Senior Member
IT to Prod hurdles
In the IT National survey thread there was some discussion about the difficulties of racing in Prod with an existing IT car. As a member of the Prod AC I have been tasked to ID these hurdles and propose a solution. I have not raced in IT for over five years now and feel a little out of touch (BTW I miss it also). I would appreciate any ideas you might have on this subject.
Thanks,
John Weisberg
Senior Member
Probably the biggest hurdle I see is getting the cars from IT classified in Production. There seems to be (to me anyway, based on 2003 GCR) a shortage of newer cars classified in Production and some requests for classification have been shot down with "not enough member interest."
If, based on the information collected by the SCCA, the cars that are raced in IT are, at a minimum, classed in limited prep production, I think you might see more crossover.
From my standpoint, my car is nearly ready to run both. Fuel cell will go in next winter and I'll be asking for LP classification sometime this year.
------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com
Senior Member
Simple enough to state what I see as the biggest obstacle (perhaps more mental than physical or financial): the difference/confusion in LP rules vs. IT rules. My understanding, perhaps flawed, is that the whole idea behind LP was to allow IT cars (assuming they have the min req'd safety equipment, so might have to add a fuel cell, perhaps other things) could run as-is in Prod. Sure, they'd be uncompetitive, even if they bolt-on slicks, but they'd be legal.
Now, as we look into it, it would seem that there are a number of scenarios (possibly fairly car-specific) where IT-legal configurations are NOT legal in LP or Prod! This would seem counter-intuitive (at least to my understanding of P+I for LP). It would also seem to be undesireable from a marketing standpoint for Prod - do you really think many racers out there want to take performance equipment off their cars to move up a class? Seems kinda backwards.
To provide a specific example, the brake package allowed for the 2.0L 924 (full-prep EP or LP FP). Seems to be some question as to whether the IT-legal disc/disc configuration would be allowed in LP FP.
------------------
Vaughan Scott
Detroit Region #280052
'79 924 #77 ITA/GTS1
www.vaughanscott.com
Senior Member
John, enjoy the messages & please don't kill the messengers.
A. Don't expect the IT car owner/driver to give up the farm to join the Production ranks. Open the gates, class some popular classed IT cars & if an IT car is classed in Production & is an overdog pull it back a bit but don't disable the car. Institute an INSTANT rule that allows a TRUE overdog (classing error) to be pulled back a bit NOW.
B. Open the mind set for allowing DEVELOPED IT cars conversion to Production without the thought that the IT folks shall be in Production for 5 years or whatever ammout of years before the X IT car/folks can sniff the front.
C. Eliminate the mind set that a given car can not be classed in more than one class. Example:
1st gen Mazda RX-7 street ported in E Prod.
1st gen Mazda RX-7 non-ported in H/G Prod.
D. Align the roll cage rules so that a IT roll cage is legal (tubing diameter/weight/attachment points) in Production.
E. Very softly ask the existing light weight car Production folks to get over their fear of racing with a 2100 plus pound car. They get laped at the present time at National events by the same over weight cars.
Thanks for reading
David Dewhurst
2551 North 67th Street
Wauwatosa, WI 53213
Edit: SCCA #250772
ps: Spec-7 #14 being converted to ITA/7 which could just as well be converted to H/G Production.
[This message has been edited by ddewhurst (edited March 30, 2004).]
Senior Member
I know Darin will have some input...
Hurdles:
Cage requirements. I would add to my IT-spec cage to try and get legal - if possible. It would be great to allow IT-legal cages, however.
Glass. Taped is taped. Most cars now have plastic lenses. Sure, we can remove the glass stuff but what if it's taped with duct tape? Windshield and rear galss should be able to stay.
Fuel cell. I would argue that 90% of factory gas tanks are safer than 90% of cell installs. Let us run the stock tanks.
Fire system. I would be willing to put a fire suppression systme in my car for the opportunity to more easlity convert.
