Concerned about IT's Future

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Oct 14 2005, 10:31 AM
Ack. Andy - it is troubling that your response is "I see [class] dying" rather than, "Here's what we can do to keep [class] from dying."

K

[snapback]62658[/snapback]

Let me re-phrase...

I see the cars that currently make up ITC and ITB becoming extinct through evolution, age, and availability - not by SCCA forces.

I think the classes need to stay alive - if they can run some numbers, and additional classes needed above ITS to accomodate new blood.

AB

[cherokee]

Originally posted by mgyip@Oct 14 2005, 03:02 PM
then either join a Vintage racing organization or hang up your drivers suit b/c you're holding up progress.
win without any effort.

Whew!! Rant off... :angry:

[snapback]62663[/snapback]

Nothing ticks me off more then someone telling me to go race some where else in my car that is already classed. I do not have a problem with newer cars coming down the pike. I do have a problem in moving just "popular" cars around, that ain't right. My suggestion years ago was to put B&C into the same class, add weight here take it away there and shuffle cars around a bit. But you will not see me get to angry about new cars coming into the class....I may whine about it a little but as long an you let my dinosuar run I will be happy. And if you do change stuff around to it for the entire class not just the "popular" cars.

[bg43wex]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Oct 14 2005, 04:45 PM
Let me re-phrase...

I see the cars that currently make up ITC and ITB becoming extinct through evolution, age, and availability - not by SCCA forces.

I think the classes need to stay alive - if they can run some numbers, and additional classes needed above ITS to accomodate new blood.

AB

[snapback]62675[/snapback]

Andy,

when I read your remarks I paused for a second and tried to remember were I had heard the very same comments?

then it hit me, the Production class meeting in Ohio, they were complaining that there were no more parts available for the 1960? british blah blah blah, while listening all I could think was "well I guess you need a new car".

the solution that was propposed was to allow limited prep motors from different cars, this may or may not happen, it also seems wrong if you broke ever last 947cc block you should not be allowed to ask for a 1175cc in limited form, you should be out Sorry, next time dial that build back a couple of thousandths.

one think for sure it sure doesn't sound like the SCCA will allow any car to be cast asside. even if the natural elimanation of a car would help freshen up some classes.

My vote is for the ITAC after they complete the review of all classes and cars currently running, then review and place as many newer cars in IT even if no one is requesting them, there are far to many cars that can be classified that are not because competitors don't know how to do it.

brian m

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 14 2005, 04:20 PM
... Don't give them the .5 pt bump in compression, don't allow them to use thread body shocks/coilovers, don't give them an alternative R&P, etc. etc.

Thoughts?

Thoughts?

How about, AACK!

Things are bad enough without throwing multiple prep levels into the mix. WHen conversations focus just on the top of the IT food chain, like the need for "ITR," it seems to me like a general bias toward higher performance cars. There are a buttload of perfectly reasonable, cheap econoboxes out there - some of which are still in production - that should fit the B and C parameters without resorting to massive gross weights or different prep levels.

Eventually? Yes - the auto market arms race might catch up with the lower IT class but we are a long way from that.

K

EDIT - now, it MIGHT be that nobody wants to build these cars but there's sure a disincentive to even thinking about doing so, if none of them are in the rulebook.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Some guidance will be nice...I will start another thread...

One issue is that a VTS sheet needs to be filled out for a new car to be classed - and it's a decent amount of work for potentially no reward as you don't know if anyone will build one.

AB

[ITAMiata]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Oct 14 2005, 04:41 PM
Yeah, I was thinkin' the same thing, Matt...hmmmm....no, what I meant was that if someone really wanted to race Pro, they'd have to prep two different cars; not cheap. It's likely that those with their eyes on the prize may forego Spec Miata entirely and race Pro only.

Mac, that may very well be true, with the qualifier that the class tends to attract the less-experienced folks with those traits in the first place. We (the board) have bantered on this before; so as not to get off topic I was offering it as a reason - along with the others specified - why IT may be experiencing reduced numbers due to SM and why it may gain a lot of those back moving forward.

