Want to hear YOUR opinion...

[Andy Bettencourt]

We have recently received a couple letters asking for some specific allowances due to the availablility of OEM parts. I ask you this:

When a car becomes so old (or rare) that the OEM (even Mazda) doesn't support things like brakes, windshields, etc - and there are no aftermarket OEM equivilant parts available, should we............

1. Allow the car to die a slow death, relying on drivers to retire their cars because they can't field legal versions? Does this encourage cheating? Does this promote loss of membership to other clubs who will cater to these types of drivers?

2. Allow alternate parts from other, newer models...or even alternate materials for things like glass, etc.

My immediate thoughts are to let these cars die. It becomes a NIGHTMARE to manage this type of process, as well as having to take drivers at their word on things that 'can't be found' anymore. Not even mentioning how we police each other in grid...

But what is BEST for the membership as a whole?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited March 19, 2005).]

[jc836]

I think one has a good argument for allowing the cars to die. However, they should also be allowed to be used for non-competition (points) events in some sort of special class. Once the car is declared as no longer supported by the factory or aftermarket (such as glass)is probably the best point at which to move its spec line. This also has its issues, but would not render the car useless for things like track days (HPDE and autocross). Just a few rambling thoughts.

------------------
Grandpa's toys-modded suspensions and a few other tweaks
'89 CRX Si-SCCA ITA #99
'99 Prelude=a sweet song-FOR SALE
'03 Dodge Dakota Club Cab V8-Patriot Blue gonna tow

[SilverHorseRacing]

I normally stay out of these discussions, but my thought would be that it is time to let the car go. I've junkyard hunted many a part for my cars, and when the yards no longer have any examples, that should be a hint to either put the car into vintage, or restore it and put it out to pasture. I know that's tough for some to swallow, but the cars get older, just like we do. And at some point, if it can't be brought into line with the rules, what else are you going to do? My car will get there someday too, and by that point, it will have been so outclassed by newer models that I would have built a new one anyway to keep up.

------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com

[ddewhurst]

I race a 1985 1st gen Mazda RX-7 & OEM equivilant parts including brake rotors are available. When the aftermarket parts are no longer available let the cars die....

Have Fun
David Dewhurst
SCCA 250772
CenDiv
ITA/7 #14

[924Guy]

As an active owner/racer of a car that's likely to tip over that edge in the next 10 years - I'd say that yes, it's a hint that it's time to either move to a more open class (Prod or GT) or retire it to vintage. IOW, I'm happy with the current rules situation.

------------------
Vaughan Scott
Detroit Region #280052
'79 924 #77 ITB/GTS1
www.vaughanscott.com

[Knestis]

When it's time to go, it's time to go - and they should do it with dignity.

K

[ITA Racer]

Originally posted by 924Guy:
As an active owner/racer of a car that's likely to tip over that edge in the next 10 years - I'd say that yes, it's a hint that it's time to either move to a more open class (Prod or GT) or retire it to vintage. IOW, I'm happy with the current rules situation.

My thoughts are the same as quoted above.



------------------
95 ITA Neon

[DaveITB1]

R.I.P.

[itbgti]

"Let me do it ma....Ole' Yeller was my dog."

[RacerBill]

I agree that when you can't get parts anymore, let it pass. But here's a proactive slant (and another reason for the National office to keep statistics on Regional races. Assign every line in the ITCS a number and keep track of each regional race with entrants keyed to the spec line number. Any lines with no entries for a year are placed on probation for a year and if no further entries, that line is dropped the following year. This would help keep the list of eligable cars manageable. Make allowances for unique situations - I was going through a (divorce, illness, new child, grandchild, whatever) in 2005 but intend to race my 19xx Gogomobile in 2006! I would just hate to see the GCR go to two CD's

------------------
Bill Stevens
Mbr 103106
BnS Racing
83 ITA Shelby Dodge Charger

[dickita15]

let em die. or go to prod

[Greg Amy]

Let 'em go.

[JeffYoung]

While I own one of these cars, I agree. Once you can't get parts to comply with the rules, you should change not the rules.

