August Fastrack out!

[lateapex911]

And (for the bazillionth time), this new allowance doesn't give us anything that we don't essentially already have. It just gives it to more people for less money. I am now more likely to commit to a really tuneable option to replace my $90 off-the-shelf chip, because I can do it for less dough and have more control over my destiny than was the case under the old rule.

K [/b]

This...this exact quote, is, in my eyes, the intent of the new wording.

Kirk has nicely summed up here what drives cost (time, money, or a combination of both) up: Popularity. If nobody really cares to go as fast as possible, the costs reflect that. As soon as two people with the resources decide that THIS class is worth winning on a large scale, kiss bargain basement racing goodby. No rule, in multi marque racing, can effectively police spending, but this one will help to offer less expensive options, and does so without moving the performance target.

[dj10]

How long will this take for the BOD to approve or turn down this rule? Do the wait until the last minute (12/31/07)? Just wondering.

[JeffYoung]

and of course, in SM, costs are in control, and there is no rules creep....not trying to be a smart ass, but I would say that:

1. $8k Sunbelt/Rebello/Race Engineering motors in SM is not a good sign.

2. The $2k clutches in SM was not a good trend (fixed, I understand).

3. The threads about the legality of what you GET for $8k for your motor was not a good sign.

Etc., etc., etc.

Honestly, given the car counts in IT I've seen this year, I'd tell a new racer to start with an ITA or B car. Hell, you can run decently to start with in a $5 to $10k ITS RX7 or Z car.

There have been rules changes in IT for sure since I started racing in 2003, but I still think the basic things that make IT, IT, have not changed:

1. No real modifications to motor or intake system.

2. Suspension must remain stock with bushings, springs and shocks/struts free.

4. Brakes remain stock, with pads (define pad! lol) free.

5. Body remains stock.

Pretty simple minded I know, but to me those are the core values of IT that make IT what it is, and have not been touched in the lasted round of rule modification.

I do think a cooling off period where we let the changes that have been made sink in for a few years is a good idea to evaluate them, and see where things stand.

[tnord]

and of course, in SM, costs are in control, and there is no rules creep....not trying to be a smart ass, but I would say that:

1. $8k Sunbelt/Rebello/Race Engineering motors in SM is not a good sign.
[/b]

costs are basically peaked at 30k at least. for a comparable IT build, you'd be in another 10k by my estimation. and btw, SM motors are more like 6-7k depending on where you get it and what year you're buying.

2. The $2k clutches in SM was not a good trend (fixed, I understand).
[/b]

you mean the $1200 clutches that are perfectly legal for IT?

3. The threads about the legality of what you GET for $8k for your motor was not a good sign.
[/b]

this isn't completely rumor and speculation, but i can't do much to substantiate this claim either, but i think the vast majority of the cheater stuff was coming from one builder in particular. people have for the most part figured this out now.

Honestly, given the car counts in IT I've seen this year, I'd tell a new racer to start with an ITA or B car. Hell, you can run decently to start with in a $5 to $10k ITS RX7 or Z car.
[/b]

if you're a great driver yeah, you can be respectable in a $10,000 IT car. but there's some underlying reasons for this...

1) you might be in a division without much competition
2) the others in your region still have a long way to go on car prep and/or driver

make no mistake about it, a $30,000 ITA car driven decently will destroy a $10,000 ITA car driven quite well. by opening up the ECU rule and making it more accessible, the avg prep level of IT cars just went up, making it more expensive to maintain the current finishing position for all but those who have already spent the coin on a standalone-in-stock-housing.

[BlueStreak]

ITAC did exactly what its membership asked it to do. What more do you expect?

I'm in a CIS car, so "in the box" or not means zip to me. I don't see this change having any impact on the finishing order in any event that I will be running.

I do have to wonder how many of the supportive letters came from people sponsored by dyno owners

If it opens up some chasm someone didn't forsee, there will be enough screaming that it will get changed back to the "in the box" rule or ????

I, for one, appreciate the efforts being made by ITAC.

If you're all freaked out over this to the point that you decide you are going to drop another 10k in your budget to stay up front, perhaps you might better serve your racing aspirations by selling everything and purchasing a part time ride in a "pro" series for a bit.

Eddie

[GKR_17]

Now to build a competitive car I will also have to buy a Motec... ...I have never driven an IT car[/b]

That is no different now than with the old rule. The top cars had Motec already, now you have more options to accomplish the same result, if you were to run an IT car that is...

[trhoppe]

I'm 100% for the new rule, and I can't even benefit since both my old car and half-built new car are limited by non-electronic CIS injectors. The new rule levels the playing field for all of the EFI cars while allowing the addition of the two simple sensors in order to permit the most inexpensive solutions (e.g., Mega-squirt). The new rule also makes it much easier to run a newer car that would otherwise go into limp mode just from the required (not just allowed) mods. It's good for the class, but there's no good reason to make the switch on a well-running IT car just because it's allowed. The cars that will need it are the newer cars with OBD issues.[/b]

Nicely said! This just lets everyone spend LESS to get where some people are right now.

-Tom

[JeffYoung]

Travis, at least here in the SEDiv where SM is very competitive, I sense more frustration among SM drivers than the IT crowd. We (teh IT crowd) are pretty happy with the state of things. We've got big fields, good competition, and the Speedsources/Bimmerworlds/Sunbelts have checked out, for now at least. Not to knock them, but they did some good things.

But right now, I would say you don't need a pro built car or huge dollars to run up front in ITS or A. A well built car with some hard work on your part will get you there.

I don't think that is true in SM right now here in the SE. You must have a pro set up and pro powered car to finish up front. And you have to be part of the clique that gets the best motors and parts. Weird, but true I think.

For me anyway, the changes the ITAC have made to IT have resulted in immediate improvements in car counts and compeittion in my class. So, I guess I am biased in that regard, but right now ITS in the SEDiv is a hell of a lot of fun.

[tnord]

Travis, at least here in the SEDiv where SM is very competitive, I sense more frustration among SM drivers than the IT crowd. We (teh IT crowd) are pretty happy with the state of things. We've got big fields, good competition, and the Speedsources/Bimmerworlds/Sunbelts have checked out, for now at least. Not to knock them, but they did some good things.

But right now, I would say you don't need a pro built car or huge dollars to run up front in ITS or A. A well built car with some hard work on your part will get you there.

I don't think that is true in SM right now here in the SE. You must have a pro set up and pro powered car to finish up front. And you have to be part of the clique that gets the best motors and parts. Weird, but true I think.

For me anyway, the changes the ITAC have made to IT have resulted in immediate improvements in car counts and compeittion in my class. So, I guess I am biased in that regard, but right now ITS in the SEDiv is a hell of a lot of fun.
[/b]

Jeff, am i reading this right? are you saying that SE IT cars aren't really running pro motors anymore and are willingly leaving power on the table? this would go a ways to explain why many of the SM guys can beat on up a good chunk of IT cars.

same is true in MiDiv. if you want to beat Stretch/Drago/Reynolds/James/Daniels/etc....yeah, you better bring a big weapon. and same as in the SE, just writing the check to the builders doesn't mean you're going to get the same power as the 'in' crowd.

what you're describing to me sounds just like SM was THE YEAR BEFORE IT WENT NATIONAL. maybe i've been ruined hanging around SM for 4 years now, and that my assumption of how many people will take advantage of the ECU allowances are too high. but to let this ECU thread overlap into the national discussion, you can bet the last dollar of your 401k that if you guys let IT go national, you absolutely will have to spend the thousands on ECU upgrades to compete.

[JeffYoung]

Uh, no, still pro motors in IT (although I don't have one...lol). It's just that instead of people buying $40 and $50k ITS cars turnkey, most folks are building their own stuff with a pro motor of some sort (either pro motor with their ecu work, or some combination of parts). But the true "Bimmerworld" or "Sunbelt" ITS cars are gone.

SM has not changed here even with the advent of SM national racing. There are 4-5 guys who run on the regional level, and you have to have a certain plate full of parts to get to that part of the field. The other 20-25 guys don't have a chance.

EDIT -- for what it is worth, I am opposed to IT going national. That is another element of "ITness" that I don't think should be touched.

[SPiFF]

YAY!!! A little further then I thought the IT long beards would take it, but it is about time the ECU rules got cleaned up!

For me, OBD2 Honda, this saves me money. The best part is now the rules are even for all (ECU-ed) cars. This will also make it possible for future cars which will need ECUs to be replaced in to order to race them with all the "safety" stuff on new cars.

[Renaultfool]

I believe that the ITAC did a great job on this rule!
It will allow for a lot of new cars to join the IT ranks.
Lets remember guys, they don't make Pintos and Rabbits anymore. The rules written when these were the main cars in IT just don't address the needs of the more modern car with it's more sophisticated electronics.
There are many less expensive ways to correct the mixture and timing on many current cars that were not allowed by the old rules, or made prohibitively expensive by the old rules.
Sounds to me like the "Haves" just don't want us poor riffraff with our junk yard conversions up there racing with their $40,000 toys. Too bad, more competitive cars make for more fun at the track.
I for one will still run my stock ECU with a couple resistors in the temp circuits. Good enough for me.
Carl "The Renaultfool"

[BlueStreak]

Lets remember guys, they don't make Pintos and Rabbits anymore.
[/b]

Actually:
http://www.vw.com/rabbit/en/us/

But I do get, and even as a rabbit driver, agree, with your point.

[AntonioGG]

If the status quo wasn't acceptable by most people (and I agree it seemed to be the worst out of the 3 choices), why weren't the choices to go back to stock ECU w/ reflash or full open? That would have been more interesting to see.

As an outsider sitting in the bleachers a few rows behind Travis, I agree with his viewpoint completely.

Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars.

Do you guys know what I think? Look at the cage rules, fire system rules, and now ECU rules...I smell a big realignment of all the classes coming our way. I don't think it's a bad thing either. Pardon me the use of a cliche, but to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs.

[seckerich]

"Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars."



Do you really believe a car classed in IT should have a rev limiter? Do you also believe it should go into limp mode after sensors that are mandated to be removed make it undrivable. Think about your statement for a minute--sound stupid yet?? This has nothing to do with "the car you decide to race" if it can not be made to run under the rules. Somehow we got alternate carbs in the early days of IT for some cars--wonder why?? The stock unit was unable to be tuned. See anything similar yet.

I still think the rule needs some rewording to severely limit the "new wiring" to the allowed sensors. That will be the next big snafu. Needs to state that the stock harness must remain unaltered except to replace connectors and the wires to the map and tps must be seperate and serve no other purpose.

[tnord]

Do you really believe a car classed in IT should have a rev limiter? Do you also believe it should go into limp mode after sensors that are mandated to be removed make it undrivable.
[/b]

which can be overcome with a true chip/reflash/daughterboard allowance (and btw, THIS was the original intent of the current rule). no need for completely open ECU rules.

[AntonioGG]

"Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars."
Do you really believe a car classed in IT should have a rev limiter? Do you also believe it should go into limp mode after sensors that are mandated to be removed make it undrivable. Think about your statement for a minute--sound stupid yet?? This has nothing to do with "the car you decide to race" if it can not be made to run under the rules. Somehow we got alternate carbs in the early days of IT for some cars--wonder why?? The stock unit was unable to be tuned. See anything similar yet.


[/b]

Thanks for calling my post "stupid" Steve.

I'll return the favor....do you really think I was saying an IT car should race with a rev limiter. Now does your post sound stupid? :P

[JoshS]

If the status quo wasn't acceptable by most people (and I agree it seemed to be the worst out of the 3 choices), why weren't the choices to go back to stock ECU w/ reflash or full open? That would have been more interesting to see.[/b]

Those were the choices ... and it was interesting.

[shwah]

Antonio,

I think that the items you mention will make it easier to create a logical development path through different prep levels/classes, without an earth shattering realignment.

[gran racing]

I did the smart thing and decided not to begin reading this thread until I got back to work from vacation. LOL!

Unfortunately I do not feel that moving back to all stock ECUs is feasible, or even best for the category in the long-term. The existing “stuff what you can into the OEM box” has so many flaws to it. There have been several comments made throughout the course of this thread, which I simply don’t agree with and make me wonder if they are just reactions. One argument is that it changes the performance envelope. As a few have stated, these modifications are already possible for people that have the funds. This rule change makes it more attainable for people that do not have the money to go out and buy MoTec or other similar units.

I have fought hard to keep IT an entry level class for years. I believe that the fight is lost...[/b]

This rule is what makes you think that IT is no longer an entry level class? Really??? What truly makes IT an entry level class is that people can easily go purchase a safe and reliable racecar for under $5,000, then go out on the track and have fun racing. Heck, this Spring a friend and I purchased a fairly new trailer with a nice ex-SSC Neon for $2,000 total that could run somewhere near the middle of an ITA field. Now I realize this is not the norm, but getting into IT certainly is entry level with or without the ECU rule change.

I really could care less about the added money as much as I care about the added time it adds to a build for the average racer and those are the ones we loose when mid-pack becomes a couple laps down rather than just a straight away.[/b]

Well, if a person is mid-pack, won’t they still have 1/2 of the field to play with even if they are further back from the leaders? I can next hear someone saying they’d lose track time, but that wouldn’t be the case because if the leaders are finishing races faster, regions would in-turn increase the race lengths. I do not believe the average person needs to add ECU work into their build process just because it would become more accessable.

I am curious to hear what your definition of the “average racer” is, especially since many people probably have different perceptions. Related to that, what level of a car build do you think these people complete?

------------
Many posts ago, Jake mentioned an aspect that plays a vital role in IT - diminishing returns. This is such an important factor. This also ties directly into what Kirk said about directing resources to various areas.