July 2012 Fastrack

[pfrichardson]

...are posted:

http://www.scca.com/clubracing/content.cfm?cid=44472

Pam Richardson

[Greg Amy]

Thanks, Pam!

http://www.scca.com/assets/July2012prelimMinutes.pdf
http://www.scca.com/assets/TB12-07prelimJuneMeetingJulyFastrack.pdf

[JeffYoung]

Much appreciated.

[Greg Amy]

The full-up...

http://www.scca.com/assets/12-fastrack-july.pdf

[Rabbit05]

I saw that all ITB Volvo's are now in ITC ?? :(

Or am I missing a Volvo model or two ?

[Ralf]

You're missing the 142/144.

[evanwebb]

That's just brilliant. A car that has run three seconds a lap faster than the ITC lap record at Summit Point that has stood for more than a decade is now moved to ITC. Wonderful.

[Chip42]

what are the current cars (240 volvos) running compared to ITC? what was the weight then, and now as an ITC car? are you sure the summit point record is in a 240, not a 142/4? are you aware of the fact that there were known to be a large number of not exactly legal volvos in ITB around that time who have since mostly moved on or come in line with the rules?(IIRC these were 14X cars but they are simillar to the 240s. They were making too much power, call it cheating if you like, but I think it had more to do with local group rules creep beyond the book more so than any one group or racer intentionally cheating to find an advantage over the others) My point is that it's not likely to be as bad as you are making it out to be. and if we're wrong, ask the ITAC to fix it. but prove us wrong first.

this was in fastrack for member input, complete with new weights in both B and C. we waited a few MONTHS before making the change, which was based on the recalculated, and very low, process ITB weight (unachievable, maybe by a couple of hundred lbs) or a high for the class, but achievable, process ITC weight. everyone's input is and was welcome, but we recieved nothing on this topic.

[Gregg]

are you sure the summit point record is in a 240, not a 142/4? are you aware of the fact that there were known to be a large number of not exactly legal volvos in ITB...
This.

The car Evan is talking about specifically is a 240. And Chip has hit it on the head. It's not often that you see an ITB car w/ more straight line speed that a good deal of the ITS cars in the same run group.

We likely won't be seeing this car again in the MARRS series anytime soon.

[dave parker]

That's just brilliant. A car that has run three seconds a lap faster than the ITC lap record at Summit Point that has stood for more than a decade is now moved to ITC. Wonderful.

No one ever said that the Datsun 510 that set the ITC lap record at Summit Point was a legal car.

Holy crap, did I just say that! The horror.

cheers
dave parker

[evanwebb]

This.

The car Evan is talking about specifically is a 240. And Chip has hit it on the head. It's not often that you see an ITB car w/ more straight line speed that a good deal of the ITS cars in the same run group.

We likely won't be seeing this car again in the MARRS series anytime soon.

I certainly hope you are right Gregg! Especially given that the guy really couldn't drive to save his life either, even Dave Parker said he should find other pursuits! :-)

Anyway, it's one car at one track, not enough data to base anything on but nonetheless it has me worried... especially when I see that 2700 lb brick barreling down on me!

[Chip42]

it has me worried... especially when I see that 2700 lb brick barreling down on me!

given the nature of run groups and the generally increasing weight of newer cars, you will be on track at some point with 2700# and higher cars, likely with more speed than an IT-legal Volvo 240 should ever attain. So having something "heavy" in your class shouldn't bother you at all, you already share the track with heavy cars and should have a race-length advantage in class due to tire wear. having something in your class that is too light should make you quite upset, though.

[jumbojimbo]

I see a 79 Volvo 240 DL registered in ITB for the upcoming MO race.

Am I mising the IT spec line for a 79 240?

[Harvey]

No you aren't missing anything that car is now in ITC???????

[jumbojimbo]

No you aren't missing anything that car is now in ITC???????

So it's likely a 79 242/244 not a 240 and will be running in ITC.

[Harvey]

That would be my guess since a 242 is nothing more than the 2 door version of the 240 series car.

[Chip42]

Its still up to the entrant to know what class his car is in. Many people don't keep up with the rule changes.

[jjjanos]

Or that's the car in his garage and he registered it but intends to run something else. I've seen RX7's registered in ITB and when the driver gets to the track, he just changes the class at registration.

[rsportvolvo]

I'm a bit late here, but there are some errors with the line items. The 2.0L B20 engine is OHV, not SOHC as listed in the new line item. Also the wheel base increased to 104.3" in 1979, so the 3rd line item needs correction too.

If the newly classified specs for the 240 are not supported by track data (i.e. the cars are too fast for ITC), then a re-look is part of the normal process. Time will tell.