Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 70

Thread: Modern Cars in IT

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    554

    Default

    In case you guys forgot - there is precedent for V-8 cars in ITS. Remember the Sunbeam Tiger??

  2. #22
    Guest

    Default

    But, isn't the TR8 still classified in ITS?
    IIRC the TR8 has been classified in the ITS class since the mid to late 80's.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Lilburn, GA
    Posts
    597

    Default

    Being relatively new to the club racing scene I find this an interesting topic. I think there's a big disconnect between the SCCA and the younger crowd. I think the cars are part of the reason. I'm in the process of trying to figure out which IT class I'd like to race in and what car I'd like to drive. I haven't seen the entire list of classified cars, but it seems like a time warp to 10 or 20 years ago.

    I've been in the import car scene for a long time and personally own one of the dreaded (at least by the SCCA) 300ZX twin turbos. I haven't done much to the engine other than exhaust, but I have a fully adjustable suspension on all four corners with 18" forged aluminum wheels. I'm guessing this "street car" (in the right hands) would run circles around all the cars in IT. I also have a friend whose 18 year old son recently bought an Integra Type R that he's already done several mods on. He wants to race it. I think he's mainly talking autocross at this point, but what if he wanted to do IT? Would this car fit it any class? Or would it be "too fast"?

    My point is that how does the SCCA expect to lure in the younger crowd when these guy's street cars are faster and more modern than the cars they'd have to race? You think these guys have ever worked on a carburetor? I've been reading the ECU thread and find it interesting that there's this big debate about something that people have been doing to street cars for 10 years (probably longer in some form). There are 20 year old guys out there with laptops in their cars twiddling with ECU parameters that probably know a heck of lot more about engine tuning than guys club racing.

    I think one of the big attractions of street racing is the fact that you can do anything you want to the car. These guys like working on their cars and spend tons of money on them.
    Older cars aren't going to attract these people to club racing. The car is only part of the equation, of course, but the young guys won't get into club racing if they don't like the cars.

    Technology advances, cars get faster. I think the SCCA better figure out a way to embrace the newer cars and allow them to race (not just in the pro Speed Touring car class). I think this will begin to draw in some of the younger people. Otherwise, as has been mentioned, the SCCA is going to become a race league of old guys driving around in old cars.

    I don't want to divert this thread, but I think it would be good for the organization if a way could be found to include many of the later model cars. I don't know if that means creating new classes, changing rules around, or what. I got my start in autocrossing and here in Atlanta there are regularly 200+ cars showing up. A good number of these cars are young guys running their street cars. The next step up for them would be club racing, but is there a place for them to go within SCCA? Something to think about.

    David

    PS: I too read the article on import cars in the SCCA. I found it historically interesting, but kind of laughed at the underlying implication that SCCA is drawing in the import crowd. I think that's true for autocrossing, but not for club racing.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    David, good points all. We can keep the older cars already in IT AND have new ones via appropriate classifications. One additional class above ITS, plus another class for "all turbo" cars and frankly I think we are there.

    Norm, yes, the TR8 is classed in ITS and there are more of us out there racing them than you would think. There's Todd Kischbach in the NEDiv, although I understand he is turning his into a GT car, Morey and Andy Doyle in the Midwest (who are still competitive as hell at Gateway and Mid-Ohio), myself in the SEDiv and I believe a Charles Murdoch in Arkansas. John Roper also used to run one out of Louisiana I believe.

    But, when you say V8, remember this is a smogged out, low compression, small displacement V8s from 1980. Stock horsepower? 133. Yep. Less than an ITA Neon. Or an ITA SE-R.

    I havent' dyoned the car but I think I am maybe getting 170 hp at the crank, with headers, etc. Maybe another 20 there with port matching and better breathing (I have ram air ducts, stock, that I am not using), and going .020 over.

    Bottom line is that those early 80s V8s aren't going to make a lot of power using IT rules. You are stuck with stock carbs, cam and heads, and that's where the major chokepoints are.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    centerville, MN, US of A
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Originally posted by rlearp:

    ... all cars have strengths and weaknesses, pick your weapon....

    Isn't this the whole point?. If some one wants to race, race what's allowed.
    Period.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Originally posted by DavidM:
    Being relatively new to the club racing scene I find this an interesting topic. I think there's a big disconnect between the SCCA and the younger crowd.

    Otherwise, as has been mentioned, the SCCA is going to become a race league of old guys driving around in old cars.

    You hit the nail on the head and one of the reasons I started the post and mentioned the true story of my friend at the suspenion shop.

    I've only been around a short time here, two months, so, a lot of you might discount my viewpoint and ideas. However, I feel being new allows me to sort of look at things objectively and ask "why".

    I'm just asking about some relatively simple (and cheap) cars that should be allowed to race. But the SCCA is losing a whole bunch of potential members since there are many young people that would like to race their cars but have no AFFORDABLE place to race - that is Improved Touring. Yes, you can point to other classes and say "race it there, it is allowed" but those are not affordable for the young man.

    Ron

    ------------------
    Ron
    http://www.gt40s.com
    Lotus Turbo Esprit
    Ford Lightning
    RF GT40 Replica
    Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Originally posted by Mark LaBarre:
    Isn't this the whole point?. If some one wants to race, race what's allowed.
    Period.
    As mentioned at the beginning of the thread - what is allowed doens't seem to follow much rhyme or reason in many cases. Allowed seems to be at the whim of a board and if someone on the board doesn't like a car etc. it is not allowed.

    A 300z should certainly be allowed to race. Sure, it has 220hp stock but it is quite heavy. Is it not allowed because someone who already has class leading cars fears losing that lofty position? They are cheap and plentiful and in my opinion perfect IT fodder. Hell, for that matter early Porsche 928s have even less hp, weigh a bunch, and are even cheaper! Lets class one!

    But, in a few years there are going to be a bunch of fantastic performance cars that are perfect IT fodder as well. I'm assuming they will not be allowed, why not? Create new classes, allow IT to grow within the SCCA. Or, is one of the reasons why that isn't done is so that people are forced to race in the higher level, national, and more expensive categories?

    Come to think of it, isn't IT the biggest section of the SCCA? If so, how come it isn't given coverage in that SCCA magazine that comes in my mailbox from time to time? Seems that if a lot of people race IT, which it does since I see more IT races put on at local tracks than any other SCCA type, then why can't one find results from the races easily?

    Just trying to learn and understand.

    RANT OFF.

    ------------------
    Ron
    http://www.gt40s.com
    Lotus Turbo Esprit
    Ford Lightning
    RF GT40 Replica
    Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!

    [This message has been edited by rlearp (edited November 07, 2004).]

    [This message has been edited by rlearp (edited November 07, 2004).]

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    West Palm Beach
    Posts
    138

    Default

    There were so many different 928 engine trims over the years that it would be nearly impossible to keep track of them.

    The last ones (GTS?) made had 345hp in the early 90s.

    Still........I don't even think a speedsource or bimmerworld customer would enjoy the crankshaft nightmare they would run into while racing the 928.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    Actually Prince, the 79-82 928 and 928s all had reasonable hp (low 200s) and would, I think, make a decent IT car (and not an overdog) at around 3100 lbs or so. Probably not a whole lot of power to be found in the 928 in IT trim.

    Ron is right, class more cars.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    This actually is a issue that hits home for me as the cars I started racing in Solo I and II haven't been allowed in club racing for over a decade. The public reason given was always that turbocharges are too expensive. [/B]
    Was this truely presented as the reason for not allowing turbo cars? If so, someone has no clue about costs and their ignorance is showing. Turbochargers are relatively cheap compared to the other things that go on in IT. Call Turbonetics and one can get a completely new T3 (various trims) for $500. Want yours rebuilt instead? $250-$300. Much cheaper than a set of wheels, Motec engine management, tires, etc.

    ------------------
    Ron
    http://www.gt40s.com
    Lotus Turbo Esprit
    Ford Lightning
    RF GT40 Replica
    Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!

  11. #31
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    SCCA has been VERY reluctant to classify turbo cars since the '80s, when a lot of them hit Showroom Stock category.

    Until we are VERY sure that we are collectively willing to do what it takes to actually police engine management systems, this is going to be shaky ground, given that turbos respond REALLY well to tweaking.

    I MIGHT get a few HP with a chip in my 2.0 VW but if I had a 1.8T? Whee!

    K

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    554

    Default

    As alluded to . . .

    it's just too easy to up the boost in a turbo car - and relatively difficult to prove it. (Find, and install, a recording boost gauge - and then either put the car on a dyno or have somebody drive it at WOT through the entire rev range.) That's EXACTLY why they were dropped in the early '90's.


    ------------------
    Norm - #55 ITA, '86 MR2. [email protected]

    Website: home.alltel.net/jberry

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Agreed. We covered the turbo stuff up above and I don't think there is a good solution, really. But, still doesn't answer the basic question of what will be done with all the great cars that could be classed that are coming, or a lot of find cars that have never been classed for some, at least to me, strange reason. Non-turbo 300zs are perfect.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Lilburn, GA
    Posts
    597

    Default

    Anybody know how the turbo cars are/will be policed in the Speed series? I believe they will be letting in some of the more popular turbo cars (WRX, 1.8T, etc.) into the series next year and they used to have the twin turbo S4 Audis in GT.

    David

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    Why not put them all in their own class (turbo cars) and let them do what they want? No policing, other than the fact that there IS a turbo on the car...ITT I call it.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    616

    Default

    ITT is used in some regions for "Improved Touring Truck". How about ITF for Improved Touring Forced induction and let superchargers in also?

