Attn: First gen guys...

[lateapex911]

Ok, I'm thinking of adding the RX-7 to the list of cars to be considered for a move to a lower class by writing an "official" letter.

So...if we WERE to be moved to ITB, lets look at the issues.

1- Wheels. No more 7" wide rims. The often used sizes on the 7" rim are 225/50-13 and 225/45-13. Some 205/60-13s as well. So, on a 6" wide rim, will these tires work? Or will we need to look at smaller sizes. No matter what, we won't be presenting the same footprint as we are now. Anyone car to guess a potential time loss? (Percentage)

2- Weight. They (the ITAC and therefore, the CR will never consider it without a weight change. Just for the record, at the 2003 ARRCs, the IT-7s were about 3.5 seconds off the fast ITA guys, and about a second faster than the ITB guys. So, keeping in mind the performance loss due to the wheel change, what weight should I suggest as a fair number??



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[ddewhurst]

Jake, I need to ask you a question about your desire to have the 1st gen RX-7 reclassed in ITB. What is your gain in asking for the reclass of the 1st gen ? If you have a 1st gen will reclassing the car make you personaly a winner ?

We have a serious guy here in the CenDiv who races SCCA & MC races & he with his 1st gen is 1 to 1.5 second off the fastest CRX qualifying time & he gives them fits & then some.

I ran my first race this year today with my partial converted 1st gen RX-7 ITA & whipped one of the ITAC members (who racers a ITA honda) who then protested me for rules GCR 4.5, 9.1.1.A, B, & C. The check written ITAC protesting whiner had his protest against me rejected. The same ITAC member got whipped by a real fast ITC Datsun racer so he protested him. The best part of the whole deal is that this protesting fool has had his car reclassed to ITB for 2005. The ITC guy will continue trashing him. I with my Spec-7 have had many good races with the ITC guy & we never touched each other. & if the protester continues I will intentially sandbag & start behind the protester next year with my fully prepared ITA RX-7.

The protesters new nick name should
be _ _ _ "Racing Room" _ _ _ _ _. He likes nicknames.

Hvae Fun
David

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
Jake, I need to ask you a question about your desire to have the 1st gen RX-7 reclassed in ITB. What is your gain in asking for the reclass of the 1st gen ? If you have a 1st gen will reclassing the car make you personaly a winner ?

Honestly David, I am not exactly sure where you are going with this, so I will take it at face value.

So, what will I gain? Well, I am looking into the idea of the reclass, so that 1st gen RX-7s have a shot at running up front. So, I guess my "gain" would be as good a chance as anyone else.

"If I have a 1st gen will it make me personally a winner"? Ummm....David? Look at my sig...you know I have a first gen! As for the winner part, I don't follow you. Are you referring to race wins or what?

We have a serious guy here in the CenDiv who races SCCA & MC races & he with his 1st gen is 1 to 1.5 second off the fastest CRX qualifying time & he gives them fits & then some.

Who is this guy?? How long is the track? Who are the CRX drivers. Interesting info, but the context is important.

I ran my first race this year today with my partial converted 1st gen RX-7 ITA & whipped one of the ITAC members (who racers a ITA honda) who then protested me for rules GCR 4.5, 9.1.1.A, B, & C. The check written ITAC protesting whiner had his protest against me rejected. The same ITAC member got whipped by a real fast ITC Datsun racer so he protested him. The best part of the whole deal is that this protesting fool has had his car reclassed to ITB for 2005. The ITC guy will continue trashing him. I with my Spec-7 have had many good races with the ITC guy & we never touched each other. & if the protester continues I will intentially sandbag & start behind the protester next year with my fully prepared ITA RX-7.

The protesters new nick name should
be _ _ _ "Racing Room" _ _ _ _ _. He likes nicknames.

And what Honda is it? And I take it by the "has had his car reclassed to ITB" comment that you feel that he is using his powers on the ITAC for personal gain?

Look David, I'm looking into the concept, and I have no desire to land in a class and be an overdog. Besides, my letter would not be the first letter requesting just such a reclassification.

So, I take it from your response that you feel the car is just fine as it is, and capable of, in the best of hands, running against the best of the class?


