My vote is that all classes in the SCCA be treated equally. Therefore, if the top 24 classes are going to make the runoffs, then so be it for all classes.

I'm tired of being a second class member of the SCCA...

[charrbq]

Bill, it's a small point that we differ on, but AS and SSGT existed for a couple of years simultaneously. One was not born from another, originally. The last year for SSGT to compete at the Runoffs as a National class was 1994. AS had been around for at least two years by that time. The final championship for both was held in 1994...one at Mid Ohio, and one at Topeka. After that, all the old SSGT cars were made eligible for AS, the preparation rules were modified to include such things as racing rubber, restricted carberators, and passenger seat removal...some of which were not yet allowed in IT. The class was then made national.

The reference to my buddy in AS was intended to reinforce your point. Rather than run both regionals and nationals, he is forced by the necessity of his goal to run only the national races.

Maybe we're missing one another's point.

[dickita15]

Does anyone know why we still have National events Vs. Regional events? Other than the points and theoption to run at the kohler runnoffs is there really a reason? I have always wondered why we don't get everyone together. Regionals and Nationals are like 2 totally different clubs...
[/b]

The format for a national race is tightly structured in the GCR, items like 45 minutes minimum of practice and qualifying and the 30 minute race length. I see the reason for this, someone traveling to a track he is not familiar with can go with a expectation of how the race will be run. In national racing with the focus on leaving with points you do not want someone to be at a disadvantage for local custom.

With the regional race format the sponsoring region can tailor the event more to give the drivers what they want. Two day double and even triple race weekends are possible this way for example.





having ITR/ITS/ITA going national and leaving the lower cost B/C to regional is an interesting idea, but i don't think i would support it. [/b]

I was told by a CRB member once while discussing the concept of IT being a national class that he was concerned about the number of cars in IT that were quite old and very hard to document the specifications for. I think this is one issue anyone trying to make IT national would have to address. Because of the newer cars in ITR and ITS in these classes that objection easier to overcome.

[bldn10]

"I'm tired of being a second class member of the SCCA..."

Bill, if you consider a Regional-only class second class, I have to ask why you ever got into it? Or perhaps, after you cut your teeth why haven't you moved up, as is the nature of SCCA? IT has always been Regional-only - by intent and design. There is not nor ever has been any reason for anyone in or thinking about getting into IT to think differently. I just don't think we are in position to walk into something w/ our eyes open and then complain about the view. :-)

[lateapex911]

I still get a kick out of the cost to race that everyone has in thier heads. No a national contending effort is not cheap, but apparently most of us here pay for all of our parts and services at list price, and don't come up with any good ideas, or do any fab/design/test/build ourselves. There are podium runoffs cars running on less budget than some reported IT 'norms'. I think you will find that many racers would do a fine job of stepping up to higher competition levels without taking out 2nd mortgages.
[/b]

yea but..........

TIME is a part of the budget. Making your own parts takes time. That time is often better spent at work....earning more money. (That you could spend buying the part, often at a net net gain) Or with a family, or increasing the value of your house, or whatever. But no matter what, unless you only work certain hours a week, and do nothing but sit on the couch in the free time, the time spent working on the car comes at a cost, and has to be considered a budget item.

[Bill Miller]

"I'm tired of being a second class member of the SCCA..."

Bill, if you consider a Regional-only class second class, I have to ask why you ever got into it? Or perhaps, after you cut your teeth why haven't you moved up, as is the nature of SCCA? IT has always been Regional-only - by intent and design. There is not nor ever has been any reason for anyone in or thinking about getting into IT to think differently. I just don't think we are in position to walk into something w/ our eyes open and then complain about the view. :-)
[/b]

Maybe it's because he likes the IT ruleset and prep level?


I was told by a CRB member once while discussing the concept of IT being a national class that he was concerned about the number of cars in IT that were quite old and very hard to document the specifications for. I think this is one issue anyone trying to make IT national would have to address. Because of the newer cars in ITR and ITS in these classes that objection easier to overcome.[/b]

Dick,

What's hidden in that comment is that they really don't care about IT specs at the Regional level. Again, another red herring.

Chris (Harris)

Yeah, I guess we're missing each other's point. I'm not saying that SSGT left and AS started, more that AS was born out of a need for a place to race ex-SSGT cars.

[StephenB]

I voted for IT to stay Regional. That also implies that I believe that there should be two divisions in amateur racing.


I would like to see more crossover of cars from IT to the National classes. I believe that this would be better for the club as a whole rather than more classes (however, I feel that ITR is a very good move). Not to claim that my car would be a front runner in any class, but as an example, the Dodge Shelby is classed in ITA, FP (limited prep) EP (full prep) and GT3. Choices! Someone once had a spreadsheet that showed all the cars that were classed in SCCA road racing and what classes they ran in.
[/b]


I think that when a car is classified it should be classes in Production and GT. This is a tough task for the CRB but very important for long term growth of SCCA. This is definetly the most frustrating thing for me. I am stuck with my car in IT and my car won't get classed in other classes do to "The lack of member interest" So I will NEVER be able to run nationals! And no I am not going to build a new car that's an unreasonable thing to say to someone that is doing this for fun and would spend a 2 years budget for racing to build a new car. And I also don't think that sayig I should have picked a different car when I started is a good answer. We have so many people join our club that wouldn't hink of this wihth everything else they need to think of.

I think that Racerbill is on to something!!

The fact that everycar is not classed in a national class is the ONLY arguable reason that I can think of for IT going to National. Other than that let's face it IT is a stepping stone and we should all realize this.



Also Thanks to a few of you for pointing out why Nationals should stay seperate from Regionals. It does make sence after your posts!

[Knestis]

Interesting perception that, since Regionals are a "stepping stone" to Nationals, that Nationals are somehow "better." Or that there is some progression or farm system from IT to Indy. That just isn't so, i don't believe.

K

[JamesB]

As long as the fun and competition isnt lost with IT changing I could care less. I don't care about nationals, I never once thought about nationals. Maybe in 10 years my tune might change, but I am happy running regionals with the same guys to the point where we get together on the slower months just to laugh and bench race.

However, if going national means I would have sink a whole lot of cash just to have fun mid pack, then im 100% against it. With all the whine about creep in the past 2 years I been on the site I am amazed national status even came up.

