National Class

[LIRacer]

Why is IT not a national class when AS which is IT for V8s (IMHO) is?

[Greg Amy]

Holy ker-rist...



(No personal offense, but this ain't the right time for this...use Google for now...)

[erlrich]

Why is IT not a national class when AS which is IT for V8s (IMHO) is?

Short version Bruce; IT was intended from its inception to forever be a regional-only class.

What Greg is referring to is the fact that this topic has come up many, many times in the past, has been an extremely contentious issue every time, and (some suspect) MAY be ONE of the issues underlying the current CRB-ITAC fiasco. Definitely do some investigating, I'm certain you'll understand.

[LIRacer]

Ok, i'll look in to it, Thanks.

[RedMisted]

Why is IT not a national class when AS which is IT for V8s (IMHO) is?

AS is really not "IT for V8s." The preparation rules for an ITR V8-powered Mustang differ from those for an AS Mustang. But you're forgiven because on the face of things, A Sedan DOES look like an IT class.

[StephF]

Weeellll...my understanding is that with STU coming to be, IT can be run as a national.

[924Guy]

Weeellll...my understanding is that with STU coming to be, IT can be run as a national.

If your car's not too old.

Not exactly a rubber-stamp entry to the world of Nationals...

[StephF]

But an entry just the same for a lot of folks.

OP, slightly longer Cliffs notes version: there was an endless series of discussion about this very thing, mosty centering around how much $$$ it would cost to be competitve at a Nat'l level, the spirit in which the class was created, and so forth.

Bottom line, while expensive, it's no where near as expensive as it would be if we all went nat'l. Most people seem to want it to stay this way. STU will allow some folks to run nationals. And if anyone wants to be a National-only racer, well you will need to go back to the drawing board and choose a national eligible class and a car for that class.

As you may have gathered, there is an underlying political issue going on here as well, but I'll leave that to the ones who know the ins and outs of it all, because frankly, I can no longer keep up with who/what/when/where/why around here. We have so many boards, it's just plain confusing.

IT is fun the way it is. And we have enough enduro, Pro-it, restricted regionals, etc that I for one don't feel like I'm missing anything by not running nationals. Just my opinion...

[Ron Earp]

Why is IT not a national class when AS which is IT for V8s (IMHO) is?

AS is FAR from being an IT-like class. When we were working on classing V8 Pont cars in ITR this misconception that "AS was already IT for V8s" came up more than a few times. Fortunately a cursory examination of the rules puts that notion to rest.

[shwah]

Updated a few key points.

But an entry just the same for a lot of folks.

OP, slightly longer Cliffs notes version: there was an endless series of discussion about this very thing, mosty centering around how much $$$ it would cost to be competitve at a Nat'l level compared to competitive in a lowly subscribed division, while likely being the same $$$ it is today in areas with strong competition, the spirit in which the class was created, and so forth.

Bottom line, while expensive, it's no where near as expensive as it would be if we all raced in an area with very competitive IT fields, or went nat'l. Some people seem to want it to stay this way. STU will allow some folks to run nationals uncompetitively. And if anyone wants to be a National-only racer, well you will need to go back to the drawing board and choose a national eligible class and a car for that class.

As you may have gathered, there is an underlying political issue going on here as well, and my post represented one of those political positions.

IT is fun the way it is. And we have enough enduro, Pro-it, restricted regionals, etc that I for one don't feel like I'm missing anything by not running nationals. Just my opinion...

I agree that IT is fine the way it is. I also think it would be better if we had an opportunity to be a national class. A lot of the arguments against this were centered around the added cost (read - the requirement to fully prep a car to the rules) to compete at a national level. Many people do that now. Many others don't have to and are able to finish well.

[tnord]

Updated a few key points.

A lot of the arguments against this were centered around the added cost (read - the requirement to fully prep a car to the rules) to compete at a national level. Many people do that now.

just so the OP doesn't get the wrong idea that this perspective is the consensus amongst the IT community. i believe this to be patently FALSE. so does the majority of others with an SM background. :shrug:

[shwah]

What is false? That a some folks thought it would cost more to be competitive, or that some folks are fully prepping IT cars?