------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[dickita15]

david and others
I too am interested in where ist gens are competitive. I have heard that they are in some areas but it is contrary to what i have seen. here in the northeast we have some pretty well developed ita cars and the rx7's are definately way off. when i went to the arrc i found some pretty well developed it7 cars from the southeast and cen div I think and they were much slower than the ita cars.
so under what conditions are first gens running well in ita.
is it there are tracks that favor them.
are the hondas and acuras less than fully developed.
are the rx7's pushing the rules.

just trying to understand

dick patullo

[dyoungre]

David,
Can I ask a question that puts a different spin on your example: Had the ITA RX7 been classed as ITB, how would he have finished in ITB - would he have won? Been an overdog/track record for ITB?
Also, you stated that the RX7 was within 1.5 seconds of the CRX Si - was that CRX the race winner?

As with Dick, trying to understand the context of your example. Thanks!

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[ITSRX7]

Since we don't have IT7 up here, I will use the last few years of ARRC as data:

Top qualifiers:

2001
ITB: 1:47.7
IT7: 1:47.7

2002
ITB: 1:49.0
IT7: 1:50.2

2003
ITB: 1:48.8
IT7: 1:49.1

Not knowing the weather situations or timing of qualiying, track conditions etc...it seems as if the two classes are capable of the same times given the proper conditions. I have not dug up anything faster than the 2001 qualifying times.

Discuss.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Speed Raycer]

Here's an issue... should the RX get moved to B, and weight is added, what happens to all of the cars using 1.5"x.095 cages? The cut-off is 2200 (+180 for driver in IT) which is right at the limit for the RX. Would they be grandfathered like the cars built before the 100 sq. inch plate rule?

------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it

Izzy's Custom Cages

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Speed Raycer:
Here's an issue... should the RX get moved to B, and weight is added, what happens to all of the cars using 1.5"x.095 cages? The cut-off is 2200 (+180 for driver in IT) which is right at the limit for the RX.

Ummm... Scott... If there are any RX-7s out there with 1.5" x .095" cages, they are illegal RIGHT NOW...

ITCS 17.1.4.C - Specifications

The SCCA shall specify the minimum weight for each classified car as qualified or races, with driver.

You'll notice the SS cage specifications do not say "Without Driver", as the GT, Production, etc. rules do...

IT cars must have cages installed that meet the minimum weights with driver, meaning the RX had better have at least a 1.500x.120" cage in them...

(Why suddenly is the air around impound filled with the sound of checks being ripped out of checkbooks... )

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


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[planet6racing]

I don't have the GCR in front of me right now, and I've been wrong before (but only once!), but I'm reasonably confident that, somewhere in either the General Competion or ITCS sections of the rules it states that the cage is based on the weight minus 180 pounds. I remember this because I went over it 4 times before buying the steel for my car...

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by planet6racing:
..but I'm reasonably confident that, somewhere in either the General Competion or ITCS sections of the rules it states that the cage is based on the weight minus 180 pounds.

YOU ARE RIGHT! I didn't read into it far enough...

GCR 18.1.6.D
For the purposes of determining tubing sizes, the vehicle weight is as raced without fuel and driver. ... Improved Touring cage tubing sizes are to be calculated based on the published vehicle weight minus 180lbs.

I appologize for the misdirection and not knowing this rule better (only built one cage myself, and it was a Prod car cage...)

In that case... This would definately throw a wrench in the spokes of moving the car to ITB...

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


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[mustanghammer]

In that case... This would definately throw a wrench in the spokes of moving the car to ITB...

************

It seems to me that this issue would preclude allot of Lead Trophies. For instance, How much weight can be piled on a CRX before cage specs are an issue?

Frankly, using this as an argument to halt the movement of the 12A RX7 to ITB doesn't hold water. How many RX7's running a 1.5" 095" cage weigh EXACTLY 2380 when they come off of the track? Aren't most cars "balasted" for a little insurance against Scale error?

My ITA/7 RX7 weighs 2530 after a race with me in the car (on Hoosier tires). Now before anybody in Mid Div threatens paper my cage was built over-spec by the original owner (1.75 x .125 wall tubing). So, I am legal. But if I were to rip the cage out and use the spec tube for a 2200 car I would still be over weight for the cage.

Please do not allow this cage issue to be used as a crutch. Based on the ARC numbers presented by others, who says we need to add weight?

For what it is worth, I have a pretty well preped car and I have run on 5.5" rims at This knocked about 1-1.5 seconds ff of my best time with the same tire on a 7" rim also at. Again, is extra weight needed JUST because this what was done with other cars?



------------------
Scott Peterson
KC Region
IT7 #17

[Greg Amy]

I wouldn't worry about this issue too much.