HOWEVER -- I do not believe in any proactive de-listing or de-classing of cars. Just because someone doesn't run the car doesn't mean no one ever will. Delisting of cars makes no sense to me. Keep as many options open for the racer as you can. Some people get off on driving something a bit unusual -- and keeping them in the ITCS may end up attracting more people than you think.

Also, I do not agree in moving the post 68 cut off date or any other rule change that would effectively ban existing, running IT cars. If the car can't meet the rules, so be it, but no changing the rules on an existing IT racer and his car to legislate it out of existence.

Prod is not an option for a lot of us by the way, either because of cost or, more likely for S and A cars, the car simply isn't classed in E Prod.

[badal]

You could do it a couple of ways:
Allow alternate parts and list them on a spec line. It sounds like the parts we are talking about would not be anything that would have a performance advantage.

Allow all cars older than a certain date to use alternate fenders/glass/whatever.



------------------
"Bad" Al Bell
ITC #3 Datsun 510
DC Region MARRS Series

[bldn10]

Until the last few days I would have said just let them die. But now I fear that we must obtain written, legal directives from all owners or else some may appeal to their elected representatives to pass laws w/ the intention of forcing us to continue to feed parts into these cars whatever the cost or indignity to them. :-)

------------------
Bill Denton
87/89 ITS RX-7
02 Audi TT225QC
95 Tahoe
Memphis

[Knestis]

As of very early this morning, Bill Frist wants to review every case before it is dropped out of the ITCS? Argh.

K

[Greg Amy]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">As of very early this morning, Bill Frist wants to review every case before it is dropped out of the ITCS? Argh.</font>

Did I miss something? - GA

[Ron Earp]

I've got one of "these cars" too and I do agree with letting them go - to an extent.

I don't think they should get kicked because one can't get a washer bottle, wiring harness, or similar non-performance part that gives no competitive edge. But, I assume we are not talking about parts like this.

I feel as many cars as possible should be listed to give folks options on what they can build. For someone like myself, I'm attracted to the car that others don't have and I'm 100% sure there are others like me. Met some this weekend at VIR. Not everyone wants a 240z/325i/Civic/Miata or whatever the most popular flavor of the day is. I don't think it costs any time or money to de-list a car, but it'll certainly cost time and effort to re-list it when someone comes along that has 41 shells and 35 motors of a XYZ Thingamajig GT and has finally decided he wants to race it.

I was actually trying to think of what cars would be out of parts. I think Jeff and I arguably have two of the rarest cars in IT and neither one of us have any real huge problems with parts - no I can't get some stuff but I can still get all the important stuff that is meaningful for racing. Certainly if I can still get windshields etc. for a JH one can do the same for most other stuff listed?

Ron

------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning Tow Beast
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 a 260Z ITS - Zero

[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited March 21, 2005).]

[gran racing]

[quote]

I do not agree with this theory. I understand the need to let some cars die out, but why narrow the options if we don't have to. I personally like having many different cars in a field. For someone new coming in, having many options is nice even if the car isn't the car to have in that class.

I do also feel that some parts should be allowed, but this makes managing the process a bit tougher.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[JeffYoung]

Two comments then I have to start collecting parts for my oddball....

1. Kirk, you crack me up. So my car is a TRSchiavo?

2. On delisting. You know how Ron Earp made his car choice? Me and him and 2 other guys were driving back from a karting event at VIR last summer. He saw a GCR laying in the back of my truck, opened it up, and started going down the lists of cars. The words "Jensen-Healey" and "Lotus 907" captivated him....and off to IT Oddball land he went.

Point is that a fair number of IT racers are IT racing because their odd car is classed. I've seen enough ITS GTV6s and Alfa Milanos and TR8s and ITB Opel GTs and ITA AMC Spirits to know that the following is true:

Ratio of Oddball Race Cars to "Normal Race Cars"

EXCEEDS

Ratio of Oddball Street Cars Still Running to "Normal" Street Cars still running.