[Bill Miller]

To the OP, Chris (RedMisted) and Ron are right, AS is very far away from IT, in terms of prep. Aftermarket brakes, aftermarket transmissions, etc., etc. However, as Chris said, they do look like they could be IT cars (probably more than anything else out there). As Steph and Chris (chois) have mentioned, there's a belief that having IT go National will raise costs for some. It may, but then again it may not. I think Chris' highlights of Steph's post show that. To Chris (chois), pay no attention to Travis. He keeps up with his notion that SM and IT are similar, and leaves out how the folks that originally bought into SM were sold a bill of goods vis-a-vis the "$10,000 race car that could run at the front". Granted, costs did go up because SM became popular. Would it have become as popular if it hadn't gone National? No way to know. I suspect that it could have. If SM had not gone National, you'd probably have a situation similar to what you see in ITA along the East coast, people spending big $$$$ to run at the front (and large fields). What's false is to compare a spec class to a somewhat open category like IT, where you have many different options, and therefore get some cars which are better for some tracks. Getting the last bit out of a spec class costs more than it does for a non-spec class. Part's bin blueprinting gets expensive. It's also why you pay 4x - 6x more for a 'pro' SM motor than you do a crate motor from MazdaSpeed. Part of that is that everybody isn't running the same car, so you don't know if the variability is in the car, the prep, or the nut behind the wheel.

[lateapex911]

. It's also why you pay 4x - 6x more for a 'pro' SM motor than you do a crate motor from MazdaSpeed. Part of that is that everybody isn't running the same car, so you don't know if the variability is in the car, the prep, or the nut behind the wheel.

This is true, but, there's more:

Diminishing returns comes into play.
In SM, you spend your savings fund to get teh last 2 HP, because that will be either enough to keep up with the guys who already have it, or you want to be ahead of the curve. When EVERY car is the same, 2 HP can be a deciding factor.

In IT, it's impossible to know if spending your last nickle on 2 HP will be enough to make a difference. A, it's impossible to compare, and B, you might be sufficiently ahead or behind another make/model, that it's irrelevant.

For that reason, IT build have a potential savings element. (Assuming all things being 'equal'.... same basic economics, not discussing Chevy builds vs Porsche builds)

Those who run Nationals tells us the 'cost' is having to travel and the requirement to, in a competitive class, have the quiver of tires for situations, and fresh rubber, etc on the car for every session. That presumes a Runoffs bid, or the desire to be at the top of the class, week in, week out.

IT is cheaper because you don't HAVE to travel (there IS no Ruboffs bid)...but, you CAN spend the same bucks on tires if you so choose, and in some areas of the country, running at the front of an IT field is more expensive that a nationals class...even if you are aiming for the runoffs.

[tnord]

SM pro motors are as little as $5000. i'd love to find a built ITA motor for $833-$1250. shit, i'm pretty sure i'll spend that on just my ECU and dyno time.....for i expect <2hp peak.

and for any of those areas where you think IT people are spending more than the national guys, that might be true for the lower competition, lesser subscribed classes....but is irrelevant to what would happen should IT go national.

[Knestis]

The cost question leaps past a LOT of mediating variables:

IT Goes National --> Cost Skyrocket for Everyone

No. Absolutely not, unless a bunch of qualifiers get inserted into the assertion. Ultimately, "competitiveness" has got to be considered in there somewhere. If one wants to be the biggest fish in a pond, AND the IT pond gets bigger (more competitive) because the category gains National status, then (duh) it's going to cost THOSE FISH more to maintain their dominance.

But asking the pond to stay small to maintain the status quo for individuals happy with their situations? That's bad old SCCA mentality - me, me, ME, MEEEE...!!

If Joe Racer is currently spending $25,000/year of his discretionary dough to race an IT car, he can continue to do that. If that doesn't buy him as many trophies as he's used to because the fields get deeper and tougher, that's tough ta-tas. And it's likely - I think - that a National option would siphon off the most committed ($$) of the current Regional racers, would pull a bunch of folks out of other categories (like SM did to IT), and leave the competitive equilibrium for REGIONAL IT races/series about where they currently are.

K

[tnord]

i don't think i ever said, or even implied that costs would skyrocket.

i don't think effectively splitting the class in two is a good idea.

if joe racer still spends his $25,000 to go regional racing, but now he's only racing against four people rather than the 15 he used to race against, in a much shallower field. is he still getting the same enjoyment/dollar that he used to? i doubt it.

hey, i thought splitting SM into natl/regional would do the same thing....send the guys with money up to national and leave the "regular guys" to run around and have fun with their regular cars/budgets. didn't happen.

but go right ahead and think i'm just being "selfish" to try and protect my own situation.

[Knestis]

I was addressing the common - and oversimplified - cost argument against National status for IT, Travis. It was not a direct response to you.

K

[dickita15]

For what it is worth there is no discussion in the circles I travel of IT becoming a national class except in the context of it was an idea a year or two ago that was not adopted.

[rx7chris]

Aren't national events a bit more expensive to enter as well? I could care less one way or the other. I'm not looking for anything more than some good wheel to wheel action, and the way it stands seems to full-fill that want. What is the advantage of a national class anyways?

[jhooten]

I heard the lynch ropes being pulled out when, as a point of argument in the runoffs qualifying debate, I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.

[mossaidis]

We're just "regional drivers", what the hell do we know anyway? :) We're the equivalent of oval dirt track driving, beer drinking drivers to NASCAR drivers. Psst... regional drivers. The classification system sounds more NYC housing situation before mandatory low-income housing was placed into regulation. Perhaps SCCA will "show us" around the runoffs like boy scouts at LRP.

Feeling cynical,
Mickey

[mossaidis]

...I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.

I agree. How can someone argue that IT is not a nationally recognized class? It is... therefore it should be included into the Runoffs.

[StephF]

We're just "regional drivers", what the hell do we know anyway? :) We're the equivalent of oval dirt track driving, beer drinking drivers to NASCAR drivers. Psst... regional drivers. The classification system sounds more NYC housing situation before mandatory low-income housing was placed into regulation. Perhaps SCCA will "show us" around the runoffs like boy scouts at LRP.

Feeling cynical,
Mickey


Why would anyone worry about being a "regional" driver rather than a "national" one? And why would anyone feel like they are less because their class is a regional one??
:shrug: There's some damn good drivers in IT. And there have been many who went on to be pro from here too. That's nothing to hang your head over.
If you run 4 events a year or more, you still get a National license. Doesn't matter what you class you run in, YOU are still licensed nationally.

We have the ARC, IT Fest, Pro IT, enduros, etc. If anyone really wants to do the Runoffs now, you can go with STU, or run something that's Nationally qualified.
It's not like we are sitting out here in the backyard with a few random scraps for races to eat while the house dogs are getting Alpo inside.

This subject has been done to death (usually during the bench racing months) with the exact same result every time. Some people want it, some don't. Maybe someday that will change to a national class, but for now, it is what it is.

And shwah, don't put words in my mouth. I told the OP that was the Cliff's notes version as I understood it. I really don't care either way, and don't care to see myself "quoted" like that. If those are your feelings, then you own your words.

[mossaidis]

Oh Steph, my facebook friend... my comments were part fun part serious. I never hang my head, well unless I eat too much chocolate cake and get a belly ache. I will correct myself and say this is a regional ONLY class vs national available class issue. Sorry to mislead.

Again STU <> IT (that's a not equal sign for you non-SQL heads). No reason why IT as it is, albeit with revised weights (doh!), should not be a national class. Why was it designed to be a regional only class? Folks wanted to have fun without the expense and those sophicated ruling members wanted nothing to do with it at a National level, true? no idea. I do know that running competitively in SS means *usually* means buying a newer car and unfortunetaly w/o the fun and speed of IT trimmings... (mickey DUCK!). I pick IT over buying a new Civic Si SSB anyday.

[Knestis]

I heard the lynch ropes being pulled out when, as a point of argument in the runoffs qualifying debate, I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

[lateapex911]

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

Me, for two. The world has changed a lot since the implementation of that system, and it's antiquated now. With racing series being run by all the marque clubs, Porsche, BMW etc), the SCCA needs to get in tune with the times. While it will be argued that it might/might not be good for IT drivers, the club as a whole would benefit.

[tnord]

even this guy is in favor of IT "going national" if it means doing away with the regional/nat'l structure and the top TWENTY classes go to the runoffs.

actually....i might have to adjust that view....we need to get rid of some classes on the whole.

[Greg Amy]

Travis, I'm with you as long as it results in twenty GROUPS at the Runoffs.

The real issue with limiting classes is time available for groups...I like what they're doing this year, in that they're combining classes into groups for the last xx lowest-attended classes. They didn't make the numbers? Fine, let 'em run, just don't decrease the track time for the groups that did.

I used to be against IT going National...not so much any more. There's just no way I.T. woulda gotten much more expensive for me when I decided to do it "right"...now, eh...

[shwah]

And shwah, don't put words in my mouth. I told the OP that was the Cliff's notes version as I understood it. I really don't care either way, and don't care to see myself "quoted" like that. If those are your feelings, then you own your words.

Your post suggested that the opinions that you placed in it were the opinions of the IT racing community. I just pointed out that there are other view points. Some see it one way, others see it another way.

Didn't mean to offend. Sorry about that.

[shwah]

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

+1 here

This is why I dropped the whole IT national thing before. I realized that there was a bigger issue. Running two separate club racing series dilutes driver attendance and competition, dilutes worker attendance and/or increases worker burnout, and creates additional financial exposure to regions. All the while making the whole program that much more confusing to potential new members.

[Bill Miller]

SM pro motors are as little as $5000. i'd love to find a built ITA motor for $833-$1250. shit, i'm pretty sure i'll spend that on just my ECU and dyno time.....for i expect <2hp peak.

and for any of those areas where you think IT people are spending more than the national guys, that might be true for the lower competition, lesser subscribed classes....but is irrelevant to what would happen should IT go national.

Travis,

Try to pay attention. Where did I say that a Pro SM motor cost that much more than an ITA motor?

The bigger question is, why does it start at $5k for what you can get from MazdaSpeed for ~$2k, when they're supposed to be 'spec' motors. And since a Pro SM motor starts at $5k, please tell me how many of the first 10 cars on the Runoffs SM grid were running those motors?

Regarding how much fun someone has in their race, if you're running at the front of your class, do you care if there are 5 cars in your class, or 25 cars in your class?

As far as the whole Regional/National thing, and the IT going National thing, count me as another one that agrees w/ what Kirk posted. I've been saying pretty much the same thing for a couple of years now.

[tnord]

It's also why you pay 4x - 6x more for a 'pro' SM motor than you do a crate motor from MazdaSpeed.


Mazdaspeed Crate ~$2500
$2500 x 4 = $10,000
$2500 x 6 = $15,000



And since a Pro SM motor starts at $5k, please tell me how many of the first 10 cars on the Runoffs SM grid were running those motors?


2 of the top 3.



Regarding how much fun someone has in their race, if you're running at the front of your class, do you care if there are 5 cars in your class, or 25 cars in your class?


yes. i feel a greater sense of accomplishment when i beat 25 people rather than 5. but you're probably one of "those guys" who feels like a winner in a 2 car field.

[924Guy]

I'd much rather beat 2-3 guys like Beran, Schaafsma, Spencer, Moore, etc, than a field of 10 or 20 uncompetitive cars with uncompetitive drivers. Had enough of both to know the difference, but one's definitely much more of a challenge than the other.

It's quality, not quantity.

[tnord]

I agree Vaughan, but in general, if there's a field of 20, at least a couple of those guys are going to be a "Beran" or "Schaafsma" etc.

[lateapex911]

Quality over quantity every time.

[Bill Miller]

Mazdaspeed Crate ~$2500
$2500 x 4 = $10,000
$2500 x 6 = $15,000



2 of the top 3.



yes. i feel a greater sense of accomplishment when i beat 25 people rather than 5. but you're probably one of "those guys" who feels like a winner in a 2 car field.

The point is, why does a supposed 'spec' motor from a pro builder start at 2x what you can get one from the mfg for?

Which 2 of the top 3, and who's motors? If that's really the case, one of two things is going to happen. Either the guys charging more than $5k for a SM engine are going to lower their prices (or get out of the SM engine business) or the shop that's selling those $5k Runoffs' podium engines is going to raise their prices.

When was the last time you won a race in a field of 25 ITA or SM cars? Point is, if you're running at the front, it doesn't matter if you've got 5 or 25 guys behind you. You're ahead of them on the grid, and you usually don't see them unless you're lapping them. As others have pointed out, it's about the quality of the guys you're racing against, not quantity. And while I agree that you stand a better chance of having more quality drivers/cars in a larger field, it doesn't mean you can't have good racing in a small field. But even at the Runoffs, you get guys that run away from the enitre field. I think it was not that many years ago where the T1 winner lapped the ENTIRE FIELD.

[tnord]

Drago -Stewart Engines iirc (http://classifieds.specmiata.com/detail.php?id=2252)
Pombo - Rossini

haven't even bothered to count who else in the top 10 had what.

i don't think we've had a 25 car ITA field around here since i started. the last race i ran, and won, was 14 iirc, and i think i won an ITA race with 17 as well in my old SM. is there tougher competition in 8 car fields elsewhere? probably. but that's a whole nother issue.

i was sitting outside turn one at that T1 race, where Lux (who was leading iirc) got a flat, Heinricy was taken out, and there was another significant incident right in front of me. i think 5 of the top 6 DNF'd or something like that.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I don't even know what you guys are arguing about anymore. At the Runoffs, I would bet you an entry that NOBODY had a pure crate motor. What's the point? Stock optimization has been going on for decades in Showroom Stock.

[JeffYoung]

I am about as anti IT going national as they come. This I would agree with. Do away with the distinction all together (which gets rid of the one big problem I see on having IT go national and that is the dilution of regional fields) and I support it. Hell, I might even make the trek to RAmerica one year if they do it right -- top twenty classes go to the RuleOffs.


I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

[lateapex911]

Actually Andy, I'd say that considering the participants, this is anything but an argument, at least compared to past history. This is a spirited discussion at worst, LOL. I haven't heard either tell the other to take a Solex and shove it where the sun doesn't shine once!

[dpc]

the first race can't come soon enough....dave

[Bill Miller]

Drago -Stewart Engines iirc (http://classifieds.specmiata.com/detail.php?id=2252)
Pombo - Rossini

haven't even bothered to count who else in the top 10 had what.

i don't think we've had a 25 car ITA field around here since i started. the last race i ran, and won, was 14 iirc, and i think i won an ITA race with 17 as well in my old SM. is there tougher competition in 8 car fields elsewhere? probably. but that's a whole nother issue.

i was sitting outside turn one at that T1 race, where Lux (who was leading iirc) got a flat, Heinricy was taken out, and there was another significant incident right in front of me. i think 5 of the top 6 DNF'd or something like that.

Those look to more like $6k engines if you have to start w/ a crate motor, or $5k+ and your good core.


yes. i feel a greater sense of accomplishment when i beat 25 people rather than 5. but you're probably one of "those guys" who feels like a winner in a 2 car field.

Not sure which T1 race you were watching, but I was talking about the '01 T1 race at M-O where Heinricy lapped the entire field, in the wet, when T1 was pretty much spec corvette.

[trhoppe]

I am about as anti IT going national as they come. This I would agree with. Do away with the distinction all together (which gets rid of the one big problem I see on having IT go national and that is the dilution of regional fields) and I support it. Hell, I might even make the trek to RAmerica one year if they do it right -- top twenty classes go to the RuleOffs.
Exactly here. Instead of having a "regionals" and "nationals" split, you just have a ton of SCCA classes. Top 20 classes go to the RubOffs and bam, done. Maybe as Greg said, you could do a few more and combine groups, split starts, etc.

I personally want to run the Runoffs, I want to race in the "top amateur" class, its just that none of the SCCA "national" classes fit me and what I want to do to a car. I tried SSC, not fun for me, I tried T2, great idea, but was a bad time in my life, too young, to spend so much $$ so it didn't happen.

I would also support SSB and SSC going away and getting turned into T4 T5 or something, then I'd go that route. Right now, none of the T2 or T3 cars excite/inspire me enough to sell my ITA car and go there. Hell, SM is actually one way I've been leaning :)

-Tom

[gran racing]

What would be the difference between SSB and SSC vs T5 &T5 beyond a name change? (I'm not familair with the rules differences if there are many.)

[JoshS]

T allows a bunch of things that are not allowed in SS. The most significant ones would be shocks/struts and diffs.

This proposal was shot down by the membership (and loudly) 3 years ago, due to, among other things, the perceived costs of the allowed mods.

[trhoppe]

Meanwhile SSB and SSC are way struggling with car counts. I can totally see how the current SSC guys are arguing against it though. That truly is "rules creep" in that you'd need to drop $5k to keep your car competitive. Oh well.

But Josh nailed it, you don't have to drive a stock suspensioned race car, which in my mind, was fun, but for a few laps, and then sucked :shrug:

[IPRESS]

Hoppe leaning towards SM................watch it that's what happened to Tiger, he leaned that direction and got hooked on it!:D Hoppe you would be my favorite SE SM driver, the shitstorm you would keep stirred up would be worth the price of admission! Please give it serious consideration. You in there raising a storm with those guys from Florida and at RAtlanta, it is upthere on my list with a sequel for "THE HANGOVER".
Do IT!:023:

[ner88]

Tom
Read the 2010 SSB rules for Miatas.
It's an SM car with no restrictor, open tires and less weight.
but, shhhhh don't tell anyone!:D

[Bill Miller]

T allows a bunch of things that are not allowed in SS. The most significant ones would be shocks/struts and diffs.

This proposal was shot down by the membership (and loudly) 3 years ago, due to, among other things, the perceived costs of the allowed mods.

Actually Josh, it was shot down by the mfg's. They threatened to pull support for racers running their cars if the SCCA turned SSB and SSC into T4 and T5. There was a letter circulating that was signed by several of the mfg reps that pretty much stated that (I may still have a copy of it somewhere). The CRB pulled the recommendation.

[JoshS]

That was actually a slightly different proposal. The first time around it was just to turn SSB/SSC into T4/T5 as was mentioned here, and the SS drivers couldn't stomach the costs. But the one the manufacter's responded to also included merging SSB into T3 with some slower cars going to T4 with SSC. The manufacturers nixed that with excuses like "We don't want our MX-5 competing against our RX-8."

EDIT: Upon reflection, I think it was all at once. It was primarily the SSC drivers that didn't want the T allowances, and the manufacturers that didn't want SSB and T3 to be combined.

[Bill Miller]

Josh, My memory on all the details is a bit fuzzy. I believe that you are correct. They were going to move some of the SSB cars into T3, and the rest of them, along w/ the SSC cars were going to be called T4. I don't think there was a T5 in the mix. Bottom line though, the mfg's definitely scuttled the idea. And they obviously swung a big enough stick that it made the CRB pull the proposal.