ITAC News.

[benspeed]

Thanks Josh - and yes, I did receive an update on my request. Thanks!

[Andy Bettencourt]

Thanks for the time to post this Josh.

[lateapex911]

Thanks Josh. The cage discussion is very very scary. The IT rules core brilliance is in the cage limitations. Once you tie the chassis together, you've opened the Pandoras box of huge spring rates and the attendant damper needs and costs. As it stands now, there's a strong diminishing returns effect in play on dampers. Spend all you want, but the benefits get mighty slim once you pass a certain pint. Tie the structure together, and that aspect goes out the window.

I'm still shocked the engine mount thing is in play. Tell Lee and Les to get in the current century, LOL.

[JeffYoung]

I totally agree on the cage issue. The person who brought it up makes valid points, but at the same time, allowing unlimited cages in IT makes a fundamental change to what has constitued an IT car for many, many years.

[trhoppe]

I cannot fathom how you could even talk about relaxing the cage rules but not allow alternate engine mounts. I cannot even come close to understanding. How can that conversation even start?

"hey, I know we just had a conversation about rules creep being the con for a modification, lets talk about redoing the cage on all IT cars". WHAT? REALLY?

[JoshS]

I cannot fathom how you could even talk about relaxing the cage rules but not allow alternate engine mounts. I cannot even come close to understanding. How can that conversation even start?

"hey, I know we just had a conversation about rules creep being the con for a modification, lets talk about redoing the cage on all IT cars". WHAT? REALLY?

Tom, we talk about every letter we receive. Trust me, we've spent more than 10x the time on engine mounts as cage rules in the last couple of months.