September fastrack

[ScotMac]

>> I could see the "why is that car allowed to run in multiple IT run groups but not mine?"

** Please make 7" wheels legal for ITB to facilitate crossover at races where my brother-in-law and I share my MR2. (Whether this is a good idea or not has nothing to do with this allowance.)

K
[/b]

Please do not tie the relaxation of the wheel restrictions to the dual classing. It correctly stands on it's own, and should not be brought down by the issues associated w/ dual-classing.

Thanks, -Scot

[Bill Miller]

Well presented. The point though is that discussions about tweeners and dual classifications are suggested as a remedy ONLY for the first of your two situations. A VERY important distinction that should have been made this clearly earlier in the discussion.

If the problem is in the OTHER half of the weight/power math - if a car doesn't make the ponies required to get into the predicted range of ratios, that's a much more complicated issue. I am completely NOT a fan of trying to micromanage that part of the system by playing around with information re: what different engines "really make" with IT improvements. It's just way to susceptible to manipulation, inaccurate information, politics, and other manipulations.

K
[/b]

Kirk,

It's not just about making the ponies or not. The ITAC has already tweaked the subjective stuff for certain classes (which I think was a good thing). They've adjusted the FWD 'adder' for ITS and ITR. That kind of adjustment is EXACTLY what I was talking about when I was advocating a defined classification formula some five-odd years (or more) ago. The model should evolve, and constants refined, as more data become available (and unfortunately, some of that data will have to be based on actual performance information).

[Knestis]

Please do not tie the relaxation of the wheel restrictions to the dual classing. It correctly stands on it's own, and should not be brought down by the issues associated w/ dual-classing.

Thanks, -Scot
[/b]

Yeah, but my point with that illustration is that people are going to conflate issues like you just wouldn't believe.

Wheel widths are a consideration where A-to-B moves are concerned because the wheel rules ARE different in the two classes involved. As soon as dual classification is allowed (IF it is allowed), the next concern in line for some is going to be wheel size. We've already heard "I'd have to buy new wheels!" as the basis of arguments to NOT move cars from A to B - by owners of THOSE CARS. It's no stretch to imagine that different parties will logically follow with...

** "Moving my Borgward from ITA to ITB is a great idea BECAUSE I can use my stock 6" wheels"

** "Running 7" wheels is a good idea because I have them and I got moved from A to B"

** "We should NOT allow 7" wheels in B because those guys who just got re-classed from A will have an inherent advantage - they already have the wider ones and I have to buy them"

** Et cetera, et cetera. You get the picture? Everyone's trying to protect their little competitive patch of turf and if-then logic gets totally lost in the disingenuous cases to further particular interests...


...and Bill - if the tweaks can be applied to broad characteristics of the cars involved (FWD vs. RWD being a great example), then there's not so much risk there. The point at which those adjustments to the process get granular enough that there is a "mid '90s Toyota Celica" adjustment, a "Datsun 510" adjustment, and a "1500 cc Rabbit" adjustment (et al.), we've well and truly crossed the line to competition adjustments (bleah).

When we say, "Well, that generation of Cavaliers gain 35% power and 40% torque with IT improvements so let's make them weigh XX pounds more than they used to," we are making decisions based on OUTCOME measures - the results of building a race car - rather than on INPUTS like the mechanical attributes of the vehicle. That represents a huge departure from established practice in the IT category.

K

[mustanghammer]

good lord bill, chill out.

what do you suggest should've been done with the BMWs to slow them down in S?

how did i insult all the folks with tweener cars? all i said is that if they care so much about winning, they need to get a different car. you'll never please anyone, and if we change the entire philosophy of the class to appease a handfull of people at the risk of everyone else, that is not a good idea (especially considering the car will still be an underdog in the lower class following the same process).

actually there pal, i ran in IT exclusively for the last two years. the SM to IT thing is a COMPLETELY different issue than dual classification within a single category. good try though.
[/b]

Ummm let' see Travis I'll just sell off all my RX7's and the parts I have accumulated and buy something else.....ya that's ticket! Thanks buddy I was wondering what I was going to do with that pile of money I have. Since you're so smart tell me what to buy. And no, I'm not insulted at all. I like having other people tell me how to spend my money.

As far as Dual classifications in the same catagory we have been doing that in MiDiv for the last 3-4 years. It's called IT7/ITA and YES, sometimes the same car get ran in two different classes (if IT7 is grouped with SM) on the same day. Hell I have seen the same car run in ITA and EP in the same day, not to mention the SM bush-wackers that run IT on allot of Regional/National weekends. I can't say I have seen anything all that bad happen as a result. Unless you consider the additonal revenue to the region and the additional track time to the driver a bad thing.

Last I checked this CLUB RACING and I am a member - have been for 18 yrs. So what is wrong with making a change that will bring out a few more cars? Who is hurt by this? I have gotten IM's and seen postings from fellow tweeners that say they will come out dual classing or a move to ITB is made. Why not see if they are telling the truth. What is the cost?

Oh, and another thing, I can't speak to the number of active/inactive MR2's that there are but there are allot of RX7's out there. More than we see in out little corner of the world. So don't be so quick to kick dirt on us or marginalize our place in this club or our value as participants.

Insulted...no. Pissed off....getting there

[tnord]

Ummm let' see Travis I'll just sell off all my RX7's and the parts I have accumulated and buy something else.....ya that's ticket! Thanks buddy I was wondering what I was going to do with that pile of money I have. Since you're so smart tell me what to buy. And no, I'm not insulted at all. I like having other people tell me how to spend my money.
[/b]

well, a place to start would be the crx, integra, miata, nx2000, or maybe a civic. if you really want to win, just do what the others are winning with. i'm not sure how saying "go get what others are winning with" is telling you how to spend your money.

As far as Dual classifications in the same catagory we have been doing that in MiDiv for the last 3-4 years. It's called IT7/ITA and YES, sometimes the same car get ran in two different classes (if IT7 is grouped with SM) on the same day. Hell I have seen the same car run in ITA and EP in the same day, not to mention the SM bush-wackers that run IT on allot of Regional/National weekends. I can't say I have seen anything all that bad happen as a result. Unless you consider the additonal revenue to the region and the additional track time to the driver a bad thing.
[/b]

I've said IT7 should go away for a couple years now, pretty sure I've even told you this in person at some point. IT7 is a regional deal not recognized in the GCR (maybe it is, but i just looked and didn't see it), so it's not quite a valid comparison.

Last I checked this CLUB RACING and I am a member - have been for 18 yrs. So what is wrong with making a change that will bring out a few more cars? Who is hurt by this? I have gotten IM's and seen postings from fellow tweeners that say they will come out dual classing or a move to ITB is made. Why not see if they are telling the truth. What is the cost?
[/b]

go back and read kirk's posts, he's a better wordsmith than i am.

Oh, and another thing, I can't speak to the number of active/inactive MR2's that there are but there are allot of RX7's out there. More than we see in out little corner of the world. So don't be so quick to kick dirt on us or marginalize our place in this club or our value as participants.
[/b]

don't take it so personally scott. it's nothing more than trying to create the greatest good for the greatest number of people. i think a dual classification system potentially benefits a small handfull of people relative to risks it places on the entire IT class (and by extension, the club as a whole since IT entries represent a big percentage of entry fees). that's it, nothing more.

[Bill Miller]

i'm not sure how saying "go get what others are winning with" is telling you how to spend your money. [/b]

Do you even read what you type?

I've said IT7 should go away for a couple years now, pretty sure I've even told you this in person at some point. IT7 is a regional deal not recognized in the GCR (maybe it is, but i just looked and didn't see it), so it's not quite a valid comparison. [/b]

And exactly why should it 'go away'? IT7 may not be listed in the GCR, but it has expanded to other regions. IIRC, the WDCR introduced it last year, even though they already had Spec7. And just as a point of reference, it was IT7 that really got me to thinking about how screwed up the classification process used to be. The fact that the RX7 is so popular that they were able to create IT7 is a testament to just how many people race those cars. But you'd rather see them 'go away'.

go back and read kirk's posts, he can actually defend his position.[/b]

Fixed that for you.

don't take it so personally scott. it's nothing more than trying to create the greatest good for the greatest number of people. i think a dual classification system potentially benefits a small handfull of people relative to risks it places on the entire IT class (and by extension, the club as a whole since IT entries represent a big percentage of entry fees). that's it, nothing more. [/b]

Please see first comment in this post. On one hand you say you want the IT7 folks to 'go away', and on the other, you say you're worried about IT entries. And I'll ask you this again, what are the risks dual-classification places on IT?

The simple fact that IT7 came about, continues to bring people to the track, and has expanded to other Regions is pretty solid evidence that dual-classification increases the number of entries. One of the only downsides I can see, is that it has reduced the size of the ITA fields.


Kirk,

We're on the same page. The tweaks should be made on the mechanical attributes of the vehicles, but I like the fact that the ITAC recognized that those tweaks may carry more or less weight, based on the overall characteristics of the class. Others have pointed it out as well, FWD vs. RWD becomes less of a differentiating factor when you're talking about lower hp cars. I suspect something like Carb vs. EFI is another example.

[tnord]

you're so smart bill. i wish i could be like you.

have fun guys.

WWHHHEEEEEEE!

[Andy Bettencourt]

Bill doesn't drive this home enough but IT7 / Spec7 popped up because the lack of a cohesive classification process resulting in some serious overdogs in ITA - sending the 12A to the back. Plenty were built so they created a home for themselves. The SCCA failed these guys.

So, now the 12A is, on paper, in the same league as the rest of the class but min weight is uber-hard to come by. A new build yes, maybe current builds, no. And now that I think about it more, maybe we ought to be leaning more toward guys who did 'reasonable' builds in the past - of which there are what, a hundred 12A's out there? It's tough to go backward once your car is built.

Here is my question: Will the 12A in ITB bring guys back from IT7 / Spec 7? I am not sure. They are settled in and presumaby happy - now they have to ballast way up and buy a couple sets of new wheels - all to go slower. Hmmm.

For me, it all comes back to defining a tweener, deciding to reclass it at a higher weight, and having the stones to tell people that their car is 'correctly classified' when they ask for a re-class because they can't win locally. Kirk's post about what people will request after something like this happens, is SPOT on.

[tnord]

Bill doesn't drive this home enough but IT7 / Spec7 popped up because the lack of a cohesive classification process resulting in some serious overdogs in ITA - sending the 12A to the back. Plenty were built so they created a home for themselves. The SCCA failed these guys.
[/b]

i'm aware. some of the same reasons SM came about. and as you said, now that everything has been adjusted, they should be just fine in A.

[lateapex911]

Bill doesn't drive this home enough but IT7 / Spec7 popped up because the lack of a cohesive classification process resulting in some serious overdogs in ITA - sending the 12A to the back. Plenty were built so they created a home for themselves. The SCCA failed these guys.[/b]

Right, the once popular, and some said dominant, 12A was the poster child in my mind for how the classification process was a one way street, and mistakes could only be rectified by making more mistakes. In other words, the CRX got classed way light, so other cars were added to compete with it. Which hammered the rest of the class down the running order even harder.

So, now the 12A is, on paper, in the same league as the rest of the class but min weight is uber-hard to come by. A new build yes, maybe current builds, no. And now that I think about it more, maybe we ought to be leaning more toward guys who did 'reasonable' builds in the past - of which there are what, a hundred 12A's out there? It's tough to go backward once your car is built.
[/b]

On paper given the current constraints of the process, but I would argue the process still fails the car as the real characteristics of the mechanical package are not being fully compesated for. (Huge lack of torque of the rotary, vis a vis the other cars in the class. To the tune of 20 or more percent in many cases). Your point about already built cars needing complete rebuilding to hit new targets is a good one.

Here is my question: Will the 12A in ITB bring guys back from IT7 / Spec 7? I am not sure. They are settled in and presumaby happy - now they have to ballast way up and buy a couple sets of new wheels - all to go slower. Hmmm.
[/b]

One thing that has been mentioned, but rather obliquely is the regional naure of our racing. Things are wildly different over the vast expanses. If we decide to, say, move the RX-7 down to ITB, (using the current process assumptions and methods) I suggest it will make zero impact in areas where the IT7 class is doing well. Why would these guys want to move? More expense, more testing, more hassles with a new package, and now they get to be mid pack in ITB? Thats not going to happen. The regions have freedom to make/maintain classes, and they will do just that to protect their bottom line.

