Golf IV in B and Beetle in C?

[Ralf]

The other thread mentioning the Golf IV being in ITB kind of surprised me, so it got me looking at the specs. Why does the Golf IV belong in B at 2350 pounds and the New Beetle belong in C at 2760 pounds? As far as I know, they are the same car other then their external shape. Other then wheel size, their specs are the same. And can there really be a 410 pound difference in the cars?
And one last thing, if the Golf IV is listed, how come the Jetta IV isn't? There are alot of them available now for cheap.

[shwah]

Someone thought the beetle could not get down to ITB weight. Remember weight is set based on a target lb/hp ratio for each class.

Someone just needs to request the jetta to be classed. However, it may end up in C if the ITAC feels it will never be able to get down to ITB weight.

[Ralf]

Talking with Albin, he isn't even at spec weight, so how did someone figure the IV would get there?

[Knestis]

My MkIII is within about 40# of minimum, with a big fuel cell (aluminum box) and lots of optional tubes in the cage. Beran P's MkIII was at the minimum as I understood it.

K

[StephenB]

My MkIII is within about 40# of minimum, with a big fuel cell (aluminum box) and lots of optional tubes in the cage. Beran P's MkIII was at the minimum as I understood it.

K

Actually beran runs ballest to get UP to minimum... I saw it this weekend after tech... :)

Stephen

[StephenB]

Talking with Albin, he isn't even at spec weight, so how did someone figure the IV would get there?

Someone has already made a IV and it makes minimum...

[Ralf]

Someone has already made a IV and it makes minimum...

How much does the driver weigh? :blink:
And so if the IV can make weight, does the Beetle have to have a full interior in it plus ballast to make weight? 410 pounds is a lot of weight. :o

[StephenB]

Ralf,

I am 100% positive about barens car being under weight since I saw that with my own eyes... that car is a near perfect build and even utilizes a carbon fiber splitter...

As far as the A4... that is hearsay from some people that I trust and that build awesome cars BUT I have not scene it nor do I know the actual weight firsthand.

Stephen

[Ralf]

Stephen,
I guess its a good thing then that it can make weight since that may make it a viable car to get if one needed to build another VW. My search for A2 cars here in the middle of the country for parts hasn't turned up anything good. A4 Jetta's are plentyful and a quick search on Craigslist have turned up 2 for $2500.

[Bill Miller]

does the Beetle have to have a full interior in it plus ballast to make weight? 410 pounds is a lot of weight. :o

I don't think we'll ever know, as I don't think one has been built. We went round and round about this when the car was classified. Unfortunately, there were people in positions of influence that worked off assumptions and wags.

[Knestis]

It looked like a tweener when we did it and the rule of thumb at the time - informed by folks here - was that if it looked like a car couldn't make weight, or couldn't do so without a truly heroic effort, it went heavy in the lower class. There are arguments that some would prefer to race a car above its spec minimum at a lower race weight in a faster class, but would be knowingly handicapping a car right out of the gate.

Of course, all of those assumptions lived on top of the first principle that we would eventually get all cars aligned to the then-process. That may or may not stand at this point.

K

[shwah]

The A3 can certainly get to weight. I know that Aaron was carrying ballast in his, and likely still would have with the PS reinstalled.

[OTLimit]

Talking with Albin, he isn't even at spec weight (but hasn't tried very hard, either), so how did someone figure the IV would get there?

Fixed that for you. Everyone needs to understand that the HP car has gotten the bulk of his attention for the last two years. The ITB car gets enough attention to keep it running, get it to the track, and let him have fun instead of fighting it on a constant basis (like the HP car). And because of what happened at MAM last Saturday, the ITB car is getting a lot of attention right now.

[Bill Miller]

Someone has already made a IV and it makes minimum...


Would like to know more about that car Stephen, as that's 550#+ that has to come out, w/ a 190# driver, to get to 2350#. Good luck w/ an A4 Jetta, because there's an extra 120# or so. An A3 Golf 2dr started off roughly 200# lighter than the A4 version, yet they're both at 2350# race weight.

Curb weights for 'equivalent' models (base GL)

Golf 2dr 2720# +/- 10#
NB 2765# +/- 10#
Jetta 4d 2840# +/- 10#

Those numbers are pretty consistent from '99 to '03, varying by a couple of lbs either way.

[rx7chris]

If someone wants to come by, you can scale the bug i'm selling. It's in the classifieds if anyone is intrested.

[D. Ellis-Brown]

I for one would like to see the MK IV Jetta added to the ITCS, and at the 2350 weight. Having built a MK III Jetta, the number one issue we worked was to get the weight out of the car. Consequently we had to put it on a "rotissorie" . We removed all of the undercoating, drilled out the welds on un-necessory brackets, removed the seam sealant, etc....2 solid weeks of hard, nasty work, but we were able to get the weight down to 2350 with less than 2 gallons and a 190 lb driver. I would like to see the MK IV Jetta at the same weight. Might be a fun project.......
David Ellis-Brown

[gran racing]

Kirk, the only issue with the car going into ITC is how few cars race in that class (overall, not one or two off races or regions). No fault of how it was classed. If ITC were like ITA is now, you'd see more Bettles built.

[Knestis]

>> ...drilled out the welds on un-necessory brackets...

You and I have had this discussion, I think, but I anticipate someone will chime in on this - so why not me?

:)

K

EDIT for Dave - The ITAC talked about that issue, in terms of whether it would be "more attractive" as a too-light-to-achieve B car or a fat car in C. We eventually came back to the first principle that it wasn't our job to engineer - or even consider - the popularity of a class or make/model option. Cameron proposed moving (or cross-listing?) it to B and the response was based on the same logic: If ITC is a class, cars that fit there should be put there.

[shwah]

David, that all sounds IT kosher except the removing of un-necessary brackets. Those are necessary to remain IT legal.

[RSTPerformance]

Yet another reason we should have dual classing...

#1 reason let people (like the MR2 drivers and possible beatle drivers) choose the class they want, not some guy/gal who thinks they know what people want.

#2 reason, double dippers = more income for the regions = lower or at least stable entry fees

#3 reason, we dual class the Miata's, and thats just one reason those cars are so popular...

Raymond "I know... Being classed heavy (acording to the process) wont prevent you from winning races" Blethen

[D. Ellis-Brown]

When I say un-necessary brackets, it was those that held the old rear seat back, the ones on the floor that held the carpeting, the ones that held the interior trim panels, and the like, ditto for the ones that held the stock exhaust system and the exhaust shield and the like. Can the frame for the sunroof be removed?, YES, but the rear compartment shelf... NO, The driver side stock seat runners that are welded to the tunnel. YES, to faciltate replacement mountings, Audio systems may be removed in their entirety, Air bag systems maybe removed, AC System and associated brackets, Parking Brakes, mechanisms and actuating components may be removed....etc. hood and trunk latches maybe removed, etc....Again, this is how we intepreted the rules, and consequently we included brackets. Instead of cutting out the "un-necessary" brackets, we drilled out the welds, and removed the bracket.
Now I'm sure that someone can debate some the brackets that I refer. But when we built the car, in 2006, the rules stated in the section 9.1.3 B "Intent" ..... No compenent or part normally found in a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, alterd or removed for the purpose of obtaining any competitive advantage. As I stated in a previous discussion back prior to the 2008 edit of this statement, I / we did not gain any competitive advantage by getting the car down to the "Legal" race weight of 2350 lbs.. When the wording was changed, which I considered an error and I forwarded my concerns to the ITAC, we did not review or even considered going back and re-install any brackets that may be in question. Getting the car down to the minimum weight does not give us any competitive advantage. The primary statement of the Intent of IT rules is to restrict modifications to be useful and necessary to construct a safe race car and that is what we did.

As a side note...... What rule within the ITCS, or GCR, Permits the removal of the factory / stock seat belts?. We have always removed them, but in numerous times I have read the ITCS and GCR, I have never seen the words that state 'It is permitted to remove the factory installed seat belts" Please advise..... Thanks David Ellis-Brown

[Gary L]

As a side note...... What rule within the ITCS, or GCR, Permits the removal of the factory / stock seat belts?. We have always removed them, but in numerous times I have read the ITCS and GCR, I have never seen the words that state 'It is permitted to remove the factory installed seat belts" Please advise..... Thanks David Ellis-Brown

9.1.3.D.9.e (page 365 of 2010 GCR) reads in part:


e. Front passenger seat, rear seat back, rear seat bottom cushion(s), sun visors, seat belts and their attaching hardware and bracketry may be removed.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Two things:

My general rule on brackets: If it's welded, leave it. If it's bolted in and what it held can be removed, take it out if it does nothing else.

On the Beetle:

That decision was based on Curb weight and estimated potential loss. It WAS a guess, but the logic and data were sound. But also, because it was a twin to the MKIII at the time, it was in interesting case study in what people would migrate to...a heavy car that was right in the target area for pwr/weight, or a lighter car that may not be able to make weight.

[shwah]

Well there is a real ITC Beetle that was just sold by a guy in FL. Hopefully we can get an idea of the weight it hits from the new owner and verify whether it is in the right class.

As far a brackets - the caveat I have to Andy's policy is that if the bracket is NOT present on any iteration of the car on the spec line, it can be removed - welded or not. This is rare, but there are cases for instance where a beefy tow hook is added to the unibody mid life cycle which was not there the years prior. Depending on location I would consider removing that.

If the brackets for systems that are allowed to be removed are present on all cars on the spec line, and there is no specific allowance to remove the brackets, then I would leave them.

[Knestis]

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/gti/images/itcockpit2.jpg

So I can whittle out the bracket that captures the rear seat pivot? And the vertical bracket in front of the main hoop, that supported the seatbelt tensioner? And that big ol' bracket that held up the front of the back seat?

AWESOME SAUCE...!

Kirk (who isn't at minimum weight but can now get closer)

[Knestis]

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/gti/images/itrear.jpg

...and the bracket that supported the rear C-pillar cover and load area cover hardware?

This gets better and better.

K

[Knestis]

Oooh! And the bracket that the original hood catch bolted to...? I probably have to leave the pieces of that, that hold up the radiator... Hmmm.

K

[jjjanos]

So I can whittle out the bracket that captures the rear seat pivot? And the vertical bracket in front of the main hoop, that supported the seatbelt tensioner? And that big ol' bracket that held up the front of the back seat?

AWESOME SAUCE...!

Kirk (who isn't at minimum weight but can now get closer)

"seat belts and their attaching hardware and bracketry may be removed."

2 schools of thought -
A. That's part of the hardware and bracketry that can be removed
-or-
B. The tensioner isn't part of the attaching hardware and you are out of compliance because you lack the tensioner.

[Bill Miller]

"seat belts and their attaching hardware and bracketry may be removed."

2 schools of thought -
A. That's part of the hardware and bracketry that can be removed
-or-
B. The tensioner isn't part of the attaching hardware and you are out of compliance because you lack the tensioner.


Actually, I would argue that the tensioner is part of the seat belt.

Here's the link to that ITC Beetle that Chris mentioned.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5001016-ITC-Beetle-F.S.-Florida

Too bad the OP edited out the list of things done to the car. Really curious about how much it weighs.

[Knestis]

"seat belts and their attaching hardware and bracketry may be removed."

2 schools of thought -
A. That's part of the hardware and bracketry that can be removed
-or-
B. The tensioner isn't part of the attaching hardware and you are out of compliance because you lack the tensioner.

...or C. The tensioner, which is intergral to the belt assembly, can simply be unbolted, but the bracket that's welded to the chassis has to stay.

Why is the easiest, most obvious solution not a school of thought...? Not convoluted enough...?

:blink:

K

[jjjanos]

...or C. The tensioner, which is intergral to the belt assembly, can simply be unbolted, but the bracket that's welded to the chassis has to stay.

Why is the easiest, most obvious solution not a school of thought...? Not convoluted enough...?


How did you describe that piece of metal? "...the bracket..."
So, it's a bracket.

The bracket is integral to an assembly that can be removed, n'est-ce pas?
We are allowed to remove bracketry, n'est-ce pas?
Does that bracket serve any other function?

[Bill Miller]

If it's welded to the chassis, is it still a bracket, or is it part of the chassis?

[Knestis]

If it's welded to the chassis, is it still a bracket, or is it part of the chassis?

There's the real question...

And of course, this requires that the specific allowance uses the term "bracket" somewhere.

K

[rx7chris]

Just got word on the bug. Roughly 2360 w/o driver and fuel. GET SOME.

[shwah]

So on first effort 100 or less over ITB weight.

[rx7chris]

yeah, could have been lighter if i didn't have to patch a sunroof and kept out the extra cage tubing. I'm sure there's some more weight to be cut, but it doesn't really matter since the car is in C and has to be ballasted up to minimum. Either way, I was pretty pumped to hear how light I was able to get it. Shows it's got potential I think. Have to see how it actually does on the track now.

[Bill Miller]

Just got word on the bug. Roughly 2360 w/o driver and fuel. GET SOME LEAD, LOT'S OF LEAD.

:D

[Gary L]

So on first effort 100 or less over ITB weight.
Come again? 2360 + 180 driver + 30 fuel = 2560. That's 200+ lbs heavier than the Golfs in ITB, right?

[Flyinglizard]

Does anyone have the 6# harmonic balance that bolts to the cross member?? Does anyone have two horns?

If you take all of the bolts out of the car, that is what the chassis should look like, according to the rules as I have read them.

Is the big rear seat housing a part of the seat or chassis. As the Pastor says " slippery slope" . Can you cut the rear parcel shelf supports out? No IMHO/MM

David, WE are comming for you soon. Mike is going to drive the old welded up Roc in ITB. Hope to see you on the track then . PS, put all those brackets back in tho :) MM

[shwah]

Come again? 2360 + 180 driver + 30 fuel = 2560. That's 200+ lbs heavier than the Golfs in ITB, right?

I was working on the assumption that they would not carry the classification error over to the Beetle. 2350 spec weight works out to something like 22% hp gain. BTW - no need to finish with 30# of fuel...

[Gary L]

30 lbs of fuel... must have been my start-of-race mentality kicking in automatically.

As for the "classification error", no comment. :)

[Bill Miller]

I was working on the assumption that they would not carry the classification error over to the Beetle. 2350 spec weight works out to something like 22% hp gain. BTW - no need to finish with 30# of fuel...

And that's the dilemma Chris. When you don't fix an error on one car's classification, what do you do when essentially the same car comes along, only in a different box?

[BullFish]

Hey Guys,

I am the new owner of the Beetle that Chris built! I ran it at Mid Ohio this past weekend, the first time it has ever turned a wheel in competition. With me in the car (193 with gear on) and a full tank of fuel, we estimate we are 130lbs under weight to make tech at the end of the race. There are a few minor changes in store for the car that will add weight, but we will still be adding ballast to make weight. The car is not nearly fully developed, as it sports a stock driveline, no diff, and I think the spring rates are off. All of that said, I had a blast this past weekend and finished every lap (which is a feat for us this year.. geez!) I plan on bringing the car to the ARRC as long as the funds hold up. We will see. I need to pick the brains of the VW guys here for help on setting up the chassis. I am now coming full circle, as I started racing 20 years ago in Vee's, and still have my AS Mustang, but I am having a blast with the ITC guys here in Cendiv.

On a side note, I heard a rumor of an ITC Feature event possibly coming together next year at Nelson Ledges... Possibly being called "The C Cup." Lets see what happens.

Thanks for listening to the newbie ramble... See you guys out there.

Kristian Smith

[Conover]

Hey Guys,

I am the new owner of the Beetle that Chris built! I ran it at Mid Ohio this past weekend, the first time it has ever turned a wheel in competition. With me in the car (193 with gear on) and a full tank of fuel, we estimate we are 130lbs under weight to make tech at the end of the race. There are a few minor changes in store for the car that will add weight, but we will still be adding ballast to make weight. The car is not nearly fully developed, as it sports a stock driveline, no diff, and I think the spring rates are off. All of that said, I had a blast this past weekend and finished every lap (which is a feat for us this year.. geez!) I plan on bringing the car to the ARRC as long as the funds hold up. We will see. I need to pick the brains of the VW guys here for help on setting up the chassis. I am now coming full circle, as I started racing 20 years ago in Vee's, and still have my AS Mustang, but I am having a blast with the ITC guys here in Cendiv.

On a side note, I heard a rumor of an ITC Feature event possibly coming together next year at Nelson Ledges... Possibly being called "The C Cup." Lets see what happens.

Thanks for listening to the newbie ramble... See you guys out there.

Kristian Smith


I hope you make it to the ARRC! I want to check out that car! Glad your having fun!