ITAC News.

[tom91ita]

I have some bad news for you. The reclass was effective 1/1/05, I searched all of the old Fastracks to find it the other day. In other words, 2009 was its 5th year of competition in ITB. And I misspoke, the adjustments cannot be made after the end of the 4th year according to the rules.

i appreciate your comments regarding the updates and nothing that follows is directed to you personally but i am a bit frustrated. this is very interesting and very disappointing. here is the note i sent to [email protected] November 28, 2008.

i have been submitting essentially variants of this with NO response and now i may be past the 4 year deadline. i would hope that submissions inside the 4th year and still not resolved (at least in mind, no response means still under consideration) could be considered.

and please note that i think the formula i presented below appears to be in error as the 50# i subtracted for "poor" suspension should be a 50# adder for DWB suspension. my car's weight compared to other 12V ITB hondas would be relative but it does slightly skew the backcalculated power factor i arrived at.

Dear CRB,

I believe that the basic formula as applied to Improved Touring needs to be revisited. It is my understanding that if a car was within 100 pounds of its target weight, no adjustments were made. I believe this is in error. These process weights should not be to the nearest 100#’s, they should be to the nearest 5 or 10#’s or something that is limited by the accuracy of the scales (e.g., + / - 0.5%).

I must also share that I think my car (1986 Honda CRX Si at 2130 #’s in IT was negatively impacted. I am unable to use any reasonable factor of the formula to arrive at my car’s existing weight.

It is my understanding that the Process for Targeted Weight as applied to ITB is as follows:

• Stock Horsepower x Typical HP gain in IT trim x Weight to Power factor
  
  • ITB Weight to Power is 17 pounds per HP
  • Typical Gain in IT Trim is 25% so 1.25 factor
• Weight Adjustments
  
  • Subtract 50 pounds if front wheel drive
  • Subtract 50 pounds if not strut suspension and independent rear suspension

Applying the above methods to my car results in the following:

91 x 1.25 x 17 = 1934 #’s

· - 50 #’s for FWD
· - 50 #’s for solid rear beam axle

This should result in a weight of 1834 #’s. Please compare this to the weight in the GCR of 2130 #’s. My car is nearly 300#’s over per the base process. By brief background, my car was classed at 1980 when in ITA. It was then given a 150 adder when dropped to ITB.


There are some that maintain that my car should have a HP gain % of 35% instead of the general 25%. If this is the case, my car would have a process weight of 1988 #’s.

It appears that my car is using the same factors and methods applied to its more successful younger brother, the 1988 CRX Si in ITA. The ’88 Si with its 16 Valve engine and OBD0 ignition has more to gain with a good valve job and ECU modifications. My car has the 12 valve head and a vacuum advance distributor.

I back-calculated the % gain that my engine would require to result in 2130 #’s and it is 44%. I do not believe that is achievable.

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Tom