I decided to send in a request to remove/replace wires in IT cars
I am sure there are divided opinions on this. The request is pasted below. What do folks think?
Request Details
Title: Allow replacement wiring
Category: IT
Class: IT
Car: none
Request: Please provide an allowance to remove or replace wires and connectors in vehicle and engine wiring harnesses. Prohibit the addition of any functional current/signal path that was not present in the OEM system (you cannot run a new wire path that wasn't already there unless it is already permitted within the rules), in respect of the principles of the class.
The reason for my request is just a basic desire to simplify repair and maintenance of the race car.
While I am aware that there may be some cases where a car could loose some amount of weight through re-wiring, I struggle to convince myself that this could account for more than one or two dozen pounds. Personally as a competitor I don't mind one bit if every other racer in my class is able to achieve minimum specified weight - that would only make the racing more competitive and thus enjoyable. Considering that most oem wiring is routed along the floor and/or frame rails, I am not even convinced that loosing a few pounds there is an advantage vis a vis weight distribution.
As car builders and maintainers we would appreciate the opportunity to clean up the appearance and servicability of our race cars when we encounter a wiring failure or decide to take advantage of an allowance such as installing a replacement ecu. Please allow us to do so.
thank you,
Chris Schaafsma
letter number #3799
How long are you willing to keep the debate going?
This is a post that I made a few days ago in another debate "It is nice to see that the debate still continues about the removal of brackets.....among other things--- "Things that don't change have the tendency to remain the same". I go back to a request I submitted to the IT Advisory Board a in 2009, to reinstate the verbage under "Intent"..... "Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed for the purpose of obtaining any competitive advantage"..... I would imagine that 50% plus of the debates aired in this site, would be eliminated. What do you think? Is removing a bracket, welded or bolted, gaining you any competitive advantage? Is removing a horn, windshield washer resevoir, light bulbs or some wiring gaining you a competitive advantage? I think that most of the competitors understand the difference. What do you think?
The Intent of IT is fairly straight forward, but it has evolved from the original intent to find a home for older Showroom stock cars, and the dual use as the current rules state. I would rather see the debate be over "competitive advantage items" rather than nonsense, non value items like dome light wiring, washer bottles, horn, misc. wiring and the like. But that is only my opinion.
How about thinking outside of the box. I beleive that the ITAC should represent and respect the IT racers first, in concert with the stated objectives of the CRB and SCCA. I want and encourage debates over rule changes, fairness, cost to the competitors, keeping a level training field, and the like. But if the ITAC is not going to represent the IT racers, maybe it is time for the competitors to request a change in how the ITAC is staffed, and have the ITAC representatives elected by the registered IT drivers and have representation from each of our Areas. Then if the majority wants a significant change, there should be no one to stand in the way. What do you think?
If we are going to have a debate, let's make it worthwhile.
Respectfully submitted,
David Ellis-Brown
Central Florida Region