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    554

    Default

    Originally posted by DavidM:
    Anybody know how the turbo cars are/will be policed in the Speed series? I believe they will be letting in some of the more popular turbo cars (WRX, 1.8T, etc.) into the series next year and they used to have the twin turbo S4 Audis in GT.

    David
    Looked at the T2 list, lately??


  18. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Boyertown, PA- USA
    Posts
    454

    Default

    I have a few points, but wanted to start out by addressing a clearly incorrect statement-

    Originally posted by 2Many Z's:
    I don't know about the V-6 Mustang's potential in ITS (for instance), but a SS Camaro is able to run consistant 1:30's at Summit while the largest portion of the ITS field is running 1:27's-1:29's.
    OK, what exact races are you watching? Non-SS Camaros in T2 are running 1:25's at Summit in the National races.

    That being said, I have a question-
    Going on this theory of grouping cars simply by speed potential, I would place the V6 gen3 Camarobird in ITA. Now, keep in mind, this car has 10.5" front brakes, rear drums, and a 5-speed with piss-poor ratios, along with the incredibly anemic 135-140hp V6 which sounds like a small block under water. Also, it weighs over 3000 lbs in IT trim (BTW- if anyone wants to argue these facts, I'll be happy to post my sources, or show you old data from my 87 'bird).

    Imagine I'm cruising along in, say perhaps, a Honda CRX (I heard there's a few of those in ITA) and I'm coming around to lap this poor bastard in the lead sled. I get around him on the straight and duck in front before the corner. This driver, now demonstrating the amount of intelligence it takes to race a V6 F-body, decides that he can brake where I do, since we're both in ITA, right?

    Do YOU want that kind of weight disparity on track with you?

    On the other end of things, let's say we make a turbo car legal and we magically control the boost to keep it correct. How pissed off are you gonna be when this guy goes BLOWING past you on the straights, but can't corner to save his life? I could build an 87 Shelby Charger that would make 200hp and 200ftlb of torque legally in IT trim, but unless we got brake upgrades and wide tires we wouldn't be much faster than the carbed ITA I bet (I'm pretty sure Greg A. has some input on that...)

    My point is simple-
    The cars that are in each class right now work well because they are somewhat similar in many factors, not just lap time. Sure I'd support a few more IT classes, but some people on here are talking about cars that simply don't belong on track in that configuration. You're asking SCCA to meet people's every whim, when those people aren't at all interested in being flexible or working with what's already there. Quite honestly, I think the attitude shows a bit of immaturity in principle. Why classify a car for 5 people when it's going to make it more dangerous or unsafe for 105 others?

    Just because a few people think a car is fast, that doesn't mean it belongs on a track where it can ruin the day for a bunch of others.

    ------------------
    Matt Green
    "Ain't nothin' improved about Improved Touring..."

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    kansas city mo
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
    Imagine I'm cruising along in, say perhaps, a Honda CRX (I heard there's a few of those in ITA) and I'm coming around to lap this poor bastard in the lead sled. I get around him on the straight and duck in front before the corner. This driver, now demonstrating the amount of intelligence it takes to race a V6 F-body, decides that he can brake where I do, since we're both in ITA, right?

    Do YOU want that kind of weight disparity on track with you?

    This does not matter too much here we race with ITE cars and I have had Vipers, SVT Mustangs, and 350 Firebirds and Cameros blaze by me...at one race there was an ITE Ferrari. These cars are far faster then 99% of the "real" IT cars out there and fatter in some cases. (I also think that these cars should be run with AS, I think that they run on DOT tires don't they? but that is a national class and we cant have that) I do agree with you it is un-nerving to see that turbo 911 running up on you on the brake zone, wondering if he is going to try it or not. You just have to be very aware of your place and what is going on around you on the track. I have seen a few of these people with the car in 5th or 6th gear and their brain in neutral.

  20. #40
    Guest

    Default

    Matt, I don't know what part of my statement is hard to understand, but I'm talking about Guy Pavageau in his SSB V-6 Camaro, I never said a word about a T2 Camaro. Why are you comparing a V-6 Camaro to a V-8 Camaro?
    If Guy can run a 1:30 in SSB trim, I'd say that car is capable of running a couple seconds faster if it were to run in IT trim, which would put it in the 1:27 to 1:28 range, which is where the majority of the ITS cars are at this time. Except for a couple of the high budget 325's like Ed and Sam who usually run in the 1:24's and 1:25's, I'd say the V-6 Camaro might have a chance to run near the front of the pack.

    http://www.wdcr-scca.org/results/results.c...ndex.htm?040103

    [This message has been edited by 2Many Z's (edited November 09, 2004).]

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •