ITAC News.

[JeffYoung]

Dave, it's once a month. FOr the most part just dealing with letters/classification requests. We've talked in general about three bigger issues:

1. ITR power to weight based on 2750 325is which skews the class "too heavy" for bogey cars like the 222 hp 300zx.
2. ITS cars making WAY more power than ever expected by the Process (and that's all of the front runners really, 240z, RX7, TR8, Mustangs).
3. ITB having a lot of power/weight issues and cars that were never processed.

However, like Chip said, even the redo on ITB isn't going to adjust the front running cars any, if at all. More of an applicatio of the Process to the rest of the class.

[Chip42]

We have also discussed the massive process failing of ITC but decided to just leave it alone. Means that slow ITB cars have no where to go, but keeps the very good balance that exists in C now, where C exists, anyhow.

Edit: and I gripe about the agnosticism of the process and the committee to the benefits of torque.

[lateapex911]

We have also discussed the massive process failing of ITC but decided to just leave it alone. Means that slow ITB cars have no where to go, but keeps the very good balance that exists in C now, where C exists, anyhow.

Edit: and I gripe about the agnosticism of the process and the committee to the benefits of torque.

Thanks Dave. Yea, jeff, in my 5 years I don't think I missed a call. Sadly, I fubar'ed the MR2 from a hotel room in Watkins glen when Andy had to miss a call, (read the wrong weight line) and NObody said boo, (Cough peter Keane, cough). Maybe I should missed that one! Also remember towing the trailer home once in a construction zone and I kept losing the call...my GF was the dialer-in-er.

Yea, Chip, ITC is, well, ITC. IT seemed like it was working where it was working, and messing with it to benefit ITB etc would mess it up. So we kinda left it sorta as is. (IIRC)

And torque was struggled mightily with as well. Lot's of viewpoints on that one!

The ITR thing is interesting in hindsight. ITR would NEVER have happened (well, probably not for years and years) if not for the issue with the E36. necessity is the mother of invention and the issues that car caused was the straw that allowed us to sell the class to the higher ups. Ironically, it's what constrains the class. We realized that, to a degree, but, it seemed like a "better that than nothing at all" kinda deal.

I think the main issue we kept running up against was how close to perfection do we want to get, and at what costs...and how realistic is it?? And everyone, and everyone's friend had a different tolerance and opinion on that.

[Chip42]

Small turnout last night but we did make some progress on B, I'd say we're nearly there. Theres one new ITA classification out there, SHOULD be a no brainer but Will wait a month.

Jake, my biggest concerns for IT are general for the club. We have very different cars now. Some are nice and heavy and even with increased power levels still look like they slot into the existing classes, but more and more, modern cars don't fit IT, nor prod, GT, etc... Due to output, displacement, and or turbochargers. Fixing ITR will regain some of those cars, but sooner than later ANOTHER class wILL need to be added to the top of the stack. And we are all going to need to figure out turbos. And as racers, we are going to have to learn to run modern car technology. I seriously doubt club racing can survive on 80s and 90s machines forever.

[shwah]

Don't worry. Less people are waiting on it now than in the past. A lot of us have moved on to where we have an opportunity to compete.

[Chip42]

In all honesty, Chris, I feel roughly the same way and am looking at making the same move. The problem you have with itb isn't going to get fixed here. What would "fix" that, and I use quotes because tjere is substantial difference in opinion regarding what, if anything, is broken, is a reworking of how we classify cars in IT or at least in ITB. Do you honestly think that is going to happen anytime soon? Right now we aim to get every car in the itcs processed according the the way we say it is done. It will help some old cars which were never processed. That's about it. MkII and up VWs, Hondas, MR2s, etc... Are all ready "correct" per process math.

I await your rants about mr2s and Hondas which, in my experience, are NOT a problem.

[gran racing]

It's just too bad how this was approached. For several years, people were thinking this was going to be done MUCH sooner. It was suggested before as a way to not spend time on cars that people didn't care about was to post in Fastrack that if a person wanted their ITB car reviewed, submit a re-classification request. Then do it in the order requests were received. Or something so it's not one massive project which a lot of work wouldn't matter in the real world since people weren't driving them.

I too have moved on (not for that reason), but still think it was a big flop in administration at least from an outsider's perspective. It is what it is though.

[shwah]

I await your rants about mr2s and Hondas which, in my experience, are NOT a problem.

Wait on dude. The issues have always been with the process math, the false belief that the system is truly objective, and the penalty of getting that wrong in high #/hp classes (NOT with the specific cars people use as examples). As long as the ITAC is not willing to use additional information to make decisions, we get the ITB that we have. Not my problem at this point.