March fastrac

[Andy Bettencourt]

Observations:

1. The remove your head from ass comment is funny to me. It's a joke, not a slip up.

2. Prather wants the FP Miata reduced by 50lbs? Didn't he just win a National Championship?

3. Mr. Waterhouse loves him his Mini's!

4. The Calais deal was the seperation of the regular model and the 442 model. It was not sepcifcally asked of the CRB that they allow the spec line note change to carry over but I guess they did it proactively. I know nothing of the history of the allowance and think it is against class philosophy. Weird.

5. Mini Cooper in ITB should be fun if anyone builds one

[xr4racer]

Why the 1990 cutoff for prepared? Some cars like the RX-7 and many others have body styles that were built pre '90 and post '90 with very few changes.

Matt Miller

[JoshS]

The way I read it, if you have a pre-1990 car legal for IT, you can still run that in Prepared. But you cannot build a car directly to the Prepared rules published in the book if the car is that old.

[Joe Harlan]

Why the 1990 cutoff for prepared? Some cars like the RX-7 and many others have body styles that were built pre '90 and post '90 with very few changes.

Matt Miller
[/b]

Because there are plenty of classes for old cars? I really don't have an issue with it. Touring and SS have a 10 year old maximum. I don't see a vin requirement so my 1989 S13 can run as a 1990 model. The year deal is the least of the issues with this class. The rules still need some work and it is gonna be a big money deal to run at the front.

[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'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'll shoot down things that actually make sense as being 'inconsistent w/ class philosophy', 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't read it wrong. Unfortunately, that's the way a lot of people still view IT and Regional racing. It's well and truly ironic that the 'head up your ass' comment made it into this issue of FasTrack. I honestly don'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'm sure they'd welcome you w/ open arms, and pretty much take the whole package w/o any changes. And you can bet that you'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's just no longer worth it to me to subsidize that kind of nonsense.

[dickita15]

ITA – Dual classify the ITA RX-7 in ITA and ITB (Patullo). The car is properly classified.

I must admit that while I am not surprised by the decision. Reading this one line really does not do justice to the argument I presented regarding the impact of cage requirements, trusting the weight setting process and allowing the free market to make choices where the right solution is not crystal clear.


On the subject of IT cars running in Prepared to experience National races, remember that in some parts of the country there is not a strong regional series like we are used to in the Northeast. It is easy for a Narrc or Marrs competitor to think this is condescending but is some divisions there are not enough opportunities for good racing in regional classes.

[Bill Miller]

Dick,

I understand that not every part of the country is lucky enough to have the kinds of IT series that run up and down the East coast, but I hardly see how letting people bring a knife to a gun fight would create 'good racing'. And did I just miss it, or did they not say if the IT cars would run in BP or DP? I'm not so sure it would be the case, but maybe some of the hot ITR cars might do ok in DP, but even that's a stretch.

[gran racing]

On the subject of IT cars running in Prepared to experience National races, remember that in some parts of the country there is not a strong regional series like we are used to in the Northeast. It is easy for a Narrc or Marrs competitor to think this is condescending but is some divisions there are not enough opportunities for good racing in regional classes. [/b]

Ah, good point. I didn't think about that.

Too bad the 7 can't be dual classed, but I suppose many other cars would want that as well. It would be pretty cool to see it in B.

[dickita15]

You are right Bill, from the little reading I have done of the Prepared rules a legal IT would not be in the same league, however as Joe pointed out the concept of running a car in a higher class has much appeal and this is a first step. Honestly something like this for prod is logical but with the way the prod guys are change it just can’t happen there, at least now.

Besides it is just an option. We may not think it is significant but I do not see where allowing an additional opportunity can be bad.

Too bad the 7 can't be dual classed, but I suppose many other cars would want that as well.
[/b]

and this would be bad why?

my letter asked for the allowance of dual classification as a possibility for all cars that could safely race in two classes and then went on to descibe the specific issues with the Rx7 because as I stated in the letter I was most familiar with that example.

Trust the process and let the market decide.

[Bill Miller]

That's just it Dick, I don't buy that "I want to race in a group where I'll be a rolling chicane" line. Racing where you'll be a back marker has appeal? If that's the case, run your car in ITE. There's nothing magical about a National, so why pay the extra $$$? I can think of a couple of differences between Nationals and Regionals. Nationals cost more, have longer races, and don't have any IT cars. That's it, nothing special. I've been to the Pocono dbl National, and I can tell you, it doesn't come close to the Labor Day dbl at Summit Point in either car count or good racing.


I'm telling you, this move is designed to bolster numbers for Prepared so that they can get a Runoffs' slot. You think anyone is going to keep track of which Prepared cars are really IT cars, and not count them towards participation numbers?

[p.keane]

Bill, no one on the current CRB believes that the IT guys are red headed step childern. I have been a long time supporter of IT getting national status. I believe that if it happend 3 or 4 of the exsisting runoff classes would be sitting home the year after they were elligible. The line in the revised Prepared rule is just what it says, we would like the IT guys to show up at the National events and let the old gaurd see that they are not ratted out cars. Secondly, we did not want to hear what a**holes we were because an IT car was not competitive in Prepared, it is not supose to be. With the current climate within all of our ad hoc committees and the CRB, I think you are making a mistake by packing up and heading to that other sactioning body. PK

[mustanghammer]

For Sale:


************************************************** **************

1 National class legal ITA RX7 complete with a National License holding driver

Price: Race Entry Fees plus $500.00

My car can be used to bolster Run-Offs car counts in the following classes

GT2
GT3
E Production

I promise to start, finish and not beat any National driver that is running a mule engine and just stroking it long enough to get a National finish.

************************************************** ****************

[Wreckerboy]

Slightly OT - How about the Nissan 240SX with the 97.5mm wheelbase (GTL, item 5)? With a 3.44 inch wheel base it should have some amazing turn in capability, but I don't really see it being that stable in a straight line.

[Stan]

Sorry about not making time to reply again last night...life intrudes.

Yes, the letter from Mr Johnson is real. I am confident he has his view of the situation, but I will just comment that he appears unhappy that the "process" finally caught up to his car. I am also confident that as the process initiated first in IT is applied more universally in Prod we will get more letters from unhappy car owners. That's life.

As far as the rear discs in the Olds, there may have been a breakdown in communication between the ITAC and the CRB that led to it being misapplied to too many cars. Mistakes happen and can be corrected, but that's not a reason to go spastic over it. Likewise, if your favorite IT request got turned down again, contact the ITAC to get a reading on why, and then re-engage. If you haven't convinced the ITAC, odds are you haven't convinced the CRB.

The Prepared rules were closely patterned on the published World Challenge rules. Unfortunately, those rules differ sharply from what is actually used in the field, so over the next few months you can expect a lot of corrections and clarifications to ensure that as many cars are captured as practical.

Lastly, the IT wording in Prepared is simply an up-front acknowledgment that the CRB is not going to change either the IT specs or the B/DP specs to make IT cars more competitive. If you have a late model ITR prepared to the limits of the rules, the car should be very competitive in DP, where WCT and purpose built cars are limited to 250 crankshaft hp. If you bring your early 90's ITB car to BP...not so much. Likewise, if you consider National racers a bunch of wankers that you don't want to be seen with, fine. If, OTOH, you want to cross over and add some Nationals to your racing calendar, have at it. Your choice...have a good race!

Stan

[shwah]

Not going spastic over the Olds brakes, just noting that it does not fit the IT philosophy. I would expect this could be corrected pretty easily.

When I am ready to get serious about national racing, either IT will be national by that point (I'm not beating that drum, but I could see it happen), or I will be running an FP car. I think it might be fun to, as some say, 'wade into those murky waters'. Until then I may take in a DP race here and there with my weak ITB car. At least initially the fields will be low, and weak relative to the performance potential of the category, so there may well be someone to race against. Once the class gets up to speed I won't bother.

I am sure that part of the goal is to build numbers, but I honestly beleive there will be plenty of numbers with the 'real' prepared cars, as they get on track. There are several older WC cars for sale, and there are several guys with the $$ to play with that want to run a 'real' race car. I think they can also expect some crossover from other series. I know of one NASA USTCC car that is seriously looking at DP right now, due to disatisfaction with their current series management, and contingency sponsor issues on that side of the fence. It should be possible to move a GAC car into Prepared as well.

I wonder if VW will add DP to the list of eligible classes for thier contingency program?

[planet6racing]

OK, I guess I'm a little lost. What the hell is "Prepared?" Is that the new BP and DP categories? But I thought the P was for "Production," not "Prepared."

Basically, it'll be me against a bunch of cars built to World Challenge specs?

[erlrich]

OK, I guess I'm a little lost. What the hell is "Prepared?" Is that the new BP and DP categories? But I thought the P was for "Production," not "Prepared."

Basically, it'll be me against a bunch of cars built to World Challenge specs? [/b]

Bill - yes, and yes. See page 339 of your GCR. I think, as others have noted, that the only IT class that would have any chance of competing with the DP cars would be ITR. Still, how funny would it be to have a few of our top IT guys sitting on the grid at the Runoffs?

Peter, Stan - thanks for stopping by to check in on us from time to time. I'm fairly new at this and so don't have sufficient history to have developed the level of cynicism other have, so I probably appreciate your efforts a little more than I should . Still, please don't allow the 'glass half empty' crowd around here to deter you from jumping in from time to time.

That said, I do think the notice about IT cars running in prepared may have come across as a little patronizing. A+ for content, C- for presentation.

Slightly OT - How about the Nissan 240SX with the 97.5mm wheelbase (GTL, item 5)? With a 3.44 inch wheel base it should have some amazing turn in capability, but I don't really see it being that stable in a straight line. [/b]

It's all in the setup - corner weights have to be spot on The real problem I see is getting enough offset so the front wheels don't rub the rears in those hairpins.

[dickita15]

I'm fairly new at this and so don't have sufficient history to have developed the level of cynicism other have,
[/b]

don't worry it will come with time.

[JeffYoung]

After one scare, I'm pretty pleased with this Fastrac. And more pleased with STan and Peter coming here to post offer explanations.

Thanks guys.

[jhooten]

There's nothing magical about a National, so why pay the extra $$$? [/b]

One good reason, with the pending demise of the closest track to me and the next nearest being a 200 mile each way tow, I could do one double national weekend and have enough race credits to renew my national liscense instead of having to tow 400 miles 2,3,or 4 times to get enough regional races to renew. Ends up being cheaper in the long run.