Here is a question: Why the added safety stuff for Prod (cage and fire)? Today's ITS cars are faster than all but EP, no?
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Senior Member
I think it is simple... adjust the prod rules to allow any legal IT car to race without changes...
IE: door glass, headlights, even tires.
It is legal to run a fuel cell, or a fire system in IT, and a prod legal cage is legal in IT so no need to make acception rules such as those. The only thing that needs to change is where their is blatant conflicting rules. The prod guys/girls should not be afraid as even a fully preped IT car should not stand a chance against them *if the prod guy/girl is at least a good driver.
What other rules besides the headlights, tires and the door glass would need to be changed to make the rules allow cross overs? I think if you allowed this type of cross over then you would see that production would become the largest SCCA classes in existance. Well maybe besides SM and WC touring cars.
Raymond "I would love to go production" Blethen
PS: don't limit the cars being classified to the "popular cars." Classify all IT cars, even if it means more work. I can't believe that you wouldn't see a huge increase in production #'s. I am so against all the "popular car" crap that gets talked about, every member is important not just those that run a developed car. Most production cars are rare beasts and that makes it a special class all on its own. I think the excuse of "not enough member interest" is the lamest of all excuses ever used... If and when I send in the info on the Audi to get classed I get that responce sure enough I will have stickers on my car that say
"I would run prod but SCCA doesn't feel I am an important memeber so thier is not enough member interest"
I hope that SCCA does feel each of its members input is important.
Senior Member
If all IT cars get classed in production, class them all in LP. IIRC, there is no guarantee of competiveness that way and these cars wouldn't be as subjected to PCA's. Oh, and my message didn't mean to imply the "popular" cars, just the active cars (no point in classing the Chevy Cavalier in LP if it isn't being run in IT, for example).
Is the only difference in the cage the 7th and 8th points as allowed in the ITCS? I'll read up on it tonight (if I get time), but that's about the only thing I remember "different."
For me, IT is a stepping stone. I'd like to move into National racing but would rather get my feet wet by running both, then move up rather than just jump in whole hog. If I'm going to do that, I'm switching to a formula car.
------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com
[This message has been edited by planet6racing (edited March 30, 2004).]
Senior Member
Ignore the fact that I'm officially having no opinion on the topics of the national issues survey when you read this:
If it is decided to let IT cars run in a Production class as-is, what is the point of having different classes?
Is anyone besides me already confused by the multiple prep levels and specs of the Production classes?
If the philosphy is to replace a narrow set of allowed modifications - that typically define a "class" or "category" of race car - with one that groups cars of disparate preparation levels by on-track performance, why don't we just finish the job, combine SS, IT, Prod, GT, and the spec classes and create five or six performance-indexed classes with breakout times?
Just askin'...
K
Senior Member
I, for one, am willing to make changes to my car to run production. I can't afford to run both in the same weekend, so I'd have at least a week to convert it over. Of course, having a plastic car helps because it makes getting at things like the door glass very easy (just unscrew the body panel!).
I'll agree that I am confused about some of the production rules. Especially the fuel and suspension rules (I didn't really know about the fuel one until Greg brought it up in the other thread). The fuel thing could be a deal breaker for me running production...
------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com
Senior Member
As a longtime ITC racer and now GProd racer, I'd like to make some observations:
1. I think anyone who has a unusual IT car (i.e. one not otherwise classified in prod already) w/ a valid logbook that asks for classification in production should get it. The only reason I put in the caveat about the logbook is to prevent the "poseurs" and the rules-racers. If you aren't even going to race a certain "unusal" car in IT, why should it be classified in production? There are certain well known exceptions such as the ITS BMW 325is that may be too fast for prod, even with the limited prep rules. But all other cars, especially ITA, ITB, and ITC cars should have a place in prod.
2. If you prep an IT car to the limit of the rules, including all optional prep, then there are only THREE LITTLE THINGS stopping you from going to prod (assuming it's already classified):
* remove the passenger door glass.
* remove the headlights (and replace with flat panels if they are exposed)
* remove side marker/turn signal lights and replace with flat panels.
If you already have a prepped door, and the headlights/side marker panels ready made and easily affixed then you could switch from IT mode to prod mode in less than 30 minutes. You may have to add ballast to make the prod minimum weight as sometimes it's more than the IT weight.
My feeling is that if these THREE or FOUR LITTLE THINGS are stopping you from going to prod with your IT car, then well...
3. Nationals. I suspect some of this discussion about being able to run IT cars in production is so they could run in nationals. I realize this is a very touchy subject but I'm in my second season of racing nationals after 5 years in the SARRC wars. I read a lot of people here saying "oh, yeah, I'd run nationals if I could". Well, let me point out that very few tracks hold more than one and at most two national races during the year. This would mean that if you wanted to attend the Runoffs, you'd have to travel a ways for one or two races to accumulate points. If you're only looking for a way to add a couple of more races to your yearly schedule, why bother with the hassle with going to production?
I think this would be a major stumbling block for many IT racers, as they are used to racing 4,5,6 or more times a year at the same track (Road Atlanta, Summit Point, to give a couple of examples). In the NEDIV, there's only ONE national race at Summit during the year, so if you're going to race NEDIV nationals you'd have to travel. This is going to increase your racing budget.
4. Money. The folks who run nationals are serious. You see the fast guys on sticker tires every weekend. These guys bring their A-game every weekend, and if you want to compete you're going to have to bring yours too. Otherwise you're going get dusted. As an example, Scott Giles set a new lap record at VIR in ITC @2:27.4 a couple of weeks ago. That same car (88-91 Civic His also in GP as a limited prep car. The lap record in GP is 2:17.0! So the best ITC car ever at VIR is a full ten seconds off the lap record. Where are you going to find those 10 seconds? It's one thing to build a top-notch IT motor with OEM parts. It's another to build a prod motor, starting with a camshaft program, spending money on lightweight pistons, cranks, rods, clutches/pressure plates, having new gears made, etc., etc. Lexan windows can help but cost $$$, slicks are more expensive to run than DOT tires.
Just some things to think about. I made the switch to GP and love everything about prod. The car drives more like a real racecar, it stops like one, the cornering speeds are unbelievable, and rolling off the grid on the pace lap at the RUNOFFS for the first time will send tingles down your spine and make your hair stand on end...
MC
------------------
Mark Coffin
#14 GP BSI Racing/Airborn Coatings/The Shop VW
Scirocco
Zephyr Race Coaching and Consulting
http://pages.prodigy.net/scirocco14gp
[This message has been edited by racer14itc (edited March 30, 2004).]
Senior Member
Ditto!!!
Two comments......
A person racing an IT convertable, like an MG, Alfa, Fiat, Miata, etc. will have the added burden of completely removing the front windshield, and all brackets if they want to run prod.
A Production legal rollcage is NOT necessarily legal for IT (The 7th/8th attachment points are more liberal in production than IT, and you can add gussets in along the A,B, and C pillars to stiffen the car). You can however build an IT legal cage that is acceptable for production.
Senior Member
I believe that if a Miata uses the factory hardtop it would be considered a 'closed' car and could race as such. I saw an FP Miata at the Moroso national which ran with the hardtop in place.Originally posted by Greg Gauper:
Ditto!!!
Two comments......
A person racing an IT convertable, like an MG, Alfa, Fiat, Miata, etc. will have the added burden of completely removing the front windshield, and all brackets if they want to run prod.
A Production legal rollcage is NOT necessarily legal for IT (The 7th/8th attachment points are more liberal in production than IT, and you can add gussets in along the A,B, and C pillars to stiffen the car). You can however build an IT legal cage that is acceptable for production.
MC
------------------
Mark Coffin
#14 GP BSI Racing/Airborn Coatings/The Shop VW
Scirocco
Zephyr Race Coaching and Consulting
http://pages.prodigy.net/scirocco14gp
Senior Member
John,
Are you looking only at easing the transition from IT to Prod, or are you looking at dual-purpose cars that could be run in either IT or Prod? If it's the second option, one of the issues would be fuel. You'd force folks to run race gas all the time.
And Raymond, there's nothing in Prod that says you can't run DOT tires. A lot of the Prod guys use Dirt Stockers for wets.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Hi John, Daryl Brightwell here, as someone who is near completion of a EP 1st gen rx7 I would like to point out the single biggest hit I am taking to join the prod crowd is the tranny, and its going to delay my getting it to the track for months after the car is done. EP rules are such that if I run the stock tranny I can run 100# less, and hell I cant make minimum weight now!!!!! and even if I could run 100# less that wouldnt come close to making up the difference between lap times of a dog ring boxed close ratio car and a stock box car so I wont even bother bringing it out without the 3000 dollar tranny. So in a nutshell, you want to bring IT and PROD closer, get rid of the high dollar transmisions in prod and leave them to the megabuck GT guys. see you at the track when my left leg sells.
[This message has been edited by 7'sRracing (edited March 30, 2004).]
Senior Member
That doesn't jive with PCS page 30 Convertable and removable tops and all attaching hardware shall be removed from open cars.Originally posted by racer14itc:
I believe that if a Miata uses the factory hardtop it would be considered a 'closed' car and could race as such. I saw an FP Miata at the Moroso national which ran with the hardtop in place.
MC
But that makes the case for a rule change to permit hardtops for ease of crossover.
[This message has been edited by Greg Gauper (edited March 30, 2004).]
Senior Member
I too, like Mark and Greg have switched to the dark side, and now run in prodution.
Vaughan, what "performance" parts would you have to remove going from IT to PRoduction?
I run an adjustable cam gear pully which isn't legal in IT, and I've re-located the battery which isn't legal in IT. Maybe I'm missing something in your post that might be 924 specific.
Chris Albin did run the same car in ITB and GP 2 years ago, and simply changed doors to be legal. I know that there are some grand-father'd rules in IT that still don't make sense, like heater core, door glass, headlights, but that's for another discussion.
The conversion isn't that difficult, and yes, I would like to go to the run-offs some day, but I'll wait until it moves to the left coast. I think that I would bet on hell freezing over first.
------------------
Tim Linerud
San Francisco Region SCCA
#95 GP Wabbit (Bent)
http://linerud.myvnc.com/racing/index.html
Senior Member
I'm a current ITC racer considering a future move to limited prep G Prod, and in my mind its pretty simple.
Just make the limited prep safety rules the same as the IT safety rules...
-As mentioned above, I feel my OEM Honda fuel tank is plenty safer than alot of the shadetree mechanic fuel cell installs I've seen. If its safe enough for IT, why would it be any less safe with slicks on the car?
-Why is a fire system needed instead of a bottle (legal for IT) when the only changes I'm going to make are tires, remove weight, and some minor engine/tranny mods? Do these things make my car more combustable than it was in IT? (see a running theme here?)
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for plenty of fire protection, but the rules need to make sense. Why would a limited prep GP Honda Civic be more combustable than a ITC Honda Civic? Well, it wouldn't, and thats my point.
-Cages... So I'm going to make the car about 150lbs lighter to go to prod but suddenly I need more cage? Again, that doesn't make sense.
-Glass... Let me keep it. Again, if its safe enough for IT...
If I could convert my car to GP in about 2 hours (remove PS glass, change tranny, remove headlights, bolt on slicks) to run a National you bet your fanny I'd do it. Then take the same 2 hours to convert it back to an ITC car for the ARRC.
I'd be all over that. In a heartbeat.
