Page 51 of 52 FirstFirst ... 4149505152 LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,020 of 1031

Thread: ITAC News.

  1. #1001
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    we had a meeting last night. a week late as there was a SNAFU with the conference line on our regular 4th Monday. SCCA got it all fixed up. not sure how much the CRB will review tonight, usually they get a week.

    we did approve a new requested car, add some specline years and body styles to keep current, and review some other letters which we will move on ASAP, likely on "this month's" call.

    we discussed the ITB review and have made good progress. hopefully this will come out of committee this year.

  2. #1002
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    meeting last night was very productive. we mostly talked about the cars up for the WDYT in a recent Fastrack and while we haven't agreed to dual class I do think the solution we did agree upon will meet with the standard 50/50 opinion split. some new cars are getting classed, and we have broken the ITB stranglehold but are NOT done the hard work of realigning the class as a whole. it was a good meeting though, with some VERY good discussions about our philosophy and the future of the class, which I think is bright. more after the fastrack comes out.

  3. #1003
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Getting closer to 2015. Any progress you could talk about? Any idea when an announcement will be made?
    Ralf
    ITB Golf GT

  4. #1004
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    Yes! An update would be great! Thinking the Audi will finally get rid of a couple hundred pounds and get classed correctly for next year :-)

    Stephen

  5. #1005
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    Stiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil working on it guys. Sorry it's taking so long, I hope it will be worth the wait.

  6. #1006
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    I have to say, and this is primarily my fault, we haven't pushed this hard enough. Chip has, and is adamant, as he should be, that we get the ITB recommendations done this year. I think we can accomplish that.

    Raymond, on the Audi, I don't think the weight on that will change again. I'm not particuarly happy about that, but it is what it is. We did the best we could given the situation.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  7. #1007
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    NH, US
    Posts
    3,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffYoung View Post
    I have to say, and this is primarily my fault, we haven't pushed this hard enough. Chip has, and is adamant, as he should be, that we get the ITB recommendations done this year. I think we can accomplish that.

    Raymond, on the Audi, I don't think the weight on that will change again. I'm not particuarly happy about that, but it is what it is. We did the best we could given the situation.
    That is Stephen not Raymond! I keep to myself lately. Unfortunately I have never really had a positive experience with the ITAC or CRB so I don't really have any comments...

    Raymond

    PS: The Audi in question never got a weight change, keep the facts better than Phil, Chris, Bob and Peter!!!
    Last edited by RSTPerformance; 09-20-2014 at 12:43 AM.
    RST Performance Racing
    www.rstperformance.com

  8. #1008
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSTPerformance View Post
    That is Stephen not Raymond! I keep to myself lately. Unfortunately I have never really had a positive experience with the ITAC or CRB so I don't really have any comments...

    Raymond

    PS: The Audi in question never got a weight change, keep the facts better than Phil, Chris, Bob and Peter!!!
    Yeah, you are right, I may not be able to keep straight in my head all of the hundreds of classing decisions we made.

    I can tell you this though. I volunteered a lot of time reviewing your car, and dropped $50 or something of my own money on the shop manual, to try to sort this out. While I agree the Audi was not treated straight up, it wasn't like the car was uncompetitive or that there weren't legitimate arguments for its present classification.

    Your attitude continues to lack.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  9. #1009
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Black Rock, Ct
    Posts
    9,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSTPerformance View Post
    That is Stephen not Raymond! I keep to myself lately. Unfortunately I have never really had a positive experience with the ITAC or CRB so I don't really have any comments...

    Raymond

    PS: The Audi in question never got a weight change, keep the facts better than Phil, Chris, Bob and Peter!!!
    Jeff is still on the ITAC, so he has to remain professional. I, however, don't.

    That statement, is, to be blunt, bullshit.

    And selfish. First, it's very crappy to judge an entire committees years of work based on YOUR car. Do you not race in a category?? In a class within that category?? Is the Committee solely concerned with ONE car that is raced by what, FOUR guys...ever??? Should THAT car be set with a blind eye to the hundreds of other races in the class?
    Stop being so self centered and think bigger picture. The ITAC has done a ton of good across the category, and you are better for it. ITS was a mess. ITR didn't exist. ITA had big issues. And ITB is certainly better than what it was, (Although it's still got issues)

    And while you might not LIKE what they've done to your car, throwing the ITAC under the bus is flat out wrong. THREE members resigned in protest over the way YOUR fucking car was treated. NObody has ever given MY car more than 5 minutes of discussion, (And oh, by theway, it's raced by a LOT more people than your old Audi) and they sure haven't resigned over it! And do you hear me bitching? NO, because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. And when was the last time you saw the members of any other AD Hoc consult with YOU, and go out and spend THEIR own money trying to get reliable data on YOUR car?

    I didn't like the way IT was being treated or run. So I volunteered and joined the committee, and spent hundreds of hours and hundreds of dollars to try and improve things. Have you?

    ITB is a better class now than it was before, and it's because of the ITAC. YOUR class is better. YOUR racing is better. YOU have more choices. Sorry if YOUR car isn't exactly what you want. But that car has more unreliable data floating about it than nearly any other car. Funny that you SWEAR that some data is the right data, and that data happens to benefit , ummm, YOU!

    Was your car treated properly by the CRB? Nope. (Join the crowd) There are 300 PLUS cars in the ITCS. If the ITAC can create a process and run it and get 50% "right", it's doing great. Because of various real world reasons, and the limitations of racing stock based cars, some cars (like mine, like yours) fall through the cracks.

    Thats life. Move on. But don't come here and say you've never had a positive experience with the ITAC, because if you race in IT, you've had a positive experience, and you can thank the ITAC for it. Think big picture, not, "MY car doesn't weight what I think it should".

    Sorry if you think I'm being a dick.

    And just to be a equal opportunity dick, the ITAC, as a body, as no excuse for the lack of results, or at least the lack of communication over the ITB reorg. I know its difficult..I've seen the numbers and the "That doesn't make sense" aspects of the cars and ratings. But it's been 4 YEARS! I suspect that some committee members are putting the work in, others aren't. Which, if true, sucks for the guys pulling the weight. But, it's a volunteer gig, and I can point at HUNDREDS of guys who whine but don't pitch in, so it's hard to throw too many stones at the guys who DO pitch in, even if they're dragging their feet.
    But, yea, ITAC: It's past time to move on this. At least be transparent and communicate. I KNOW it sucks to keep coming on here and giving the same speech: "Hey, we're working on it but progress is slow". But maybe somebody will read that and volunteer to pitch in.
    Jake Gulick


    CarriageHouse Motorsports
    for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
    IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
    Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
    BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
    GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
    New England Region
    lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com


  10. #1010
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    Jake thanks, and you are right. We, or at least I can say I, have dragged our/my feet too long on this. Time to get it done. I've worked hard on other ITAC issues, this one not so much and its hurting ITB. Time to move it along I agree.

    And, thanks again to you, Andy, Kirk and others who paved the way for the Process. Shitty time to be on the committee, but I can say that 95% of the groundwork you guys laid came to fruition. I wish you all could see some of it from the inside. I think for the most part you'd be pleased.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  11. #1011
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Black Rock, Ct
    Posts
    9,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffYoung View Post
    Jake thanks, and you are right. We, or at least I can say I, have dragged our/my feet too long on this. Time to get it done. I've worked hard on other ITAC issues, this one not so much and its hurting ITB. Time to move it along I agree.

    And, thanks again to you, Andy, Kirk and others who paved the way for the Process. Shitty time to be on the committee, but I can say that 95% of the groundwork you guys laid came to fruition. I wish you all could see some of it from the inside. I think for the most part you'd be pleased.
    Thanks!

    I look back on my ITAC years with fondness, except for the final 3 months or so.

    It took a lot of people, some who weren't on the ITAC, lots of work and a sea change of attitude to get it done, but IT is far better off than it was in the late 90s.
    SCCA certainly hasn't used it to it's potential, which is a shame.
    And many won't remember how things used to be, only their issues from their little world, so the perception of change may be not wideswept.
    Jake Gulick


    CarriageHouse Motorsports
    for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
    IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
    Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
    BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
    GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
    New England Region
    lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com


  12. #1012
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    NH, US
    Posts
    3,821

    Default

    Jake- Posts like that are way over the top... I never said I didn't like or apprecite Jeff, there are some great people in SCCA and he may just be one of those people. I am sorry that I no longer want to provide input because I have witnessed others (example quoted below) or been part of some very negative experiences. I guess my post was unnecessary and should have just stated that I was still disappointed in the lack of effectiveness seen in the ITAC/CRB. Maybe Jeff can post a list of what has been proposed over the past year and what has been considered accomplishments? That would far outweigh any of my "negative/
    Quote Originally Posted by lateapex911 View Post
    Bullshit
    comments and restore faith in the committees!

    NOW FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME I DON'T CARE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE AUDI, IF YOU DIDN'T NOTICE, I HAVE MOVED ON... half joking, I think it is you and a few others that needs to get over the Audi

    Lastly Jeff- Thank you for your efforts... I am sure you have done your best with the difficult situations you have faced.

    Raymond

    Quote Originally Posted by lateapex911 View Post
    The ITAC, as a body, as no excuse for the lack of results, or at least the lack of communication over the ITB reorg. I know its difficult..I've seen the numbers and the "That doesn't make sense" aspects of the cars and ratings. But it's been 4 YEARS! I suspect that some committee members are putting the work in, others aren't. Which, if true, sucks for the guys pulling the weight. But, it's a volunteer gig, and I can point at HUNDREDS of guys who whine but don't pitch in, so it's hard to throw too many stones at the guys who DO pitch in, even if they're dragging their feet.
    But, yea, ITAC: It's past time to move on this. At least be transparent and communicate. I KNOW it sucks to keep coming on here and giving the same speech: "Hey, we're working on it but progress is slow". But maybe somebody will read that and volunteer to pitch in.
    RST Performance Racing
    www.rstperformance.com

  13. #1013
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    newington, ct
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Unfortunately I have never really had a positive experience with the ITAC or CRB so I don't really have any comments...
    Ray, it was this comment that was taken a bit personally. While I don't agree with some of the outcomes and how the whole ITB deal across the board has been handled, I do know there are countless hours being put in but the ITAC as a whole.

    The reason why Jake is so passionate is due to just how much he put into the ITAC. Flying down to the ARRC with a MAJOR reason being the ITAC. Him and his girlfriend going to the Cape with us for a vacation, leaving our festivities to find WIFI somewhere and be on the ITAC con call for several hours. Significant comment. I thought he was nuts!!
    Dave Gran
    Real Roads, Real Car Guys Real World Road Tests
    Go Ahead - Take the Wheel's Free Guide to Racing

  14. #1014
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    Hell, one year, Josh Sirota did the ITAC call from the HOSPITAL waiting for his wife to give birth. I've missed a few calls over the years due to travel but try my best to be on. Others were religious about it. I don't think Jake, Kirk, Andy or Josh ever missed a call. Chip and Matt now too, and Gary, perfect attendance.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  15. #1015
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    newington, ct
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    How often are the call held?

    What have you guys been discussing lately, besides ITB?
    Dave Gran
    Real Roads, Real Car Guys Real World Road Tests
    Go Ahead - Take the Wheel's Free Guide to Racing

  16. #1016
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    I will be honest, I don't think there's a lot of desire to see ITB fixed, or more specifically a lot of perceived need. That lack of group desire along with some personal issues on my part affecting my time certainly have cut my drive, though I very much still want this done. I apologize to those who are waiting on it, but in also think the current health of the class will not be affected as the vast majority of the changes that will come from the effort are for cars that simply aren't run or are not run in large numbers.
    Last edited by Chip42; 09-22-2014 at 03:51 PM. Reason: reworded

  17. #1017
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,251

    Default

    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.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  18. #1018
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    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.

  19. #1019
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Black Rock, Ct
    Posts
    9,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip42 View Post
    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.
    Jake Gulick


    CarriageHouse Motorsports
    for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
    IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
    Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
    BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
    GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
    New England Region
    lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com


  20. #1020
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    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.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •