1st gen class change to ITB ------ NOT!

[lateapex911]

[quote]Originally posted by tdw6974:

As it stands if you run a RX-7 in ITA- NO Impound and no trophys u T weaver

Well, except for acts of God....AKA... torrential rain in Biblical proportions.



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

[Boswoj]

Please don't take my "ego" post as an explaination for some drivers in your region not wanting a class move. I was just commenting on something that I hadn't really considered before having a conversation with some local racers. I was introducing it as more background, not to minimize your concerns.

To more directly address your situation, I have really found a couple of things that are pretty consistent. 1) Different tracks definitely favor different cars, and 2) A well planned and executed racing program will always have more success. The same guys who are top competitors in your region driving 1st gen Rx-7's would also likely be the top competitors if they drove Hondas - and they would probably turn faster times. It's amazing how a top notch driver and a meticulously prepared car will find their way to the front of the grid, but it is really a testament to the best "program' more than anything else it seems.

Boswoj

This whole thing isnt just about Improved Touring, im running into the same sh-t in production, rules are made on the buddy system and the rest of us deal with it for years, the little fat book is ripe with back door deals. for instance, PCS says "ALL CARS can use headlight doors to duct air to the engine" they wrote this knowing full well that without cutting a hole in the rad support (which is illegal) this wasnt going to work, so why was it added, well there just happens to a few cars that have these perfectly placed original openings made right into them, what a friggin coincidence, who would have guessed that only a few people would benifit from this rule. I'm sorry, something was stinking in denver that week. Im looking at alternatives as well.

[Brad]

Which do you think we have a better chance of getting approved:

1. 12a 1st gen moved to ITB

2. 13b gsl-se 1st gen in ITA and 12a in ITB

3. IT7 approved as it's own national class

4. 12a 1st gen in ITA with streetporting to get our HP competetive :-)

------------------
--Brad--

[lateapex911]

best chances first...

13B 1st gen to ITA. Easy...no-one races them, there are hardly any left, so how much harm can it do?

a distant second, the ITA 1st gen goes to B.

third, IT7 as a national class. No way.

Street porting the 1st gen and staying in A? I'll run around Lime Rock wearing only my checkered flag if THAT ever happens!


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

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited November 29, 2004).]

[dyoungre]

Originally posted by gran racing:
...And what in the world does Honda have to do with the RX7 being moved to ITB? Just how many Hondas were in ITB during the past few years? Gee, it's funny that my Prelude was in ITA at 2,450 with 110 lb hp. Glad to see that originally I benefited from the wonderful Honda break. Oh yeah, but it was moved to ITB in '05 not because it belongs there but because it is a Honda.

Dave,
I don't believe in Black Helicopters, even if they have an 'H' on the front. But since you brought up the parameters of your '87 Si as compared to the RX7, let's compare:

Your Prelude Si has 110HP at a weight of 2450lbs, RX7 has 101HP at 2380 lbs - so a lb/HP comparison of 22.3 vs. 23.6 Advantage, Honda. Your Prelude has EFI vs ours a carb, and 114 ft-lbs torque vs 105 ft-lbs; Advantage, Honda. Your Prelude has double A arm front suspension (nice camber curves!) versus our Macpherson strut, and independent Macpherson strut rear versus our solid axle. Advantage, Honda. Stock wheel diameter - 14 in. vs 13 in., and I will assume that means larger brake disc diameters (correct me if I'm wrong). Your Prelude has front wheel drive, the RX7 has rear wheel drive: advantage, Mazda. I'm not sure the front/rear weight distribution, but I will assume: advantage, Mazda.
I don't disagree that your car belongs in ITB. What I don't understand is the rational for your car being moved and the RX7 being considered appropriately classed. Either there is some conspiracy against old cars, Mazdas, Rotaries, or the board has a misunderstanding (or some data they have that they haven't shared?)about 'performance potential' after race preparation has occurred, that differs between our cars. You must admit - that the specifications suggest that the two cars should be virtually identical.

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

[This message has been edited by dyoungre (edited November 30, 2004).]

[gran racing]

Dave,

The H thing is a matter of perspective. When I originally submitted my request to have the Prelude classified, everyone told me to expect it to go to ITA because it is a Honda. Some of these people were Honda drivers, others not. So I sat and waited. Yup, the response was the car is deemed to best fit into ITA not B. The response I received why it was not put into ITB was due to “competition potential”. How many times has that been used as the rationale in the past?? Oh well. On a different note, I don’t know if you have been following the recent Fastrack post and other threads on forums, but it is interesting to hear the BMW guys talk about how the RX7 always gets things done for them. In this case they are talking about the ITS RX7, but it is still an RX7. I’m not saying that I agree with this perspective, but I do find it interesting. (This hurts the conspiracy theory about Mazda and Rotaries)

As far as comparing the RX7 and the Prelude – I honestly have not spent much time on this comparison. Although Dick and Jake probably have given it more thought; we’ve briefly discussed it at the track. Also, I am not familiar enough with the RX7 to do this comparison in much detail. But I’d be willing to share my Prelude info. with you when I have more time / access to my data references. Shoot me an e-mail with some info. about the RX7 and we can do a little comparison just for kicks. ([email protected])

Some brief information: So far from what I’ve determined, the Prelude’s ECU is extremely hard to do anything with legally. It can not be chipped. L Believe me, I’ve looked into this quite a bit and contacted many tuners even some in Canada. (It could be done if allowed to use a piggy back system.) The prelude stock wheel is 13”. Not sure about brake disc diameter comparisons off the top of my head. One thing that really hurts the Prelude is how front heavy it is.

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

[Quickshoe]

Dave,

I believe your closing words nailed it. the mazda gains somewhere north of 30% hp in IT trim, while most of the boinger crowed will get somewhere around 15%. I believe the rx7 belongs in B...just stating why it maybe more about the potential than the emblem.

[JeffYoung]

Which (the gains the RX7 sees in IT trim) me to ask -- why are we so afraid of street porting?

It's essentially what piston engines are allowed with gasket/port matching right? And, it is easy to police with the lollipop right? And, it should result in a "known" gain?

Something that bumps the 12a RX7 from 130 hp or so to 150 hp or so seem to me to be a decent solution to this problem. It keeps the car in A and makes it more competitive with the Hondos. It doesn't piss off either faction of the RX7 camp, and it keeps the ITB guys happy (who will NOT be pleased that a car capable of 7 seconds a lap faster than their record at VIR is now classed with them).

The only group that won't be pleased is the CRX/Integra/240sx crowd, and given that the 7 still won't be an overdog in A with 150 hp what is their real beef?

See, I figured it all out sitting here at work at lunch....

[mustanghammer]

The ITAC was split on the vote for a move for this car. Follow the "Attn 1st gen guys" thread to 'understand' the rationale against such a move.
AB

Andy,

Can you be more specific? I have read the thread you are refering to backwards and forwards. The only objections I see are from a couple of drivers that don't want to move out of their run group and an early comment about roll cage specs.

Can you tell who is against this and their reasons?

This might help us make our arguments or at least let us know if we are pissing into the wind.



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

[lateapex911]

Well, first some numbers...IF the RX-7 gains 30%, that would give it 130 or so, right? And the Honda gains 15%? So that would be around 126 or so... (Actually, I think they both do a little better) but they are kinda close to each other. The 7 has the HP, but the Prelude has the torque. The rotaries are very torque challenged, and the build does nothing for that.

Jeff...here's what I know about the porting idea. First, porting a rotary is more like giving a piston engine a bigger (longer duration and greater lift)cam. Second, I watched the process at the ARRCs very carefully, then consulted some experts to confirm my thoughts. According to them, the test reveals very little. It is quite possible, I am told, to build an engine that will have 10-15% more power than the best "legal" build, and sail though the tech process.

