Nothing is official 'till Fastrack is released?

[ebassett]

I sent a reqeust last year to the ITAC regarding a new entry into the ITB field. It was approved and sent on to the CRB for approval. I was told approval or disapproval would be in the February Fastrack. Well, no-show in February.

I sent an email wondering if it would be this month. I got a return email saying it would be decided tonight (2/2/10) and posted in the next Fastrack. I asked if i could get an email about the decision and i was told they could get fired for releasing this information.

The reason i want to know now is because events are gearing up. I want to be prepared and ready when those events roll around and not still wondering if I'm even accepted in a class or not.

So is it true that nothing from CRB is "official" till Fastrack says so?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I sent a reqeust last year to the ITAC regarding a new entry into the ITB field. It was approved and sent on to the CRB for approval. I was told approval or disapproval would be in the February Fastrack. Well, no-show in February.

I sent an email wondering if it would be this month. I got a return email saying it would be decided tonight (2/2/10) and posted in the next Fastrack. I asked if i could get an email about the decision and i was told they could get fired for releasing this information.

The reason i want to know now is because events are gearing up. I want to be prepared and ready when those events roll around and not still wondering if I'm even accepted in a class or not.

So is it true that nothing from CRB is "official" till Fastrack says so?

What was the request?

[Greg Amy]

WAG: http://www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26101

[ebassett]

To have a new car classed in the ITB field (528e to be specific). The information i sent was approved by ITAC and passed on to CRB. I was curious as to why a decision would be so secretive and i would have to wait until Fastrack was released to know the outcome.

[JeffYoung]

ITAC recommended classing the 528e in ITB. CRB rejected that, and wants it in A at a higher weight. Should be in Fastrack this coming month.

[lateapex911]

Oh, THAT request, LOL.

OK< here's what I know. When I was on the ITAC, we reviewed your request. We, strangely enough have good intel on that engine and it's potential in IT trim. We deduced that the car could not get down to an ITA weight, and recommended that it be classed in ITB. That recommendation went to the CRB, who rejected it. They feel the 'car doesn't 'fit' ITB", and that the engine is too big. They told us we had to re-recommend it for ITA, or not class it. So, we did as we were told, it is now in their hands as an ITA recommendation.

I'm sorry if ITA isn't where you think the car should be, and I am in agreement with you.

I resigned from the ITAC over issues (like this) and won't know anymore from here on in. I'll know it's ultimate fate when you know.

[ebassett]

I guess my request caused some problems within the ranks. I apologize. Thanks you to all you guys that helped get this through.

I believe the car should be in ITB but i guess CRB knows best, not you guys who drive in the IT classes.

My question still remains...Will the secret voting tonight be givin to me or will i have to wait till the new Fastrack?

[JeffYoung]

My recollection was a bit different from Jake's, I thought the car was approved it just need to be weighed and put in A, and should be in the next Fastrack.

For what it is worth Earl, Jake and I were strongly in favor of the car going in B since it was clear with its curb weight it would never make its ITA weight. The CRB had a fair response to that which is it would be the biggest motor in ITA with a ton of torque.

[Andy Bettencourt]

For what it is worth Earl, Jake and I were strongly in favor of the car going in B since it was clear with its curb weight it would never make its ITA weight. The CRB had a fair response to that which is it would be the biggest motor in ITA with a ton of torque.

As was I. It has always been policy to place a car in the 'fastest' possible class that it's minimum weight can actually be acheived.

So this is a perfect example of fundamental policy issues. Does the IT community think that a car like this should be weighted per the process in ITB (with accounts for actual HP gains and an additional adder for excessive torque) where it can actually make weight, even though it doesn't 'look' or 'smell' like an ITB car...

or

Put it in ITA with the 325e/eta that has the same motor at a weight that will be 1000% unobtainable.

I know that sounds incredibly bias, but I can't write it any other way because it makes zero sense to me other than the risk of putting it in ITB at Process weight is simply too much for so 'little' reward. You make the call. It really is a question that defines current departure in philosophy for me at least.

[Knestis]

Add it to the list.

Seriously. I just get to the point where I start to be less worried and we get some stupid thing like, "it doesn't LOOK like an ITB car."

K

[Greg Amy]

... we get some stupid thing like, "it doesn't LOOK like an ITB car."
Well it really doesn't...hey, just sayin'... :)

GA, who wonders why someone would want to race a big heavy car within ITB instead of taking a shot with a car effectively lacking a minimum weight limit - with shat-tons of torque - in ITA... :shrug:

[rcc85]

Yeah, what does an ITB car look like anyway? GTI? Volvo 142? BMW 2002? Alfa GTV? Audi Coupe? Fiero? MGB? Suzuki Swift? Plymouth Arrow? Pinto? Those cars all look so much alike, I get confused sometimes.

Bob Clifton
#05 ITB Dodge Daytona

[lateapex911]

Well it really doesn't...hey, just sayin'... :)

GA, who wonders why someone would want to race a big heavy car within ITB instead of taking a shot with a car effectively lacking a minimum weight limit - with shat-tons of torque - in ITA... :shrug:

It looks a LOT like a Volvo 242 to me. We went over this....twice, on TWO calls. I went through the ITCS and came up with several cars that were within an inch or two in dimensions and within 20 pounds that were ALREADY in ITB. So, it looks like an ITB car to me....not that that's even a valid point, LOL.

Jeff, after I wrote my resignation letter, I went to the letter tracking site and transferred all my notes. I needed to run the numbers on that car, and I recall doing that. I'm now locked out of that system. (shock!) so I can't double check. I seem to recall 2550 was the recommended weight.

Seriously, when the discussion came up, I listed our options, on the con call as: (paraphrased), "So, if understand it correctly the CRB will allow us to recommend it for ITA or not at all" We voted on ITA.

They meet in 12 minutes. and Fastrack gets released on the 20th.

IF it's approved (I see no reason it wouldn't be, but there was discussion boo hooing the car and some suggested refusing to class it at all, so, who knows, maybe that will come up again????) be prepared to use every hollow wsay bar, aluminum fastener, undercoat stripping, carbon seat, super light cage, super light fuel cel trick in the book. If you're doing this to save money because you HAVE the car, it will be far cheaper to find another platform to make competitive in the long run. (IMO)

[lateapex911]

My recollection was a bit different from Jake's, I thought the car was approved it just need to be weighed and put in A, and should be in the next Fastrack.

For what it is worth Earl, Jake and I were strongly in favor of the car going in B since it was clear with its curb weight it would never make its ITA weight. The CRB had a fair response to that which is it would be the biggest motor in ITA with a ton of torque.

Did you mean ITB? There are bigger engines with more torque in A already. (3.8L, 190 tq, stock)

[RSTPerformance]

Not classing the car all together will really prove my point that a big gap exists between ITA and ITB... Something that will take a few years to fix unfortunatly... And the "fixin" is giing to be a long painfull process.

Raymond

[lateapex911]

Not classing the car all together will really prove my point that a big gap exists between ITA and ITB... Something that will take a few years to fix unfortunatly... And the "fixin" is giing to be a long painfull process.

Raymond

I don't know about that, it is an odd duck of a car, big and heavy with a motor that has a curve more approximating a diesel than a normal car motor.

[RacerBill]

Yeah, what does an ITB car look like anyway? GTI? Volvo 142? BMW 2002? Alfa GTV? Audi Coupe? Fiero? MGB? Suzuki Swift? Plymouth Arrow? Pinto? Those cars all look so much alike, I get confused sometimes.

Bob Clifton
#05 ITB Dodge Daytona

Dodge Charger!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

[wepsbee]

Not to hijack a thread but it sounds like there is a handy formula for determining where a car should be placed. Is there an avenue to run your car through this formula to determine where you are before a request is submitted for a reclassification?

[Greg Amy]

Not any more...

[924Guy]

Not to hijack a thread but it sounds like there is a handy formula for determining where a car should be placed. Is there an avenue to run your car through this formula to determine where you are before a request is submitted for a reclassification?

Ahhh... you must be new here... ;)

[lateapex911]

Dan, (everyone else skip this, it's old news to you, LOL!)
The cliff note version: years ago cars were classed without a process/structure. Curb weight, how people think the car did in SS, and other nebulous factors were used, resulting in some classifications that didn't jive. Post classification rules changes benefited some cars more than others. Some of us used the net to discuss that here on this site, about 6+ years ago. Eventually, we had a mass of direction/interest and many of us wound up on the ITAC, the govering committee of IT.

A Process was created, and there was "the Great Realignment" (tGR) about 5 years ago. tGR affected 20 or so 'worse case offenders' and moved them into line with a structure that had as it's foundation, performance targets for each class. The Process used a formula of sorts, with adders for a cars physical elements to predict performance and align it with the performance target for the class. Essentially it uses stock HP as a starting point as discussion and analysis revealed that it was the best predictor of IT power. Different engines get different factors, then the other modifications are made for suspension, etc. Weight is the operative unit.

For 5 years, we adjusted cars on a case by case basis, usually baed on member requests. "Please review XYZ, it doesn't seem to jive with other cars in the class" is the typical request. As time passed, the Process was sharpened, and loose ends were attended to. This summer we rolled out "V.2.0", which removed areas where repeatability wasn't great, added evidentiary standards and buttoned things down generarlly. Like V.1.0 it's goal was to answer the members desires for repeatability, transparncy and fairness. The differences in terms of the weight the process spit out were nil for a median ITB, or ITA car. FWD adder was adjusted in the highest class, IIRC. Other than that, it was a buttoned up version of what we'd been doing for 5 years.

Through this period, the CRB (our immediate bosses, they answer to the BoD, and the BoD answers to you) was complicit and supportive of our actions. This past summer though, they objected to a number of recommendations we made, and held them in limbo, unknown to us. Eventually it was learned that they were at odds with the recommendations, and indeed, our methods. This was a 180 degree shift in the situation. Then they told us we could no longer adjust cars....at all. We then drafted responses to be published in Fastrack for all the requests/cars that we'd recommended already (some were on the books for more than 9 months by now) stating that we "Don't adjust cars". That never made the publication, and the CRB reversed the position, and we did the adjustments over again.

Some stuck, and have been published. Others have been rejected. Others have been sent back to the ITAC and we have been given options "X class or nothing, instead of Y class". And still others have been processed, but the weights the Process produced, and the ITAC recommended (to keep everything in line, consistent and balanced) have been changed by the CRB to weights they think are better.

The CRB stated, on the last con call, theat, essentially they absolutely do not support the core of the Process, which is stock HP. They feel displacement is a factor that must be considered more extensively. When making a recommendation for a cars weight, they instructed the ITAC to "Make it make sense" when compared to other similar cars. For example, a recommendation for a 2.0L car should "line up with" other 2.0L cars already listed.

The ITAC feels that a 2.0L car that has 120hp stock will not compete well with a 2.0L car with 140hp stock, all other things being equal, and using displacement to "line things up" is a bad path to follow.

The ITAC looks back at 5 years of the Process and finds it has resulted in far better equity and competition, that the category has perhaps ever seen, and notes that the clauses in the rulebook that allow the ITAC to adjust a cars weight because of "overdog domination" have never needed to be used. In other words, the Process is working.

Note that this "Predict, run the numbers, set and essentially forget" methodology is absolutely the opposite of whats been done for the entire existence of the club. Weight adjustments have occurred nearly exclusively as a result of on track observations, mostly at the Runoffs. Also note that the IT category is much different than the other categories in the club, with a 300+ model count to administer, and no singular event with full tech to evaluate performance. Our category is fundamentally different, and requires a different approach.