Funny thing: I just re-read my post and laughed out loud. I said SM drivers were guilty of "wreckless" driving when I truly meant the complete opposite! "Reckless", of course, is the correct word. Freudian slip, perhaps? Not bloody likely... - GA

[snapback]62674[/snapback]

My first two years racing was in SM. I usually managed a top ten placing and am a better driver now then I was then. I left SM because I didn't like all the metal to metal banging and was tired of fixing the car (or making a new one). At the time I just thought that those guys were so driven to win that they didn't care about hitting someone else. I switched to ITA thinking it would be different, and have been in ITA with my Miata for two years.

The real difference isn't attitude. I'm building a new ITA Miata because a friend and I came together in MARRS V and went into the trees. We COULD have avoided the contact, but the desire to win was higher then the desire to avoid contact. Having had the last half of the season to sit on the sidelines I've come to realize the difference in SM and ITA is the cars, not so much the drivers. In SM when there were a bunch of us running withing a 10th of a second, or two 10ths of a second per lap of each other, there was no clear cut place to make a pass. All the cars were basically the same and the only way to make a pass was usually to bump another car out of the way, or off the track (the same is true I suspect of SRX7). In ITA I know my Miata isn't as fast on the straight as the CRX or the 240, but I know I can out break them and I know I'm faster through the corners. There ARE places to make a clean pass in a class with a variety of cars that simply don't exist in spec classes. Just something to think about when calling all the SM drivers crazy and reckless.

Different types of cars in a single class allow for better racing in my mind. Aside from the fact that I think the Miata in ITA trim is SOOOOOO much more fun to drive then in SM trim, I wouldn't go back to SM simply because I really like pitting my Miata against cars with different strengths.

Hopefully I'll be able to scrape the cash together to finish the Miata during the winter and see everyone in MARRS again next season.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Kirk,

It's one additional prep level. Take Pablo for example. Ex-SSC car, runs ITB in IT trim, or ITC in SS trim (or something similar). The concept seems to have worked in Prod, and I thought that it might be an alternative method for filling classes, or giving people prep options.

[ITAMiata]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 14 2005, 04:20 PM
I&#39;m with Kirk on this one. I&#39;m not realy comfortable w/ the idea of just writing off ITC and ITB. For quite a while now, I&#39;ve spoken about how the entire performance envelope of available cars has shifted up. Twenty years ago, the number of available 4 and 6 cyl cars that made 150+ hp was pretty thin. Now there everywhere, and there aren&#39;t many cars around, that are less than 5 years old, that make < 100 hp (essentially, ITC feeder stock). So, what do you do about it? Do you continue to class cars like the NB at really bloated weights, just so you can put more choices in ITC?

This is something that literally just came to me, as I was reading this thread. When I think about it, I&#39;m actually surprised that no one else has brought it up (or maybe I just missed it). It&#39;s a model that&#39;s shown to actually work in another category, so maybe it can be adapted to IT. It&#39;s the concept of running higher output cars in a lower class. It&#39;s the concept of limited prep. I know that one of the first things someone is going to say, is "IT already is limited prep, there&#39;s nothing else to reduce" or "It&#39;s too many levels of prep." But that&#39;s not true. Don&#39;t give them the .5 pt bump in compression, don&#39;t allow them to use thread body shocks/coilovers, don&#39;t give them an alternative R&P, etc. etc.

Thoughts?

[snapback]62672[/snapback]

What about the Scion XA and XBs? Aren&#39;t they less then 100 hp?

Bill

[mgyip]

Originally posted by cherokee@Oct 14 2005, 12:53 PM
Nothing ticks me off more then someone telling me to go race some where else in my car that is already classed. I do not have a problem with newer cars coming down the pike. I do have a problem in moving just "popular" cars around, that ain&#39;t right.

[snapback]62680[/snapback]

My point is that I&#39;m tired of hearing "but my antique won&#39;t be competitive if SCCA allows newer cars into the class". That&#39;s progress. I don&#39;t have a problem running my so-to-be antique in ITA while the newer, faster cars show up and make me look (key word there, LOOK) even slower. I&#39;m not hung up on the concept that in order for cars to to be classed, they must become a front runner.

