1993 Golf III in ITB

[itbgti]

What is everyone's thoughts as to this car in ITB in '04? Will it be competitive, and can it keep up to the A2 GTI's? Is 1993 the only model classified? Also, is it guranteed that this car go into ITB, or is it just on the meeting table?

Any input would be great.

Regards,
Alan

[Knestis]

FasTrack makes it sound like a done deal.

If you (or anyone else) is interested in running a mkIII, get in touch with Jeremy Thoennes (say "tennis") at club racing and find out what it would take to get other years of the same car added to the spec line. I spoke with him about my addition and he was very supportive. I came away believing that he IS interested in shaking loose the IT rules logjam.

I don't know about the details but, on paper, it looks like a solid ITB car.

Kirk

[JOESELLSVW]

I thought that I just read in the Feb. Fastrack that the Golf 3 platform was ruled as too competitve for ITB and would remain in ITA. Is this for 2003 only and the pan is to move the car to B in '04? has anyone built one of these cars for ITA so far? I didn't see any on the results, but I wasn't really looking either... JOE

[Ralf]

Originally posted by JOESELLSVW:
I thought that I just read in the Feb. Fastrack that the Golf 3 platform was ruled as too competitve for ITB and would remain in ITA. Is this for 2003 only and the pan is to move the car to B in '04? has anyone built one of these cars for ITA so far? I didn't see any on the results, but I wasn't really looking either... JOE

Joe, since you sell VW's I'm assuming you work at a dealership. Can you do some research and see how many 93 Golfs were actually imported into the US? If I remember correctly there was a problem at the factory and we didn't see any 93's until late '93, almost '94.

Edit: Just did a search on Kelly Blue Book and Edmunds and they only list a 4 door Golf. So if you want to build an A3 car wait until they classify the car into ITB and then ask them to classify the other years eligible.


------------------
Ralf
#53 ITB Golf GT
MiDiv



[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 26, 2003).]

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by JOESELLSVW:
I thought that I just read in the Feb. Fastrack that the Golf 3 platform was ruled as too competitve for ITB and would remain in ITA. Is this for 2003 only and the pan is to move the car to B in '04? has anyone built one of these cars for ITA so far? I didn't see any on the results, but I wasn't really looking either... JOE

That's they way I read it Joe. I doubt that anyone has built one. Why would you when you're down on HP to the 1.8 16v cars? Be interesting in ITB though. IIRC, the 2.0 8v motor is a Digifant FI motor and makes 115hp stock. That's 10-12 more than a 1.8 8v, and since it's a Digi car, it can be 'chipped'.

I don't follow the A3 stuff, so I don't know what a 'chipped' 2.0 8v is good for. But, if you can squeeze 20hp out of a 1.8 8v in IT trim, I would expect at least that much from the 2.0 8v. So, that works out to ~135hp and the car only weighs 70# more than the A2 Golf. Should be an interesting car. Be interested in knowing how many people are going to build them for next year?



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

[Knestis]

It's not worth the weight of the pixels that make up the image but, considering that...



K

[Bill Miller]

Looks like 118-120 for HP and 125-128 for torque. Granted the 2000 2.0 8v is slightly different than the '93 2.0 8v (OBDII and all that).

/edit/ But, more important than the absolute numbers are the gains. Looks to be on the order of 10hp and possibly 12 ft-lb.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited January 26, 2003).]

[JOESELLSVW]

In 1993 there was a strike at VW's Mexican assembly plant in Puebla that plagued the introduction of the then new generation Golf. It hurt so bad that in that year several VW dealers went out of business. In 1994 things got a little better, but there was wide spread talk of VW leaving the US market. Other things contributed to this besides the strike. Flight 803, if I remember right, was shot down over Lockerbie, Scotland and on board were several key members of VW of North America executive board. This sent VW of NA reeling and it took Ferdinand Piech a few years to right the ship. But I digress, in 94 and 95 VW built the Golf Sport, a 2.0, two door Golf in sporty trim, ie: alloys, different seats, etc. , kind of a pre-GTI without the ABS. In 96 the 2.0 GTI was introduced with ABS and 99.95% came with a sunroof. Part way through the year the sunroof was a standard feature on the GTI. I do like these cars, and I do think that there is good potential for them, but the question remains where? In ITA, outclassed by the 16v, in ITB looks like it would be a very strong car.... the crossflow 2.0 has better low end torque than the 1.8 and more at the top end. Not to mention a stiffer chassis. I'm going to stop now before this becomes another hijacked thread. I'm still unclear though... where's this car going to race in '03...'04? JOE

[itbgti]

Joe,

Definetly not off topic...thank you very much for the information. Maybe you can give some more:

I believe the 93-99 2.0L motors are all the same, as well as the platform for the car. The only major differences (I believe) were the GTI came with an exterior/interior package and disc rear brakes. Some of the other golfs came with disk rear brakes as well. I do not think it would be difficult to get the entire model year line classified as a single line in the GCR, just as 85-92 Golfs are classified.

Please keep the posts coming.

Ragards,
Alan

[Knestis]

Originally posted by JOESELLSVW:
... where's this car going to race in '03...'04? JOE

For the balance of '03 it will remain in A. The proposal has gone from the Comp Board to the Board of Directors for final approval and there is a period during which comment can be made to them. It is not truly official yet but the BoD - as I understand it - generally defers to the CB, unless there is a hew and cry from the membership on the issue at hand.

K

[Bill Miller]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">It is not truly official yet but the BoD - as I understand it - generally defers to the CB, unless there is a hew and cry from the membership on the issue at hand</font>

And sometimes not even then. The ECU rule is a good example.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

[Jason Weaver]

Hello all, I am a newbie and I wanted to introduce myself. I just recently purchased a 1996 GTi 2.0 8v ITA car, (one of the few that currently exist???)and I have been following the forums for a few days, so I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to chime in.
I orginally had a BMW E36 in mind (I even bought one) until I realized what it would take just to get it on the track. (oneday )At any rate, I really got excited at an affordable already built, current logbook, etc. complete car. I drove the car for the first time at CMP and I absolutely love the car! I was hesitant about getting into a FWD car (only other track experience is in my NSX) but the car really is awesome.
From what I understand from the previous owner, if the car ever got classed down to "B" it would be a real contender (well the car anyway)and I would imagine this will happen at some point. I don't even have my license yet (Feb. hopefully) but as soon as I obtain it I will submit a request for ITB (can't hurt right) or whatever else may be needed to try to get the ball rolling. At any rate, thanks for a great forum and thanks for the space! I look forward to the wealth of knowledge that is here. I'll do my best to add what I can as I learn more about the car etc. Sorry for being so long winded!


------------------
Jason

[This message has been edited by Jason Weaver (edited January 28, 2003).]

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Jason Weaver:
Hello all, I am a newbie and I wanted to introduce myself. I just recently purchased a 1996 GTi 2.0 8v ITA car, (one of the few that currently exist???)and I have been following the forums for a few days, so I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to chime in.

Where did the previous owner race this car? According to the ITCS, only the 1993 model is currently listed which means your car isn't legal in SCCA ITA.
Did the previous owner race it in SSC and then convert it to ITA spec before realizing that its not classified in IT and therefore sold it to you? Better do some research fast so you can get the car classified in IT and get to race it this year.


------------------
Ralf
#53 ITB Golf GT
MiDiv

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 28, 2003).]

[Knestis]

Yup - what he said.

You don't need to make the request to have it listed in ITB, since the '93 looks like it might already be headed that way. It would take as long for that process to take place as it will for the Board of Directors to consider moving the '93.

Your better bet is to request that all of the eligible years (through '98 now) of the car are added to the already-existing classification for the '93. It is a much smaller issue to add cars to the "spec line" than to start from scratch.

You will need technical information to support the contention that the cars are all essentially the same, which shouldn't be too tough for that generation of Golf.

I think others will follow if you lead the way on this...

Best of luck!

Kirk

[Bill Miller]

One interesting thing is that the SSC cars are listed at 2500# w/o driver yet the ITA version (earlier car but same chassis) is listed at 2350# w/ driver. Nothing like a 330# weight break going from SS to IT (using the 180# avg. driver weight).


C'mon Kirk, you don't think I'd let this pass do you?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

[Knestis]

But, as I am learning by applying the conceptual framework of my dissertation to IT classification trends, the weight spec is grounded ENTIRELY in context.

The Golf III got plunked in A ('cause it was new and scary) but was "lightweighted" as a de facto competition adjustment, knowing that it was in over its head there. The CB responsible for the placement KNEW they had rounded down, whether they paid any attention to the SS wieght or not.

It moves to B at the same weight and...well, I don't have to explain that to YOU.

My math says that it has an IT-spec power/weight adjusted advantage of about 130# over the MkII, even if it nets out 70# heavier. I would be a little surprised if it can get to the minimum, I think...

K

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Knestis:
But, as I am learning by applying the conceptual framework of my dissertation to IT classification trends, the weight spec is grounded ENTIRELY in context.

The Golf III got plunked in A ('cause it was new and scary) but was "lightweighted" as a de facto competition adjustment, knowing that it was in over its head there. The CB responsible for the placement KNEW they had rounded down, whether they paid any attention to the SS wieght or not.

It moves to B at the same weight and...well, I don't have to explain that to YOU.

My math says that it has an IT-spec power/weight adjusted advantage of about 130# over the MkII, even if it nets out 70# heavier. I would be a little surprised if it can get to the minimum, I think...

K

Ahhhh, I think you may be onto something. But since the CB does not want to be forthcoming w/ the IT weight specification process, you cannot assume that the A3 Golf was intentionally rounded down as a defacto comp. adjustment. As I said in another thread, since the botched the A2 Jetta GLI specs so bad, I could just as easily chalk the ITA weight of the A3 Golf up to nobody doing their research. Hey, they dropped the weight on the ITS VR6 Corrado because it was 'wrong'. It will be interesting to see if the weight is changed. Either way, I'm going to ask why or why not. I know they didn't change the weight on the Accord when it went from B to A.

And, here is another question. Just how many people have actually built and raced an A3 Golf in ITA? Where's that 'fully developed' example to show that it's not competetive in ITA? Where's the data to support the 'lack of comp. potential'? Kind of reminds me of when the 2.0 911 and the 914-6 went from limited prep EP to full prep EP overnight.

I haven't spoken w/ Jeremy lately, but has he given any indication that the CB is going to be taken to task to get rid of the perception of lack of objectivity?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608

[Bildon]

>>Where's that 'fully developed' example to show that it's not competetive in ITA?

Bill, I don't know of any A3s in ITA.
But we all know why. It would have been a complete waste of money to prepare one and then have to run against a far lighter CRX with more HP.

However, now that it's in "B"... this looks like a worthy candidate for class honors...finally VW gets a 2L to chase the Volvos with!

The more I think about it, we may just do an A3!

------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2002 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

[Knestis]

I would like to go on record as saying that this recent development has me a little PO'd. I thought that I had my plans solidified and this option comes along and, frankly, it is a better on in some ways.

Grumble.

K

[Bill Miller]

Bill,

I was wondering when you were going to chime in on this. Paulo DeCauto (sp?) has done a good job the last couple of years in the MARRS series w/ his A2 GTI against Broring's old Volvo. And we all know what Chris Albin has done w/ his A2. Should be really interesting.

Any comments on the A3 suspension geometry/handling vs. the A2?

BTW, how's the Corrado comming?

Kirk,

You shouldn't be PO'd, you should be happy that this came along before you started the other car!

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608