Why is IT not a national class when AS which is IT for V8s (IMHO) is?
Printable View
Why is IT not a national class when AS which is IT for V8s (IMHO) is?
Holy ker-rist...
(No personal offense, but this ain't the right time for this...use Google for now...)
Short version Bruce; IT was intended from its inception to forever be a regional-only class.
What Greg is referring to is the fact that this topic has come up many, many times in the past, has been an extremely contentious issue every time, and (some suspect) MAY be ONE of the issues underlying the current CRB-ITAC fiasco. Definitely do some investigating, I'm certain you'll understand.
Ok, i'll look in to it, Thanks.
Weeellll...my understanding is that with STU coming to be, IT can be run as a national.
But an entry just the same for a lot of folks.
OP, slightly longer Cliffs notes version: there was an endless series of discussion about this very thing, mosty centering around how much $$$ it would cost to be competitve at a Nat'l level, the spirit in which the class was created, and so forth.
Bottom line, while expensive, it's no where near as expensive as it would be if we all went nat'l. Most people seem to want it to stay this way. STU will allow some folks to run nationals. And if anyone wants to be a National-only racer, well you will need to go back to the drawing board and choose a national eligible class and a car for that class.
As you may have gathered, there is an underlying political issue going on here as well, but I'll leave that to the ones who know the ins and outs of it all, because frankly, I can no longer keep up with who/what/when/where/why around here. We have so many boards, it's just plain confusing.
IT is fun the way it is. And we have enough enduro, Pro-it, restricted regionals, etc that I for one don't feel like I'm missing anything by not running nationals. Just my opinion...
Updated a few key points.
I agree that IT is fine the way it is. I also think it would be better if we had an opportunity to be a national class. A lot of the arguments against this were centered around the added cost (read - the requirement to fully prep a car to the rules) to compete at a national level. Many people do that now. Many others don't have to and are able to finish well.
What is false? That a some folks thought it would cost more to be competitive, or that some folks are fully prepping IT cars?
To the OP, Chris (RedMisted) and Ron are right, AS is very far away from IT, in terms of prep. Aftermarket brakes, aftermarket transmissions, etc., etc. However, as Chris said, they do look like they could be IT cars (probably more than anything else out there). As Steph and Chris (chois) have mentioned, there's a belief that having IT go National will raise costs for some. It may, but then again it may not. I think Chris' highlights of Steph's post show that. To Chris (chois), pay no attention to Travis. He keeps up with his notion that SM and IT are similar, and leaves out how the folks that originally bought into SM were sold a bill of goods vis-a-vis the "$10,000 race car that could run at the front". Granted, costs did go up because SM became popular. Would it have become as popular if it hadn't gone National? No way to know. I suspect that it could have. If SM had not gone National, you'd probably have a situation similar to what you see in ITA along the East coast, people spending big $$$$ to run at the front (and large fields). What's false is to compare a spec class to a somewhat open category like IT, where you have many different options, and therefore get some cars which are better for some tracks. Getting the last bit out of a spec class costs more than it does for a non-spec class. Part's bin blueprinting gets expensive. It's also why you pay 4x - 6x more for a 'pro' SM motor than you do a crate motor from MazdaSpeed. Part of that is that everybody isn't running the same car, so you don't know if the variability is in the car, the prep, or the nut behind the wheel.
This is true, but, there's more:
Diminishing returns comes into play.
In SM, you spend your savings fund to get teh last 2 HP, because that will be either enough to keep up with the guys who already have it, or you want to be ahead of the curve. When EVERY car is the same, 2 HP can be a deciding factor.
In IT, it's impossible to know if spending your last nickle on 2 HP will be enough to make a difference. A, it's impossible to compare, and B, you might be sufficiently ahead or behind another make/model, that it's irrelevant.
For that reason, IT build have a potential savings element. (Assuming all things being 'equal'.... same basic economics, not discussing Chevy builds vs Porsche builds)
Those who run Nationals tells us the 'cost' is having to travel and the requirement to, in a competitive class, have the quiver of tires for situations, and fresh rubber, etc on the car for every session. That presumes a Runoffs bid, or the desire to be at the top of the class, week in, week out.
IT is cheaper because you don't HAVE to travel (there IS no Ruboffs bid)...but, you CAN spend the same bucks on tires if you so choose, and in some areas of the country, running at the front of an IT field is more expensive that a nationals class...even if you are aiming for the runoffs.
SM pro motors are as little as $5000. i'd love to find a built ITA motor for $833-$1250. shit, i'm pretty sure i'll spend that on just my ECU and dyno time.....for i expect <2hp peak.
and for any of those areas where you think IT people are spending more than the national guys, that might be true for the lower competition, lesser subscribed classes....but is irrelevant to what would happen should IT go national.