[RSTPerformance]

While IT is and I feel should be a stepping stone or a way to race for less $$$ the argument that it needs to remain regional so that is stays a "stepping stone," doesn't work for me. Especialy if someone then argues that we should just have combined weekends.

If IT were to become a "National" class it would still remain and be looked at as a stepping stone. It could (which may be a bad thing) be compaired to your local circle track. Hobby stock is a steping stone to street stock, to pro stock, etc. or however the cars are classed in your area.

For whatever reason many people view classes that cost more $ as higher level racers, despite the fact that the racing generally isn't as close and is far more dependant on the machine rather than the driver. No matter how much someone were to spend on a "Natinal IT Class" they will still be racing in the "entry level" class, no matter how much I dislike that statment and don't agree with it, I do think that is what Outsiders see."

Raymond



As long as the fun and competition isnt lost with IT changing I could care less. I don't care about nationals, I never once thought about nationals. Maybe in 10 years my tune might change, but I am happy running regionals with the same guys to the point where we get together on the slower months just to laugh and bench race.
[/b]


:birra: I like your way of thinking...

I guess one of the answers should be I don't care as long...

[gran racing]

the time spent working on the car comes at a cost, and has to be considered a budget item. [/b]

Edit this...read Jake's post too quickly. :unsure:

[JamesB]

:birra: I like your way of thinking...

I guess one of the answers should be I don't care as long...
[/b]

It's likely the only reason I am out there racing. The fun of competition and the fun of comrodery when your done.

[planet6racing]

"I'm tired of being a second class member of the SCCA..."

Bill, if you consider a Regional-only class second class, I have to ask why you ever got into it? Or perhaps, after you cut your teeth why haven't you moved up, as is the nature of SCCA? IT has always been Regional-only - by intent and design. There is not nor ever has been any reason for anyone in or thinking about getting into IT to think differently. I just don't think we are in position to walk into something w/ our eyes open and then complain about the view. :-)
[/b]

I'm working on it. Just had to wait for the right class to come along, and now it has...

IT has been, probably up and until this past year, been traditionally treated like crap. Why did I get into it? The same reason I started racing a Saturn - ignorance. Don't get me wrong, IT is fun, great competition, and all sorts of other good stuff, but it has been the bastard child of the SCCA. I agree with the sentiment that Regionals are a stepping stone to Nationals and that the classes really shouldn't be.

[dickita15]

Dick,

What's hidden in that comment is that they really don't care about IT specs at the Regional level. Again, another red herring.

[/b]


Bill, you are right but it comes as not surprise to me that the CRB is focused on national racing and therefore does not care a lot about regional racing.

The reason ITR went thru so smoothly is it was not a threat to the “no new classes” lobby because it was not a competitor for a runoffs slot.

Again my point is only that an effort to make IT national would require a response to that concern

[Bill Miller]

Interesting perception that, since Regionals are a "stepping stone" to Nationals, that Nationals are somehow "better." Or that there is some progression or farm system from IT to Indy. That just isn't so, i don't believe.

K
[/b]

Kirk,

Regional racing IS a stepping stone to National racing. It's actually defined that way in the GCR (look at the requirements to get a National competition license). And that's not a bad thing. Actually, it's a good thing. It gives the people getting into the sport a somewhat more relaxed atmosphere to get their feet wet and get used to competition. What is NOT the case, is that IT is a stepping stone to other forms of racing. Sure, IT is a popular entry point, but there are plenty of people out there w/ the talent and the budget to race in other categories, but they choose to race in IT.

Part of the reason that IT gets viewed as this entry-level category (and why the CRB seemingly doesn't have much interest in IT specs) goes way back to the dawn of IT. Kirk can probably fill in some of the blanks here, but when IT was created, the cars were never considered 'real' race cars. Keep in mind, there were no (or very, very few) 'tin tops' in Prod at the time. Production-based race cars had to come from sports cars. These were 2-seat roadsters. The people that created IT, did so to give people a place to run old SS cars. They also created it as a marketing tool. Let people put some minimal safety equipment in the cars, don't let them really do anything else to them, and let them go play on the track. The whole 'no guarantee' clause is rooted in the belief that IT cars weren't 'real' race cars. It would be a great way to get people interested in the Club and the sport, but once they were interested, they'd buy or build a 'real' race car.

The problem is, times have changed, and IT has changed. The ruleset has evolved (some would call it creep), and as is evidenced by the participation numbers, a lot of people like the ruleset. Prod is too much of a moving target, and it's still too slanted towards old British cars w/ tractor motors. GT is great, as long as you have dump trucks full of $$$ to spend. SS and T don't offer the level of development that a lot of people want (but are still popular nonetheless).

I'm sure there are plenty of people that look around and say "Why would they spend $40k on an IT car when they could race "fill in the blank" for the same money?" It's because that's what people want to race, and it's the ruleset that they want to race under. It's just a shame that the powers that be in this Club continue to treat a group of people thar are arguably the life blood of the Club, so shabbily.

And again Dick, the lack of spec thing is a red herring that's trotted out by people that don't want IT to be National. Don't think for a moment that the powers that be don't know that IT going National would send 3 or 4 classes packing from the Runoffs, the first year.

And the 'no new classes' thing is another load of BS. Witness the 'new' T1, BP & DP, and F1000. They already capitulated on the 'only 24 classes at the Runoffs' when T3 didn't make the numbers (yet our President has come out and said that GTL would not have been given the same consideration). These people run the Club the way they want to, regardless of what the members want. They break their own rules when they get in the way of their agenda. Anybody want to be that the 'new' T1 gets a Runoffs' slot in '08 even if they don't make the numbers?

To the folks that are talking about doing away w/ the whole Regional/National thing, I've been pushing that for about 2 years now. Don't change any of the races. Nationals become Qualifying (for the Runoffs) races, and Regionals become Non-Qualifying races (or whatever names you want to use to differentiate them). Based on participation numbers across all Divisions, in the Qualifying races, the top 24 classes 'go to the show' the following year.

[charrbq]

Bill,
It's good to see that we do agree on most things most of the time.

The only time I've seen the cost of entry go up was when they created the Club Formula Ford division to eliminate the drastic price reduction from this year's car to last year's car. Suddenly, the price of a two year old Lola went from reasonable to more than the car cost new. What they failed to consider was engine, tire, etc. costs were the same for new cars as for old ones. The class has since dwindled to near nothing.

