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...

[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!

[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!

[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

[Bill Miller]

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
[/b]

Ron,

The reasoning I heard years ago was that it was due to the poor design of the stock drum brake system and that it was prone to failure under race conditions. This was not an official position, but info I got from someone that raced one.

They&#39;ll shoot down things that actually make sense as being &#39;inconsistent w/ class philosophy&#39;, yet push crap like this through (Kirk, I admire your efforts, but did you really think that it would be changed?).

And no Raymond, you didn&#39;t read it wrong. Unfortunately, that&#39;s the way a lot of people still view IT and Regional racing. It&#39;s well and truly ironic that the &#39;head up your ass&#39; comment made it into this issue of FasTrack. I honestly don&#39;t know why the IT community puts up w/ this kind of attitude. The SCCA needs the IT community WAY more than the IT community needs the SCCA. Pack the whole thing up and take it to NASA. I&#39;m sure they&#39;d welcome you w/ open arms, and pretty much take the whole package w/o any changes. And you can bet that you&#39;d be able to take track dates w/ you, as it would get damn expensive for a Region to put on a race w/o the IT cars showing up.

The people in Topeka will continue to jerk the racers around as long as the racers let them. It&#39;s just no longer worth it to me to subsidize that kind of nonsense.

[jjjanos]

The people in Topeka will continue to jerk the racers around as long as the racers let them. It&#39;s just no longer worth it to me to subsidize that kind of nonsense.
[/b]

Wow. I look at the CRB and the other committees of members "at" Topeka and I see nothing but racers.

[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!")

[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.

[Stan]

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.[/b]

Dave, for the past 5 years I have been trying to get the Club to eliminate the difference between Regional-only and National classes...and just have classes. Peter has been doing the same even longer. The difference is that we are both now on the CRB and are gaining allies in the fight for class and category equality. We aren&#39;t there yet, but at the same time I know that some IT folks would like to run Nationals without having to invest in a new car, so we&#39;ve opened the door as far as we can for now.

A word on "being used". Ultimately each and all of us who race are "being used" by others as well as "using" others...unless you&#39;ve built your own road course and don&#39;t share it with anybody else. It&#39;s called banding together as a club to share our hobby. And it is our "using" and "being used" that makes this madness even possible, so I&#39;d urge you to not get too wound around the axle over "being used".

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

Tabled for committee input.

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

Sounds more than just a little bitter, Dave. I don&#39;t know Grammer, but I do know that the prospect of running Enduros is the only reason I haven&#39;t sold my 510.

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.[/b]

IT people don&#39;t fall all over each other to get into Production car racing for a variety of reasons. Chief among them I suspect is the screwing the Prod guys gave IT cars after the first round or two of cross-listing. Me? I&#39;d sweep them all into GTL and be done with it, but I can&#39;t seem to make much headway with that idea, either.

Stan

[DavidM]

Dave, for the past 5 years I have been trying to get the Club to eliminate the difference between Regional-only and National classes...and just have classes. Peter has been doing the same even longer. The difference is that we are both now on the CRB and are gaining allies in the fight for class and category equality. We aren&#39;t there yet, but at the same time I know that some IT folks would like to run Nationals without having to invest in a new car, so we&#39;ve opened the door as far as we can for now.
[/b]

Here&#39;s to hoping this happens. I think doing away with the National/Regional class distinctions could be one of the best things the club can do to improve itself.

Due to the Road Atlanta repaving, the regional weekend normally held at the end of February will be combined with the National event in June. Us regional guys will get our own races, but will qualify with the national classes. This could be an interesting trial for coexistence. I&#39;m looking forward to it as I&#39;ve never participated in a national weekend and I think the national guys will be surprised by us regional folk.

David

[mustanghammer]

Dave, for the past 5 years I have been trying to get the Club to eliminate the difference between Regional-only and National classes...and just have classes. Peter has been doing the same even longer. The difference is that we are both now on the CRB and are gaining allies in the fight for class and category equality. We aren&#39;t there yet, but at the same time I know that some IT folks would like to run Nationals without having to invest in a new car, so we&#39;ve opened the door as far as we can for now.


[/b]

Thanks for your efforts in this regard.

I am a supporter of IT having national status. I say this knowing full well that I don&#39;t currently have the best ITA car there is. If IT went National I would be willing to build a new car as long as I get to use IT rules and regs.

Thanks