ITR, When???

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 16 2005, 09:55 PM
Exactly why I started this thread. Sure as a non-member, I could take a wait and see approach; however, I'd rather take a more proactive approach. For now I'd do DE's and BMW JP class events, but I'd like to matriculate to IT in the year after or two. Having looked at the rules for T2 for the Z3, I'd have to run Ebach springs, no coil overs, and I'd have to put the whole interior back in to SS standards after my car's already built for World Challenge.

James

[snapback]65638[/snapback]

Well there is already a group trying to create a home for former world challenge cars and wherever it ends up it is unlikely to be IT. Think production or something relatively different altogether. The list of allowed WC mods far exceeds IT prep such as brakes, modified suspension pickup points, modified cotrol arms and the list goes on. So the car is really not eligible to be run in either SS/Touring or IT trim if it was built to the limits of WC.

[Geo]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 16 2005, 08:38 AM
I've seen people talk about this before, how expensive AS is. Point of fact is, AS is probably about the same, or cheaper than ITS, certainly at the pointy end of the field. You can pretty much get just about any AS car for under $25k, and have some reasonable choices for under $15k. That's pretty much at, or below where ITS cars are selling at. There's an ITS E36 in the Nov. SportsCar for $19k, and I thought I saw one listed on this site for $24k. We've seen a few others that were well North of $30k.

[snapback]65521[/snapback]

You know Bill, this is an extremely good point. Perhaps all the talk about IT being cheaper is just a red herring.

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by Matt Rowe@Nov 16 2005, 08:05 PM
Well there is already a group trying to create a home for former world challenge cars and wherever it ends up it is unlikely to be IT. Think production or something relatively different altogether. The list of allowed WC mods far exceeds IT prep such as brakes, modified suspension pickup points, modified cotrol arms and the list goes on. So the car is really not eligible to be run in either SS/Touring or IT trim if it was built to the limits of WC.

[snapback]65639[/snapback]

But other than the full cage, removal of the drivers window glass and interior gutting, this chassis is stock with stock spring/dampers even. So it's headed for JP/IT at this point depending on the engine prep.

James

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Geo@Nov 16 2005, 11:11 PM
You know Bill, this is an extremely good point. Perhaps all the talk about IT being cheaper is just a red herring.

[snapback]65640[/snapback]

George,

I've been saying that for a while now. The pointy end of ITS hasn't been 'cheap' for a looonnnggg time. And ITA is not that far behind (what's a Serra Acura go for?). Heck, I remember a guy selling an ITC Scirocco a year or two ago, asking $12,500 for it! :119:

[Andy Bettencourt]

Funny story. Was at a party tonight with a kid who wants to build a 300ZX over next year while he gets liscenced for 2007...

...he just may have a place to race then!

Let me ask these questions:

Roll cage min thickness?
8" wheels max?

AB

[lateapex911]

I've been thinking about this too....

8" wheels would be keeping with not only the speed of the class, but the equipment that comes with the typical car that would fit the class.

But..what happens in few years when we need to move a car to ITS because it's just a "tweener"?

I know, the process is too good, and the ITAC to sharp for that to happen! Pat pat...

Still, planning for the unexpected makes the unexpected...expected.

I would look to Touring and Prod to align cage specs, as that's where some of the cars would presumably come from, and possibly go to in time.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Nov 20 2005, 09:52 PM
I've been thinking about this too....

8" wheels would be keeping with not only the speed of the class, but the equipment that comes with the typical car that would fit the class.

But..what happens in few years when we need to move a car to ITS because it's just a "tweener"?

I know, the process is too good, and the ITAC to sharp for that to happen! Pat pat...

Still, planning for the unexpected makes the unexpected...expected.

I would look to Touring and Prod to align cage specs, as that's where some of the cars would presumably come from, and possibly go to in time.

[snapback]66113[/snapback]

Stay away from the prod cage stuff. The touring cage rules are perfect for what you are looking. You guys really should talk to Bob Dowie about SIR's before you look to hard at a class above. You may find it interesting how easy it would be to fit and use.

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 21 2005, 01:36 AM
Stay away from the prod cage stuff. The touring cage rules are perfect for what you are looking. You guys really should talk to Bob Dowie about SIR's before you look to hard at a class above. You may find it interesting how easy it would be to fit and use.

[snapback]66115[/snapback]

LOL

Bob? Bob who?

Kidding..kidding..Bob is the Comp Board liason who is on the ITAC con calls... I've been to Bobs shop and yes, the SIR topic has been discussed repeatedly..........

and for some strange reason, I bet it comes up on tomorrows con call as well...



On the cage, I guess I was inferring that whatever the cage rules end up being, they should segue nicely between the categories. I would hate to see a conflicting design prevent movement of a car from one category into another. I prefer to allow the car to "morph" over it's racing lifetime.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Nov 20 2005, 11:52 PM

But..what happens in few years when we need to move a car to ITS because it's just a "tweener"?

[snapback]66113[/snapback]

The same thing that happens when a car goes from A to B, they buy new wheels! I think the cost is far outweighed by the opportunity to compete.

Besides, these cars we are talking about for IT® are too much for ITS, I don't see many, if any tweeners.

AB

[Hotshoe]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Nov 21 2005, 04:52 AM
I've been thinking about this too....

8" wheels would be keeping with not only the speed of the class, but the equipment that comes with the typical car that would fit the class.

[snapback]66113[/snapback]

Jake and Andy,

... I agree on the eight inch wheels. My 98 BMW Z3 came stock with that width rim. Plus I can still run the wheels that are allowed in T2.

... Do you guys think that this has a good chance of happening? ( ITR ) And is there anything I can do to help?

...Rick

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Hotshoe@Nov 21 2005, 10:19 AM
Jake and Andy,

... I agree on the eight inch wheels. My 98 BMW Z3 came stock with that width rim. Plus I can still run the wheels that are allowed in T2.

... Do you guys think that this has a good chance of happening? ( ITR ) And is there anything I can do to help?

...Rick

[snapback]66124[/snapback]

I think that it would be a great thing to develop and tweak over the 2006 season for proposed implamentation in 2007.

Joe raises a question: Would you rather a seperate class with it's own performance envenlope (which may be harder to get done) or some specific cars with SIR technology?

AB

[1stGenBoy]

[ I bet it comes up on tomorrows con call as well...


Jake,
I think you really mean the 28th not the 21st


Bob Clark

[Joe Harlan]

Andy Just for laughs run the numbers on a 90 to 96 300zx and consider that the car will like not be able to get ligher than 3000lbs. These are fun cars to drive but they needed 2 turbos to make them exciting to drive.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 21 2005, 10:42 AM
The same thing that happens when a car goes from A to B, they buy new wheels! I think the cost is far outweighed by the opportunity to compete.

Besides, these cars we are talking about for IT® are too much for ITS, I don't see many, if any tweeners.

AB

[snapback]66121[/snapback]

I agree Andy. The other thing to do, is give people the option. If a car gets moved from ITA to ITB, don't actually 'move' it, just create an additional classification in ITB. That gives people the option of staying in ITA or moving to ITB. Also, see my earlier comment, in another thread, about no future adjustments on the ITA car.

As far as choking down the proposed ITR cars, w/ a SIR, so that they fit in ITS, I don't think you'll see a whole lot of interest there. After all, who wants to race a car that is totally choked down, and will be slower than their street version? If you're going to class them, they need their own space, above ITS.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 21 2005, 09:13 AM
I agree Andy. The other thing to do, is give people the option. If a car gets moved from ITA to ITB, don't actually 'move' it, just create an additional classification in ITB. That gives people the option of staying in ITA or moving to ITB. Also, see my earlier comment, in another thread, about no future adjustments on the ITA car.

As far as choking down the proposed ITR cars, w/ a SIR, so that they fit in ITS, I don't think you'll see a whole lot of interest there. After all, who wants to race a car that is totally choked down, and will be slower than their street version? If you're going to class them, they need their own space, above ITS.

[snapback]66135[/snapback]

Bill, don't get what I am saying wrong. I think we have a shot at 1 class above ITS not 2. The problem I see is the need will be for cars 300HP and above. (look at the T2 model) a lot of the cars we are talking about here are 230 to 300. at weights 2700 to 3300 lbs. If you could limit then even only a tiny amount but know they were limited. themn rather than be a back marker they could fit into an existing class. I also am not say a flat plate restrictor(which junks out the way a car drives) I am saying use a properly engineered inlet restrictor.

[Bill Miller]

Joe,

I hear what you're saying. Honetly, based on some of the cars that have been proposed for ITR, some kind of power limiter will be needed. Otherwise, you're going to create another version of what ITS is today.

I honestly don't know what you do w/ the T2 cars. Even w/ ITR, I don't think they fit. What's a good target wt/hp ratio for ITR? Are folks going to want to race T2 cars in IT, and turn slower lap times than they did in T2?

What's stock HP on an RX8? 350Z? Z4 3.0? '03 Mach I? E36 M3? '04 CTSv?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 21 2005, 12:24 PM
Joe,

I hear what you're saying. Honetly, based on some of the cars that have been proposed for ITR, some kind of power limiter will be needed. Otherwise, you're going to create another version of what ITS is today.

I honestly don't know what you do w/ the T2 cars. Even w/ ITR, I don't think they fit. What's a good target wt/hp ratio for ITR? Are folks going to want to race T2 cars in IT, and turn slower lap times than they did in T2?

What's stock HP on an RX8? 350Z? Z4 3.0? '03 Mach I? E36 M3? '04 CTSv?

[snapback]66148[/snapback]

Stock RX-8 is 238hp. Betting that it could make 300 in IT trim. This thing would rock at 2850...

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 21 2005, 10:24 AM
Joe,

I hear what you're saying. Honetly, based on some of the cars that have been proposed for ITR, some kind of power limiter will be needed. Otherwise, you're going to create another version of what ITS is today.

I honestly don't know what you do w/ the T2 cars. Even w/ ITR, I don't think they fit. What's a good target wt/hp ratio for ITR? Are folks going to want to race T2 cars in IT, and turn slower lap times than they did in T2?

What's stock HP on an RX8? 350Z? Z4 3.0? '03 Mach I? E36 M3? '04 CTSv?

[snapback]66148[/snapback]

Right now the track record at PIR is 3.5 seconds quicker than the ITS record. Now also consider that the ITS records are still held by Z's so if a really prepped and driven E36 was introduced I think the ITS record woould get within a second and a half. Remember T2 still has carpets ect. and our Z's in T2 can't get to minimum. So the Z in T2 is 3370 at the finish of a race. 3370 and 300hp do the math.

[Bill Miller]

Well Joe, looks like you're at a 11.2 wt/hp ratio, and Andy is at a 9.5 wt/hp ratio (w/ his RX8 example). What's the current ITS target wt/hp ratio? If you look at an E36 325 @ 2850#, and assume 205 whp, that's a 13.9 wt/hp ratio. And IIRC, that's well better than anything else in ITS. I thought the target was closer to 14.5.

What&#39;s a good target for ITS? 13.0? 12.0? 11.0? <10.0?

/edit/ I know the E36 numbers are whp and the RX8/350Z numbers are chp, so those ratios will be a bit higher, depending on the level of driveline loss.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 21 2005, 10:58 AM
Well Joe, looks like you&#39;re at a 11.2 wt/hp ratio, and Andy is at a 9.5 wt/hp ratio (w/ his RX8 example). What&#39;s the current ITS target wt/hp ratio? If you look at an E36 325 @ 2850#, and assume 205 whp, that&#39;s a 13.9 wt/hp ratio. And IIRC, that&#39;s well better than anything else in ITS. I thought the target was closer to 14.5.

What&#39;s a good target for ITS? 13.0? 12.0? 11.0? <10.0?

/edit/ I know the E36 numbers are whp and the RX8/350Z numbers are chp, so those ratios will be a bit higher, depending on the level of driveline loss.

[snapback]66158[/snapback]

Oh bill I agree. I am saying the T2 cars need a place(maybe I think they are way expensive and most will be junked out after the 10 year limit. Second its the 300zx I am speaking of. I don&#39;t have the specs but it does not get close to a 350z to be shoved up to IT(*) whatever.