Nico, are you and 2 beer Charile comming to the ARRC this year? I hope so!Originally posted by theenico:
anyone out there?
Alan
Senior Member
Nico, are you and 2 beer Charile comming to the ARRC this year? I hope so!Originally posted by theenico:
anyone out there?
Alan
Senior Member
Most definitely, and with any luck, I might actually bring the Scirocco.
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
Senior Member
Cool... Make sure you bolt on a supercharger, or a nitrous bottle.
They would never catch anything like that in tech. But paint your intake manifold and "watchout"!
Senior Member
Jake -
My '86 car can make weight, and I'm about 180#, suited-up. And Nico built my cage, too. Boy that titanium is great stuff.
------------------
Norm - #55 ITA, '86 MR2. [email protected]
Website: home.alltel.net/jberry
Senior Member
What's up Norm,
Did the Canadian say anything about the extreme oil pressure yet? I'll send you an email
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
Senior Member
Darin and any lurking ITAC people,
any comments?
Originally posted by theenico:
Darin,
Just for grins, run the math on the 83-88 Scirocco.
1.8 8V 90hp
currently spec'ed at 2270# in ITB
P.S. I built the cage in Watney's car
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
Senior Member
Nico,
It would seem a little heavy for ITB.
Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.
Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Senior Member
Andy,Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Nico,
It would seem a little heavy for ITB.
Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.
Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula.
AB
Thanks for responding so quickly. The "run the #'s" comment was pseudo tongue in cheek, although I do dislike ITC cars out dragging me down a straight. I'm also aware that until PCA's, in one form or another, get passed I'll have to keep hiding the extra 200# I carry in the car. Until that happens, I'll just continue racing when I can afford it (not nearly often enough) and having fun, because fun is what it's all about.
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
Senior Member
Simple solution to the problem Andy, re-run the weight on all the cars in the ITCS. Jake's spreadsheet looks pretty complete. Treat the cars as if they were new classifications, and take it from there. Significant deviations from the current spec weight would warrant a look at re-classification.Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Nico,
It would seem a little heavy for ITB.
Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.
Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula.
AB
You guys want to make IT a better place for everyone, well there you go, give everyone the same shot at getting their car appropriately spec'd.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Senior Member
Simple solution to what?Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Simple solution to the problem Andy,
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Senior Member
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Simple solution to what?
AB
Run all the cars through the formula, do the 'adders', and see where the weight falls.Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.
Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Senior Member
Grrr.. Just read through the Sept. Fastrack. My letter to the comp board was completely mis-quoted. For the record, I did not ask to "allow the BMW Z3 to use the stock 8.5-inch wheels". I had asked about being allowed to use the legal SSB wheel configuration for the car (16x8) in IT. I know the car came with 16x7 wheels stock and I know that the limit is 7-in wide in ITA - I was just asking about the possibility of an exemption to enable an easier "crossover" from a legal Showroom Stock configuration to IT (and was anticipating it would get shot down). No hard feelings, I just hate being mis-quoted.
-noam
Senior Member
Let me assure you that despite being mis-quoted, the ITAC understood what it was you requested. I'm sure the editor of Fastrack just was a little too agressive in his/her editing.Originally posted by nlevine:
-noam
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Senior Member
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Simple solution to what?
AB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having said that, we are now entering a problem area which was brought up by the ITAC when there was a call to create a published 'formula' for classing cars.
Requests come in to 'run the numbers' on a car already in the grid. Then there are complaints and bad feelings when the numbers don't 'work' for that person/car. There are too many factors that can't be plugged in to a formula
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Run all the cars through the formula, do the 'adders', and see where the weight falls.
No comments Andy?
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Senior Member
Nope. No more pissing into the wind with you.
I will say that the excersize you are asking for is currently under consideration by the ITAC. The resultant 'numbers' could turn the classes upside down - for the better? Maybe.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
[This message has been edited by ITSRX7 (edited August 21, 2004).]
Senior Member
I'm curious as to what you mean by 'turn the classes upside down'. Do you mean that some cars that may currently have an advantage may lose some/all of that advantage, or that some cars that currently don't stand a chance in hell at a podium, may actually have a chance?
Do you have a problem w/ all cars being given the same chance at an appropriate class/spec. wt?
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Senior Member
It means that there could be a lot of changes.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Senior Member
And it also means there could be very few.Originally posted by ITSRX7:
It means that there could be a lot of changes.
The fact is, we are taking a fresh look at classifications and weight. Beyond that there is nothing at all to report. This could lead to a lot of changes or very few changes. Who knows? But it's what a lot of people have hoped somebody might do. We have no time table for this at this time. We are more concerned about doing the right thing, whatever that may be.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Senior Member
Oh yeah, if PCAs don't fly we will have at least one hand tied behind our backs.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Senior Member
You're right Andy, there [i]could[/b] be a lot of changes. And if there are, it could indicate a few things. A) There are a lot of cars out there where the weights don't fit the modelThe model is not that good C) There are cars that are 'better than the sum of the parts', and other factors need to be considered.
If you look back at when this whole comp. adj / PCA discussion started, I have always advocated a standard model that was applied to all cars the same, w/ subsequent adjustments to address the 'other factors'.
If the only reason for not publishing the process is that everyone will want their car evaluated, you should publish it. You may get people that aren't happy w/ the results, but at least then everything's out in the open. IMHO, that's a far better situation than who/when/why some cars get looked at, and others don't.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks