Should IT be Regional???

[Geo]

I am torn on this idea.

From the point of view of the SCCA as a whole and in the near-term, eliminating all distinctions between National and Regional makes a lot of sense. Hold races and they all count. The most popular 24 classes one year go to the big event the next. Tough cookies to the classes that don't make the show.

From a personal perspective, I worry about cost and prep proliferation. From a completely pragmatic point of view, cost containment is purely up to the individuals competing. Anyone can spend whatever they like.

However...

I think SM is an omen. There are always people with more money to spend and are more clever.

Here is a story that echoes in my mind (from Race Tech magazine, December/January 2004):

"The pioneer who introduced carbon fibre monocoques and semi-automatic gearshifts to Formula One, [John] Barnard first considered an involvement in touring cars a couple of years ago.

He even caused a stir by attending a BTCC technical meeting. 'It really was an unfair contest,' recalls one person present that day. 'From the sort of questions he was asking, and the naive answers he was getting, you could see immediately that if he had got involved with the series he would have taken everything to a new - and not necessarily welcome- level.'"

The point of the above is that while we may think we are really clever, and the few folks willing to spend big $$$ in IT are a rare and unique breed, the fact is there are folks with far bigger budgets out there and far more clever (if it's true in BTCC it's most certainly true in IT) than the vast majority of regional racers. I fear that what we have seen in SM would be recreated in IT - much bigger budgets and much more extreme prep levels.

Look, I could easily be wrong. But I am VERY circumspect about considering moving IT to a National class. It could easily ruin a good thing.

In an effort to offer a solution, I'd suggest IT+ along the lines of Kirk's MT2 proposal. No requirement for 5 year old cars and set a "dead duck" date where they are no longer elligible. More like the Speed Touring Cars of 5 or so years ago. Kirk, if you have the MT2 proposal on your computer, could you please forward it to me? I can't seem to find it. Anyway, IMHO, this would be a much better type of class for National racing.

[gran racing]

I'm not buying the whole "it doesn't cost more to run nationals than IT" theory. Yes, there are people in IT who spend some serious cash but I believe that number would increase if it went national. I've spoken with several previous year front running SM guys, and they're not so happy the class went national.

The whole experience thing between national and regional is a f-n joke. Because someone runs more races (not does better or is a better driver) is what determines if someone can hold a national license? I'll admit I was a bit frusted when attempting to instruct at a SCCA school but couldn't since I don't hold the glorious national license.

I'm not sure how much IT would gain by becoming a national class. Not saying I may not be able to be convinced otherwise, but my thought right now is stay as a regional class.

[Andy Bettencourt]

SM is not the 'predictor' of what would happen to IT. SM is a VERY young class that was still in it's growth curve when it went big time. The sudden jump in prep level (ie: pro-prepped drivelines) took a lot of racers by suprise. This isn't going to happen in IT. The guys who were surprised (and dissapointed) it happened in SM where guys who WANTED SM to go National and didn't understand that their crate motor with the legal bolt-ons wasn't going to cut it anymore. Hell, all the top Showroom stock cars all have Sunbelt/Rebello/Race Engineering engines in them...

The top cars that hit the ARRC are already prepped to the max. Nothing changes. I can tell you for a fact that ITS and ITA up here in New England are already at 'Nationals' level. There are many pockets of this type of prep all over the country. Are there pockets of 'affordable' cars running around battling for a Regional Championship? Sure there are, and this might change, but it has just been sh!t luck that it hasn't happened already.

As Dave Gran said, you are going to get is MORE people prepping to the limit...SOME people are already there - and you can see who they are by looking at local championships and track records.

What IT would gain is simple:

More race dates, a chance to win a National Championship and the weeding out of some cheater cars (scrutineering is MUCH more strict at National events). All good IMHO.

And don't discount what Bill Miller said. Guys who want to run Nationals will run that 'curcuit' in order to go to the show. It's takes a lot of money, time and committment to run a National program. There is almost nothing left over for Regional racing. You will see very little crossover after the first year...and if you do, it will be the guys in top prep cars you were already seeing anyway on a weekly basis.

You have to look at history and where we are today. Undersatnd my viewpiont is infuenced by the need to develop a 100% effort to get to the front of ITA in my area. Anthony Serra powered and prepped cars fill the grids and Greg Amy's 5 years of development is paying off. I have to match it to have a chance - and I understand that because we are all looking at the same rulebook - and that is fair.

AB

[Bill Miller]

Tim,

You pretty much 'get it', thanks. But, I wouldn't say that all classes have to be included. The SCCA has already set the precedent that for '07, they're not going to allow the same 25 classes that are eligible for the '06 Runoffs. The top 24 classes for '06 get to go in '07. That is of course, unless they capitulate again and change the rules of the game, mid-stream.

David (Dewhurst),

With all due respect David, you've been drinking a bit too much of the Prod kool-aid. The "if you want to go to the Runoffs, pick an eligible class" attitude is part of what I mentioned in my original post. It's turf protection, plain and simple, and is disingenuous to the folks that pay the freight. And your speculation that 'non-Qualifying' (nee Regional) races would have lower car counts is just that, speculation. I think it would be just as easy to make the case that car counts would go up, as now you wouldn't have the big-dollar guys keeping low-budget folks away. It's all speculation David. And while I think that this board gives insight into the way that the IT community feels on issues, the only way to really know is to ask the community at large (i.e. FasTrack request for input).

Dave (Gran),

I never said that you can run Nationals for what it costs to run IT. It will, w/o a doubt, cost more to run at the front at that level. But, as Andy said, don't think for a moment that it doesn't take close to a National-level effort to run at the front of ITS and ITA in any series on the East Coast (NARRC, SARRC,
MARRS). I also agree that the National/Regional license thing is a joke. I had a National license for a couple of years, and never ran a National.

Ken,

We're talking about the SCCA here, thank you very much.

George,

I really think my proposal would help w/ cost containment. Folks that didn't want to run 'Qualifying' races wouldn't feel that they've got to prep to the level of the guys that are currently winning in IT, to have some kind of shot at finishing higher up on the results sheet. I think a prime example that supports this, is to look at the folks that run Prod cars at the Regional level. Hell, look at anybody that runs a Runoffs-eligible class at the Regional level. I think it's a pretty safe bet that their effort is not at the level of guys running Nationals. This is not meant to be a slap at anyone the elects to run their car at the Regional level vs. the National level, simply an observation. That being said, I think that you do have folks running Nationals w/ low-level efforts. Part of that is due to that's where their friends race, and part is due to the fact that the Runoffs, for many, is more of a social event. Actually, I think those things go hand in hand. Believe me, I've seen some pretty silly things done, just so people get credit for a start, so it counts towards their Runoffs' requirements. For example, several years ago I was at a National at Daytona. There was a car that had such a bad rod knock, that it sounded like the engine would grenade at anything above idle. This guy go permission to take the green flag from pit lane, and pull over as soon as he got on the track. Counted as a start. What a frickin' joke!!


As far as cost control goes, wait until ITR is introduced. If you think that there are some big-buck ITS cars out there, hold onto your hats, as IMHO, $50k - $75 ITR cars will be all over the place. I also think that once ITR is introduced, you'll see more push to make it National, as it will be faster than EP, and I think you'll get a lot of EP folks interested in ITR because it's faster. Those are folks that will want to run for a National Championship, and will want that championship to be official, not some self-declared deal like the ARRC. Don't get me wrong, I think an ARRC win is a pretty prestigious thing to have on one's resume, but the bottom line is, it's not the same a gold medal from the Runoffs.

All that being said, I'm goint to start working on a formal version of what I outlined in my first post to this thread. I'd like to invite interested parties to work w/ my on it, if they feel so inclined. I think that the ITR proposal team worked pretty well, and I'd like to use that same model for this proposal. I'll ask our Webmaster if he can give us a work area, similar to what he did for ITR.

As Andy and Jake said, there are some significant changes going on w/in our organization, and this may be the time to do it.

[racer14itc]

edit

[Knestis]

Back from Choctaw, MS (don't ask) and late to this one but I think it's a net-net deal. There are going to be downsides and upsides and whether you think it's a good or bad deal will just depend on your priorities. I for one would tend to think that it would be a good move for the Club, thinking strategically, but it would have to be part of a complete rethink of the Regional/National relationship.

One wildcard idea: Rallying used to apply a "coefficient" system, that applied points multipliers to events, based on their length. It might be cool to do a similar thing, giving each division a couple of SuperPoint events to use as showcases - like double coupons at the grocery checkout. Little events like the restricted regional that's going to happen with the driver school at Rockingham could be a Coefficient 1, etc.

Geo - the MT rules are still on the web at http://www.it2.evaluand.com/compare.php3

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

MC is right on. But where we differ is simple. He comes from ITB/ITC land where prep level is not what it is in ITS/ITA - on average. You just don't see pro-level motors, as the norm, in either class across the country.

The only thing that top IT teams don't have right now in his cost-model is an extra motor. And I submit that the prep rules in IT limit what a competitive IT car will cost as compared to a competitive Prod or GT car.

If you prepped to the EXACT same level (ie: max to the rules) in IT, Prod, GT, SM, etc, etc...IT comes in WAY at the bottom of the list, second only to SM in terms of cost effectiveness.

COULD you spend $50K on an ITC VW? Sure but there is NO way you would have to. Not everyone has to have a 'restoration quality' racecar. Will IT get an infusion of money if it goes National? You bet. Will it effect most Regions? You bet. But there are most certainly people and programs out there that are at this level already...and for the peopple who race against them nothing would change...until the top cars LEFT Regional racing and went National - leaving Regional races for the others.

It can work both ways.

[Bill Miller]

Mark,

At the risk of you accusing me of 'skewering' you again, I'm going to disagree w/ a lot of what you say. You say that 5 years ago, you had a $10k ITC VW Scirocco. Not for nothing, but that was a pretty full-tilt ITC effort back then. And while costs will probably go up if you're shooting for a National Championship, anyone that would spend $50k on an ITC car would be spending a lot more money than they needed to, to have a competitive car. You mentioned Walt's car, how much did he have in that car? I think that looking at values for ARRC-podium IT cars is a pretty good gauge of what top National-level IT cars would cost. $50k for an ITC Scirocco? Not likely.

Your ITC/GP comparrison is a red herring. Full-prep Prod cars are such totally different animals than IT cars, you simply can't compare them from a cost perspective. You've said you've got $50k into your GP car. Does that include the sunk cost from initially trying a 1.5 FI motor and then switching to a 1.6 carb motor? You've built youself a nice, competitive GP car. You got a medal at the Runoffs last year, and I wish you well w/ it at the Sprints and the Runoffs this year. But to say that you'd have to spend as much to build an ITC version of that car is quite a stretch.

Based on your theoretical car, could you spend that much? Sure. Would you need to spend that much to have a competitive car. No. Would you see $15k - $20k ITC cars? More than likely.

I'm not sure what the disparity in lap times at the Runoffs has to do w/ the issue at hand, no do I have any idea why you brought it up. It's something that you deal with with ALL classes, so it's a non-issue, and not germane to the discussion at hand. The compliance issue you raise is also another red herring. Why would it be any more important to veryify compliance if you're racing for a Runoffs medal than an ARRC medal? If I didn't know better, it almost sounds like you're saying that IT cars aren't that important, and nobody cares if they comply w/ the rules or not.

And you don't really have 25 classes to pick from if you want to go to the Runoffs in '07. That is of course, unless the rules get changed mid-stream again. Of the 25 classes that go this year, the way things are right now, one of them stays home for '07.

Right now, someone can choose to run a Prod car. They can decide if they want to spend the time/money/effort to go after a Runoffs medal, or they can decide that they just want to go run the local series. They get to determine how much money they spend. Things would be no different if people had the same options w/ IT. If someone wanted to spend $50k for an ITC car, that's their choice. The fact that there's only one place for IT cars to run today, makes the people that choose to run a limited program, and are more concerned w/ having fun than having to win it all, have to deal w/ the group that will do whatever it takes to win.

There's no logical reason why IT shouldn't have the same options and opportunities as any of the other categories defined in the GCR. Sorry Mark, but your position sounds more like trying to protect your turf, than looking at what might be best for the club.

[zchris]

Well now that IT has slid down that slippery slope of rules creep and IT cars now use things like Motec ECU's that cost as much as a good IT car 10 years ago, I understand the desire to go national. Its to bad the club now has no true entry level class. Because those who influenced the rules did not just say NO to rules creep, we now have a problem of to many classes that are expensive heavily modified racers. IT is now so close to Prod in terms of prep level they might as well merge. Or maybe, those that wish to go National could just convert to Prod.. Nah, makes to much sense. Lets, as Americans, see if we can't come up with some convoluted reverse engineered way of making this happen that would even make the Execs at GM prowd. Guys, get real.
Chris Howard

[pfcs]

So my question is, why would anyone want to go to the runoffs now that they're at Topeka?
Much ado about nothing.

[Bill Miller]

Well now that IT has slid down that slippery slope of rules creep and IT cars now use things like Motec ECU's that cost as much as a good IT car 10 years ago, I understand the desire to go national. Its to bad the club now has no true entry level class. Because those who influenced the rules did not just say NO to rules creep, we now have a problem of to many classes that are expensive heavily modified racers. IT is now so close to Prod in terms of prep level they might as well merge. Or maybe, those that wish to go National could just convert to Prod.. Nah, makes to much sense. Lets, as Americans, see if we can't come up with some convoluted reverse engineered way of making this happen that would even make the Execs at GM prowd. Guys, get real.
Chris Howard
[/b]

Chris,

How do you figure that? Even limited-prep Prod cars are so far beyond IT that it's not funny. Alternate control arms, composite body work, dog-ring gearboxes, rear discs instead of drums, cams that are only limited to amount of lift, knife-edged cranks, etc. And those are things that are legal on a l-p car. Let's not even talk about full-prep cars.

[lateapex911]

I think Mark makes good points, but I might differ on the net conclusion.

Yes, you WILL see silly expeditures if it went National.

But.....lets get to the heart of the issues.
-Does a gorgeous trailer make the car faster?
-Do two spare engines make it faster?
-How about a 5K paintjob?
-Or a megabuck Data Aq system ?
-Or .......

You get the point....certain expenditures are intimidating to the low buckers, but all of us have likely beaten guys who could spend us to death. A good Data Aq system is actually a distraction if you don't know how to use it, and it takes you away from more important things, like proper prep.

The other thing to consider is the SM comparison. Thats a bit of a red herring too. The ruleset for SM is limiting in ways that the IT set isn't. So while the same build is occuring, it's cloaked in secret "magic dust" by the builder.....most of don't know how they make the power they do, but they do, so we pony up. The IT ruleset is more open, and that can yeild savings. Also, the difference between the SM cars is paper thin. If you make 125 hp, and can buy a car with 3 more, you have to do it, as thats a 2% difference. But will a 3 hp difference define the finish in a race of 190 hp ITS cars or 250 hp ITR cars? Unlikely.

Also, keep in mind weight. For many, making weight in IT is easy. You don't HAVE to put the car on a rotiserie and strip the gunk off the bottom. Its actually disadventagious to do so, as you'll just have to add it back, but higher up!

Bill makes a good point regarding Prod prep, which is the other category near us in our racing solar system. A friend, John Weisberg, went Prod for years with his RX-7. That car was a revolving door for parts. Why? Because when they allow you to run alternate carbs or FI systems, you end up trying them all., LOL...kaaaching! Then he sold the car....gave it away after parting it out.

And so on....IT prep isn't apples to apples with Prod prep. yes, you can spend a goodly sum on an IT car, but the point of diminishing returns comes much more quickly.


That said, Marks points are valid...it will... and SHOULD take a solid effort to get to, and win a National Championship in whatever class you run in. Period.

Bill, I'm not going to agree that Mak is protecting his turf, I think his comments were honestly how he feels and thinks, and were not part of any greater conspiracy.

Nor do I think he was saying that IT is less important, in regards to the scrutineering issue. My thinking is that the Atlanta Region thinks having a big race for IT and other Regional only cars is cool, and takes the classes as they are, complete with warts and all, and hopes that a ringer in a Jensen with Wensdays cam doesn't show up, LOL.

However, if IT were to go National, it will likely be incumbent on the ITAC to comb the ITCS list and determine if, or if not, each car can be properly scrutineered. That will be the ugly side of things, as it will likely be necessary to exclude certain models for documentation issues.

Kirk, I like your ideas. Coefficients, or factors, for differing levels of races. Like 1 for a basic school, 2 for a major race and 3 for a Divisional Championship race. or something like that.

Bill, your concept is great, and I encourage you to put your ideas together formally, and you are welcome to my input at any time.

(But not sure we should go 'secret' on the top of IT.com again, LOL )

[racer14itc]

edit

[lateapex911]

Well now that IT has slid down that slippery slope of rules creep and IT cars now use things like Motec ECU's that cost as much as a good IT car 10 years ago, I understand the desire to go national. Its to bad the club now has no true entry level class. Because those who influenced the rules did not just say NO to rules creep, we now have a problem of to many classes that are expensive heavily modified racers. IT is now so close to Prod in terms of prep level they might as well merge. Or maybe, those that wish to go National could just convert to Prod.. Nah, makes to much sense. Lets, as Americans, see if we can't come up with some convoluted reverse engineered way of making this happen that would even make the Execs at GM prowd. Guys, get real.
Chris Howard
[/b]

Chris, I've respected your posts here in the past, but on this one, I have to differ.

First, there are some very good reasons why we are where we are. Turning our backs on the progress of time can be self defeating. You listed Motec as an example.

Well, if we want to class cars, we need to allow cars to actually race. Certain ECUs have speed limiting issues. And certain ECUs can't (or couldn't) be reprogrammed. How can we write categorical rules to take care of all possibilities in that area? Well, we need to write rules that have proper allowances to allow people to race the cars that are classed. I hate the ECU thing too, but I understand how we got where we are. (And keep in mind, the IT philosophy is NOT a line item allowance philosophy as it is in other categories)

Sperical bearings. Another oft pointed to example of the death of IT. Should the rule allow only stock bushings? Good luck getting those! Alternate material only? Welll, that eliminates most materials as they require a different design to actually function. Any design in alternate material, except Sperical bearings?? Well, thats an expensive solution. I can make a SB out of Delrin...but it will cost more....a LOT more than a plain old $30 SB. The net net on the SB thing is that there were cars out there with Delrin SBs...which took more time effort and money than just allowing SBs. I don't see the performance level changing one bit due to that rule, but it will save me time and money as I put my suspension back together. Thats more entry level in my eyes.

Speaking of entry level, I also disagree that "the club has no true entry level class". First, IT is a category, and within that category exist a number of excellet "entry level" options. I caould have bought the ARRC winning ITB Accord last fall for $8K. Ummm...that's the very DEFINITION of a great entry level buy, LOL. And who says you have to win the ARRCs, or even be in the winning car in your entry year? I know guys who drive to the track, then race and drive home! IT has plenty of entry level capability, and it will in the future as well. It's the fact that you can prep the car to a reasonable level yourself that makes it so.

Convert to Prod??? Honestly, thats NOT simple, or inexpensive. And frankly, the category management, over the years, has done EXACTLY what you are faulting IT for, but a hundred times over!

Not to mention the backstabbing nature of comp adjustments that is the accepted norm in that category.

It is my opinion that Prod is seeing the numbers they see for good reasons. If Prod was NOT a National category, I bet it would die instantly.

No thanks..

[Bill Miller]

Bill,

I stopped worring about what you think or say a long time ago. While you were sitting at your computer writing dissertations about what's wrong with my OPINIONS on this matter (and making snide little comments along the way), I was rebuilding the cylinder head of my Runoffs back-up motor. It's really easy to take pot-shots from behind the safety of your little keyboard at those that DO when you're somebody who DOESN'T.

When was the last time you raced that HP Rabbit you own ?? Was it 2003 or 2002? And I seriously doubt that you have first hand knowledge of what it takes to prep and drive a top notch IT or Prod program.

When you and your car are sitting in impound at the ARRC or Runoffs, let's talk.

MC
[/b]

No big surprise there Mark, you personally attack people when they don't agree w/ what you have to say. You once went so far as to tell me to never stop by your paddock because I disagreed w/ you publicly. Take your elitist attitude and shove it up your ass. Maybe that's why you're a teacher, because you get off on being in a position of power and control over a bunch of students.

[Bill Miller]

Jake's last post made me think about something that's come up several times. People talk about IT being SCCA's "entry level class", and that making it National would take that away. While I agree that IT is probably the normal 'entry point' for someone that wants to race a production car w/ the SCCA. But 'entry level' or not, you're sure not going to run at the front w/o putting forth a serious effort. Doesn't matter if it's ITC or ITS. If entry-level is what you're looking for, you can get into a Prod car for about what you can get into an IT car for. Jake mentioned John's EP 2nd gen. RX7. He pretty much gave that car away. That was a car that medaled at the June Sprints, and IIRC, ran as high as 4th or 5th at the Runoffs. From what I remember, at one point in time, you could have bought it as a good Regional EP car for ~$12k. You could have bought it w/ all the trick Runoffs' goodies for $20k less than Coffin's $50k National ITC Scirocco.

[racer14itc]

edit

[Bill Miller]

Bill,

Nice language.

Bill, you're an internet Bully and I don't understand why everyone else is so afraid of you and pointing out that the "emperor has no clothes" in your case. If someone disagrees with you, the cursing and foul language appears pretty quickly. The remark about the paddock wasn't due to the disagreement itself but instead the libelous things you said and borderline threats you made towards me.

BTW, the teaching career was two careers ago. keep up, will ya?

As usual, the internet bully has taken over. I'll sign off and get back to having fun and working on my racecar. Y'all have fun arguing over something that will very likely never happen in my racing career. The biggest things that will stop it is internal politics, and manufacturer lack of interest in 5 year old cars.

MC
[/b]

Wow Mark, now you actually flat-out lie.

[racer14itc]

I have had enough of this board and certain disagreeable people.

Good luck to all.

MC

[Andy Bettencourt]

Good luck to all.

MC [/b]

Mark,

You were supposed to say, "Be careful what you wish for..."
AB