The only way to be able to know is a complete teardown.

So, thats what the CRB is afraid of. The old 'give em an inch and they'll take a mile' problem. Of course, we don't really know if there aren't inches being taken as it is! And of course, the same is true for piston engined cars, but more on that later...

I think the CRB is especialy sensitive on this issue because just doing a little undetectable porting can result in significant gains. Piston engines can be checked more esily for such transgressions, and the things that are equally hard to check on a piston engine, such as conn rod weights, etc., won't net the gains that a teensy port job will.

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

[Boswoj]

I think I can safely say that the "porting" solution is a Pandora's box that will NEVER be opened in IT. No, it's not ewasy to enforce with the lollypop - the lollypop is intended to enforce stock ports. There are literally an infinite number of ways to port a rotary that would not be definable with a "lollipop". Just look at the huge effort that was just invested (led by Lemon @ Mazdatrix I believe?) to finally come up with a definitive limit to what is considered a "streetport" for EP! The various top rotary engine builders are a bunch of creative, innovative, and free-thinking guys and any number of radical designs could be considered to be a streetport by teh letter of the law - but not to the spirit of the law. Without using an intake restrictor plate, or similar parameter limiting device, 12a's won't jump from 130 to 150 HP. They will jump to 170+, and I like to believe that the fair-minded Mazda racers aren't realy looking to be overdogs - they are just looking for a good race.

Oh - and did I mention that porting would simply be COMPLETELY and TOTALLY not in keeping with the entire philosophy and context of the IT concept? Come on guys, I want to see the Rx-7 competitive again as much as the rest of you but that is definitely not the way to do it. Perhaps we should be discussing things that actually could happen?

Rick

[dyoungre]

Quickshoe,
I've had a professionally built 12A motor that has been dyno'ed, and I'm aware of the potential (crank HP to crank HP, I think it's even better than 30%) but based on 'subjective' opinion, the Hondas (in my experience, the CRX Si) has a LOT of potential, simply by bolting on a header. Again, is there DATA that points to the rotary's potential versus all/some piston engine's potential? Most multivalve (3 or 4 valve per cylinder) engines are no longer port flow limited like the 2 valve engines, and they also are not rpm limited by valve float, like their predecessors.
It is only my opinion, but I don't think the 12A has as much of an improvement advantage as it may have had when it was first classed. I would kill for some data!

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

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by mustanghammer:


Andy,

Can you be more specific? I have read the thread you are refering to backwards and forwards. The only objections I see are from a couple of drivers that don't want to move out of their run group and an early comment about roll cage specs.

Can you tell who is against this and their reasons?

This might help us make our arguments or at least let us know if we are pissing into the wind.

I don't think it's appropriate to speak out of school on this one. Any member who wants to tell how they voted, can. Some may not. My vote should be obvious.

AB

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

[mustanghammer]

I don't think it's appropriate to speak out of school on this one. Any member who wants to tell how they voted, can. Some may not. My vote should be obvious.

AB

Andy,

Thanks for the answer and your support.

I have not sent a letter to the Comp Board this year regarding this issue. I did send a letter in 2003 regarding the then proposed PCA's.

I am wondering if the letter writer is given a more detailed answer than what is shown in Fastrack? I hate to sound like a spoiled teenager but the "why" needs to be included in the response.

Finally, would the number of letters on this sugject matter to the ITAC or the Comp Board?

It seems to me that everytime this has been requested it has been shot down with the same response seen in the January Fastrack. Doesn't seem possible that this issue could be ignored considering the number of insterested parties that are on both sides of this issue. While my time on this board is short, I don't see the same response from other marks regarding these issues. I didn't see a 100+ email thread regarding the desire to move gen 1 CRX's to B for example.

Thanks for your time and service






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

[ddewhurst]

How come???????

Some of the 1st gen RX-7 owners/drivers are so bound to get reclassed to ITB when they wouldn't have any better normal chance to win in ITB than they do in ITA or IT7 from my humble observations. Do ya think that a person who finishes 5th through 10th within a group of ITA 1st gen RX-7's is going to win in ITB?

Extreem example:

How about the folks that race in Pro Spec Miata as an example. Lets look at a 40 car race group & how many drivers have a normal chance to win in a Pro Spec Miata race ? 6 maybe.......

Continue the Fun
David

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by mustanghammer:

Andy,

Thanks for the answer and your support.

I have not sent a letter to the Comp Board this year regarding this issue. I did send a letter in 2003 regarding the then proposed PCA's.

I am wondering if the letter writer is given a more detailed answer than what is shown in Fastrack? I hate to sound like a spoiled teenager but the "why" needs to be included in the response.

Finally, would the number of letters on this sugject matter to the ITAC or the Comp Board?

It seems to me that everytime this has been requested it has been shot down with the same response seen in the January Fastrack. Doesn't seem possible that this issue could be ignored considering the number of insterested parties that are on both sides of this issue. While my time on this board is short, I don't see the same response from other marks regarding these issues. I didn't see a 100+ email thread regarding the desire to move gen 1 CRX's to B for example.

Thanks for your time and service

I am not sure the letter writer is given more than what is printed in FT. I wish they were and have actually called come 'writers' who have provided phone numbers in there requests in order to give them the committees concensus - especially when it is unanimous. The reason the FT stuff can't be expanded on is simple econimics. It would be a novel every month of full explanations.

The quantity of letters is important. SO FEW people actually write in on ANY topic (solicited or not) that when you get a decent amount, it makes an impact. Having said that, I put LITTLE value on a form letter that 20 people copy and send in. WHY? Because when people are forced to sit down and write their own thoughts, they often change their position or become indifferent. Asking sometone to explain why they feel a certain way is powerful...most can't do it. Learning WHY each individual has an opinion is WAY more valuable.

I disagree that the issue has been ignored. IT has been the hottest topic we have dealt with over the past 6 months. Just becasue no move was made doesn't mean we ignored it, right?

AB

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

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
How come???????

Some of the 1st gen RX-7 owners/drivers are so bound to get reclassed to ITB when they wouldn't have any better normal chance to win in ITB than they do in ITA or IT7 from my humble observations. Do ya think that a person who finishes 5th through 10th within a group of ITA 1st gen RX-7's is going to win in ITB?

Extreem example:

How about the folks that race in Pro Spec Miata as an example. Lets look at a 40 car race group & how many drivers have a normal chance to win in a Pro Spec Miata race ? 6 maybe.......

Continue the Fun
David

David,

You are missing the ENTIRE POINT. It's not about being gauranteed a win or how competitive a driver is within his run group. It's about where the car fits. ITA or ITB. The CAR.

AB

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

[Andy Bettencourt]

Duplicate...

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited December 01, 2004).]

[dyoungre]

I was listed as the originator of the proposal in FT, although I know that multiple people wrote in (mine was not provided as a chain letter). I did not recieve any feedback outside of FT, but I also didn't provide my phone number. I suppose I will, next time I write in.

Andy,
It is still not clear to me as to what the arguments are against moving the RX7 to ITB (based on the previous thread) except that, in some regions, due to track layout, competition levels, etc, the RX7 is indeed competitive in that region's ITA field. I agree, constructive feedback would be great - either to enlighten me on the big picture, or to know what needs to be argued rationally with concrete evidence.

The point is that we, as competitors, are all striving to improve, and we all try to measure our performance. Winning a class would be a rewarding validation that a goal was achieved. Getting to the point that you can say "I've really improved - I'm only 3 seconds a lap slower than the people I'm competing with" isn't the same as competing for a class win. I'd like to know that it is conceptually possible to reach the summit.

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