Adjustments

[Knestis]

To put this in context, you need to know that I just wrote an note this weekend to the CRB endorsing - sight unseen - the strategic realignment plan put forth by the ITAC. Please not that this does NOT mean that I don't still have misgivings about what the current ITAC ajustment schema might become if it gets out of hand.

This quote is from my other favority racing board - http://www.honda-tech.com/zeropost?cmd=tshow&id=1436656 - and suggests that we get closer to the edge of the slippery slope every time someone has a conversation about race weights:

Jeremy [Thoennes, apparently] said that they would look at results if i did race this car to see about giving the car a weight break if it needed it and it does sound like it. so by the time i run mid-pack if i do that and get comfortable with the car. and Hopefully they will give me a weight break to be competitve and in a couple seasons be a top driver ( dreaming and hopen here).

The car in question is the early '90s Protege LX, listed at a too-fat 2510 pounds in ITA (if my informration is correct).

Now, I understand that we are playing telephone here - someone said that Club Racing said - but even the SUGGESTION that we will get to experiences real Competition Adjustments (blech) makes me want to take a scalding hot shower, to wash off the ickiness.

BE CAREFUL PLEASE, ITAC folks. You might have your best efforts yanked out from under you. If this happens, it's going to righteously PO a lot of people who supported your efforts on the assurance that we wouldn't go there.

K

[Bill Miller]

Just the hint that people are getting that kind of policy information from Topeka makes my skin crawl. And the fact that people are interpreting whatever is being said as the potential for getting traditional comp. adjustments is really a bad thing. Like Kirk said, a lot of people are going to be plenty pissed if some kind of bait and switch is pulled.

/edit/ Kirk, love the Hondatech avatar, looks just like you!! :P

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 21 2005, 02:42 PM

BE CAREFUL PLEASE, ITAC folks. You might have your best efforts yanked out from under you. If this happens, it's going to righteously PO a lot of people who supported your efforts on the assurance that we wouldn't go there.

K

[snapback]66122[/snapback]

He should have contacted me or the ITAC instead... We would have told him that "sure, we'll look at the results... the results of the dyno runs, detailed build sheets, development level, etc..."...

I'll say it again... Race Results are NOT a basis for making adjustments...

Further, the ITAC is working to get OUT of the business of making adjustments to IT... Once some things get sorted out, there shouldn't be a need to make further adjustments to this class... at least not from a specifications and classifications standpoint... with the exception, of course, of classifying new cars to the class...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 21 2005, 11:11 AM

Further, the ITAC is working to get OUT of the business of making adjustments to IT... Once some things get sorted out, there shouldn't be a need to make further adjustments to this class... at least not from a specifications and classifications standpoint... with the exception, of course, of classifying new cars to the class...

[snapback]66134[/snapback]

[Knestis]

I told him in that strand to get in touch with the ITAC and, in hindsight, should have provided your email. It's a little unclear, I think, from the information provided on the SCCA site, how to get in touch with you so the Club Racing office becomes the source of answers. Look for example at how many times posters here have emailed Jeremy asking for rules clarifications, even though there is - to my knowledge - NO official system or precedent providing for that course of action.

I'm not for a minute suggesting that there is any active bait-and-switch going on here. It's a reality of policy implementations that their creators can lose control of them, as others in an organization repurpose them for their own uses.

Kirk (who's put his avatar here, too so people will be able to identify him at the track)

[JeffYoung]

Holy smokes! That is KIRK!

Kirk, I've got a note from Jake somewhere laying out for me what the ITAC is trying to do - a ONE TIME correction to about 40 cars' weight and classification using a weight/horsepower/intangibles formula (it is NOT based on race results).

I'm very comfortable that this is what these guys are trying to do. If others within the SCCA are garbling that some in communicating it to members, well, that's a risk you always get in dealing with large organizations.

I'll forward Jake's note to you.

Jeff

[Bill Miller]

Hey Jeff,

Don't say 'forumla', it makes Darin all cranky!! :P

Sorry Darin, couldn't resist.

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 21 2005, 01:34 PM
...who's put his avatar here, too so people will be able to identify him at the track...

[snapback]66149[/snapback]

Worked for me.

[ddewhurst]

***Don't say 'forumla', it makes Darin all cranky!!***

Bill, ya need to be careful using that word "forumla". One of your friends on another site has the ONLY forumla that WORKS. Ya sure!!!! Just ask him.

[lateapex911]

I don't even know HOW to say F-o-r-u-m-l-a......

Now, Formula....well THATs different.

Yes I shot Jeff, and Kirk a note explaining the basics and asking for letters to the CRB and their local BoD guys in support of our general direction and work up to date, and/or a vote of confidence on the basics of the proposal.

As I explained it to them, it utilizes the oft referred to "process", and I explained what the process takes into account, as has been explained on these pages numerous times.

Thanks to them for considering, and actually taking the time to draft thoughtful and well written letters of support.

Others have too, but as they haven't indicated their desire to be publicly thanked, I'll just keep their names secret!

I will say again, that if any of you like the idea of a general re-org and have confidence that the direction is appropriate, please send a quick e-mail to the CRB and your Bod guy. You really don't have to say the proposal is the best, nor even that you support the actual items contained with-in. Merely a letter commenting on the general direction is fine. And if you are in disagreement with it, well that should be known too.

Thanks guys, and NO, the idea of Fred calling in and getting a weight break will NOT happen!

That said, history has shown that even the best intentions can go awry. I can forsee instances where factory HP was underquoted, and the "process" relies on accurate data to work. In such a "garbage in-garbage out" case, I would imagine another look at the car would be wise...but thats a case of a clear cut error.

In any event, it is our mantra to make instances like that rare, and once things get settled down, even rarer.

[JRDbuilt]

I am the person who originally posted that on Honda-tech and those are the words i heard from Jeremy due to a question i called him about regarding the weight. If there is someone on here i should talk to please let me know!


thanks
CJ

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by JRDbuilt@Nov 21 2005, 08:09 PM
I am the person who originally posted that on Honda-tech and those are the words i heard from Jeremy due to a question i called him about regarding the weight. If there is someone on here i should talk to please let me know!
thanks
CJ

[snapback]66213[/snapback]

Any and all letters concerning IT cars hould be sent to:

[email protected]

In the subject line, list Attn: ITAC, and a subject, like "Please correct race weight on Borgward Special 3.0"

IF you are requesting a change to a car you are driving, and feel it isn't currently competitive, take a deep breath, and be prepared to tell us why. List your efforts, send in dyno sheets, list components used to get to the level of power you have, tires, races, guys who are nationaly known you've run against, their tires that day, the qualifying times and conditions (drafts?) and so on...

In other words, even the most well documented, well developed, open and shut case won't be able to have the credibility needed to warrant a change...on it's own.....rather, it will add to the collective knowledge, and it could be helpful in signaling an issue with that particular car where the process has not worked as it should.

If that is indeed the case the car will be looked at and the facts reconsidered....

But remember, this is NOT Prod, and cars can not be micromanaged to run against each other at Mid Ohio.....

(On edit, IT is a huge category with a lot of spec lines (cars), and mistakes have been made over the years 9since what, '84?)...currently there is a rather large proposal submitted to the boards to fix many of those, but as now of course, they still stand. If the proposal is implemented, it is possible that there could be cars that slipped through and still need attention. In that case, of course, it will receive prompt attention.)

[Knestis]

Thanks for checking in here, CJ. You kind of stepped into a LONG-running - like 5 year - conversation about weight adjustments for IT cars. It hasn't even been possible to consider changing IT weight specs until just recently, and then only after a LOT of hard work to change the process and cultures involved.

The "prod" referred to above is the Production category. It is an entirely different ball of wax - mostly disfunctional, in my opinion - wherein I can complain about not being competitive in my 1959 Puddlebee and, if I find a favorable ear, I can get different specs for next season. It's a freakin' mess and we are trying hard to avoid IT falling into that same system.

K

[JRDbuilt]

Kirk, that helps clear up some of the confusion i had regarding this matter myself with the protege. I guess if i do come across the right car ill be more than happy to be the geny (sp) pig for this car with weight because im looking at it for seat time and personal development. so racing to win is what ill be shooting for but winning a race might be another story.

Im not sure if this has anything to do with this topic but not being able to sleep last night lead me infront of a calculator and my notebook. and by most of my calculations and just general knowledge with most of the ITA cars and what kind of power they put down yeilds me with a power to weight ratio ( this is my formula and not someone elses ) around the mid 16._ _ . To be able to compete with the weight of the protege you would need roughly 175 hp in the motor to have that same power to weight ratio or you would need 148._ _ _ at the wheels which I do not see happening with making the motor 100% legal for IT. Because you are starting out with a 125hp stock that puts it around 107 stock hp using factory ratings. so going from 107 to 148 at the wheels is 41 wheel horsepower that is needed to be at the competitive weight ratio.

now this probably doesnt mean anything to anyone I just figured I would throw it out there.

hopefully everything will get straightened out.
-CJ

[lateapex911]

Actually it does make sense...

so, that said, write that letter of support of the proposal....if you know what I mean, wink, wink,

[ddewhurst]

I have trouble with formula "9since". <_<

[Geo]

While Jeremy is a good source of info on a lot of rules and rulings that have already been made, he&#39;s probably not the best for asking about a change to the rules.

Why?

Because he has nearly zero part in it (other than perhaps advising in certain cases). Rules are decided by the CRB with help from the advisory committees and they must be approved by the BOD.

[Z3_GoCar]

Originally posted by JRDbuilt@Nov 21 2005, 07:55 PM
Kirk, that helps clear up some of the confusion i had regarding this matter myself with the protege. I guess if i do come across the right car ill be more than happy to be the geny (sp) pig for this car with weight because im looking at it for seat time and personal development. so racing to win is what ill be shooting for but winning a race might be another story.

Im not sure if this has anything to do with this topic but not being able to sleep last night lead me infront of a calculator and my notebook. and by most of my calculations and just general knowledge with most of the ITA cars and what kind of power they put down yeilds me with a power to weight ratio ( this is my formula and not someone elses ) around the mid 16._ _ . To be able to compete with the weight of the protege you would need roughly 175 hp in the motor to have that same power to weight ratio or you would need 148._ _ _ at the wheels which I do not see happening with making the motor 100% legal for IT. Because you are starting out with a 125hp stock that puts it around 107 stock hp using factory ratings. so going from 107 to 148 at the wheels is 41 wheel horsepower that is needed to be at the competitive weight ratio.

now this probably doesnt mean anything to anyone I just figured I would throw it out there.

hopefully everything will get straightened out.
-CJ

[snapback]66240[/snapback]

You&#39;re in for a long one if you think you can make a change based on trying to even up the power/weight ratio. You can argue till you&#39;re blue in the face, no one makes x for your car, and it won&#39;t make a difference because you can always have one custom made for some money. 125hp + a 25% gain= 156hp sounds like you&#39;re perfectly classed to me.

James

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 21 2005, 04:11 PM

I&#39;ll say it again... Race Results are NOT a basis for making adjustments...

[snapback]66134[/snapback]

Funny, sure seems like race results weighed in pretty well with the e36 changes. Results that seem to include one particular orange car that runs alot at Road Atlanta <_<

[dickita15]

Fred, I think you will find that the proposed changes are based more on the perfomence calculations than results. That said people use results to defend those calculations and may even use results on a partcular make to tigger a closer look at the numbers.