The cost question leaps past a LOT of mediating variables:
IT Goes National --> Cost Skyrocket for Everyone
No. Absolutely not, unless a bunch of qualifiers get inserted into the assertion. Ultimately, "competitiveness" has got to be considered in there somewhere. If one wants to be the biggest fish in a pond, AND the IT pond gets bigger (more competitive) because the category gains National status, then (duh) it's going to cost THOSE FISH more to maintain their dominance.
But asking the pond to stay small to maintain the status quo for individuals happy with their situations? That's bad old SCCA mentality - me, me, ME, MEEEE...!!
If Joe Racer is currently spending $25,000/year of his discretionary dough to race an IT car, he can continue to do that. If that doesn't buy him as many trophies as he's used to because the fields get deeper and tougher, that's tough ta-tas. And it's likely - I think - that a National option would siphon off the most committed ($$) of the current Regional racers, would pull a bunch of folks out of other categories (like SM did to IT), and leave the competitive equilibrium for REGIONAL IT races/series about where they currently are.
K
i don't think i ever said, or even implied that costs would skyrocket.
i don't think effectively splitting the class in two is a good idea.
if joe racer still spends his $25,000 to go regional racing, but now he's only racing against four people rather than the 15 he used to race against, in a much shallower field. is he still getting the same enjoyment/dollar that he used to? i doubt it.
hey, i thought splitting SM into natl/regional would do the same thing....send the guys with money up to national and leave the "regular guys" to run around and have fun with their regular cars/budgets. didn't happen.
but go right ahead and think i'm just being "selfish" to try and protect my own situation.
I was addressing the common - and oversimplified - cost argument against National status for IT, Travis. It was not a direct response to you.
K
For what it is worth there is no discussion in the circles I travel of IT becoming a national class except in the context of it was an idea a year or two ago that was not adopted.
Aren't national events a bit more expensive to enter as well? I could care less one way or the other. I'm not looking for anything more than some good wheel to wheel action, and the way it stands seems to full-fill that want. What is the advantage of a national class anyways?
I heard the lynch ropes being pulled out when, as a point of argument in the runoffs qualifying debate, I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.
We're just "regional drivers", what the hell do we know anyway? :) We're the equivalent of oval dirt track driving, beer drinking drivers to NASCAR drivers. Psst... regional drivers. The classification system sounds more NYC housing situation before mandatory low-income housing was placed into regulation. Perhaps SCCA will "show us" around the runoffs like boy scouts at LRP.
Feeling cynical,
Mickey
Why would anyone worry about being a "regional" driver rather than a "national" one? And why would anyone feel like they are less because their class is a regional one??
:shrug: There's some damn good drivers in IT. And there have been many who went on to be pro from here too. That's nothing to hang your head over.
If you run 4 events a year or more, you still get a National license. Doesn't matter what you class you run in, YOU are still licensed nationally.
We have the ARC, IT Fest, Pro IT, enduros, etc. If anyone really wants to do the Runoffs now, you can go with STU, or run something that's Nationally qualified.
It's not like we are sitting out here in the backyard with a few random scraps for races to eat while the house dogs are getting Alpo inside.
This subject has been done to death (usually during the bench racing months) with the exact same result every time. Some people want it, some don't. Maybe someday that will change to a national class, but for now, it is what it is.
And shwah, don't put words in my mouth. I told the OP that was the Cliff's notes version as I understood it. I really don't care either way, and don't care to see myself "quoted" like that. If those are your feelings, then you own your words.
Oh Steph, my facebook friend... my comments were part fun part serious. I never hang my head, well unless I eat too much chocolate cake and get a belly ache. I will correct myself and say this is a regional ONLY class vs national available class issue. Sorry to mislead.
Again STU <> IT (that's a not equal sign for you non-SQL heads). No reason why IT as it is, albeit with revised weights (doh!), should not be a national class. Why was it designed to be a regional only class? Folks wanted to have fun without the expense and those sophicated ruling members wanted nothing to do with it at a National level, true? no idea. I do know that running competitively in SS means *usually* means buying a newer car and unfortunetaly w/o the fun and speed of IT trimmings... (mickey DUCK!). I pick IT over buying a new Civic Si SSB anyday.
Me, for two. The world has changed a lot since the implementation of that system, and it's antiquated now. With racing series being run by all the marque clubs, Porsche, BMW etc), the SCCA needs to get in tune with the times. While it will be argued that it might/might not be good for IT drivers, the club as a whole would benefit.
even this guy is in favor of IT "going national" if it means doing away with the regional/nat'l structure and the top TWENTY classes go to the runoffs.
actually....i might have to adjust that view....we need to get rid of some classes on the whole.
