Question about race groupings

[StephF]

I know I saw this discussed in another thread, but can someone tell me who we should send our thoughts and requests to in regards to 2007 race groupings? If memory serves, that will be discussed in a couple of weeks at the mini convention, right?
And what would fellow IT folks like to see as far as groupings for next year? Personally, I would prefer to run with other IT cars that at least handle the same in the corners as we do. Speed differences are easier to deal with if that race group can get by and keep going rather than getting by and slowing in the corners. Running with SM and show stock type cars is getting old. Especially having to rebuild my just rebuilt car because someone in another race group tried to use it as a bumper...
I'm sure they aren't wild about running with us either. Fine by me, I'd prefer to watch them from the sidelines anyway. With a large bag of popcorn...
What would you all like to see?

[RSTPerformance]

Steph-

Honestly I would think that ITC should run with ITB and whomever ITB runs with. Generally we don't have turnouts like we did at Lime Rock (but maybe that will change!!!) and adding 5 or so ITC cars would only give the ITB guys more competition. It would also give ITC cars more fun of having the challange to beat as many ITB cars as possible. If you realistically look the times, car prep, and driverability for most ITB cars and ITC cars they are somewhat similar at the New England tracks (NHIS & Lime Rock).

With recent decreases in ITS levels it only makes sence IMO to have ITS/ITB/ITC as one group.

ITA/ITR as a possible second groupe.

If need be at event specific races switch up the groupings to fit all the cars into the two groups.

Raymond

[Ed Funk]

Just in case we have to run with the "Super Special Me" crowd, I just placed my order for lettering for the back bumper---"Don't hit me I'm an old guy". Think it'll help?

[StephF]

Did you remember to order mine?
"I'm a woman....go ahead...MAKE MY DAY!"

[Rabbit05]

I was going to add, " If you can read this flip me back over ! " to the underside of my car as a joke. Never thought I woulda had a use for that one though !

How you feeling Ed ? Still a little sore here, but nothing a beer can't fix.

John VanDenburgh
VanDenburgh Motorsports
IT ???

[Eric Parham]

In many classes such as IT, the mix of driver skill is relatively homogeneous through much of the field. The spread in lap times is often due in large part to other factors such as the completely different equipment, funding and preparation levels found throughout club racing.

In SPEC classes, on the other hand, the theory is that everyone is running exactly the same or intentionally equivalent equipment. In SSM (a SPEC class), this even includes the SPEC Toyo tires. Thus, the gradation of driver skill clearly peaks towards the front of the class and drops off through the mid-pack. There are exceptions, of course, but the intended drop-off of the skill versus lap-time slope ("skill-slope") is BY DESIGN in a SPEC class.

As it turns out, the SSM class is somewhat faster this year than in years past. For example, a new lap record of 1:03.4 was set in SSM at Lime Rock in Saturday's NARRC Runoffs race, while the mid-pack in SSM was turning 1:06-1:07. I haven't paid much attention to their rules so I can't say where their new-found speed is coming from. For comparison, my best time "in the clear" at Lime Rock this year was 1:05.9 (although I did find a 1:05.2 while drafting a Miata). I can knock off consistent 1:06s in the clear, and am getting to the point that I can sometimes do it when working through traffic (thus, this SSM/ITC experience has actually been helpful to my own skill development). I believe that the ITC lap record is 1:04.8, but that record is several years old and was set by one of the cars destroyed in Saturday's incident.

Unfortunately for the ITC racers, these comparative lap times place our lead cars right smack in the middle of the SSM skill-slope. I believe that the top 3 in ITC were all running low 1:06 lap times. While there may occasionally be highly skilled SSM drivers in the middle of their pack, it's a little more likely to be populated by driver's of average skill (or even less if they're pushing the car prep/equipment envelope).

As is also well known, the SSM cars that run the same lap times as the ITC cars are generally much faster in the straights and much slower in the corners than the ITC cars. This is NOT a good mix!

Thus, I agree! IT cars should run with other IT cars. Grouping ITC with ITB sounds great to me! Personally, I think the old ITC/ITA and ITB/ITS groupings worked pretty well since the faster class cars could make very easy passes on the straights (and in the corners with the 1" rim increase), but the disadvantage was that the slower class cars usually lost a lap. As it turns out, the ITC cars often lose a lap anyway with the current SSM/ITC grouping.

If ITB and ITC were combined for next year, there would inevitably be a few complaints about ITC cars getting in the way of a mid-pack ITB battle and/or ITB cars getting in the way of a front-pack ITC battle, but at least neither group would be slowing the other in the corners and dive-bombing at the end of the straights (I hope). Anyway, I think it would be worth a try.

You definitely have my vote for an ITB/ITC grouping for next year!

[StephF]

It's got my vote too....(amen on the thoughts about the midpack SSM drivers. :angry: ) I remember running with C cars when we were running in B. The mix was fine. They were predictable, and you knew how they were going through a corner, and what they would do next.
It was when they stuck us with SS cars that it was a pain. Nothing like having to brake midcorner to keep from collecting a show stock car that could then squirt away on the straight.
So who do we contact to make our feelings known about next years grouping? And can we lobby to make a change, or is this a case of tough, you run where we stick ya? Hell, there's only been a few of us; it's not like we would over subscribe a race group.
Dick P...were you the one talking about this before? Any suggestions?

[Andy Bettencourt]

So the answer to your question is contact the NARRC committee. Start with Brian Mushnick who is our NER rep on that committee. I think that the committee wants to try run consistant groups throughout the year. Check the NARRC home page for the contact names.

I like either of these groupings:

ITR-ITS-ITB

ITA-ITC-SSB-SSC

or

ITR-ITA-SSB-SSC

ITS-ITB-ITC

I think the Prod guys would like this too! SSM and SM could run together but would hurt the Region in the pocketbook as there are a LOT of Miata drivers who double dip in both run groups. I suggest attending a Road Racing comp board meeting to understand the issues - because we most certainly don't know them all. What makes sense to us here may not be feasible for a very good reason...

[dickita15]

2006 was the first year that all 4 Narrc regions agreed to run the same race groups. The last three years data on starters at each Narrc race were culled and combined in different ways to get the least possible number of race groups. Based on those numbers we have the grouping you saw this year. When combining race groups safety is job one and that is determined by weight more than lap time. This year there were some changes in the number of cars ITA is way up and Miata is down. Will all due respect Andy the double dipping of the Miata drivers is not a consideration is scheduling. Besides if they really want to run the car in two classes they will run in ITA of ITS (yea)

By all means contact your Narrc rep but cars must be combined in a way that allows up all the most track time. A full analysis of the car counts must be done for the best shot at not having breakouts and it all has to be done soon. Reserved numbers are based on race groupings. That is one of the advantages we had this year with all the Narrc regions running the same groups, less number conflicts.

[RSTPerformance]

Andy good groupings... I like it

Steph and others-

Becarefull that you don't make your argument fully on the fact that "the top ITC cars are running with the midpack miatas (or whathave you), and the midpack drivers don't know how to drive thus ruin my race." EVERY class has this, even the "IT" cars. We have all even been "that person" back in the day, or we may be that person now, who knows... Everyone has thier own opinions on different people/drivers capabilities. For example, In the past I have always hated running with ITS as the mid pack ITS drivers to me were drivers who didn't know how to drive but had lots of money to buy a fast car. Times have changed, I didn't race much last year and this year thier was only 2 drivers that I herd were an issue for ITB drivers. Collectively a bunch of us went and talked to them, nothing was resolved in person, but their driving did improve at future races.

Arguable SCCA doesn't licence drivers whom don't know how to drive, thus you might not get anywhere with your argument.

Raymond "I do agree, but I havn't goten anywhere but other than hearing what I mentioned above" Blethen

[StephF]

Ray, while we may talk here amongst ourselves about the skill levels in different groupings, I'm looking at it from the standpoint of grouping classes or cars together that handle in a similar fashion.
IT cars will corner and do the straights in the same way, unlike the cars on spec tires and stock suspension. There is less likelyhood of incidents happening because a car gets by in a straight line only to crash into you on the turn.
Look at what happened to Ed & John this past weekend. That driver apparently didn't have a prayer of making the turn carrying the speed he was carrying. And he was doing it becuase he had the straight line speed to close so much on them. So he was trying to use it to bonzai past. (or is it bonsai? which one is the mini tree?? )
Seems to me that this will give the least amount of interference between the groupings. We're still going to have a varying range of skill levels. We can live with that when we can equalize things out in the handling aspects.
Andy, I like those proposed groups too. And thank you Dick for the info on where to go from here. I will be tossing my 2 cents worth into the mix, for better or worse.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Will all due respect Andy the double dipping of the Miata drivers is not a consideration is scheduling. Besides if they really want to run the car in two classes they will run in ITA of ITS (yea)[/b]

Good to hear as we all want what is best for the Region!

[itracer]

I like either of these groupings:

ITR-ITS-ITB

ITA-ITC-SSB-SSC

or

ITR-ITA-SSB-SSC

ITS-ITB-ITC
[/b]

I would rather not run with ITR (as an Mid-pack IT. Our race is already shortened enough running with S. I personally would like to see:
ITR-ITS-ITA

ITB-ITC-SSB-SSC

Or Andy's second set with S, B, and C.

[joeg]

Do whatever keeps each race group to a reasonable number of cars.

That is a tougher task than you can imagine, especially where the race organizer tries to adhere to published schedules and groups.

I have raced in all combinations and do not care about speed differentials. I do worry about super large numbers of fast cars running with ITC and ITB. That can be far too thrilling and dangerous. (Try 77 cars on the Glen's "Short Course", for example).

As for those Miatas, put them all together--including Specs, SSM(s), SSB(s), ITA versions and Production versions.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I do think that the ITS-ITB and ITA-ITC make sense because some speed differential is preferable in my mind...

An ITR-ITS-ITA would be horrible and and oversubscribed - ITB-ITC-SSB-SSC groups would fill few grids other than the NARRC runoffs.

ITR will be VERY small for a few years so I think it fits with ITS for now...

[ner88]

"As for those Miatas, put them all together--including Specs, SSM(s), SSB(s), ITA versions and Production versions."
Don't think you could afford the entry fees after the lost revenue.
Miatas aren't the problem, teaching drivers how to race together is the real issue.

[dickita15]

I do think that the ITS-ITB and ITA-ITC make sense because some speed differential is preferable in my mind...

[/b]

I could not agree more. I think if there is a little more difference it keeps the lead battles from being intertwined.

And ITA is way to big to be with B or S. R will fit on many places including big bore. If we see more than 3 at any race next year I will be surprised.

[Tkczecheredflag]

All I can say is that when I heard "C" was running with Miata cowboys I put he "C" car up for sale. I had Robert Karl take me out of a race last year and then I over heard telling one of his Miata buddies that I should have known this is a contact sport - Class act. He told me I shut the door on him ( the video from another Maita right behind us told a different story). You could of driven my tow vehicle with the 28' enclosed on the back a my 8' Fisher Plow on the front, through the opening I left for him. I was not running mid pack eiither, 5th over all and was leading in the "C" race.

[Greg Amy]

Yep, Tim. As sad and as pissy as it sounds (and I just read over this sentence three times before posting) if Spec Miatas were grouped with ITA I would not race it. I sold a completely-built and -prepped Spec Miata last summer once I did a race weekend with them (and wrecked a car in the process; unfortunately not mine). Sorry if that offends folks, but that's a pretty strong opinion of mine that is unlikely to be changed without significant opposing proof.

Be that as it may, Jerry, once they're "out there in the wild" and licensed there's no way to get new lessons across their limited/tunnel field-of-vision.

[Ed Funk]

Thanks for selling us the car, Tim! Now we have to deal with them! And while I don't always agree with Greg's view, this time I very strongly do!