MR2 in ITB?

[Jake]

:dead_horse:

After reading reading about:

1. Well written posts about the Z3 (which has a power to weight ratio that I can only dream about)

2. New roll cage rules that would allow MR2's to gain weight without making people build new cages.

3. The new spec weight for 1'st Gen MR2's that I could only achieve if I had my 3yr old drive my car. (is that legal?)

I gotta ask, can we finally move this thing while there are still 1 or 2 being run in the country?

Out of curiosity, what would the process weight be in ITB? Yeah, I know, being mid-engined is like having an extra 50hp, and the ITAC sees no disadvantage of only having 1.6L vs. 2.0L of the top ITB cars, and nobody has ever tried to build a real motor yet (we don't count the multiple guys that put $10,000 in engine development and only got 108hp to the wheels) yadda yadda yadda....

But I gotta ask.

[Z3_GoCar]

I agree, move MR2 down to B please :D

James

[Andy Bettencourt]

Without my check and balance system I would say 2545 in ITB. As it is a hot topic here, it is a hot topic with the ITAC as well. The group continues to be about 50-50 on the topic.

I think this car exemplifies a tweener that doesn't fit into the established bracketry we have now because the ITA weight is low (and Jake says unattainable at 2270) while the ITB weight would be as much as 200lbs over it's 2350lb curb weight.

[Doc Bro]

B plus weight. Jake misses his epic battles with Dave!!! Throw the guy a bone!! And send the 1st gen RX too.

R

[gran racing]

The MR2 sure is well balanced and can brake unbelievably.

Jake, how would you feel about the car being in ITB at approximately 2,545? I'd be totally cool with it and would be willing to write in a letter with ya.

[Spinnetti]

Well, then what about the Corolla?

Logically that would go too, but I'd need to add 300lbs? good grief!
I suppose I'd just sell it to the drift crowd.

[Jake]

I'd be fine with whatever the "Process weight" comes up with. I'd like take a look at what the subtraction for the 1.6 and the adding for the mid-engine will be however. As a side note - MR2's as great as they are, don't brake or handle any better than Miatters :( The weight distribution is very close to the Miata and the Miata has a more advanced suspension.

And yea - the AE86 should come with. Spinne - can the AE86 get lighter than the MR2 so it could work in ITA at a light weight?

[924Guy]

That doesn't seem out of place to me, at around 2545# and 108 at the wheels...

[MarcV]

Still waiting for the CRX DX to be moved as well... It should have moved down with the sedan and hatchback.

[Knestis]

In as much as the cage-tube/race-weight cap has been the primary sticking point for this 'tweener (and others), I say run the numbers and make it so! Ditto the others in the same boat.

K

[mattbatson]

As an ITB guy, I say move as many down as you can.
It sounds like there are a few different models currently classed in ITA that dont really compete...

Move em down now with the readjusted weight. Sooner the better.

This isnt pro racing. None of us are pro racers...we arent winning anything here (except bragging rights...which is really kinda worthless).

So, if a mistake is made in the reclassification from A to B, readjust the very next year! Get it close and go with it!

This can only be a good thing for field size, perhaps encouraging guys with uncompetitive ITA cars to get out and race more.

[Joe Harlan]

As an ITB guy, I say move as many down as you can.
It sounds like there are a few different models currently classed in ITA that dont really compete...

Move em down now with the readjusted weight. Sooner the better.

This isnt pro racing. None of us are pro racers...we arent winning anything here (except bragging rights...which is really kinda worthless).

So, if a mistake is made in the reclassification from A to B, readjust the very next year! Get it close and go with it!

This can only be a good thing for field size, perhaps encouraging guys with uncompetitive ITA cars to get out and race more.
[/b]

Other issues to consider....7" wide wheels?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Joe is on the money here. We had two letters that askes us to review a car in A for a lower weight. We did and determined it was a rediulously classed in A and at process weight would be impossible to get to - to the Nth degree. We are talking a 110hp car here. We readjusted its weight and recalculated it for B were it fits nicely. Letters came in asking us to put it back because of the additional investment required to 'redo' the wheel and tire situation.

Be careful what you ask for - you just may get it.

[Knestis]

So what do they want? To keep their 7" wheels in B or leverage that bind into some other consideration? Or to live forever mired in A?

Again, the obligation of the ITAC, the CRB, and the "process" should be to watch out for the overall health of the category. As long as a couple of resistant individuals can block a move that consensus says is likely to be a good thing for the program, we're hobbled. I'm not necessarily saying that this kind of consensus has been achieved here but at some point, doesn't the bigger picture matter more than a couple of people who don't want to buy new wheels?

Or (and I might hate myself in the morning for this) is this another endorsement for the dual-classification solution? I firmly believe that it has downsides but again, if the net is positive, maybe it's worth considering. Perhaps even as a probationary or conditional deal - the DC car will end up in ONE class eventually, where the most entries happen - perhaps in say, three years...?

K

[Jake]

On the MR2 boards not only was there a unanimous consensus that we should move to B even with buying a new set of wheels - but even those who had to build new cages before were behind it.

I'll gladly pose the question again on the MR2 boards to the 8 people who run MR2's across the country :) (number is shrinking by the minute!)

What would the process B weight really B? Really 300# more?

[Andy Bettencourt]

2545 in ITB I am sure but it will have to run it's course.

K, They wanted to stay in A.

[Spinnetti]

I'd be fine with whatever the "Process weight" comes up with. I'd like take a look at what the subtraction for the 1.6 and the adding for the mid-engine will be however. As a side note - MR2's as great as they are, don't brake or handle any better than Miatters :( The weight distribution is very close to the Miata and the Miata has a more advanced suspension.

And yea - the AE86 should come with. Spinne - can the AE86 get lighter than the MR2 so it could work in ITA at a light weight?
[/b]


Well, here's the thing... My car is 2030lbs with a full tank of gas IIRC. It can't get any lighter than that either, short of dipping the car and taking the bondo out ;) So, Since I'm already as light as it will go, and I'm still at 108 hp with a solid axle etc, you can see why nobody runs these anymore. I love the car, so I'm still here, but thats the only reason. In the 90's I could run lead pack, but a well set up and driven (and usually cheater ecu at the time) CRX/Integra still would beat me pretty handily (I'm a bit above so-so driver with very good car prep). I had trouble with the better Mazdas too. Interestingly, except for a couple times when I was experimenting (badly) with some setups, MR'2 never gave me any trouble - must be folks got them sorted out since then (at the time, I drove a MR2 on the street).

I haven't run in a long time now, but I'd probably be too fast for B without some reduction, but not much. Even way back, the top B cars ran mid-pack into the A ranks. I just can't imagine going up to 2500lbs.. thats more than it was stock isn't it? I'm probably the last man standing in the Corolla ranks as it was considered obsolete in ITA since 95 or so...

In the end, I guess I'd say its not worth any mods to the car (wheels or weight) to get more competitive. I'm going to do one more hurrah to get it up to the current rules (maybe run next year) and see where I sit. If I can stay out of the hacks in the middle of the pack, I'll keep at it, and if not I guess it will die a natural death in IT and I'll end up using it as a track car until it goes to a drift kiddie..

[mattbatson]

Ok, I see the wheel problem...

How about this? To run in B they have to abide by the wheel situation, and add weight....

But, they can also run in A, just as they do now.

That way, they can run in both classes, depending on how competitive they want to be :D

would this work? Or is it so taboo to allow one make of car run in two classes....

I would hope SCCA could be a little more flexible in an attempt to increase car counts. This shouldnt piss off any A guys or B guys...right?

[Joe Harlan]

My take is this. For the cost of 2 sets of wheels these guys will now move from the back to the mid to front of the grid. How many times for 800 bucks can you put yourself in that position. The ITAC should not consider this in the choice. I would like to see the clasification happen with a 1 season dual classification so that people could budget the wheel change to ITB. come on guys 800 bucks and your at the pointy end of the grid or at least have a shot at the pointy end of the grid....Besides Kirk is lonely...

[JeffYoung]

Joe, if I had an MR2 that would be the problem for me. In A, at least around here, I would have competition and guys to race with. In B, I would not. Fields are small, very small. Since I don't drive an MR2, I really can't comment, but if I did the difference between running mid pack in a 10 car field versus at the front in a 3-4 car field mighte lead ME (and that's just me) to want to stay in A.

[mattbatson]

Spinetti,

I drive a suzuki swift in B, and the weight it is given is also more then stock curb weight. My minimum is 1795 and I'm pretty sure they weigh less then this stock....

Plus, race weight is with driver....

So, I weigh about 230 (248 with suit on...heavy suit :rolleyes: )

I actually am over weight by over a 100lbs....and it is going to be expensive for me to get down to the min weight.


John,
yes the ITB fields are smaller then A....All the more reason to take the uncompetitve A cars down to B!

I guarantee it is more fun to be dicing for first place in a 4 car B field then to be constantly frustrated at the back of the pack of 10 A cars...
There are plenty of talented drivers in B that will give you guys a run for the money...(no, not me B) )

Besides, if the slow A cars come down, the B fields will not be so small anymore...

[Joe Harlan]

Joe, if I had an MR2 that would be the problem for me. In A, at least around here, I would have competition and guys to race with. In B, I would not. Fields are small, very small. Since I don't drive an MR2, I really can't comment, but if I did the difference between running mid pack in a 10 car field versus at the front in a 3-4 car field mighte lead ME (and that's just me) to want to stay in A.
[/b]


Jeff, I understand that desire but the fact is if we moved some cars to B then B will grow. I would bet money that if the RX7 went to B that the pro7 classes and rx7 only classes would work their way back into B...Just my thinking.

[Speed Raycer]

I guess I missed writing my letter on the 7's possible move to ITB.

Cost of new wheels huh.... Stock plus wheels are 5.5" and we've all got a stock pile of them somehow.

If the 7 got moved to B, I'd even consider building a new motor for it and pulling the For Sale sign out of the window!

[Knestis]

No need to get all insulting about being small there, Jeff. ;)

K

[JeffYoung]

Oops..no insult intended....just saying, ask the MR2 guys before you move the car. There are some folks out there running the car who might want to stay in A.

Same is definitely true of the RX7. Lots of RX7 guys here in the SEDiv are still competitive in A and don't want to move.

[Joe Harlan]

Jeff, on the whole I would bet money that moving the RX7, MR2 and a couple of others to B with the correct adjustments would have a far more positive impact that not. I also feel that sometimes you just have to make a change for the good of the whole club not just a couple of people that may be stuck in their ways.

[Knestis]

I'm just sensitive about size issues, is all...

K

[JeffYoung]

Well, you know, some of us drive V8 race cars to, uh, overcompensate.....

[Joe Harlan]

Well, you know, some of us drive V8 race cars to, uh, overcompensate.....
[/b]


I didn't know you had a porsche with a V/8... :)

[JeffYoung]

Yup, with the carbon fiber stripper girlfriend and ceramic toupee options no less.

[gran racing]

Other issues to consider....7" wide wheels?[/b]

I completely agree with what Joe has said – scary, huh? :) People who say they don’t want to move to ITB because they’d need to buy new rims are not taking the time to think about their statement. I’m sorry, but that reasoning is just silly. Do any of these people attempt to make their cars faster? Do they ever buy new tires because the old ones are getting very slow? Do they ever buy any go-fast parts for their cars? Where is the car running now in ITA; where would it be running in ITB with a very small investment?

Go to a junk yard, get two sets of 6” rims for $200. The tires that fit on the 7” rims will also fit on the 6” rims, so that isn’t an issue. Then sell the same number of rims you had for $100 total. What, too cheap of a selling price and think you can get more? To get from a car that runs mid/back of a competitive ITA field to a car with the potential of winning the ARRC and running at the front in ITB isn’t worth a $100 investment (maybe less)? Come on now.


Fields are small, very small.[/b]

I hear ya, but once again am with Joe on this. If we can get a bunch of the tweener ITA cars properly classed in ITB, then the fields will not be small. In addition to the existing cars that would be impacted by this more, there would be other people going out and building new racecars from these choices. How many RX7s are just waiting for a chance to be competitive again?

My belief is we should stay away from the dual classification now that the cage rules have changed, at least as part of a long term deal. It will create too many issues.

[924Guy]

Yeah, you move to B, you play by the B rules. ITB rules say you get 6" rims; deal with it. I did, had to ditch all my 7" rims. Do you hear me crying? Yeah, all the way to the friggin' podium!! I'm sorry, do you want me to subsidize your rim purchase? Maybe I should pay for your new cage and some lead too, so that you can go from back of the pack to the podium for free? I'm sorry, I thought this was a sport you had to spend money in to win! Do you expect to win on the 3-year-old tires you've been running on too, since a new set of Hoosiers every year wasn't worth it to run at the back of the pack?

BTDT; now I gladly spend $800/year for tires to stay up front. I'm also now glad that instead of competing with $10k+ CRX's that I'll never catch, I'm duking it out with $5k cars I can afford to race against. Waaah waaah waaah...

I can appreciate wanting to run against a bigger, more meaningful field... but that's all about what's popular, etc... home track of Waterford, we usually have more B cars than A cars - 8-10 is typical! It's all where you're located...

[JeffYoung]

Vaughan, I agree.

But here is what I see happening in the SEDiv: you put the RX7 in B and the remaining guys who are running in A probably go to IT7. For whatever reason, there is a very strong RX7 culture here in the SEDiv, and these guys are FAST. Most of them don't want to go to B, at all.

Joe's point about having to do some things for the benefit of the club as a whole is a valid one. I'm just saying, these guys (the 7 drivers in the SEDiv) are a very large group (perhaps one of the largest collections of IT RX7s in the country, they enjoy racing each other, and they are still competitive with the A cars (numbers be damned!).

One of them constantly reminds me that the 12A RX7 was actually in ITS when first classed......

[shwah]

I say move them. The other 4cyl mid engine car is here - Fiero, albiet with an outrageously different motor (iron duke - all torque no revs)

The wheels are a complete non-issue. 14x6 wheels with 4x100 bolt pattern are so common it is silly. 80% of VWs for 2 decades came on them, and the centerbore allows them to be used on Toyotas and Hondas. (am I nuts and the MR2 is a different bolt pattern?)

[gran racing]

The MR2 is a 4x100 bolt pattern.

[Jake]

Yeah all those guys who don't want to buy 6" rims are silly! :wacko:

BTW - re-read the thread - I don't think anyone has said they don't want to buy 6" rims. Only some heresay from Andy about some mystery 110hp car. Let it be known that there hasn't been any opposition about downsizing wheels on the MR2. Even from me, where it will kill my secret weapon (oversized autocross tires)

I'm just trying to figure out where an how I can mount all the weight so it won't become a projectile! And I just finally threw out most of my interior!

Jake

[gran racing]

Ummm, you know I use 225 Hoosiers on 6" rims. In fact, I used them on 5.5" rims before.

Adding weight? Which would you rather, try to figure out how you can lose all of that weight or put parts back in the can / lead to attain a weight? I thought you were pushing for the latter, no? Either you want it or you don't.

You've seen my car with its small spare tire and OEM jack in the trunk, passenger seat, and 50 lbs of lead on the floor. There are lots of ways to increase weight of a car.

[RSTPerformance]

You've seen my car with its small spare tire and OEM jack in the trunk, passenger seat, and 50 lbs of lead on the floor. There are lots of ways to increase weight of a car.
[/b]

And you need more weight ;)

Just eat A LOT of track food, you'll get the weight required :P


I predict that at some point the MR2 will get moved, I have said that for a while... Why has it not been moved yet? Over and Over the RX-7 and MR2 letters have come in and been denied correct? I think one issue I have is why would the change be made now but not before?

Andy have you and/or others run the process on EVERY IT car to see what class they would get classed in "if" they were to get classed in todays world? Anyway we (the interested members) could see that spreadshhet with the results for ALL cars?

Raymond

[JeffYoung]

Raymond, not to pound the proverbial deceased equine, but there are a lot -- A LOT -- of RX7 drivers in the SEDiv who strongly oppose the move of the car. A lot of them, most really, don't post here. I think the consensus for the move, for that car (not talking about the MR2), is far from a consensus.

[shwah]

Now they could add weight without busting out of the specified cage tube size, that's why.

[gran racing]

I think one issue I have is why would the change be made now but not before[/b]

Some of these cars were not moved because of the previous cage rules.

Gesh Ray, I haven't even completed my first race with my new baby and you already want to add weight to my car? :(

[RSTPerformance]

Dave-

lol Just giving you some crap :) I need to loose weight is the reality!!! lol

As for the cage rule, I am hesitant the cage thing is the only issue keeping the car from moving to ITB. If I was then I am disapointed as the the reasons for the denial before. The "cage issue" should have been put out for member input. We (SCCA) knows who has been driving MR2's and SCCA should have sent out a letter to all those who may have raced one in the last couple years to see if they would want to make a change to thier cage or stay in ITA. It seems crazy that the ITAC has the knowledge to know what others are thinking, certainly they should set things up but they need to go out for more member input in things like this IF this is the only reasoning to deny the change from ITA ->ITB for the MR2.

Why was it not posted in "Fast track" before when letters were recieved (and if it was please let me know) that the car does fit perfect into ITB at X weight but because of the changes required to the cage it does not make sence to make the move at this time?

Raymond "If I missed it before (And I may have) then please let me know..." Blethen

[mattbatson]

I still cannot help but think that all of the issues with this would be resolved with dual classification.

Why is dual classification so taboo?

What are the problems/disadvantages to this?

[Knestis]

Depends who you ask. I'll let the 'pro' voice go first. The 'con' position is thick with opportunties for them to play the 'you can't guarantee that bad things will happen' card.

K

[Jake]

Adding weight? Which would you rather, try to figure out how you can lose all of that weight or put parts back in the can / lead to attain a weight? I thought you were pushing for the latter, no? Either you want it or you don't.
[/b]

Not wavering here Dave - I just need to figure out how to put in the weight safely.

[lateapex911]

Dave-

. We (SCCA) knows who has been driving MR2's and SCCA should have sent out a letter to all those who may have raced one in the last couple years to see if they would want to make a change to thier cage or stay in ITA. [/b]

Ummm, actually, weve been sending out ITAC members, but the budget ran out.

Come on, as Andy says, focus!

In the past, when a car was too heavy for the class below it, it wasn't likley to get moved, especially when it's old, and also when there are other places in the SCCA empire that are known popular hangouts, like IT7.

[Jake]

So what now? Do I need to write another letter?

[captdanh]

I don't understand why the MR2 cannot be moved to ITB. If you look at the class table on Jakes site, there are 15 ITB cars with a better power to weight ratio than the MR2.
Are Jake and the other MR2 drivers beating all of the ITB competition, or running faster lap times than all of the ITB cars when they race? If not, what is there to consider? Move it down.

[Knestis]

Request it. Run it by an ITAC member for a back-channel math review, if it's in the ballpark and everything aligns, write the letter requesting the change. I seem to remember that the MR2 was one of the cage-tube losers and that should be a non-issue now, right...?

K

[Jake]

At least three MR2 folks wrote letters last month.





Run it by an ITAC member for a back-channel math review
[/b]

Done on page 1 of this thread.

[Spinnetti]

At least three MR2 folks wrote letters last month.
Done on page 1 of this thread.
[/b]

So does my 85 Corolla GT-S get pulled along too? (I'd hate to get a big weight penalty to go with it as the top B cars are as fast as my car already).

[Knestis]

I totally support the Corolla getting a look for B, too but please recognize that how fast B cars that you see are in comparison to you, has no bearing on the weight process. You get whatever weight the process says you should.

K

[Spinnetti]

I totally support the Corolla getting a look for B, too but please recognize that how fast B cars that you see are in comparison to you, has no bearing on the weight process. You get whatever weight the process says you should.

K
[/b]


Is this is the same "process" that has left practically every Toyota outclassed (wherever they are) in the last 20 years or so? - I'm not seriously challenging the process as I know the club does the best it can - especially for Honda ;)

Seriously though, yeah, I know. I have kind of mixed feelings. I don't want to carry 1/2 ton of lead and buy two new sets of wheels to drop a class. I'd probably rather be mid/upper mid pack and stay where I am (Haven't run the last 5 years, and was just catching up on all the rules changes to give it another go).


I'm not actually too worried one way or another. If the weight is too high, I'd just run in ITE so I can at least still enjoy my car, or drop out and run other places or just track days... So many changes over the last few years that I'm not sure it worth trying to keep up with it all.... I prefer rules stability to most of the changes over the last decade anyway.

I'll wait and see - will be interesting how it all sorts out.

[dickita15]

Is this is the same "process" that has left practically every Toyota outclassed (wherever they are) in the last 20 years or so? - I'm not seriously challenging the process as I know the club does the best it can - especially for Honda ;)[/b]

No you can only blame the last two or three years on the process. Before that there was either no process or the process was secret. Kudos to the ITAC for actually developing a process over the last few years even if we still have some gripes with how it is applied now and then.



Seriously though, yeah, I know. I have kind of mixed feelings. I don't want to carry 1/2 ton of lead and buy two new sets of wheels to drop a class. I'd probably rather be mid/upper mid pack and stay where I am (Haven't run the last 5 years, and was just catching up on all the rules changes to give it another go).
I'm not actually too worried one way or another. If the weight is too high, I'd just run in ITE so I can at least still enjoy my car, or drop out and run other places or just track days... So many changes over the last few years that I'm not sure it worth trying to keep up with it all.... I prefer rules stability to most of the changes over the last decade anyway.
[/b]

This is why I would like to see dual classification. If a car fits safely in two classes at two different weights why not class it in both. Let the market decide. No matter which class the ITAC picks for a “tweener” they will make some of their constituency unhappy.

[Spinnetti]

No you can only blame the last two or three years on the process. Before that there was either no process or the process was secret. Kudos to the ITAC for actually developing a process over the last few years even if we still have some gripes with how it is applied now and then.
This is why I would like to see dual classification. If a car fits safely in two classes at two different weights why not class it in both. Let the market decide. No matter which class the ITAC picks for a “tweener” they will make some of their constituency unhappy.
[/b]

Ah, good point.. prolly the best thing to do for the tweeners actually...

[captdanh]

I have a question. Has anyone ever built and fully developed an MR2 to the full extent of the rules?
If so, how did it do against other ITA competition? If not, maybe that is why the ITAC or CRB is reluctant to move it to ITB.

[Jake]

Yes they have.... I've sent dyno numbers and other info before. Midpack at best even with one driver that is a semi-professional.

Jake

[dickita15]

I have a question. Has anyone ever built and fully developed an MR2 to the full extent of the rules?
If so, how did it do against other ITA competition? If not, maybe that is why the ITAC or CRB is reluctant to move it to ITB.
[/b]
Remember this is not Production, on track performance might be a catalyst to look at a car but should not be the reason to class it in a given class. We use a process. Trust the process.

[Knestis]

What Dick said, captdanh...

There's a very fundamental philosophy at work in IT, that a lot of folks have been protecting furiously for years - that cars get classified where their mechanical attributes suggests they should, at weights intended to be reasonably equitable. Competitiveness then falls out of that, since there's absolutely NO valid and reliable way to determine if the CAR is correctly spec'd based on lap times or finishes - which are an outcome influenced by the car, driver, tires, testing, engineering, preparation, etc., etc., etc.

K