Travis, I'm with you as long as it results in twenty GROUPS at the Runoffs.
The real issue with limiting classes is time available for groups...I like what they're doing this year, in that they're combining classes into groups for the last xx lowest-attended classes. They didn't make the numbers? Fine, let 'em run, just don't decrease the track time for the groups that did.
I used to be against IT going National...not so much any more. There's just no way I.T. woulda gotten much more expensive for me when I decided to do it "right"...now, eh...
+1 here
This is why I dropped the whole IT national thing before. I realized that there was a bigger issue. Running two separate club racing series dilutes driver attendance and competition, dilutes worker attendance and/or increases worker burnout, and creates additional financial exposure to regions. All the while making the whole program that much more confusing to potential new members.
Travis,
Try to pay attention. Where did I say that a Pro SM motor cost that much more than an ITA motor?
The bigger question is, why does it start at $5k for what you can get from MazdaSpeed for ~$2k, when they're supposed to be 'spec' motors. And since a Pro SM motor starts at $5k, please tell me how many of the first 10 cars on the Runoffs SM grid were running those motors?
Regarding how much fun someone has in their race, if you're running at the front of your class, do you care if there are 5 cars in your class, or 25 cars in your class?
As far as the whole Regional/National thing, and the IT going National thing, count me as another one that agrees w/ what Kirk posted. I've been saying pretty much the same thing for a couple of years now.
Mazdaspeed Crate ~$2500Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill "I don't have a racing license or club membership anymore and last time i raced my prod car i got my ass handed to me by SMs" Miller
$2500 x 4 = $10,000
$2500 x 6 = $15,000
2 of the top 3.Quote:
And since a Pro SM motor starts at $5k, please tell me how many of the first 10 cars on the Runoffs SM grid were running those motors?
yes. i feel a greater sense of accomplishment when i beat 25 people rather than 5. but you're probably one of "those guys" who feels like a winner in a 2 car field.Quote:
Regarding how much fun someone has in their race, if you're running at the front of your class, do you care if there are 5 cars in your class, or 25 cars in your class?
I'd much rather beat 2-3 guys like Beran, Schaafsma, Spencer, Moore, etc, than a field of 10 or 20 uncompetitive cars with uncompetitive drivers. Had enough of both to know the difference, but one's definitely much more of a challenge than the other.
It's quality, not quantity.
I agree Vaughan, but in general, if there's a field of 20, at least a couple of those guys are going to be a "Beran" or "Schaafsma" etc.
Quality over quantity every time.
The point is, why does a supposed 'spec' motor from a pro builder start at 2x what you can get one from the mfg for?
Which 2 of the top 3, and who's motors? If that's really the case, one of two things is going to happen. Either the guys charging more than $5k for a SM engine are going to lower their prices (or get out of the SM engine business) or the shop that's selling those $5k Runoffs' podium engines is going to raise their prices.
When was the last time you won a race in a field of 25 ITA or SM cars? Point is, if you're running at the front, it doesn't matter if you've got 5 or 25 guys behind you. You're ahead of them on the grid, and you usually don't see them unless you're lapping them. As others have pointed out, it's about the quality of the guys you're racing against, not quantity. And while I agree that you stand a better chance of having more quality drivers/cars in a larger field, it doesn't mean you can't have good racing in a small field. But even at the Runoffs, you get guys that run away from the enitre field. I think it was not that many years ago where the T1 winner lapped the ENTIRE FIELD.
Drago -Stewart Engines iirc (http://classifieds.specmiata.com/detail.php?id=2252)
Pombo - Rossini
haven't even bothered to count who else in the top 10 had what.
i don't think we've had a 25 car ITA field around here since i started. the last race i ran, and won, was 14 iirc, and i think i won an ITA race with 17 as well in my old SM. is there tougher competition in 8 car fields elsewhere? probably. but that's a whole nother issue.
i was sitting outside turn one at that T1 race, where Lux (who was leading iirc) got a flat, Heinricy was taken out, and there was another significant incident right in front of me. i think 5 of the top 6 DNF'd or something like that.
I don't even know what you guys are arguing about anymore. At the Runoffs, I would bet you an entry that NOBODY had a pure crate motor. What's the point? Stock optimization has been going on for decades in Showroom Stock.
I am about as anti IT going national as they come. This I would agree with. Do away with the distinction all together (which gets rid of the one big problem I see on having IT go national and that is the dilution of regional fields) and I support it. Hell, I might even make the trek to RAmerica one year if they do it right -- top twenty classes go to the RuleOffs.