Originally posted by JayLfrye:
Please pardon the knucklehead reference if you took it to heart. It was an attempt at humor.
No Problem...

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">However, in today’s world of faster communication and freedom of information more members are questioning the manner, process and/or procedures used in determining the classification. Intelligent discourse and rational debate is something that should be encouraged in a member driven organization. I believe the perception is that this is not the case, hence the migration and atrophy to organizations such as NASA.</font>
Well, as the Chairman of the IT Advisory Committee, I can assure you that this "perception" is simply NOT the case... I'd say I, George Roffe, Andy Bettencourt, Chris Albin, Peter Keane, and Chris Camadella, who all participate here and are members of the ITAC are proof that we are working hard to listen, be open in our discussions, and try to find out what it is the IT community wants.

As for the Integra and the process of classification, it's pretty simple... Though this car was classified prior to the current classification "process", it falls pretty much inline with what it would end up at today. We simply use the following procedure:

Estmated HP output * wt/pwr factor + adders = spec weight

The adders are basically figured by comparing things like brakes, tranny ratios, suspension design, drive config, etc., to some baseline cars in the class. In the case of ITS, these include the 944, RX-7, and 240Z. This weight is added/subtracted from the initial weight calculation to come up with the final number.

The process is still someone subjective, but necessarily so, since we don't have F1 technology or spec cars here.

Based on this process, the Integra comes in very close to what it needs to be to be competitive in the class, at least with the 240Z, RX-7, 944, etc...

Hope this helps,




------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX