IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?

I had one comment, and one observation -

Comment: Anyone who thinks IT going national isn't going to make it more expensive for the "cares about where he finishes, but doesn't quite have the budget to win yet" guy is fooling himself. Yes, the guy who is just out there to have fun won't be affected; he'll just have more cars lapping him each race. And yes, the guy with the deep pockets will just spend whatever it takes to keep up with the rest of the front-runners. But those guys who are maybe top-10 drivers, who want to get faster and are putting whatever spare dollar they can find into either the car or the driver are going to be pushed further back.

IT is supposed to be the "affordable" class; at least with respect to the other classes. Yes, people can spend big bucks, and some do; but make IT a national class and I bet you'll see many more big spenders coming in. And yes, I do see that as bad for the class. Maybe not Club Racing overall, but for the class yes. The only mitigating factor would be how many of those big spenders would be "national only" competitors. I'm not sure I want to find out.

Observation: For MARRS 1 we had 50 cars registered in SSM, 43-44 cars in SM, and maybe a half dozen Miatas in ITA that were either double-dipping or were shut out of SSM. As of today, with just over 2 weeks to go, there are 12 SMs registered for the Spring National at Summit. I'm not sure how representative this is of other regions, but I have to wonder if maybe some guys decided that national racing isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knestis

...and (1) is that a bad thing? (2) Under what conditions to preserve what's good about Regional IT would it be worthwhile to do?

K

---

this gets into how i feel the club should align itself competiviely against NASA.

NASA sells track time, to anyone, anywhere, with any car.
what SCCA should be selling is competition, history, prestige, etc.

going to the "top 24" format and eliminating regional racing effectively also gets rid of the "laid back/fun/hobby" aspect of regional racing. that would effectively be turned over to NASA. SCCA should try and establish itself as "the best amatuer racers in the country" and use some pro racing to help that image.

this is just the musings in my head without a whole lot of thought behind it....YMMV

I have followed this thread with great interest. I fit the profile of the “new” IT racer and would like to offer my opinion to the discussion.

I have no illusions about ever getting a “ride” and while I would like to think my skills are slightly above average I am also realistic. If I ever want to be at the front of a field I need seat time and car prep. Both of those things require $$$$ and time. Do I want to be competitive? Yes, do I want to race with a bunch of guys and gals that want to have fun? Yes, Am I willing to help a fellow racer out if they need a replacement part? Yes, Would I like to be at the front of the field? Yes.

I chose IT because I could race the car I wanted to race, a 36 year old Datsun. What class it was in didn’t matter and neither did the regional/national distinction. It still doesn’t matter to me. I never considered IT to be entry level. FWIW, with some window clips and other minor stuff I could race in Production and be a backmarker just like I am now. J I think that many of the new racers fit this category. They want to race in the car of their choosing that fits their current pocketbook.

I have made new friends, re-acquainted myself with old friends, and I am having a blast on track and finally getting to race. The racing is not made by having a National championship in my class. The racing is about the people, the friends, the fun we all have as we drive around on a closed course for bragging rights until the next race.

I have been asked by several racer friends “Why IT, you can’t go to the runoff’s?” My response has always been “I don’t really care.” I want to have fun, good, clean, close competition and I get that now in IT. It has been suggested by friends that I look at SRF or Spec-wrecker Miata as a way for either cost effective racing or national prestige and I simply don’t care.

If you want my opinion, leave IT alone. It is working fine and if someone wants to go to the runoffs, let them find one of the other classes.

I chose SCCA because I know the safety record and background of the club. The other major racing organization is still an unknown quantity for me, but that may change if SCCA doesn’t get their act together. The “temporary membership” fiasco that has affected SOLO participation still has me hacked off.

I respect each and every opinion voiced in this thread. Is there really a "them" in Topeka?
It makes me think of the old line "We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us"

Thanks for letting me voice an opinion…….


Paul

I have certainly learned something here. The train of thought that National racing is so screwed up that why would we want to be involved, and that the IT rules process is pretty good right now, are both pretty valid reasons to be skeptical.

***David:

The Cat National last year had a handful (OK, maybe 2 handfuls) of IT entrants. There is NO WAY that our participation in that event helped the National race significantly.***

Bill, there is ONE reason that the IT cars are invited to the Cat National. To support/make the event profitable. It all started out inviting the IT cars, then when Spec Miata was Regional the IT cars were not invited for IIRC two years while the Spec Miata for those two years offered 65 & 70 cars, next the Spec Miata became National & there were not enough Regional Spec Miata to support/make the event profitable. Now the IT cars are the red headed step child again. If you don't buy my understanding ask the Milwaukee Region R.E.

With your hand full of IT cars last year are you taking the economy into account. I have not counted but the Regional car counts at the Farm & RA are looking pretty low.

That last sentence is the best sum of the situation for a bunch of us that I have heard. Thanks Dick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickita15

I have certainly learned something here. The train of thought that National racing is so screwed up that why would we want to be involved, and that the IT rules process is pretty good right now, are both pretty valid reasons to be skeptical.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pballance

If you want my opinion, leave IT alone. It is working fine and if someone wants to go to the runoffs, let them find one of the other classes.

---

What everyone who says this doesn't understand is that the Runoffs participation and National participation in general is waning. One of the goals (I assume) of proposals like this one is to address this problem.

In other words, it's one thing to say, "find another class." But the problem is that there aren't very many interesting, popular classes to find anymore if you want to go to the Runoffs. You really need to think bigger picture.

>> But those guys who are maybe top-10 drivers, who want to get faster and are putting whatever spare dollar they can find into either the car or the driver are going to be pushed further back. ...

So would those of you who feel this way complain if IT at the Regional level got more popular, causing competitive pressures to increase both participation and budgets at the front of the existing grids? Say 10 new, well-funded drivers show up next year in your class in your region. Presume that NOTHING changes about IT rules, etc. ...

How do you respond to that?

K

Oh, we understand completely Josh. Topeka wants to "fix" the Boreoffs by bringing us to the party. Real multi-marque racing. Stable and rational rule set. High car counts.

Their big picture is we "fix" their problems.

My big picture is "their" problems get injected into my class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickita15

I have certainly learned something here. The train of thought that National racing is so screwed up that why would we want to be involved, and that the IT rules process is pretty good right now, are both pretty valid reasons to be skeptical.

---

I agree, Dick, but I imagine there's a whole lot more to this than we know. I'm waiting to react until I hear the details. For what it's worth, I hope it's a "Let the strong survive and the weak wither" approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffYoung

Oh, we understand completely Josh. Topeka wants to "fix" the Boreoffs by bringing us to the party. Real multi-marque racing. Stable and rational rule set. High car counts.

Their big picture is we "fix" their problems.

My big picture is "their" problems get injected into my class.

---

Makes sense. I was just addressing the "if you want to go to Runoffs, go find another class" concept. People hear that, so they start looking around for another class that offers them the same sorts of values they found in IT, and they come up empty.

I would welcome it.

On the other hand, I would be upset if those well-funded drivers (a) focused only on "national" events and didn't race with us in "regional" events becuase they wanted points to go the run offs and (b) exerted influence on the rule set because they were "national" and therefore "more important" than the guys who ran regionals only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knestis

>> But those guys who are maybe top-10 drivers, who want to get faster and are putting whatever spare dollar they can find into either the car or the driver are going to be pushed further back. ...

So would those of you who feel this way complain if IT at the Regional level got more popular, causing competitive pressures to increase both participation and budgets at the front of the existing grids? Say 10 new, well-funded drivers show up next year in your class in your region. Presume that NOTHING changes about IT rules, etc. ...

How do you respond to that?

K

---

We're on the same page then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshS

Makes sense. I was just addressing the "if you want to go to Runoffs, go find another class" concept. People hear that, so they start looking around for another class that offers them the same sorts of values they found in IT, and they come up empty.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knestis

>> But those guys who are maybe top-10 drivers, who want to get faster and are putting whatever spare dollar they can find into either the car or the driver are going to be pushed further back. ...

So would those of you who feel this way complain if IT at the Regional level got more popular, causing competitive pressures to increase both participation and budgets at the front of the existing grids? Say 10 new, well-funded drivers show up next year in your class in your region. Presume that NOTHING changes about IT rules, etc. ...

How do you respond to that?

K

---

I first look at what it will take to regain my "competitive" status. if it just means becoming a better driver, well, that's fine. if it means i need a $7000 motor and new tires every weekend.....then it's time for major re-evaluation. will i still have fun being that far back? do i have the money for this? if i build my own motor and use take-off tires, how close does that get me?

I welcome more competition (like when Mac started showing up in our Division), as it makes it more fun. Just so long as the end goal is reasonably attainable in terms of cost, I'm fine. When you get into a situation like SM, costs are so far out of reach for me, and I could at least be "out there and competitive" in IT, all the while winning free tires. well, I left.

Let me ask some of the guys with more "historical" SCCA experience than me a few questions.

When I do some SCCA history "research" on the web, I see something interesting. I see Production being an incredibly healthy class in the 60s and 70s, open to both amateur guys and "semi pro" teams like BRE, Sharp, Group 44, etc.

What's interesting to me is that production has been in a slow decline, in my view, since the mid 80s and is now a mere shadow of its former self.

My question, and I ask this solely to figure out how we best have IT avoid this fate, is of course why?

a. Was it money/factory teams? I would argue that for all the good they did, the hyper developed 325s of B-World (great guys) and RX7s of Speedsource (same) ended up hurting IT more in the 2000 to 2004 time frame than we thought. To me, ITS is just now recovering with cars just as fast, but done via amateur programs.

My fear is Nationalsocializing (whoops!) IT would bring some of that back.

b. Was it rule madness? Again, with more "at stake," there would be more bickering over the rules, and more rule madness with IT.

c. Other thoughts?

While it is impossible to do, I'd really like to "freeze" ITS in the SEDiv as it stands now. Great car counts. Lots of makes. Some high dollar efforts up front; some amateur efforts up front. Great racing. Maybe identifying what went wrong with Prod will help in avoiding its fate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshS

What everyone who says this doesn't understand is that the Runoffs participation and National participation in general is waning. One of the goals (I assume) of proposals like this one is to address this problem.

In other words, it's one thing to say, "find another class." But the problem is that there aren't very many interesting, popular classes to find anymore if you want to go to the Runoffs. You really need to think bigger picture.

---

This is a great post. Why are we to asume that the same fate wouldn't lie ahead for IT? It seems that the runoffs and national status may be the kiss of death for a class.

R

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knestis

>> But those guys who are maybe top-10 drivers, who want to get faster and are putting whatever spare dollar they can find into either the car or the driver are going to be pushed further back. ...

So would those of you who feel this way complain if IT at the Regional level got more popular, causing competitive pressures to increase both participation and budgets at the front of the existing grids? Say 10 new, well-funded drivers show up next year in your class in your region. Presume that NOTHING changes about IT rules, etc. ...

How do you respond to that?

K

---

Haven't we already seen a couple of variations of this theme already?

Case 1: The RX7 is one of the top cars in ITA - then the CRX, Integra, 240Sx, and Miata are added and it becomes impossible for the RX7 driver to even smell the front of the pack. Result - IT7 & SRX7 pop us as bastard regional classes so those displaced front-runners have a place to compete again.

Case 2: ITS, and the introduction of the 325. The guys with the bucks figure out that this car can be a huge overdog if built to the hilt. Result - a lot of ITS drivers parked their cars and/or went somewhere else to play.

Case one was not as much of a loss - but how many spec classes are we going to allow? Case two was a little more costly.

I'm not saying your scenario can't happen now, just saying that making IT a national class will increase the likelyhood of it happening. JMHO of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshS

Makes sense. I was just addressing the "if you want to go to Runoffs, go find another class" concept. People hear that, so they start looking around for another class that offers them the same sorts of values they found in IT, and they come up empty.

---

I agree, Perhaps I should have said it better but the point being is that IT works, works for me, and I could care less about a national distinction. But I also don't want a screwed up mess if IT does go national.

Point taken, :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffYoung

Let me ask some of the guys with more "historical" SCCA experience than me a few questions.

When I do some SCCA history "research" on the web, I see something interesting. I see Production being an incredibly healthy class in the 60s and 70s, open to both amateur guys and "semi pro" teams like BRE, Sharp, Group 44, etc.

What's interesting to me is that production has been in a slow decline, in my view, since the mid 80s and is now a mere shadow of its former self.

My question, and I ask this solely to figure out how we best have IT avoid this fate, is of course why?

a. Was it money/factory teams? I would argue that for all the good they did, the hyper developed 325s of B-World (great guys) and RX7s of Speedsource (same) ended up hurting IT more in the 2000 to 2004 time frame than we thought. To me, ITS is just now recovering with cars just as fast, but done via amateur programs.

My fear is Nationalsocializing (whoops!) IT would bring some of that back.

b. Was it rule madness? Again, with more "at stake," there would be more bickering over the rules, and more rule madness with IT.

c. Other thoughts?

While it is impossible to do, I'd really like to "freeze" ITS in the SEDiv as it stands now. Great car counts. Lots of makes. Some high dollar efforts up front; some amateur efforts up front. Great racing. Maybe identifying what went wrong with Prod will help in avoiding its fate.

---

Production racing was the poster child for rules creep during those years. A lot of the decline was from the defection to spec classes and the more restrictive IT rule set. I got tired of having 2 motors for every weekend because I was so far over the ragged edge to run up front it was just time before the rods came outside for some daylight.:p I moved to IT in 98 because I could get tons of track time in everything from enduros to sprints. Do not underestimate the draw of multi series racing to popularity of a rule set. I can also say that I stayed because of the competition that Speedsource,Bimmerworld, and Black forest brought to the table. They brought a very professional level of prep to the class but it was really the drivers that made the difference. You can't buy that kind of instruction. I look at my old results sheets and it is a "who's who" in Grand Am, ALMS, and other pro series. It was nothing to have 35 ITS cars alone start an ECR. We are heading in that direction again with all the work the ITAC has done to level the fields. It really sucks it took so long to deal with the BMW in ITS because we all lost. The BMW drivers left because they felt screwed, and many others left because they were uncompetitive. I miss racing with those guys. In years past when we pissed off a big group of car owners they just switched cars, now they leave SCCA. IT and our regional classes are what is keeping this club going. Production is down to 3 classes and limited prep is helping it make a comeback. I moved to EP with an RX7 but I do not see me out of IT long term. It is still the best racing anywhere.

I think I get that Jake, but who can be sure.
My statement is what I see of the IT opinions expressed here and I think those opinions are valid.
Now what is on the minds of the PTB is something different. Adding IT to the national class mix dumps 3 or 4 current national class all other things being equal.
The top 24 go to the runoffs. Here are the national car counts from last year.
1 SM 460
2 SRF 364
3 FV 140
4 GT1 122
5 FC 114
6 FA 114
7 EP 113
8 FF 109
9 FP 99
10 FM 94
11 DSR 88
12 GT2 81
13 F5 79
14 AS 78
15 CSR 71
16 S2 70
17 FE 70
18 GTL 65
19 T2 64
20 HP 64
21 SSB 61
22 SSC 57
23 GT3 53
24 T3 46
25 T1 45
26 GP 37


</SPAN>