Senior Member
Mark,Originally posted by racer14itc:
1. I think anyone who has a unusual IT car (i.e. one not otherwise classified in prod already)
Could you please explain what you mean by this? It seems odd to me to refer to an IT car that is "not otherwise classified in prod" as "unusual", when many of the most popular IT cars are NOT classified in Production currently... so I'm not quite sure what you are referring to here... Would you mind expanding on what you were saying here?
Also, to help understand this situation a little more, I'm going to start putting together a list of IT cars that are currently not classified in Production so we can see just how the situation really is...
Thanks,
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
Senior Member
Darin,Originally posted by Banzai240:
Mark,
Could you please explain what you mean by this? It seems odd to me to refer to an IT car that is "not otherwise classified in prod" as "unusual", when many of the most popular IT cars are NOT classified in Production currently... so I'm not quite sure what you are referring to here... Would you mind expanding on what you were saying here?
Also, to help understand this situation a little more, I'm going to start putting together a list of IT cars that are currently not classified in Production so we can see just how the situation really is...
Thanks,
I couldn't think of a good word for what I was trying to say. Many IT cars are already classified in production as limited prep or full prep. I would assume that most of those are popular or common cars in IT (VW's, Hondas, etc.).
If they're not already classified in prod, let's get them classified...but only if someone is racing one. No need for the Prod Ad Hoc to slog through dozens of classifications for cars that people don't even want to race in IT..
MC
------------------
Mark Coffin
#14 GP BSI Racing/Airborn Coatings/The Shop VW
Scirocco
Zephyr Race Coaching and Consulting
http://pages.prodigy.net/scirocco14gp
Senior Member
Everytime I see the "safety" issue brought up about IT cars needing to remove glass, install fire systems, fuel cells, it makes me think it's time to mandate these in IT so we can make the transition to prod easier.Originally posted by Catch22:
I'm a current ITC racer considering a future move to limited prep G Prod, and in my mind its pretty simple.
Just make the limited prep safety rules the same as the IT safety rules...
-As mentioned above, I feel my OEM Honda fuel tank is plenty safer than alot of the shadetree mechanic fuel cell installs I've seen. If its safe enough for IT, why would it be any less safe with slicks on the car?
-Why is a fire system needed instead of a bottle (legal for IT) when the only changes I'm going to make are tires, remove weight, and some minor engine/tranny mods? Do these things make my car more combustable than it was in IT? (see a running theme here?)
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for plenty of fire protection, but the rules need to make sense. Why would a limited prep GP Honda Civic be more combustable than a ITC Honda Civic? Well, it wouldn't, and thats my point.
-Cages... So I'm going to make the car about 150lbs lighter to go to prod but suddenly I need more cage? Again, that doesn't make sense.
-Glass... Let me keep it. Again, if its safe enough for IT...
If I could convert my car to GP in about 2 hours (remove PS glass, change tranny, remove headlights, bolt on slicks) to run a National you bet your fanny I'd do it. Then take the same 2 hours to convert it back to an ITC car for the ARRC.
I'd be all over that. In a heartbeat.Then these points would be moot, no?
And Scott, I don't see what you would gain by "switching" back and forth between prod and IT because you'd get spanked in production at the national level with an IT-level prepped car. No offense, just an observation. And I would assume at the regional level you'd just run ITC where you'd be competitive.
The prod rules are what they are, and I don't favor relaxing safety standards to increase car counts by allowing IT cars in as is. I'd like to see safety items like fire systems and fuel cells mandated for IT cars. But I realize that might be against the philosophy of IT as a cost effective class. So the compromise is to allow/recommend these items and those folks who are interested in running production can prepare their car to the limit of the IT rules and make the transition to prod very easy. Just my opinions...
MC
------------------
Mark Coffin
#14 GP BSI Racing/Airborn Coatings/The Shop VW
Scirocco
Zephyr Race Coaching and Consulting
http://pages.prodigy.net/scirocco14gp
[This message has been edited by racer14itc (edited March 31, 2004).]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks