July Fastrack

[erlrich]

http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastrack/08/08-fastrack-july.pdf

So, because we didn't want to go national we now get left out of Fastrack? :shrug:

just kidding...

[DavidM]

Meh. 2.5 cars to go to the runoffs. Whatever. Just as well IT isn't a part of that mess at the moment.

David

[planet6racing]

You know, I wrote a letter and provided information, and it's not even discussed in the FasTrack!!

I know, I know, it'll be in the next one. But, I really wanted to see my name in print!!!

[lateapex911]

Bill, we're doing some "housecleaning stuff" let's say, right now, and letters have been delayed a bit, sorry.

Also, did you guys see this?



Item 2. Effective 11/1/08, change section 9.3.19.A as follows:
Driving suits that effectively cover the body from the neck to the ankles and wrists. One piece suits are highly recommended. All suits
shall bear an SFI 3.2A/1 or higher certification label or FIA 8856-1986 or 8856-2000 homologation. Underwear of fire resistant material
shall be used except with suits carrying FIA standard 8856-1986 or 8856-2000 or SFI 3-2A/5 or higher (e.g., /10, /15, /20)
Certification Patch.

[planet6racing]

Bill, we're doing some "housecleaning stuff" let's say, right now, and letters have been delayed a bit, sorry.



No worries, Jake. The ITAC has nothing to do with my letter.

[lateapex911]

And, here's the task force comments from the BoD, for those than haven't seen it.


:BOD/CLUB RACING TASK FORCE SUMMARY
In response to declining entries and volunteer support for both the National Racing Program and the SCCA's Championship Event
(Runoffs), a Task Force was established to review these programs and make recommendations on how interest in them might be
renewed. The Task Force which consisted of representatives from the Board of Directors (BoD), the Club Racing Board (CRB) and the
National Staff reviewed the programs, and along with extensive member input received over several years, made its recommendations
to the Board of Directors. The Board at its May 10, meeting reviewed the Task Force recommendations, accepting some and rejecting
others.
The Board recognizes that change is always welcome for some and difficult for others. The Board also wants to provide member assurance
that the path to be taken will be straightforward and will be stable over a reasonable period of time. For these reasons, the Board
required a larger consensus, a minimum of nine votes, for approval of each item in the proposal. Moreover, the Board is committed
to seeing this program through without any substantive changes for at least the next three years. A few minor points are still to be
resolved, but none will have any substantive changes to the program.
In the course of the Task Force's review, a number of items were identified that could be implemented for the 2008 Runoffs. None of
these items would involve eligibility or the racing program, but would seek to improve the hospitality of the event. The significant
changes in the racing program included in the Task Force proposal, and agreed to by the Board, would begin with the 2009 racing season.
The Task Force report included a number of recommendations ranging from minor changes to the existing program to a major overhaul
of the entire program. The Board reviewed each item being proposed and voted for or against each. The proposal to include
Improved Touring (IT) in the National program generated considerable discussion. At the conclusion of this discussion, the Board voted
to not include IT in the National Racing Program, but because many IT drivers support IT as a National class, the Board will task the
CRB to develop a simplified path for some IT classes to progress, with necessary modifications, to the Limited Preparation National
classes.
Consolidation of classes was also a key item in the report. With the current 30 National classes, not all can be accommodated in their
own race because of time available at the Runoffs. In addition, opportunities for new classes such as those using biofuels and hydrogen
energy sources must be made possible for the future. Consequently, the Board has agreed to a consolidation plan that would
begin with the 2009 season and will result in 23 race groups. The top 10 classes with the highest participation numbers based on
the 2008 results will be guaranteed their own races, and the remaining classes may experience a race combined with another class.
The latter would be based on the number of entries and car compatibility. For 2010 and beyond, there will be 21 National classes
and 21 races at the Runoffs.
Specific consolidations for the 2009 competition year include: CSR and DSR, and SSB will be split between SSC and T3. For the 2010
season, the present class structure will be changed to the following 21 revised classes: SM, SRF, CSR/DSR/S2, GTL/GT3, FP/GP/HP,
GT3/DP, GT2/GT3/BP, FF, T1/ST, T2, T3/SSB, SSC/SSB, FV, GT1, AS, FA/FB, FC, EP, F5, FE, and FM. Obviously, competition adjustments
will need to be made by the Club Racing Board for some cars to ensure parity, and some current classes will need to be split
between two or more new classes to minimize competition adjustments
Beginning in 2009, in order to qualify for the Runoffs, drivers must start and finish four races, two must be in their division of record,
and points may be counted from a driver's best seven finishes. Also, the week of Runoff racing will begin on Tuesday with three days
for qualifying followed by three days of racing. Section 9.1.12 of the GCR will continue to be utilized to determine the retention or inclusion
of the various car classes as National classes.
The Board discussed whether or not to retain the current Club Racing program which provides for the Regional and National racing
structure as compared to a program that would involve "just races." The latter would involve all races being equal but having Divisional
Championships, a national points system or a combination thereof to select Runoffs entrants. While a change to the traditional
Regional/National race concept had some support, the Board voted it would be best for the program to retain the current system.
The Board understands that because the program entails significant changes in many areas which will directly affect many of our competitors,
these changes may cause concern. Furthermore, the Board understands these concerns and will strive to make any needed
transitions as smooth and painless as possible.
Once again, the Board is committed to this program, without significant changes, for the next three years.Bill, that's good, because I was scratching my head wondering where your letter went!

[Knestis]

Bill, we're doing some "housecleaning stuff" let's say, right now, and letters have been delayed a bit, sorry.

Also, did you guys see this?

Bullshit SFI stuff makes me want to puke. But I'm the only one, I guess.

K

[Chris Wire]

So, because we didn't want to go national we now get left out of Fastrack? :shrug:

just kidding...

Yes, and we get left out of the 2008 Club Racing calender as well. I hadn't paid much attention to it until the other day, but there is not an IT car to be found in the entire calender. Seemingly innocuous but it makes me mad just the same.

Every manner of car from FV to Rallycross to SM and Pro-everything, to butt-ugly A/Mod autocrossers are all included, but the classes with the finest racing in the club has no representation. Curious.....

Sorry, I know I'm off topic, but crap like that just bugs me.
[/vent]

[erlrich]

Bill, we're doing some "housecleaning stuff" let's say, right now, and letters have been delayed a bit, sorry.

Also, did you guys see this?

Um, did I miss something? Wasn't that from the June Fastrack?

[mustanghammer]

Yes, and we get left out of the 2008 Club Racing calender as well. I hadn't paid much attention to it until the other day, but there is not an IT car to be found in the entire calender. Seemingly innocuous but it makes me mad just the same.

Every manner of car from FV to Rallycross to SM and Pro-everything, to butt-ugly A/Mod autocrossers are all included, but the classes with the finest racing in the club has no representation. Curious.....

Sorry, I know I'm off topic, but crap like that just bugs me.
[/vent]

I noticed it and then threw the calendar away. Yes, it was insulting to me too.

[ddewhurst]

Bill, did you receive an auto response that your letter was received? Please call me with reference to the Isaac devise. Two of us in the phone book I live in Tosa on 67th street.

Thanks

How can you guys be all excited that were not included after being hardened by all the give & shove on this site.:o Shucks, my buddy Kenny's Spec Miata showed up in Grassroots Motorsports Mag this month, they even mentioned his name & accomplishmet at a Midwestern Council race. Maybe we belong to the wrong sanctioning group. :017:

[Knestis]

The prevailing sentiment here was that folks didn't want to have anything to do with IT integrating into the bigger picture of club racing ("going National"). You want respect? Or do you want us to be allowed to be basically autonomous to the rest of the program? There might be a connection.

I'm just askin'...

K

[Beran]

Is it a typo?
T3 number 3.
"Volkswagen GTI, classified in TB 08-01,"
Should it be "classified in T3"?
Also, 08-01 is this 2008 to 2001?

[JeffYoung]

The latter for me....but I think you knew that....:)

I likey my rebel outlaw regional class run by Kickin' Kirk, Jivin' Jake, Awesome Andy, Joshin' Josh, etc.


The prevailing sentiment here was that folks didn't want to have anything to do with IT integrating into the bigger picture of club racing ("going National"). You want respect? Or do you want us to be allowed to be basically autonomous to the rest of the program? There might be a connection.

I'm just askin'...

K

[shwah]

ONE sentiment here was that folks didn't want to have anything to do with IT integrating into the bigger picture of club racing ("going National").

Fixed that for you. There was more than an small contingent that felt otherwise.

It's too bad that a vocal group that is afraid to have a higher level of competition is able to hold back the category as a whole.

[Gary L]

Fixed that for you. There was more than an small contingent that felt otherwise.

It's too bad that a vocal group that is afraid to have a higher level of competition is able to hold back the category as a whole.
Chris - I think "prevailing sentiment" is in fact the correct description. It was over 2 to 1 against going National, in the poll held on these pages. That's not just a "vocal group", rather a very clear cut majority.

[erlrich]

Fixed that for you. There was more than an small contingent that felt otherwise.

It's too bad that a vocal group that is afraid to have a dramatically increased cost of racing is able to hold back the category as a whole.
Fixed that one too :D

[erlrich]

The prevailing sentiment here was that folks didn't want to have anything to do with IT integrating into the bigger picture of club racing ("going National"). You want respect? Or do you want us to be allowed to be basically autonomous to the rest of the program? There might be a connection.

I'm just askin'...

K

Autonomy, with a side of cole slaw please...

[JeffYoung]

But if I don't get my way, I'm going NASA and starting Spec TR8!

[lateapex911]

Boy, you guys sure do jump on red herrings quickly, LOL. They must be tasty.

Jeff...in long past discussions with the CRB, when we were just shooting the s8it, and the national thing came up, the issue of IT being run by us, (as opposed to the CRB and the BoD) came up, and it was met with 100% absolute certainty that if IT were to go National, that nothing would change in regards to the ruleset and the running of the category. (that's the CRB's position) Now, of course, we haven't really sat down and had actual official meetings over it, and the suggestion was tuned down by the BoD, but, that's one concern that I don't share.


I know, call me naive', but remember, i'm on the inside and know the characters.

[JeffYoung]

Herring is a NASTY fish.......

I fully believe that is how IT would be run, at least at first. I still worry about: (a) losing regional race dates, etc. if we merge but keep the regional/national distinction and (b) the influence that other racer cultures will have on IT if we go national.

In any event, I respect the "go National" position and am frankly a bit hopeful that the guys on the "inside" think it is a good idea. Means management ain't as bad as it may so appear when you look at the really farked up classes like Prod and GT.

I've posted this elsewhere, but if you get rid of the National/Regional distinction and the effect that would have on traditionally strong regional weekends, you are far more likely to get my support for this (one vote that it is!).

Otherwise, it's Spec TR8 in NASA and you guys will lose HUNDREDS of drivers as a result.......lol.


Boy, you guys sure do jump on red herrings quickly, LOL. They must be tasty.

Jeff...in long past discussions with the CRB, when we were just shooting the s8it, and the national thing came up, the issue of IT being run by us, (as opposed to the CRB and the BoD) came up, and it was met with 100% absolute certainty that if IT were to go National, that nothing would change in regards to the ruleset and the running of the category. (that's the CRB's position) Now, of course, we haven't really sat down and had actual official meetings over it, and the suggestion was tuned down by the BoD, but, that's one concern that I don't share.


I know, call me naive', but remember, i'm on the inside and know the characters.

[shwah]

Chris - I think "prevailing sentiment" is in fact the correct description. It was over 2 to 1 against going National, in the poll held on these pages. That's not just a "vocal group", rather a very clear cut majority.

Sounds to me like 1/3 of this slice of the IT world thought it was a good idea. That does not sound like a prevailing sentiment or consensus to me.

Fear of cost escalation is code for fear of stronger competition.

[trd77]

This Spec Tr8 sounds very interesting to me. I may know of two cars that might run in the class

[pgipson]

This Spec Tr8 sounds very interesting to me. I may know of two cars that might run in the class

if I want to run spec TR8 do I need a TR8 or can I use a TR7 that has been updated and modified to have the same rwhp/tq numbers as a mildly modified TR8? :blink:

[OTLimit]

The sad part is that many people racing in IT don't realize that there are a good percentage of IT drivers already spending more than many National class drivers. Numbers? can't say for sure, but I do know that realistically, I could be funding two IT cars for the same $$ as I am spending on the IT and Prod cars, with none left over. If you want to run anything above midpack in IT with any serious competition, you are probably already spending as much as many National drivers. As newer cars come in, they are getting more complicated and cost more to "go faster." Fact of racing.

[NORRIS]

Just thinking out loud.

I'm thinking SCCA may want IT to be National when National numbers dwindle and they are looking for extra income.

Just a thought

[erlrich]

Just in case anybody missed it: http://www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23946

Is it too late to retract my first post?

[planet6racing]

The sad part is that many people racing in IT don't realize that there are a good percentage of IT drivers already spending more than many National class drivers. Numbers? can't say for sure, but I do know that realistically, I could be funding two IT cars for the same $$ as I am spending on the IT and Prod cars, with none left over. If you want to run anything above midpack in IT with any serious competition, you are probably already spending as much as many National drivers. As newer cars come in, they are getting more complicated and cost more to "go faster." Fact of racing.

DING DING DING!!! We have a winner!!!

New tires for each weekend for IT front of field: Check.
New engine every year (or sooner): Check.
Dyno time to tune engine and computer: Check.
Custom shock valving for each track: Check.
Separate transmissions for each track: Check.

The only costs that, at least here in the Cendiv, that IT doesn't have that a lot of National classes have is bodywork - we don't hit each other as much. Otherwise, it's all the same.

And, yes, I know, those of you that believe that it will be more expensive will continue to do so. Those of us who believe it won't make it any more expensive will also continue to do so.

[924Guy]

DING DING DING!!! We have a winner!!!

New tires for each weekend for IT front of field: Check.
New engine every year (or sooner): Check.
Dyno time to tune engine and computer: Check.
Custom shock valving for each track: Check.
Separate transmissions for each track: Check.


Dang, I don't do ANY of these... guess I'm not committed enough?!?


if I want to run spec TR8 do I need a TR8 or can I use a TR7 that has been updated and modified to have the same rwhp/tq numbers as a mildly modified TR8? :blink:

<hmmph> That's what I get for scrapping all my Wedges... :rolleyes:



Otherwise, it's Spec TR8 in NASA and you guys will lose HUNDREDS of drivers as a result.......lol.

"And we'd like to thank our fans for being here for us... both of them!"

[gran racing]

Sounds to me like 1/3 of this slice of the IT world thought it was a good idea. That does not sound like a prevailing sentiment or consensus to me.

You know I love this forum, but what percentage of all IT entrants post here or voted on this issue? It might give a feel for some of the attitudes and raise some excellent points but that's about it. For that matter, I wonder how many people who race in IT even read FasTrack on a regular basis?


Fear of cost escalation is code for fear of stronger competition

Cost & competition often go hand in hand. Would I be bummed if on a regular basis we start seeing all of the GrandAm among other high dollar teams driving IT cars in addition to their pro rides? Yeah, I would. I wonder then what a driver who currently runs more towards the back of the pack already would think. What about those people entertaining the idea of starting to race using essentially stock cars?

In a way, some of this reminds me of how NASCAR has done things. The pro drivers are now running in what I think should be the ladder series.


Dang, I don't do ANY of these... guess I'm not committed enough?!?

LOL! Yeah, doing all that sure would get crazy expensive and I'd soon be tractor racing.


If you want to run anything above midpack in IT with any serious competition, you are probably already spending as much as many National drivers.


What type of costs are you talking about? You've peeked my interest especially since I race in ITB and have run with Chris before.

[shwah]

You know I love this forum, but what percentage of all IT entrants post here or voted on this issue? It might give a feel for some of the attitudes and raise some excellent points but that's about it. For that matter, I wonder how many people who race in IT even read FasTrack on a regular basis?


That is my exact point. A 2/3 majority of the small % of site users (which are a small % of IT racers) hardly makes a prevailing opinion. I can argue that 1/3 of that small slice of the IT world had the opposite opinion with equal little certainty that it represesnts the class as a whole.

Sounds like the 924 is a 'ringer':p

[lateapex911]

You know I love this forum, but what percentage of all IT entrants post here ?....


good point. We have maybe a few hundred checking in here with any degree of regularity, and obviously there are a lot more IT cars out there. Now, the guys posting here are the most likely to write in and have their voice counted, but the ITAC gets letters regularly from non IT.com posters.


Cost & competition often go hand in hand. Would I be bummed if on a regular basis we start seeing all of the GrandAm among other high dollar teams driving IT cars in addition to their pro rides? Yeah, I would. I wonder then what a driver who currently runs more towards the back of the pack already would think.

IF IT cars were included in the national program, available races would increase, and the serious guys,, (the GrandAm-ers, so to speak) might migrate to the National races, leaving a little room at the top of a Regional field. Not all of them of course, and I am sure you'd see hybrid programs, but, for the guy in the back, his life would likely improve. (Finishing position-wise.)

One thing we see in National Prod and GT racing sometimes is guys running the minimum number of events, and, if the field is weak, pulling off at halfway to get the "completion" and their points, while saving wear and tear on the uber expensive billet crank /slide throttlebody /high compression engine. I think that the ruleset has created that sort of scenario, and lots of guys look at that kind of racing/wrenching and decline. Hence, it's not popular, and guys CAN run halfway and still net trophy points and an invite to the Runoffs. I suggest that IT guys, if IT were to be included in the National program, would actually have to race their way into invitations, and there wouldn't be a lot of pulling over halfway. IT is a popular ruleset, and with popularity comes competition.



In a way, some of this reminds me of how NASCAR has done things. The pro drivers are now running in what I think should be the ladder series.

Different animal. NASCARs Nationwide series is a business for teams, and often there are economies of scale at play. Plus sponsor obligations/opportunities and a whole slew of things that don't exist in club racing.




LOL! Yeah, doing all that sure would get crazy expensive and I'd soon be tractor racing.

Do you have any idea how expensive it is to run THREE blown hemis on one of those tractors? I have NO idea where the hayseed dudes get their money...NO idea. LOL

[Beran]

Anyone willing to give me feedback on this - or should I start a new thread to discuss the fastrack rather then this National IT discussion... which is a good one.

Is it a typo?
T3 number 3.
"Volkswagen GTI, classified in TB 08-01,"
Should it be "classified in T3"?
Also, 08-01 is this 2008 to 2001?

[jjjanos]

Boy, you guys sure do jump on red herrings quickly, LOL. They must be tasty.

Jeff...in long past discussions with the CRB, when we were just shooting the s8it, and the national thing came up, the issue of IT being run by us, (as opposed to the CRB and the BoD) came up, and it was met with 100% absolute certainty that if IT were to go National, that nothing would change in regards to the ruleset and the running of the category. (that's the CRB's position) Now, of course, we haven't really sat down and had actual official meetings over it, and the suggestion was tuned down by the BoD, but, that's one concern that I don't share.


I know, call me naive', but remember, i'm on the inside and know the characters.


Your naive. :)

On the changes -
Last month: "Once again, the Board is committed to this program, without significant changes, for the next three years. "
This month: "We didn't mean that."

On leaving IT philosophy alone if it goes National -

This month: "Nothing will change in regards to the ruleset and the running of the category."
Next month: "except for this...."

[Knestis]

TB 08-01 is Technical Bulletin 08-01 - part of the January FasTrack (first TB of 2008). It's at....

http://www.scca.org/documents/Fastrack/08-fastrack-jan.pdf

...but the short version is:

10. Classify the Volkswagen GTI in T3.
Add new spec line to TCS, p. 585, Volkswagen GTI (06-08), Bore x Stroke(mm) / Displ.(cc): 82.5 x 92.8 / 1984, Wheelbase(mm):
2578, Wheel Size(in): 17 x 7, Tire Size: 225/45, Gear Ratios: DSG Trans: 3.46, 2.15, 1.46, 1.08, 1.10, 0.92, Final Drive: 4.10 –
3.14, Brakes(mm): (F)312 Vented Disc (R)286 Solid Disc, Weight(lbs): 3280, Notes: Restrictor TBD.

K

[jjjanos]

One thing we see in National Prod and GT racing sometimes is guys running the minimum number of events, and, if the field is weak, pulling off at halfway to get the "completion" and their points, while saving wear and tear on the uber expensive billet crank /slide throttlebody /high compression engine. I think that the ruleset has created that sort of scenario, and lots of guys look at that kind of racing/wrenching and decline. Hence, it's not popular, and guys CAN run halfway and still net trophy points and an invite to the Runoffs. I suggest that IT guys, if IT were to be included in the National program, would actually have to race their way into invitations, and there wouldn't be a lot of pulling over halfway. IT is a popular ruleset, and with popularity comes competition.

I think it has less to do with points and more to do with meeting your 4 race requirement.

Take Spec Miata - the most popular class out there.
In SEDIV, you needed 13 points to qualify. Two fourths, one ninth and one appearance got you into the show. OR a second, a third and two appearances. The only reason you need the appearance is to meet the # of race requirement.

Having a hard time finding other 2007 division standings to see if this is the case every where.

[Beran]

Thank you!
I see.... TB = Technical Bulletin
Sorry for the newbie question and thanks for the good answer.

[924Guy]

Sounds like the 924 is a 'ringer':p

Naw, the car's a POS...

...it's all in the driver... :D :eclipsee_steering:

[dyoungre]

My two cents: If there was no distinction between a "National Event" and a "Regional Event" within my region, I really wouldn't care if IT were regional.
I'm guessing the problem is that the National participants don't want to have to share the track with Regional racers on any given weekend.
Thoughts?

[lateapex911]

My two cents: If there was no distinction between a "National Event" and a "Regional Event" within my region, I really wouldn't care if IT were regional.
I'm guessing the problem is that the National participants don't want to have to share the track with Regional racers on any given weekend.
Thoughts?

Take it one step further..if this had gone out for member input, I bet the input from non IT drivers would be inversely related to the popularity of their National class. In other words, guys in the H Prods and GT-3s of the world, (or insert other troubled classes) will be very much against IT going national, because it hastens their demise. ITB, ITA, and ITS are all WAY healthier than many National classes, and would take three (I'd bet) of the current plans coveted 10 Runoff groups.

[lateapex911]

Your naive. :)

On the changes -
Last month: "Once again, the Board is committed to this program, without significant changes, for the next three years. "
This month: "We didn't mean that."

On leaving IT philosophy alone if it goes National -

This month: "Nothing will change in regards to the ruleset and the running of the category."
Next month: "except for this...."


But....there is absolutely NO guarantee of any of that occurring now. And you have no idea of what's been discussed in the past, only what you see....which might indicate...just maybe, that, the ITAC has been consistent and knows what makes IT IT.

And I bet this- If the ITAC were to have been consulted on that move when the task force was "strategising", the ITAC would have insisted on some controlling language to be written to protect the category.

[RSTPerformance]

Bill, we're doing some "housecleaning stuff" let's say, right now, and letters have been delayed a bit, sorry.

Also, did you guys see this?


Jake-

What page was the driver suit Item 2 on??? I can't seem to find it in the PDF...

Raymond

[jjjanos]

But....there is absolutely NO guarantee of any of that occurring now. And you have no idea of what's been discussed in the past, only what you see....which might indicate...just maybe, that, the ITAC has been consistent and knows what makes IT IT.

I agree. I have no guarantee that this won't happen. What I do have is a body of data, that when I look at it, suggests that the "powers that be" don't meddle in a "lowly" regional-only class, but are chomping at the bit to monkey-around with their "premier" national classes. I, and others, didn't come to that conclusion in a void - if we don't trust the powers that be, there are reasons.


And I bet this- If the ITAC were to have been consulted on that move when the task force was "strategising", the ITAC would have insisted on some controlling language to be written to protect the category.

Which I think would be a fine idea and is one of the reasons why I thought and still think that this reorganization plan was a complete FUBAR. Despite the notices in Fast Track, this had the smell and appearance of a secret cabal making decisions w/o input from those being affected. I think reorganization is a great idea and, frankly, I'm in favor of a foundation to eaves overhaul. I think IT being Runoffs-eligible might be a good thing, but it depends on the complete proposal.

[JamesB]

Opps was already answered.

Im ok with just house cleaning, less to discuss.