IT to ST crossover rules question

According to 9.1.4.B
"GCR listed IT cars, 1985 and newer, under their current IT
specifications shall compete in STU."

Let's just say you wanted to run ST in your IT car, and your car has mods not allowed in IT (missing washer bottle or poly engine mounts for example), would you then be required to make other changes to the car that are required in ST, but but not in IT?

One example of what I am thinking about is the fire system requirement. In IT, you don't have to have a fire system , but in ST you do. (9.3.23. FIRE SYSTEM All cars shall be equipped with an On-Board Fire System except Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring.)

So if I understand this correctly, if I make a change that isn't allowed in IT, but is in ST, and I run in ST, I have to comply with all rules that apply to ST and I lose the IT crossover allowance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EV

So if I understand this correctly, if I make a change that isn't allowed in IT, but is in ST, and I run in ST, I have to comply with all rules that apply to ST and I lose the IT crossover allowance.

---

Correct. Once you deviate from IT rules, you're no longer in the IT umbrella and need to be fully compliant to STx.

I have to wonder out loud if we should/could allow fire bottles in ST. Probably not, given that STU and STO can get pretty big and hairy and fast. A fire system is very handy when you're hooking along and it's gonna take a couple hundred feet (or more) to come to a stop so you can grab the bottle... - GA

complies with IT or complies with ST.

there was a situation last year where a protested ITS car (kershaw, may?) decided to duck the protest by switching to STU. tech had him remove his factory rear spoiler to comply (which I don't believe was something he should have had to do, even in STU rules at that time). I don't know if he had a fire system, but I feel pretty confidently that his oil pan drain plug was not safety wired. interesting one because it was "an IT car" that theoretically conformed to IT rules, but contention on the second point was why he had to run STU. so I guess he should have been required to be 100% in compliance with STU. as it wound up he was a hybrid.

point is - there was, and is, a lot of confusion out there as to what STU rules allow / require and how the IT crossover works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chip42

complies with IT or complies with ST.

there was a situation last year where a protested ITS car (kershaw, may?) decided to duck the protest by switching to STU. tech had him remove his factory rear spoiler to comply (which I don't believe was something he should have had to do, even in STU rules at that time). I don't know if he had a fire system, but I feel pretty confidently that his oil pan drain plug was not safety wired. interesting one because it was "an IT car" that theoretically conformed to IT rules, but contention on the second point was why he had to run STU. so I guess he should have been required to be 100% in compliance with STU. as it wound up he was a hybrid.

point is - there was, and is, a lot of confusion out there as to what STU rules allow / require and how the IT crossover works.

---

By my eyes, it looks more like the confusion is more about who's going to complain. The rules are reasonably clear, 9.1.4.B says your IT compliant car can run STU, if it's not IT compliant then you have to assume you must comply with STU rules.

On the other side, just about any IT crossover won't be able to compete with a full on STU car. I guess someone who is trying to win in STU with their ITB Golf, could protest an ITS BMW for not having a fire system, or a washer bottle and win, it's kind of a weenie move IMHO.

My original post was more to confirm my reading of the rules.

Yup, you're correct. there's some stuff that just doesn't cross over and it's an either/or kind of deal like with the fire system.


I bet most of the IT-->ST cars don't have driveshaft hoops installed either. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EV

The rules are reasonably clear, 9.1.4.B says your IT compliant car can run STU, if it's not IT compliant then you have to assume you must comply with STU rules.

---

the rules are clear enough, but they require one read them and attempt to "get" the intent. my point was only that a scrutineer forcing one change to a car that isn't required for an IT car to compete in STU, while NOT requiring conformance with the other ST specific rules HAS happened, and that was when the rules were somewhat LESS confusing than they are now. so expect some problems / arguments with officials when planning crossover participation.

Chip, we've experienced such conflicts in the past when running IT cars in STU (and prior to that, DP). These conflicts were easily resolved by just taking a moment and explaining to to the tech guys (of which I happen to be one).

Letting a pseudo-IT car run without a fire system is a technical violation, but I don't see it as a spirit-of-the-rules violation, nor a safety hazard (if it's good enough the goose...) I'll make a point of pointing out these issues to Tech as I can; it wouldn't hurt if others did the same.

GA