First, the GCR 18 states the rollcage tubing sizes for IT are "to be calculated based on the published vehicle weight minus 180 lbs" not the actual weight (emphasis mine).

Second, there is a precedent for roll cage tubing size allowances: Spec Miata. The SM rules state that "Regardless of car weight, all Spec Miata autos may be constructed to the requirements for a 2095-pound car." Given this precedence I'm confident it can be applied to other areas.

Greg

[Speed Raycer]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
I appologize for the misdirection and not knowing this rule better (only built one cage myself, and it was a Prod car cage...)

In that case... This would definately throw a wrench in the spokes of moving the car to ITB...

Actually, my fault for wording it funny. From a cage building standpoint (for IT anyway), I have to think of max weight w/o the driver, otherwise, my clients end up with pigs for cars

I will admit Darin, for a second, you had me really scared, but I've read through that rule countless times just to be double sure.



------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it

Izzy's Custom Cages

[lateapex911]

Ok, to sum up here....

So far, no concrete opinions, but it seems that......

....one guy thinks it's fine where it is, or that I have an agenda (or something), and...

.... one guy who thinks it could be moved "as is" with no weight added...the narrower wheels would do the trick by themselves, and...

.... one guy (me) who thinks its a kinda decent fit as is, but the percertion is that it will be a huge overdog, so maybe a little weight is in order,.....

.... and some data that shows the cars are pretty heads up at Road Atlanta.

Here's some empirical data. Since the CRX was mentioned as the "big dog" above, (there are others though...) here's the 'tale of the tape':

Weight: 240 pounds (that's fully 10%) heavier than the CRX.
Power: Rougly the same in legal trim, although the CRX kills with it's prodigious torque!
Brakes: CRX is better under braking. Weight helps here.
Handling: CRX holds the edge here as well, better weight and better suspension design. The RX has the big ole live axle, the CRX can do adjustable rear camber.

Where am I wrong here? What have I missed? Is that a fair summation? Are there advantages, (other than the musical exhaust note) that the RX-7 holds over the CRX??

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[Greg Gauper]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Are there advantages, (other than the musical exhaust note) that the RX-7 holds over the CRX??

RWD vs FWD ............

[lateapex911]

I'm trying to put a number on how much of an advantage that actually is. The FWD guys seem to think that their cars handle better, and I have seen some really sideways Honda products not miss a beat. When asked, they smuggly say "Floor it and let go of the wheel!" I know my leg is getting tugged, but at these power levels, is the advantage that great?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[dyoungre]

I like the results comparison at RA - with 7" wheels, the RX7 matched the best ITB time one year, and was slower in the next two. If 6" wheels are 1 second a lap slower (ballpark, but reasonable, based on earlier input) it SURELY does not seem like an overdog. So...

NHIS - Best qualifying at 'Cheap Date' (1st day)

1:17:7 - RX7
1:14:5 - ITB

2nd day
1:24:02 - RX7
1:20:38 - ITB

Limerock - Aug 7 best lap
1:06:11 - RX7
1:04:56 - ITB

Hard to find results! Anyhow, I've yet to see data suggesting that RX7s at our current weight, but with 6" wheels would be an overdog in ITB.


------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[lateapex911]

Dave-

Not to shoot holes in the concept, but those ITB times from NHIS seem mighty suspect. Keep looking...I think that has to be an error. 14 for an ITB car?? No way! They run with ITS..might be a typo?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[ITSRX7]

Dave,

Not sure where you got that data! Your ITB times look suspiciously like ITS times. Here is what I found:

Day 1: South Oval
RX-7 - 1:19.1 (Jake)
ITB - 1:18.9 (Carlson - Volvo 142)

Day 2: Chicane/Chicane
RX-7 - 1:24.2 (Sheppard)
ITB - 1:24.0 (Carlson - Volvo 142)

(Edit: these are fast race laps. The qual times are so hard to sort)

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[This message has been edited by ITSRX7 (edited October 11, 2004).]

[Hotshoe]

I would like to know the level of prep and the skill level of the drivers.
Put Sam Moore in the Volvo (ITand Don Vincini in the Mazda (ITA) Get the cars to their liking and then compare.
I ran a season with the ITB cars. They would have to really do a lot to slow the RX7 down.

I'm all for putting the GSL-SE (13on the same line with the 12A. Now that would stir the pot more than anything.