The CRB has vacillated of late, dramatically at times, but seems to be settling on an approach that is "old school", and uses "What we think we know" to 'adjust" cars. The ITAC is ..or was...philosophically opposed to such an approach, and the overwhelming input of it's members agrees.

I say "was" because this past 10 week period has seen the resignation of half the body, including Andy, the chairman. It's safe to say the resignations have come as protests over CRB actions or edicts, and the conflict those actions and edicts have placed ITAC members in with relation to the members.

Our members want clear communication and a transparent process. They want the Process published. A 'gag order' was sent to the ITAC, (Later it is suspected, but has not been confirmed, that it was not representative of the entire CRB, but of one member sending a warning) and Kirk resigned, citing the the members first principals of transparency and communication..

Our members have been clear that they support the Process and want it applied fairly across the board. Recent actions by the CRB of changing recommendations to suit their position, but ignoring the Process recommendation, as well as clear position statements denouncing the core of the Process, as well as the inability to suggest a method that meets our members principals of repeatability, transparency and fairness, as well as other issues, led to the resignation of the other three.

Of the remaining members on the ITAC, it isn't for me to say what their position is. I know they are troubled by the events, and I know that they want to serve the members and the category.

So, that's where we stand.

This has obviously been a drawn out event, and all the situations I've mentioned have been discussed heavily, and there is more specific information in many threads. V.2.0 has been 'published" over on RRAX.com.

[JLawton]

Holy christ Dan, ya been livin' under a rock???


;)


Don't worry, your car is light enough!!!

[lateapex911]

I know....I gave Dan the benefit of the doubt. But I aint typing all THAT again!

[ilium]

Eddie,

Will be nice to have you in ITA. I just finished putting in a new cage, and I should be done converting my Miata over to ITA by the end of the month. I'll get to the first competition school that I can find after that. Will you just be running Track Trials or do you plan on running some club races also?

Andy,

What kind of weight did you guys saddle poor Eddie's car with for ITA?

[lateapex911]

The 528? It was recommended to the CRB at 2550. I imagine that's what they will approve.

[ebassett]

Hi Joe! Good to talk to you. Hope you had a good winter.

I have been working here and there to get the car up to speed. My goal is to try and run all the TT this season for SCDIV. As you saw last year the car was about a second off you guys CSP Miata's for TT. I still had weight that needed to be removed. I believe it’s about 100lbs lighter this year. I still need to finish the cage as its still at 4 points. I wasn't going to pursue adding more than TT equipment until I heard if it would be classed or not.

2550 weight will never be attainable. I know that and I'm sure most of you do also.

When I started this project over a year ago I was running solo events with it stock. I knew little about cars period. I spent a lot of time reading, understanding cars and racing in general. Besides online racing I’ve never been in a racecar, but it transferred over into real life racing pretty easily as you Joe saw during last year’s TT's.

The car may never (and probably will never) be a front runner. It may be a mid pack car, it may not. A lot depends on the driver and his skill, not just the equipment. Overall I have enjoyed learning, testing and driving my car. It’s something I built myself and I've enjoyed every minute of it. If I wanted a class winning car I would have bought one like a lot of people do. That's not my style.

If the cars approved for ITA I can accept that. I will continue to build the car to IT specs and plan to race on a competitive level one day.

I have seen that my request has caused dissention in the ranks between a lot of people. I want to thanks you all for what you do for this organization and its members. Joe, you guys at SCR have done a great job getting TT going and helping beginners like myself. I thank you and look forward to many years racing in the SCDIV.

[gran racing]

Eddie, the debate on how things are handled such as the car you requested to have classed is just on piece of straw on the pile.

As long as you're having fun out there, that's what matters.

[wepsbee]

Thanks for the history lesson Jake. Sorry to have made you type all that. It is very informative. However in my defence being a relative newbie I have been concentrating on getting my car squared away and learning how to drive. This is by itself daunting enough without getting involved in organizational issues. The depth of these discussions require other than just a passing knowledge of how the CRB, ITAC and BoD groups are supposed to work. Also I am in SCCA for the fun of racing and you guys have to put up with too much B.S. and aggravation. I do understand someone is needed in that capacity to support the general racing population and to be really honest I am glad its not me.
Even though I have known Andy, Jake and some others who have supported IT only briefly it is clear IT drivers are losing great assets in the fight. Sorry to see you leave the ITAC.
REMEMBER 2010 has been declared " Be kind to a newbie year".

[wepsbee]

Holy christ Dan, ya been livin' under a rock???


;)


Don't worry, your car is light enough!!!
A certain Ct. master car builder we all know might have a different idea.

[Bill Miller]

Add it to the list.

Seriously. I just get to the point where I start to be less worried and we get some stupid thing like, &quot;it doesn't LOOK like an ITB car.&quot;

K

Exactly. Maybe it's time for someone to write in again and request that they remove their heads from their asses again.

[JLawton]

REMEMBER 2010 has been declared " Be kind to a newbie year".

Hmmmmmm. I don't think going into your third year of racing makes you a newbie any more. And we have been going easy on you!! :p

[wepsbee]

Hmmmmmm. I don't think going into your third year of racing makes you a newbie any more. And we have been going easy on you!! :p

I was hoping to stretch it out as far as I could!!! I guess I might be in trouble this year then:o I will have to get Matt to get me some extra something from somewhere.

[lateapex911]

I was hoping to stretch it out as far as I could!!! I guess I might be in trouble this year then:o I will have to get Matt to get me some extra something from somewhere.

That extra something from somewhere is in the car, real low, close to the middle of the seat, right where the sub straps go through.

;)

[wepsbee]

That extra something from somewhere is in the car, real low, close to the middle of the seat, right where the sub straps go through.

;)

HMMMMMMMMM. Oh I get it now:happy204: Right you are, confidence is building, the rest will follow.

[Andy Bettencourt]

HMMMMMMMMM. Oh I get it now:happy204: Right you are, confidence is building, the rest will follow.

Lemme drive that motha.

[wepsbee]

Lemme drive that motha.

i am planning on exactly that. The car will be getting a couple of upgrades and then I would like to attend a test day at NHMS. That will be your chance!!!!

[Greg Amy]

The car will be getting a couple of upgrades and then I would like to attend a test day at NHMS. That will be your chance!!!!
When was the last time Bettencourt even sat in a front-wheel-drive car?? Hell, I'm not sure he even knows what one is; he just thinks FWD is some kinda voodoo percentage-remover in a weight calculation spreadsheet... ;)

Nope, I'm your guy for a test day. :happy204:

[Andy Bettencourt]

When was the last time Bettencourt even sat in a front-wheel-drive car?? Hell, I'm not sure he even knows what one is; he just thinks FWD is some kinda voodoo percentage-remover in a weight calculation spreadsheet... ;)

Nope, I'm your guy for a test day. :happy204:

Luckily, I get to wrestle one every day. Let's both drive. Slow lap pays the other guys entry for the weekend...I like that. :D

[Greg Amy]

Luckily, I get to wrestle one every day. Let's both drive. Slow lap pays the other guys entry for the weekend...I like that. :D
Ooooo! A throw-down! I'm in, Rowdy! Even better, it's not OUR car we'll ball up in the process!

:smilie_pokal:

[lateapex911]

Dan's reaction reading what he has wrought: :blink:

[Andy Bettencourt]

Ooooo! A throw-down! I'm in, Rowdy! Even better, it's not OUR car we'll ball up in the process!

:smilie_pokal:

LOL!!!!! I'll drive it like Joe...no wait, I'll drive it like Jeff...no wait, I'll just go it alone! HAHAHAHA!

[wepsbee]

Dan's reaction reading what he has wrought: :blink:

You betcha:o

[wepsbee]

Actually I would really appreciate both of your opinions. Engine only has 3 races on it so I believe it will hold. Suspension will be looked at by the Ct guru of IT in March.