The arguement that the cost of preparation would go up if the class went national isn't totally valid. After all, most of us bought our IT cars as old SS or Junkyard specials. We then had to put on the necessary safety and performance equipment in order to race. Upgrading to National would be the same process. While it's true that it would cost more, it's not like we haven't done it before. The only true expense would be for safety equipment. There are many cars running national that have no more done to them in the preparation area than that (some of them even participate in the Runoffs). As with anything, if you want to do better or go faster, it'll cost you.

The only time I've ever been made to feel like a second class citizen at the races was by national drivers that felt that their license and class made them better than me. After they saw the preparation level of the classes, the speed we ran, our reliability, and the competition level or our races, they shut up. Now, their only point to brag on is that they have a national championship, and we don't. Big deal!

If The national office wants to run only the top 24 classes (or 25 if the whim hits) then fine. If their numbers aren't met by even the least subscribed to classes, then they'll create more each year...particularly if a manufacturer gets involved. The works are already in the process for the new T1, the combination of SSB and SSC to T5, and the evolvement of A-D production. Notice that their was no plan for IT anything.

They have no plan to ever include IT as a national class. The only reason that SM was grabbed was to prevent NASA or IMSA from taking it over. Of course, having the rumored greasing of pockets by Mazda didn't hurt, either. But that's just rumor. If it did happen, it would've happened to any sanctioning organization. It does help to have four spec classes powered by Mazda within your racing national racing classes.

That aside, the rules in IT are good and solid. We basically govern ourselves as opposed to a committee of people who may not really be adequately informed of our class and cars. We may not always agree with our rules and regs, but they don't change constantly. Using HP as an example (I'm just more informed about them), in the past year, the wheel width has gone from 5 to 5.5 to 6 inches, and the GP Spridgets have been moved down to HP and running a lower weight than the current HP cars. No one has to spend the money to be more competitive, but if you want to run up front, you'd better. The only major change I've seen happen to IT was the SIR's on BMW's and changing weights on some of the cars. Compared to rim changes, changes to rocker rollers, rear discs, custom transmissions, larger/smaller carbs, custom made suspensions, etc. I'll take IT rules anyday.

[Knestis]

Kirk,

Regional racing IS a stepping stone to National racing. It's actually defined that way in the GCR (look at the requirements to get a National competition license).[/b]
Hmm. How many people running Regionals have more than, say 10 races under their belts run Nationals as well?

Yeah - no question: You gotta do some Regionals for the National ticket but I guess I'm not sure that I buy the assumption that there is a blanket difference in quality between the two - particularly in terms of driver talent.


... Kirk can probably fill in some of the blanks here, but when IT was created, the cars were never considered 'real' race cars. Keep in mind, there were no (or very, very few) 'tin tops' in Prod at the time. Production-based race cars had to come from sports cars. [/b]
I hadn't thought about it in forever but when the RX7s were first listed in C Production, there were complaints that they weren't really sports cars.

Bill's description of the roots of IT are pretty accurate but there was certainly no official position that folks were expected to transition out of IT, once hooked. It is probably useful to remember that, even 20 years ago, Production cars were lower-tech than they currently are and the "Sedan" classes were steel-shelled cars, more like current P-cars. It's silly to think now of GT cars as being some logical extension of the IT-Production lineage, given how they are now built.

K

[Bill Miller]

Sorry, I guess my tongue was planted so far in my cheek that you didn't see it. I couldn't agree w/ you more, and I don't think I ever said that there was any difference in driver talent between Regional and National racing.

[Z3_GoCar]

I would argue that there is already a national version of IT that will be competing for space at the run offs, that is the new Prepared class. ITR is equavallant to C-Prepared, they run DOT radials and keep the stock bodies and suspensions. Keep an eye on how they do.

James

[JoshS]

Yeah - no question: You gotta do some Regionals for the National ticket but I guess I'm not sure that I buy the assumption that there is a blanket difference in quality between the two - particularly in terms of driver talent.
[/b]

There are no novices on track with you at a National race. That's the biggest difference.

That doesn't mean everyone with a National license is a good driver. But they at least have experience.

[JoshS]

I would argue that there is already a national version of IT that will be competing for space at the run offs, that is the new Prepared class. ITR is equavallant to C-Prepared, they run DOT radials and keep the stock bodies and suspensions. Keep an eye on how they do.[/b]Did you actually read the new Prepared rules? Internal engine mods, full engine swaps, aftermarket transmissions, seam-welded chassis, custom electronics, wings/spoilers, lexan windows, relocated suspension points, aftermarket brake calipers ... the cost of a competitive build in that class is WAY WAY higher than IT.

[Knestis]

I had my SCCA Pro license after, what - six whole races?? I KNOW how little real experience I had at that point...

K

[Bill Miller]

I would argue that there is already a national version of IT that will be competing for space at the run offs, that is the new Prepared class. ITR is equavallant to C-Prepared, they run DOT radials and keep the stock bodies and suspensions. Keep an eye on how they do.

James
[/b]

James,

Did you read the B/D Prepared specs? Alternate material body panels, sequential transmissions (w/ a weight penalty), alternate suspensions

Those classes are so far removed from IT, it's not even funny. In some cases, they're beyond Prod. The only thing that even closely resembles IT prep is the DOT tires.

[mustanghammer]

It's just a shame that the powers that be in this Club continue to treat a group of people thar are arguably the life blood of the Club, so shabbily.[/b]

Bill,

Ditto on this and everything else in your well thought out and worded post. Thanks for posting this.

:birra:

[Z3_GoCar]

Well Bill,

I just went back and reread the prepared rules and it looks like D-Prepared is not that far from my car as it sits in my garage. The hood's carbon fiber, and if I went with sperical suspension mounts the lolliepop bearing on the lower arm's are offset so I guess that would be a moved suspension mount within the allowed 6mm. To make the rear adjustable requires welding new mounts on the rear sub-frame, which is allowed in Prepared but not IT. I can use aluminum arms from the M3's too. All I need is a used 29mm SIR plumbed in behind my air filter, anyone know where I can find one of those cheap?? :P You've got to use the crank and rods the factory gave you, so no I think the motor prep maybe slightly more than IT, but it's no Prod build either. With a 250hp limit imposed by the SIR, I'm already there. I will need a hardtop and to get my lights wired up, I kind of like the open top experience though. My car could really use seam welding especially with it's reputation of dropping the differential, crossmember, and trunk floor. Making the required 2700 lbs will also mean adding about 100lbs of ballast too. So if I really wanted to go to the run-offs I'd be right there. Problem is I'm a rookie and I've just got my novice book signed. I'm not ready to go to the run offs for a couple of years, then why would I be interested in a national level class?? Because I'm not. I don't have an enclosed trailer or a truck that can haul four in comfort while pulling 10k pounds of trailer. I can't afford to live out of motels two weekends a month, and I'm not planning on two new sets of tires per event along with two sets of rains JIC. It's out all out of my pocket, I have no major sponsors to please yet and provide any real support. Still I'll watch this class.

James

[Bill Miller]

James,

All I was saying is that B/D Prepared are a loooonnnnggg way from IT. Go look at what it costs to build a WCT car. And I know people will say that you can buy used ones for cheap. Well guess what, if IT going National is going to drive up costs, get ready for people to build new, max-boogie B/D Prepared cars. Will people take the 100# penalty for a sequential box? You better believe it. The boxes alone will cost more than any ITB or ITC car out there, and more than likely more than quite a few ITA cars. Top-level D Prepared cars will be pushing 6-figures, if not more. The B Prepared stuff is going to be even more rediculous.

And nothing against you or your car, but if you think some parts catalog build is hardly going to compete w/ a purpose-built WCT car, you're mistaken. Could you go to the Runoffs w/ it? Sure, but you're not going to be competitive.

[rob22]

I believe that that IT is best served by staying out of the "National Realm" and its associated nonsense.
There already is an IT national championship, the ARRC which I would submit is as hard to win as any national class, and it is run on one of the premier tracks in North America.

Just getting a regional win in the south and east (and probably most other areas) is quite an accomplishment as there are just so many well prepared, expertly driven cars there. If you can beat the Van Steenburgs, Chet Wittel, Carlos Garcia, Irish Mike, John Dean, Evan Darling and a host of others you are a tough customer. These guys run super competitively on a regular basis and would be a handful for any top national level driver to beat.

Many national drivers run only enough races to qualify for the runoffs and win races in poorly subscribed classes. I am not saying they aren't super talented, but I think it is much more impressive to go to Road Atlanta and beat Wittel, or to Daytona and beat Irish Mike, or Sebring and beat Carlos.

Some of the best Pro Racers went from IT to pro, ie: Randy Pobst, David Haskell, Sylvain Trembly to name a few.

IT racing has gotten a bit too expensive, but it is as TOUGH as anything out there.

"Bosco' Logsdon

[Z3_GoCar]

James,

All I was saying is that B/D Prepared are a loooonnnnggg way from IT. Go look at what it costs to build a WCT car. And I know people will say that you can buy used ones for cheap. Well guess what, if IT going National is going to drive up costs, get ready for people to build new, max-boogie B/D Prepared cars. Will people take the 100# penalty for a sequential box? You better believe it. The boxes alone will cost more than any ITB or ITC car out there, and more than likely more than quite a few ITA cars. Top-level D Prepared cars will be pushing 6-figures, if not more. The B Prepared stuff is going to be even more rediculous.

And nothing against you or your car, but if you think some parts catalog build is hardly going to compete w/ a purpose-built WCT car, you're mistaken. Could you go to the Runoffs w/ it? Sure, but you're not going to be competitive.
[/b]

Bill,

I realize that I'd not be competitive, put me in the best car in the field and I'd not be competitive. The nut behind the wheel needs tightening first. So I'm in a car that doesn't really fit any class running ITE because:
1) It get's me out there
2) My car's over prepared for ITR and would need another cash infusion to dial back to the point that I'd be legal. Probably more money than an ITB or ITC cost at this point.

With time the cash infusion / neccessary parts will come, and I'll make my choice. Untill then I'll run ITE / DM and be happy for the little races in the bigger race, learn the craft of driving, and above all have fun.

James

[Spinnetti]

Well, from one perspective, I don't really care but here's some thoughts anyway:

> IT was always supposed to be regional. Now we are totally chaning the class intent, why not look at the entire rules set.

> It will cost more money to be competetive - just look at "showroom stock" which is anything but.

> I just want a place to have a reasonable chance to enjoy my car (but being a Toyota, thats slim anyway).


Overall, there haven't been too many options other than the SCCA, but I'm going to veer off topic and say what I wish IT were:
> Overall IT rules basically ok, but I see no need for coilovers or adjustable threaded perches etc.
> Should be able to totally gut the interior of the car. - Lighter = faster = more fun.
> Any cage beyone the minimum you want as long as over min weight.- why not?

There were (are?) several classes in California like this for old Corollas, RX-7 and so on, and thats where the real fun is IT style. If IT goes national, its just Produciton light to me, only in newer cars.

[Bill Miller]

Rob,

I know the ARRC is a tough race, and if some are comfortable w/ calling it the "IT National Championship", that's fine. Doesn't mean it really is. How many guys do you get from West of the Mississippi? It's most of the SEDiv folks, and a lot of the NEDiv and CENDiv folks. Is it a tough race to win? Sure. Is there a lot of serious talent (and $$) there. You bet. But, I see it as more like the June Sprints than the Runoffs. Prestigious race that a lot of talented people run, but not really a true championship.

James,

Not really sure who we went from talking about IT going National, to how your car fits in ITR or B/D Prepared.

Spinetti,


IT was always supposed to be regional. Now we are totally chaning the class intent, why not look at the entire rules set.
[/b]

That was an artificial constraint that was imposed by people long before a lot of today's racers were even a glimmer in their father's eye, much less thinking of going IT racing. Times change. If it's not what the members want, why shouldn't they be able to change it? PCAs were arguabley the most significant changet to the IT philosophy since it's inception. The general response is that it's made IT better. BTW, dual-purpose (street and track) cars were also part of the original intent of IT, and that offcially went away 6 or 7 years ago.

And it doesn't matter if you can gut the car or not, you've still got to make minimum weight, so while lighter = faster, you can't just make your car as light as you want. And it's interesting that you want to make the car faster by being able to gut it, but that you would slow it down by not being able to put a proper suspension under it.

And I just don't understand how people will say it will cost more to be competitive (unless they're running in a poorly subscribed area where people aren't running max-boogie cars). I, and several others have said it, if you're running a top effort now, it's not going to cost you any more money. Sure, there will be increased costs associated w/ travel and National entries, but that's a personal choice that you get to make, if you want to run those races. You get to still run Regionals, and more than likely will see more light at the front of the grid, as the top guys have gone National racing.

I just don't get it. People seem to think that either they'll have to run Nationals if IT goes National, or that you'll get a huge influx of $$$ from more people building max-boogie cars to run in Regionals. Nobody can make you run Nationals, and there are too many other examples that indicate that people interested in running Nationals are not going to incur the added expense of running Regionals.

[charrbq]

As much as I'd like to call the ARRC an IT National Championship, (and have before), it just isn't. When the SCCA dumped the old IT Festival after '93, we ceased having a national championship. Atlanta Region took up the reigns after the SCCA dumped Road Atlanta for Mid Ohio the same year. The ARRC's original concept was to be an IT "championship" that included other "regional only" classes to fill out the entry. However, that's now morphed into including a number of non-IT cars and has been diluted to something (as written before) more akin to the June Sprints.
As long as it remains a race where the only entry requirements are a car, the bucks, and the desire to compete, it will never be a true IT National Championship. If the drivers, and regions, and divisions wanted to make it as such, and if the administration of the event wanted to come up with a qualification program such as that of the Runoffs, then it could be considered an IT National Championship.
But it would have to loose all the other local and regional only classes to do so. Atlanta region doesn't want to do that, and we'd have a better chance of finding a living mastadon than getting all the particular divisions to agree to it.
If that happened, then the next round of complaining would come from the ITS and ITA classes that are more fully subscribed against those of us in ITB and ITC. Things like it being harder to qualify for them, needing to go deeper into the divisions for entries as there are more cars, having to spend more to go fast than the lower classed cars, etc. You know, all the things that the big boys do at the Runoffs when they compare the price of their "gofasts" to the little guys.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Sorry I missed the post explosion, I am in AZ on business with limited access to e-mail...

Chris: I would change 'theaters' because the chance to play the option to try out for a part on Broadway has it's appeal to me. Even though the local theater may be great, you only get better when you get whooped.

Trav wrote:
if i was a new driver, i sure as heck wouldn't be very excited about racing 100whp fwd 15yr old econo cars in B/C.[/b]

This confuses me. It's how it is now. It's personal. B and C have cars in them that have cult-like following, no?

Bill, I am not hanging anyone out to dry with the suggestion. It could be just ITR, it could be ITR and ITS. It's an interesting way to get the ruleset that we all know and love on the National stage while AT THE SAME TIME keeping a pocket 'protected' from the real or perceived evils of National status. I like the whole category going National.

Dick wrote:
I was told by a CRB member once while discussing the concept of IT being a national class that he was concerned about the number of cars in IT that were quite old and very hard to document the specifications for. I think this is one issue anyone trying to make IT national would have to address. Because of the newer cars in ITR and ITS in these classes that objection easier to overcome.[/b]

This is 100% correct and is a valid concern. Our ruleset does rely a lot on stock parts, unlike Prod.

Kirk wrote:
Interesting perception that, since Regionals are a "stepping stone" to Nationals, that Nationals are somehow "better." Or that there is some progression or farm system from IT to Indy. That just isn't so, i don't believe.[/b]

That is like saying Solo is a stepping stone Regional Road Racing. It's not, it's just different. The cost escalation is there so a pereceived value may come into play in some ways...

Excellent discussion. Seems like the group is split almost 50-50. Bottom line for me? I love the ruleset and I will run IT no matter where it goes.

AB

[Z3_GoCar]

.....
James,

Not really sure who we went from talking about IT going National, to how your car fits in ITR or B/D Prepared.

.....
[/b]

Bill,

I'm sorry to move this discussion, that way, my point is that B/D Prepared is not that far from IT as you and other have expressed. If you disagree with me on that point fine, but the fact that the stock crank and rods are kept, and the mod's allowed are in line with IT with up grades. Actually I see the D-Prepared rules very close to the BMW club's IT equvalent of Prepared, with the exception of the ecm and SIR of course, a JP BMW would actually be very close to a D-Prepared car as it now stands.

James

[tnord]

This confuses me. It's how it is now. It's personal. B and C have cars in them that have cult-like following, no?[/b]

not surprising, i usually only type out about 30% of the thought process in my head.

if R, S, and A go National, and B and C are left for regional, that essentially means B & C are our new points of entry for new drivers. and if i'm a new driver looking for a regional class to race in SCCA, B & C doesn't get me very excited.

i know, you can still run R, S, or A in regionals only. i admit, my statement doesn't hold as much water as i originally thought it did.


so......is IT going national good for the health of IT as a whole? is it good for the health of the club as a whole?

[bldn10]

"That was an artificial constraint that was imposed by people long before a lot of today's racers were even a glimmer in their father's eye, much less thinking of going IT racing. Times change. If it's not what the members want, why shouldn't they be able to change it?"

Bill, have you checked this admittedly unscientific poll's results? Most of the members DON'T want to change it!

I am now able to run w/ the top (and only) tier IT cars and am able to be a front-runner Divisionally and mid-packer afar. I am content w/ that. As I have said, and I make no apologies for expressing my thoughts on this, I would not be content running Regional IT in a 2-tier class even if it made me a big dog. [I agree w/ you that prep levels and expense in Regional would not go up - just the opposite.] There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the level of prep in ITS on the National side would go up. It absolutely would cost me more money to achieve the same local finishes I do now. I don't really care to do that. And neither apparently do most of us.

[charrbq]

Andy,
I thought you had nothing further to say to me since you felt we were on different planets. I was kind of enjoying that. Hope to read about you on Broadway. <_<

[Bill Miller]

"That was an artificial constraint that was imposed by people long before a lot of today&#39;s racers were even a glimmer in their father&#39;s eye, much less thinking of going IT racing. Times change. If it&#39;s not what the members want, why shouldn&#39;t they be able to change it?"

Bill, have you checked this admittedly unscientific poll&#39;s results? Most of the members DON&#39;T want to change it!

