March fastrac

[88YB1]

March FAST TRAC is up

[erlrich]

Here 'tis: http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/Fil...3-fastrack.pdf

Time to make your opinions known, if you haven't already.

[lateapex911]

yeah, yeah, yeah, but this Fastrack has the funniest thing I have ever read in it!

Here it is: http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/Fil...3-fastrack.pdf

Page 15, Prod section, line item 7.


Those Prod guys....they KILL me!


LOL>

[erlrich]

<div align="left">

yeah, yeah, yeah, but this Fastrack has the funniest thing I have ever read in it![/b]

</div>
<div align="left">
Priceless....</div>

[RSTPerformance]

7. FP – Please remove your heads from your asses (Johnson). Inconsistent with class philosophy.


I am not sure what I like better, the request, or the reply... Jake personally for me this really makes SCCA look bad and proves that the process doesn&#39;t actually work.... who reviews this crap???

on a brighter note, looks like the 2002 Mini Cooper is a done deal as of 3/1/07... Go get em!!! I think this will be a "hot car" for ITB and certainly a fun one It is on my new favorite car list!!!

Add new spec line to ITCS p. 327, Mini Cooper (2002), Engine Type: 4 Cyl DOHC, Bore x Stroke(mm) / Displ.(cc): 77.0 x 85.8 /
1598, Valves IN & EX(mm): (I)30.3 (E)23.3, Comp. Ratio: 10.6, Wheelbase(inch): 97.1, Wheel Dia.(inch): 15 / 16, Gear Ratios:
3.42, 1.95, 1.33, 1.05, 0.85, Brakes Std.(mm): (F)276 Vented Disc ®239 Solid Disc, Weight(lbs): 2500.

ECU&#39;s... not sure how I feel and I do not have time to read through 500+ post for biast info... I am trusting the masses on this one If it should absolutely not go though PM me and educate me so I send in my input. If it really does need to be changed I am sure you will get the votes to do so, so don&#39;t waste my time

Raymond "Just when you think things are settlin down, they all get going again!!!" Blethen

[JimLill]

what a hoot!

[Stan]

You guys need to keep reading page 30 very carefully...

[shwah]

Yeah I caught the prod request right away. Damn funny, by both parties. :P

You guys need to keep reading page 30 very carefully...
[/b]

You mean the part about letting people run IT cars in Prepared, so that we can experience national level competition? Might be interesting when the Prepared category is thin, but sort of like bringing a spoon to a gun fight when the real cars show up. Nice gesture though.

I was more interested in the alternate rear brakes for the ITS Olds. How is that consistent with the class philosophy?

[Bill Miller]

The Prod line was funny, and sad, all at the same time. Funny, because it&#39;s so true. Sad, because it really shows how Mickey Mouse and broken the whole thing is.

The Prepared thing is one of the biggest crocks of **** I&#39;ve read in a long time. "Experience a National event" What&#39;s that, where you only have 2 or 3 cars show up for a given class, yet you get to pay a premium for the privilege? BTW, it&#39;s pretty easy to see through what&#39;s happening w/ that one. They think they&#39;ll be able to bolster the Prepared participation numbers so they can give it a Runoffs&#39; slot.

And I don&#39;t know how they could print the answer to Dick&#39;s request w/ a straight face. Guess what, all those ex-ITS, now ITR cars are correctly classed in ITR.

The crap I read really helped seal the deal for me, I&#39;m not renewing my membership this year.

And the nonsense w/ the Quad4 cars&#39; brakes is just an extension of what was there for the other cars that were classified. Still doesn&#39;t make it consistent w/ the IT philosophy, but then again, I&#39;ve never gotten an answer as to why it was allowed in the first place.

As far as the ECU issue goes, have fun guys!

[Greg Amy]

Wow! IT cars in prod, effective 3/1/07? An astounding turn of events...

[JoshS]

Wow! IT cars in prod, effective 3/1/07? An astounding turn of events...
[/b]

No, it&#39;s IT cars in Prepared, not Production.

[Greg Amy]

Ah-hah! Gotcha. Not so intriguing any more...<grin>

(Greg&#39;s prediction: a lot of experienced IT drivers yelling "these &#39;National&#39; guys drive like ROOKIES!")

[Ron Earp]

And the nonsense w/ the Quad4 cars&#39; brakes is just an extension of what was there for the other cars that were classified. Still doesn&#39;t make it consistent w/ the IT philosophy, but then again, I&#39;ve never gotten an answer as to why it was allowed in the first place.

[/b]

No kidding! Who do you have to know to get that in? I need to make some friends so I can get rid of the rear drums on the Jensen, the Z car, and the TR8. Hell, let&#39;s just let all cars with rear drums replace them with discs.

Here we are debating things that are grey with class philospohy while this disc brake substitution is completely contrary to it.

Ron

[ddewhurst]

***You guys need to keep reading page 30 very carefully...***

Stan, this is not a shot at you. The National folks (restricted Regionals), the Prepared folks & everone else who has a wish to USE the IT folks should do the same thing that Johnson requested. We IT folks were good enough to support the numbers for the Milwaukee Region Cat National untill Spec Miata came along then the IT folks were no longer good enough to be included.

As far as I am concerned the National folks can stick it where the sun don&#39;t shine.

Oh ya, then there is Grammer with his endro things always posting on the IT site. Come & play suckers.

Classing the Mazda 1st gen RX-7 in G Production non-ported. Creating another level of prep is not consistent with the Production car class philosophy. SURE, you guys add the Hybird that a Production car traditionalist asked for. That Stan is total crap & people wonder why IT people don&#39;t fall all over each other to get into Production car racing.

[RSTPerformance]

Oh ya, then there is Grammer with his endro things always posting on the IT site. Come & play suckers.

[/b]

Dave- Not sure why you brought Grammer into this, I think it is great that he is offering us another place to play.

Ken, please don&#39;t get discouraged by davids comments and continue to let us know of every opportunity that you can offer us.


Stan- While I appreciate the efforts that you and other have made on page 30, did you (SCCA) have to bewitle the IT community like we are a bunch of hicks whom don&#39;t know how to race? "While IT cars may not be competitive in the Prepared category, competition within the category will allow regional competitors to experience a national event." You make it look like National racing is some treasure... I have seen people like Paul Newman race around Lime Rock every year and smash into everyone, I also watch all the prod guys where 1/2 are good and 1/2 are slower than most cars at a drivers school. National racing sure is an experience, 1/2 of the people think they are pro racers but in reality can&#39;t drive 1/2 as good as most the IT field on any given weekend.

Raymond "I&#39;ll stay regional" Blethen

Although after my venting I am wondering how embarrased SCCA would be if they see some POS very slow IT car show up at the National Runoffs... lol If the rules didn&#39;t restrict 1990 or newer that is the only races that I would run just to be a pain in the @$$...

[Joe Harlan]

Actually I have supported allowing lower prep levels to play in higher prep classes for a long time. I think it will be an honest chance for people to try something different without having to make the capitol invenstment of dumping their old car to move to a different class. Please note i said prep levels not prep quality. I really believe this is a good way for folks to get to know each other also. For years I have listened to pompuss jerk talk about the quality of driver and prep at a regional level and I think this is an opportunity to prove otherwise. As they say..."enjoy the ride" this is just another opportunity to race and nothing more.

[RSTPerformance]

Joe-

I agree with you 100%, I just don&#39;t like the tone in the way it came across... maybe I read it wrong...

Raymond

[Joe Harlan]

Raymond, I quit reading intent. I read the message. The message is another place to race. Years ago when I helped to re-write the RS rules out here that was a big part of the rules set. YOu could run you IT car in RS for extra track time (share the car) as long as you kept the IT level of prep. One change that was not IT and you had to meet all the RS rules including safety stuff. I thought it was a cool way for people to share a car and buddies to get to run against eachother for fun and bragging rights. I have been pitching this thought to anyone that would listen on the CRB and the BOD for manny years now. This has been pitched hard at the prod folks also but I think most of them would rather sink with the ship. While I don&#39;t fully agree with david on the GP RX7 I also don&#39;t disagree that that car could run GP at sime level of prep that would be suitable.

[shwah]

Hey - this might give me a chance to crew and drive at the Sprints. I have been trying to figure out how to convince the wife that we needed to take a trip to Road America twice in June so I could race one time, and help Chuck the next.

[mustanghammer]

You guys need to keep reading page 30 very carefully...
[/b]

Interesting....but it doesn&#39;t apply to me in my OLD 83 RX7! I guess I will have to run it in EP (it&#39;s legal there) to get that National Event feeling!

My guess is that they will be opening Prepared up to A Sedan, Touring cars and even OLD IT cars in a few years to make run off&#39;s numbers.

I was more interested in page #17. They didn&#39;t say NO!