Printable View
Hi guys,
I don't know how many here cross over to NASA. The PT rules are waaaaay screwed up. An IT car is outclassed by a long shot. If you feel like voicing an opinon now is the time before rules are changed for next year.
Couple links to check out
http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=18010
http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=18595
Why should NASA design rules just so an IT car can be competitive in IT trim? They are two different organizations, we don't need IT x 2.
They have rules (PT) that allow an IT car to run NASA as is (with a right side net/seat bolster) and do alright depending on region. If you really want to be competitive in PT, build the car to PT rules and forget about IT rules. I'm most likely scrapping my ITS platform for 2008 and going to build to PT and run ITE if I want some SCCA time. I like PT rules better than IT rules which allow much greater flexibility in building and more mods than IT allows. Look at the debates IT has over washer bottles, jacking points, motor/tranny mounts... some like it more stock than others.
How about SCCA Production... Look at their forum and that'll change your mind. The rules aren't perfect... the no point hit for non-OEM rotors, I can't wait to get some 2 piece and take advantage of this. Then there's point hits for the splitter which I think need clarification and a reduction. If HP/Wt is appealing, there are lots of German cars to race.
Since we are on the topic of NASA... "Robert Davis, Mazda senior vice president and head of the company's racing program, said his company is "trying to spread our support more evenly among the SCCA and [the National Auto Sport Association]. SCCA is better known, but I would say right now NASA is better run."
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...15003/1531/FREE
$5000 for a PT class win at 2007 Championships with only 3 minimum in class. I'll go for it...
Just my 2 cents...
Mr. Davis is certainly welcome to his opinion, as are we all. My opinion is that racers are an afterthought with nasa franchises. Their money is made with street cars and drifters and racers get the track time that is left over.
I disagree that the PT rules are broken. I am an SCCA guy to the bone but they have created something that was very hard to do. I understand it keeps getting tweaked but the foundation is down and it has it's supporters. Just because my ITA car can't be competitive in the PT class it falls in doesn't mean PT is broken, it just means my car has the 'wrong' mods for their structure.
I am also an SCCA guy. NASA's Greg Greenbaum who seems to be the rulesmaker for PT has a Neon SRT4 with 295 (he admitted) horsepower to the ground at 2900 lbs and coincidentally the Neon SRT4 with Stage 3R kit with exhaust is a PTC car. I feel this is amisclassed car. Some of the ITS cars fall into PTC, so you really do need to build a PT car from the get go to be competitive. You need to take advantage of all the no points modifications and pick and choose all of your upgrades according to the points assessed.
matt
I'm not saying a fully prepped IT car should be a nationally competitive PT car. I'm saying if it was closer NASA would get more cars racing, and it would offer people tired of the SCCA an outlet without spending a bunch of money to be competitive. The PT fields on the west coast are pitiful. My brother was the only PTB car in all the events he entered. Even then the PTC cars kicked his butt, because of the mod points he had to take. I guess if the was little crossover when running the Pro-Sedan cars (IT rules), why should i expect it with PT <_<
It seems to me that both Crazy Joe and Greg Amy have done very well in their ITA cars in PT............ :blink:
Maybe in AZ... I can tell you in TX, racers way out number HPDE or TT cars.Quote:
My opinion is that racers are an afterthought with nasa franchises. Their money is made with street cars and drifters and racers get the track time that is left over.
[/b]
That's interesting. What are the numbers? Locally, there is typically one race group with 30 (+/-) cars. There are usually 120 or so "other"carsQuote:
Maybe in AZ... I can tell you in TX, racers way out number HPDE or TT cars.[/b]
I could see why there is a problem in AZ, does SCCA dominate or just not many race cars in the state? In TX...Quote:
That's interesting. What are the numbers? Locally, there is typically one race group with 30 (+/-) cars. There are usually 120 or so "other"cars
[/b]
Group 1 HPDE 1&2
Group 2 HPDE 3&4, Comp students are in this group
Group 3 AIX, AI, CMC-2, CMC
Group 4 Spec Miata Challenge
Group 5 Time Trial
Group 6 SRX7, Baby Grand, PerformanceTouring C-F, Honda Challenge 4-5, Legends (LP,LM,LS), Allison Legacy (AL), Spec Neon, Spec E30, Spec Focus, Sevens
Group 7 Super Touring 1-2, Super Unlimited, GTS 1-5 and U, PerformanceTouring A-B, Panoz, Honda Challenge 1-3, 944 Challenge, ASC, Factory Five Challenge
Of course certain classes are much stronger than others. Group 6 for example where PT C-F runs, is mostly SRX7 and Allison Legacy. There are a couple of us PT guys and and sometimes a Seven or BG, I don't see any spec Neon, E30, Focus, HC, etc though. I'm working on building our PT for 2008.
Here are average numbers from each session/race...TWS Contender 3 for example
Group 1 - 7 cars
Group 2 - 16 cars
Group 3 - 13 cars
Group 4 - 22 cars
Group 5 - combined with Group 2
Group 6- 20 cars
Group 7- 17 cars
TT/HPDE/Comp students - 23
Race Cars - 72
If those total numbers look low, here are our SCCA numbers...
N/N: 161
N Day of R/N: 95
R Day of R/N: 105
R/R: 93
NASA TX race car count looks to be going up for 2008 as more regional cars leave SCCA to run NASA. Regional car drivers have had with the SCCA schedule. The problem in TX is SCCA, looks like yours is NASA.
Edit: pgipson - you'd have fun in TX, SRX7 is a strong class. Their 2007 schedule was 6 NASA weekends and 2 SCCA weekends, 2008 will be the same. There were 22 guys that ran with an average of probably 10-15 per race.
I've done a couple of PT races and had to play with the points (ran 205s rather than 225s) to be anywhere making PTE with an ITB Golf.
At the end of the day, it's NASA's game and an entirely different way of looking at rules-making. My personal opinion is that it's going to collapse under its own weight but I wouldn't be so selfish to assume that they should make it easy for me to be competitive with a car not actually BUILT TO THOSE RULES.
How about this - we could let Spec Miatas run in IT classes, just as they are... :)
K