I&#39;m unclear about the "popular" cars comments however. Most of the changes in ITB and ITC have been to less popular cars - the FX16 comes to mind as do some odd variations of VW Sloroccos.

[Bill Miller]

Speaking of FX16&#39;s, I know where there&#39;s an &#39;88 for sale, if anyone is looking for a donor car to build into an ITB car.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by ITAMiata@Oct 14 2005, 03:08 PM
What about the Scion XA and XBs? Aren&#39;t they less then 100 hp?

Bill

[snapback]62691[/snapback]

Doesn&#39;t the xB qualify as a station wagon?

Oh, and to answer your question, they&#39;re rated at 108hp/105lb-ft

[spnkzss]

Originally posted by mgyip@Oct 14 2005, 03:13 PM
My point is that I&#39;m tired of hearing "but my antique won&#39;t be competitive if SCCA allows newer cars into the class". That&#39;s progress. I don&#39;t have a problem running my so-to-be antique in ITA while the newer, faster cars show up and make me look (key word there, LOOK) even slower. I&#39;m not hung up on the concept that in order for cars to to be classed, they must become a front runner.

I&#39;m unclear about the "popular" cars comments however. Most of the changes in ITB and ITC have been to less popular cars - the FX16 comes to mind as do some odd variations of VW Sloroccos.

[snapback]62692[/snapback]

There is also something else to think about. The SCCA&#39;s goal is to give people/cars a place to race. Nothing is said about all cars being setup competitively. Yes popular cars maybe faster than some of the vintage cars. It happens. It also happens in the reverse. I race a 1990 Honda Civic. I have the handling and I have the brakes. A VW will ALWAYS out power me. That is the advantage to IT. Different cars with different strengths and different weaknesses so that it is somewhat "competitive". The problem is someone wants to come in with a Yogo and run 1st everytime out. It just ain&#39;t gonna happen. Personally I am thinking about moving from ITC to ITB. Not because my car is slow, not because they haven&#39;t classed any new cars in C, I personally want to go faster, and I want to race with more than 10 other cars in my class and 30 SRX7s. There have been some interesting things happening in our reagion with SRX7s. That doesn&#39;t bother me as much. What bothers me about the SRX7s is their weaknesses are my strengths and my weaknesses are their strengths. That always leads to getting in each others way. I&#39;m not saying that ITC cars shouldn&#39;t run with SRX7, I don&#39;t want any part of the decision of who runs with who. I feal bad for the people that do hav eto decide that. I would just like to run with cars in my own class and atleast 15 of them.

I don&#39;t have a logical solution for any of this. I will be more than happy to help come up with a solution, but people need to get over the idea that every car SHOULD be able to win.

Rant and a half done for the year. Let&#39;s start Bench racing for 2006. O wait, I promised my wife I would not talk about racing for a little while

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Oct 14 2005, 12:45 PM
Doesn&#39;t the xB qualify as a station wagon?

Oh, and to answer your question, they&#39;re rated at 108hp/105lb-ft

[snapback]62695[/snapback]

Auto trans only I do believe. However, how about the Chevy Alero?

James

[Despr8dave]

Well, here&#39;s my $.02 worth and my delema......do I yank the OLD 510 out of the weeds and do a complete over all and run ITC again, or do I go buy a very used Super Late Model stock car with dry sump, quick change rear, etc. etc. for what I could buy a fair ITS or ITGT or AS.......400-500 hp is a blast on slicks that I can buy new and mounted for $100 each. Set up on a full race tube chassis, I can convert to road racing fairly inexpensive(in race terms) and can freshen up the 355 Chevy for no more than my 1600 DATSUN.... used and new Chevy race parts are everywhere, I&#39;d miss the enduros, and as much as I loved my IT racing, it never compared to the weekend I spent racing a stock car (truck) we spent one evening converting the chassis from oval to road course set up, which turned out to run second fastest of all the "closed" fender cars there and on used tires we paid $35 each for.......I went through this when racing stock cars and when compared, racing Chevy v-8&#39;s cost little more than 2300 Fords.....now I&#39;m not talking IMSA or Nextel Cup engines, but ones with more power than I will ever need......life is tuffff....
David
Go in deeper, come out harder

[ITAMiata]

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Oct 14 2005, 08:42 PM
Auto trans only I do believe. However, how about the Chevy Alero?

James

[snapback]62699[/snapback]

A friend bought one and it did have an option for either manual or auto trans.

Bill

[DavidM]

I like the idea of pre-classing some of the more popular, newer cars that would fit in IT. I&#39;ll have to admit that I didn&#39;t know you COULD ask for a car to be classified until I started reading this board. I would suspect any person new to the SCCA would just look at the cars classified and figure that&#39;s what you have to choose from if you&#39;re going to build something.

Having said that, I don&#39;t know that having more cars classed would entice more people into IT. Conventional wisdom says to buy an already prepped car your first time around. My guess is that it&#39;s usually people that already own a race car or have previously owned one that are building new cars. They probably have a good idea of what car they want to use and know how to get it classed if it isn&#39;t already.

I&#39;m not sure how IT gets new recruits. Racing isn&#39;t cheap. IT is cheaper than other forms, but still takes a decent amount of money. I&#39;m guessing the market of people that want to race with sufficient funds to race is relatively small. So it would seem that the idea would be to market the strengths of IT to entice people to race in IT over other categories. I thought the post about the differences between racing in SM and IT was interesting. The number of different makes in IT seems to lend itself to better racing in a way since each car has different strengths and weaknesses. I don&#39;t think that&#39;s something people would think about if they were comparing a spec series to IT. Things like that could sway a person one way or another.

That&#39;s my $.01 anyways. I&#39;m not sure it was worth a whole $.02.

David

[Knestis]

Originally posted by DavidM@Oct 14 2005, 10:31 PM
... I&#39;ll have to admit that I didn&#39;t know you COULD ask for a car to be classified until I started reading this board. I would suspect any person new to the SCCA would just look at the cars classified and figure that&#39;s what you have to choose from if you&#39;re going to build something.

Exactly!

I started a couple of threads for suggestions re: additions to ITC and ITB. It strikes me that these are going to be great races at the ARRC, with several chassis capable of running up front, but they could suffer from neglect if attention gets focused upward.

K

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by ITAMiata@Oct 14 2005, 03:01 PM
A friend bought one and it did have an option for either manual or auto trans.

Bill

[snapback]62706[/snapback]

Thanks for the correction Bill. I was looking at the Xa for my wife, edmunds said auto trans was standard. Here are some other ITC possibles Toyota Echo. I&#39;m not sure if it&#39;s classed but the Geo Metro. I can see it now, "Penelty Box Racing!" It came to me after I asked a friend about the Metro as a rental downgrade He was going to be charged for a mid-sized in a Cavalier. He said he&#39;d take it if they had anything smaller. Ford Aspire, "Aspiring to be a race car!"

James

[KevSC1]

Originally posted by ITAMiata@Oct 14 2005, 10:01 PM
A friend bought one and it did have an option for either manual or auto trans.

Bill

[snapback]62706[/snapback]

I have a friend with an xA, and it has a 5 speed. Don&#39;t see her racing it...

[Catch22]

In the Southeast I think it is Spec Miata.

I&#39;d be willing to bet that if you look at OVERALL entries for a regional weekend from 5 years ago compared to today the number would be very similar.

The thing is, now there are 5 to 10 fewer cars in each of the IT classes and 40 cars in SM.

This is what bothers me about people constantly saying that SM is GRRRREAT for SCCA. "Look at how popular it is!" "Look at how its caused entries to go up!"
Well, no it hasn&#39;t. Its just stolen entrants from other classes.
Just my opinion of course.

But I&#39;m not worried. At some point these guys will get sick of spending $25K on a friggin Miata to run in 15th place and repair body damage nearly every weekend. This SM craze won&#39;t last forever. The big dogs will go national, and regionally the class will likely lose some of its lustre.
Or... They&#39;ll simply eventually crash every Miata ever made and we&#39;ll just run out of cars.
Just joking... Sort of.