I am now able to run w/ the top (and only) tier IT cars and am able to be a front-runner Divisionally and mid-packer afar. I am content w/ that. As I have said, and I make no apologies for expressing my thoughts on this, I would not be content running Regional IT in a 2-tier class even if it made me a big dog. [I agree w/ you that prep levels and expense in Regional would not go up - just the opposite.] There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the level of prep in ITS on the National side would go up. It absolutely would cost me more money to achieve the same local finishes I do now. I don&#39;t really care to do that. And neither apparently do most of us.
[/b]

Bill,

Belive me, I&#39;ve been watching the poll results. While interesting, I&#39;m not sure 60 or 70 people should speak for the hundreds (thousands?) of IT racers out there. Something from my stats classes about a significant and representative sample.

And just so I understand your position. You like running at the front, don&#39;t want to run Regionals if the top guys (in your area) aren&#39;t there, you think it will cost you more to get the same results against a broader group of front-runners (National racers), and you don&#39;t want to spend that extra money.

Does that about capture it? If so, you get counted in that group of people that like running up front w/o having to bring a max. effort.

[tnord]

Bill,

Belive me, I&#39;ve been watching the poll results. While interesting, I&#39;m not sure 60 or 70 people should speak for the hundreds (thousands?) of IT racers out there. Something from my stats classes about a significant and representative sample.
[/b]

then you should also remember from stats class that it only takes about 30 data pts to have a relevant sample size.



If so, you get counted in that group of people that like running up front w/o having to bring a max. effort.
[/b]

and that makes your vote only count for 1/2. <_<

[Knestis]

then you should also remember from stats class that it only takes about 30 data pts to have a relevant sample size. ...[/b]

It would sure make my job a hell of a lot easier if that were the case.

The "30" (or 32?) magic number is generally accepted for engineering statistics, where you are dealing with values x and some function f(x) but not for human perceptive studies. There is no such thing as a mean of these responses, so it&#39;s not OK to base you sampling strategy on a theorem that assumes that there IS one.

Ultimately, it depends what kind of analysis you are doing but the above just isn&#39;t an accurate representation of the complexity involved in this kind of thing.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion.

K

[tnord]

i dunno kirk....

if you had a truly random sampling (which this is not) of 30/32 IT drivers, i would say that&#39;s a sufficient sample size.

but i suppose if this is your line of work, you&#39;d know more than me.

[Bill Miller]

and that makes your vote only count for 1/2. <_<
[/b]

I&#39;m not sure I follow your logic on this one.

And if all you need is a sample size of 30-32, I guess that means the exit pollers will get to go home early this Nov.

[gran racing]

Some have brought-up the idea of IT allowing IT to run both national and regional races. We&#39;ve often looked at the percentage of IT cars to other classes at regional events, and depending upon the location, it often is significant. Several people have addimently said that drivers who participate in the national event wouldn’t also run the regional race, therefore it wouldn’t increase costs in regional races. Hmmm…with all this happening, how much would all of this hurt regional event attendance? Might this hurt regions trying to fill-up events?

Instead of a field of 20 cars in ITX, would there only be 10? Isn’t this essentially what happens in regional races where a couple of prod cars may show-up?

I’m sure we all agree that racing is only a part of what we enjoy when going to events. Front runners, mid-pack drivers, and people further back in the pack – it’s a blast hanging out with them all. Now all of a sudden IT goes national and also stays regional. At least at first, I’m going to try running with the “big boys” in the national class. I would imagine a few of my friends would do the same. I also know that some would stay in the regional class (only). I couldn’t afford (and others just would choose not to) run both regional and national events, so a big part of what I enjoy has just been torn apart. Well that just sucks.

[tnord]

I&#39;m not sure I follow your logic on this one.

And if all you need is a sample size of 30-32, I guess that means the exit pollers will get to go home early this Nov.
[/b]

those of us who are lucky enough to run up front without a full build i think are being looked down upon as having an opinion of lesser value. at least that&#39;s the impression i&#39;m getting from a few people.


as i stated before, you need a truly random sample for the 30 data pt reference to have relevance. getting a truly random sample in a voting poll is pretty much impossible, hence their inaccuracy.

[bldn10]

"Belive me, I&#39;ve been watching the poll results. While interesting, I&#39;m not sure 60 or 70 people should speak for the hundreds (thousands?) of IT racers out there. Something from my stats classes about a significant and representative sample."

I acknowledged it was unscientific. What did your stat teacher says about crystal balls? Or anecdotal evidence? I know we are just talking so I&#39;m not putting you to the test but I&#39;m not sure you have any valid support for your premise that most of the IT community wants to go National. I&#39;ve got a little bit that they don&#39;t.

"And just so I understand your position. You like running at the front, don&#39;t want to run Regionals if the top guys (in your area) aren&#39;t there, you think it will cost you more to get the same results against a broader group of front-runners (National racers), and you don&#39;t want to spend that extra money.

Does that about capture it? If so, you get counted in that group of people that like running up front w/o having to bring a max. effort."

That&#39;s your spin. Another way of looking at it is that I don&#39;t think IT is broken [in this context] so I see no need to fix it. And call me old-fashioned but I feel that the expense associated w/ front-running ITS efforts is already very un-IT-like, and certainly don&#39;t want to see it get worse. And, geez, doesn&#39;t everyone want to run up front w/o max effort? :-)

[Z3_GoCar]

i dunno kirk....

if you had a truly random sampling (which this is not) of 30/32 IT drivers, i would say that&#39;s a sufficient sample size.

but i suppose if this is your line of work, you&#39;d know more than me.
[/b]

One of the inherant assumptions is that it&#39;s a Gaussian distribution. This one would seem to be pretty highly indicative IT should remain regional by the large margin over the other options. If I may I voted for certain classes, I feel this is already being done with the introduction of the Prepared classes. I gave the example of how the rules aren&#39;t as far off of IT as some think and make allowances for some common modifications such as offset arm mounts, availible on e-36 m3&#39;s and swapable to any e-36, and custom ground cams. If you have an IT car and want to run Prepared you can. Actually I&#39;d urge IT drivers to support Prepared the first couple of years, if you&#39;re like me and looking for the option of more seat time it would get you out in another run group.

James

[lateapex911]

And, geez, doesn&#39;t everyone want to run up front w/o max effort? :-)
[/b]


Yea, sure want I do, but I don&#39;t deserve to.

[tnord]

Yea, sure want I do, but I don&#39;t deserve to.
[/b]

what does that mean?

[lateapex911]

Ooops...that means I didn&#39;t proof the post, LOL.

I meant that sure, I&#39;d LIKE to run up front with a less than full effort/car, but it&#39;s just luck if I do....it&#39;s not like I deserve to be up front with a less than full effort.

I imagine that at certain places, or at certain times, you can show up with the "B" game and do well, but not others.

[JeffYoung]

Anybody watching the poll results? Looks like heavily in favor of IT staying regional at least in part, and significantly in favor of IT staying regional in whole.

That&#39;s my view. I like my outlaw regional racing series, and I like my "unofficial" national championship at Road Atlanta.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Anybody watching the poll results? Looks like heavily in favor of IT staying regional at least in part, and significantly in favor of IT staying regional in whole.

That&#39;s my view. I like my outlaw regional racing series, and I like my "unofficial" national championship at Road Atlanta. [/b]

Or, 40% would like IT in some form or another to be National... :)

Would you like your &#39;unofficial&#39; national championship to be at Laguna?

[Ron Earp]

Anybody watching the poll results? Looks like heavily in favor of IT staying regional at least in part, and significantly in favor of IT staying regional in whole.

That&#39;s my view. I like my outlaw regional racing series, and I like my "unofficial" national championship at Road Atlanta.
[/b]

I suppose what I don&#39;t like about the regional thing is that my second class membership pays the bills for a lot of races. If SCCA depended on Prod, Formula Vee, or all the other short list classes it&#39;d be in trouble.

I also think it sad the second rate members get better coverage of their second rate races in GRM because the HQ can&#39;t bother to put them in SportsCar.

R

[JeffYoung]

Ok Andy I TRIED to cover the fact that 40% want some form of Nationall......lol.....tried.....

I would be perfectly amenable to the ARRC moving around. One year at RA, one year at Mid-Ohio, one year at Topeka, and one year at Laguna Seca.

And yes, once, I would take a week and try to make the tow out to Cali to run Laguna. Having a "National" Championship there would give me a reason to do so...

[lateapex911]

Keep in mind that it isn&#39;t a National Championship. It&#39;s a big regional race in georgia that some consider the de-facto national Championship.

I&#39;m very impressed that Ron Carroll has set up transportation for IT guys (or whoever, I guess) to get to Atlanta from LA in a big enclosed rig for a little over a thou. The trip over the rockies makes it a loooong tow. maybe he&#39;ll go the southern route, which will make it merely a loong tow, LOL,.

The ARRCs are prestigious, but as the Atlanta Region owns the ARRC name, it won&#39;t happen anywhere but in Georgia.

I guess a secondary concept would be to organize a "outlaw" National Championship that was more centralized, or moved around the country, as georgia is anything but central. Of course, then you&#39;d get into discussions about IF it were centralized, do you centralize it geographically? Or by IT population?? LOL...

[JoshS]

I guess a secondary concept would be to organize a "outlaw" National Championship that was more centralized, or moved around the country, as georgia is anything but central. Of course, then you&#39;d get into discussions about IF it were centralized, do you centralize it geographically? Or by IT population?? LOL...
[/b]
If you were to do it by IT population, it would never leave the east coast. I&#39;m willing to wager that one of the reasons why IT is more popular in the east than the west is precisely due to this unofficial "national championship" race.




And yes, once, I would take a week and try to make the tow out to Cali to run Laguna. Having a "National" Championship there would give me a reason to do so...
[/b]
You realize it would take a lot more than a week, right? Figure a 4-day drive each way, 12 hours a day, close to 48 hours of driving (at least, that&#39;s the case for me to Road Atlanta). So 8 days just in over-the-road travel. 3+ days at the track (you&#39;re going to want to do a test day at a track you haven&#39;t been to before, for a national championship race, right?), it&#39;s closer to 2 weeks.

[lateapex911]

Josh, thats the classic "chicken or egg" question. Is IT bigger on the EC because of the event....or is the event here because IT is bigger here? (i&#39;m guessing more of the latter, and the Atlanta Region decided to take the plunge...but it&#39;s not just IT classes)

And...IF it were out west one year, would the numbers be good? Whats the IT scene like out there? I watched a GREAT race in ITA once in ..oh...&#39;90 (?) at Sears point between a Mazda RX-2 and a Mazda RX-3Sp, and something else. A real throwdown, and the field, IIRC, had a good 20 ITA cars in it.

Even at 3 days out, 3 back, you&#39;re right...it&#39;s a looong week!

[Ron Earp]

. Of course, then you&#39;d get into discussions about IF it were centralized, do you centralize it geographically? Or by IT population?? LOL...
[/b]

Hell, didn&#39;t stop the SCCA from moving to Topeka, then putting the Nationals there. Anyone looked at the population of the US lately by geography? Guess what, most all of us live on the Coasts.

[racer_tim]

Josh, at least our regional IT programs are better than our National program here on the left coast.

Everybody still doesn&#39;t get it. San Francisco Region puts on 11 regionals a year at our 3 tracks. Thunderhill, Laguna Seca, and Sears Point. We start in March and this year only go to October. ITS, ITB, and ITC aren&#39;t doing very well from a participation standpoint, but here is a breakdown to how many competitors have earned points in our IT classes this year:

ITS 14
ITA 85
ITB 8
ITC 9

ITE (Run what ever you want on DOT tires and a tub chassis) 25

ITX (2nd entry for any IT car for about 1/2 of the first entrance fee) 39

SM (which can also run as both ITA, ITE, and ITX) 120

It&#39;s not a lack of participation, but there isn&#39;t a real incentive to tow 5,000 miles across the country, to either Topeka, Mid-Ohio, or Road Atlanta, unless you have something to prove, or just want to say that you did it once.

I&#39;d like to go back at least once, but it&#39;s not in the cards for a couple of years. Maybe by then, we&#39;ll get something @ Miller Motorsports Park, which is only a 12 hour tow from San Francisco.

[Ron Earp]

Maybe they should have moved to CA.

How many racers show up at "normal" events during the year at Topeka&#39;s race track? Bet it is far shy of the numbers you get there, or we get in the SE.

R

[Knestis]

those of us who are lucky enough to run up front without a full build i think are being looked down upon as having an opinion of lesser value. at least that&#39;s the impression i&#39;m getting from a few people.[/b]
Seriously, Travis - that is NOT what&#39;s being intended here - at least certainly not from my corner. The complaint is that the desires of those lucky enough to be in that situation to MAINTAIN that situation don&#39;t trump other interests. At least to the extent that those interests (for the greater good of the Club, of the category, whatever) can be demonstrated... I say that because it&#39;s not clear at this point that they HAVE. That said, any argument against an expansion to National racing, that is predicated on the assumption that people in that situation simply deserve to keep it, is going to be open to some criticism.

K

[Bill Miller]

Seriously, Travis - that is NOT what&#39;s being intended here - at least certainly not from my corner. The complaint is that the desires of those lucky enough to be in that situation to MAINTAIN that situation don&#39;t trump other interests. At least to the extent that those interests (for the greater good of the Club, of the category, whatever) can be demonstrated... I say that because it&#39;s not clear at this point that they HAVE. That said, any argument against an expansion to National racing, that is predicated on the assumption that people in that situation simply deserve to keep it, is going to be open to some criticism.

K
[/b]


Kirk,

Always the diplomat! :D

All kidding aside, Kirk&#39;s right Travis, your opinion doesn&#39;t have any less value, but don&#39;t look for a lot of sympathy. Honestly, it&#39;s starting to remind me of some of the arguements put forth during the E36 SIR discussions. And honestly, I think that you&#39;d be happy to have the top guys go National racing. You almost be assured a podium at a Regional w/o spending any more money.


I acknowledged it was unscientific. What did your stat teacher says about crystal balls? Or anecdotal evidence? I know we are just talking so I&#39;m not putting you to the test but I&#39;m not sure you have any valid support for your premise that most of the IT community wants to go National. I&#39;ve got a little bit that they don&#39;t.
[/b]

Bill,

I don&#39;t think I said anywhere that most of the IT community wants to go National. What I said was that I was convinced that this poll is indicitive of the IT community&#39;s wishes.

[85itccivic]

Just for a reference of participation numbers I looked up the Marrs series points for the year .
What follows is totals of how many cars have accumulated points in each IT class this year.

ITA 32
IT7 9 this is ITA rx7s that have their own class
ITB 27
ITC 19
ITS 15
ITE 18

[Bill Miller]

Same numbers for NARRC

ITS - 58
ITA - 79
ITB - 51
ITC - 18
IT7 - Don&#39;t have IT7
ITE - 33

Note: These numbers my include some double-counting between NARRC and MARRS, as I believe the MARRS out-of-regiona race at WG is also a NARRC race. It looks like the MARRS folks that ran that race also collected NARRC points.

[tnord]

Maybe they should have moved to CA.

How many racers show up at "normal" events during the year at Topeka&#39;s race track? Bet it is far shy of the numbers you get there, or we get in the SE.

R
[/b]

give me your definition of a "normal" weekend and i&#39;ll tell you.

iirc there were about 200 at the national weekends.

[Bill Miller]

SARRC participation

ITS - 89
ITA - 99
ITB - 61
ITC - 44
ITE - Don&#39;t have ITE
IT7 - 48

[tnord]

All kidding aside, Kirk&#39;s right Travis, your opinion doesn&#39;t have any less value, but don&#39;t look for a lot of sympathy. Honestly, it&#39;s starting to remind me of some of the arguements put forth during the E36 SIR discussions. And honestly, I think that you&#39;d be happy to have the top guys go National racing. You almost be assured a podium at a Regional w/o spending any more money.

[/b]

who&#39;s looking for sympathy? all i&#39;ve ever touted through all threads on this topic was to consider others outside of the east coast when making the decision.

there&#39;s a few assumptions imbedded in your post bill that i find rather humorous. you might want to look here (http://www.midiv.org/PDF/2006_Mid-Am_points.pdf), although i know it&#39;s rather insignificant compared to what it would mean 1000miles east of KC.

[Bill Miller]

give me your definition of a "normal" weekend and i&#39;ll tell you.

iirc there were about 200 at the national weekends.
[/b]


Travis,

It&#39;s probably a safe bet that the National numbers were a bit inflated as you had people that wanted to drive the track before the Runoffs. There were definately people on the Prod board that said they went for that reason.



who&#39;s looking for sympathy? all i&#39;ve ever touted through all threads on this topic was to consider others outside of the east coast when making the decision.

there&#39;s a few assumptions imbedded in your post bill that i find rather humorous. you might want to look here (http://www.midiv.org/PDF/2006_Mid-Am_points.pdf), although i know it&#39;s rather insignificant compared to what it would mean 1000miles east of KC.
[/b]


Ok, so putting up the same numbers for the link you gave me

ITS - 8
ITA - 16
ITB - 8
ITC - 1
ITE - 10
IT7 - 6

That only counts drivers who scored points (just like from the other series)

And please tell me what imbedded assumptions that you find humorous. And I&#39;m still not sure what low or high participation numbers has to do w/ people&#39;s desire for IT to be National. You seem to be saying that areas like the one you cited would not want IT to be National because they don&#39;t have many IT racers. Is that it? Help me out here, because I really don&#39;t understand what your point is.

[tnord]

And please tell me what imbedded assumptions that you find humorous. [/b]

doesn&#39;t really matter.....it applies to my individual situation, which is not what the discussion is about. sorry to veer OT.

[IPRESS]

There are two sides of this going national deal for sure. Either you want it to go that way or not. I n-know from the SM experience that the PTB is not really for more national classes. (And then they add some new ones in spite of it.) On the other side the whole class designation seems to be influx so if you want to shoot for it now might be the best time. In SM at least 90% or more wanted to be considered for national status. Not sure from what I have heard it is that way in IT.

[IPRESS]

I don&#39;t know if it means anything to you guys, but Track Sponsored track day for the Runoffs is $400 and the Trans Am cars are part of the deal. My old SM buddies think the ARRC practice day was pretty dang good now! AH, the glory of being a big time national racer! :birra:

[Bill Miller]

I don&#39;t know if it means anything to you guys, but Track Sponsored track day for the Runoffs is $400 and the Trans Am cars are part of the deal. My old SM buddies think the ARRC practice day was pretty dang good now! AH, the glory of being a big time national racer! :birra:
[/b]


Mac,

I don&#39;t think anyone thinks, or is saying, that you won&#39;t spend more money going National racing. That&#39;s the way it is today in any of the National-eligible classes, it will cost you more if you want to run Nationals vs. Regionals, even if you don&#39;t change your prep level. Point is, nobody makes you do it.

[IPRESS]

Bill, I know I just don&#39;t think I would have any :unsure: self control!