And in Nor Cal? Same answer, but for different reasons...the RX-7 (5 of them last April as I recall) is nearly the only ITA car raced out there, except for the double or triple dipping SMs, and I think (Josh help me out here) that when I visited, there wasn't one ITA Miata out of the over 50 that raced in ITA. And ITB was 3 cars. So here we have another region where the RX-7 guys are kind of playing by themselves.

In the NE, we have the "Mazda Cup" an informally run perpetual trophy that gets handed to the best finishing RX-7 driver in ITA in each race. I doubt that, again, if the process puts the car in B in the same manner as in A, we would see a wholesale buying of wheels and lead weight and testing, just to run for a theoretical mid pack ITB finish. I bet the Region would be approached with an IT7 proposal. Just a guess, but the point is that when we discuss large global changes we have to consider what really happens out in the real world.

Thats why DC is a tempting concept, because it lets the market decide, and the answer can be different where the market is different.

[JoshS]

And in Nor Cal? Same answer, but for different reasons...the RX-7 (5 of them last April as I recall) is nearly the only ITA car raced out there, except for the double or triple dipping SMs, and I think (Josh help me out here) that when I visited, there wasn't one ITA Miata out of the over 50 that raced in ITA. And ITB was 3 cars. So here we have another region where the RX-7 guys are kind of playing by themselves.
[/b]

At our double regional on Labor Day weekend, we had 45 ITA entries. 10 RX-7s, 1 Scirocco, and 34 SMs. No true ITA Miatas that I know of. Many of the RX-7s are rentals from a single shop. And just 4 ITB cars (two Volvos, a BMW, and a Honda).

BTW, one of those RX-7s is very quick and routinely wins ITA -- although my ITR car isn't done by any means, he is a very experienced driver and he and I are about the same speed.

[Rabbit07]

There is something that troubles me about having an early RX-7 with lots of ballast for ITB. The front Spindles are a bit fragile to begin with and then you task them with more weight! Those poor little wheel bearings. Just my $.02

Just ten more days and we will have a new fast track to talk about for 3 wks!

[dickita15]

There is something that troubles me about having an early RX-7 with lots of ballast for ITB. The front Spindles are a bit fragile to begin with and then you task them with more weight! Those poor little wheel bearings. Just my $.02
[/b]

We have had a lot less spindle and bearing problem since we upgraded our inspection process to make sure they are true. We started taking more care due to the expense of fabricating custom struts and wanted to make sure we started with a good spindle.

Many of the current A Rx’s are within 100 pounds of the ITB weight.

Smaller wheels may help bearing life.

[ddewhurst]

***Bill doesn't drive this home enough but IT7 / Spec7 popped up because the lack of a cohesive classification process resulting in some serious overdogs in ITA - sending the 12A to the back. Plenty were built so they created a home for themselves. The SCCA failed these guys.***

Andy, you may include ITA/7 (one in the same) in your above statement but please don't include Spec-RX7 because including Spec-RX7 in your statement would not be factual.

The three FACTUAL things used to develop Spec-RX7 were:

1. A list of things that keep people from racing.

2. A list of things that would appeal to people who were not already racing.

3. A series that would somehow avoid the increasing cost and constant change found in Improved Touring.

Please continue, remembering that some of us will catch the BS.

[Andy Bettencourt]

***Bill doesn't drive this home enough but IT7 / Spec7 popped up because the lack of a cohesive classification process resulting in some serious overdogs in ITA - sending the 12A to the back. Plenty were built so they created a home for themselves. The SCCA failed these guys.***

Andy, you may include ITA/7 (one in the same) in your above statement but please don't include Spec-RX7 because including Spec-RX7 in your statement would not be factual.

The three FACTUAL things used to develop Spec-RX7 were:

1. A list of things that keep people from racing.

2. A list of things that would appeal to people who were not already racing.

3. A serious that would somehow avoid the increasing cost and constant change found in Improved Touring.

Please continue, remembering that some of us will catch the BS.


[/b]

Dave,

Pllease. If the RX-7 was as competitive in ITA now as it was 'then', Spec 7 wouldn't exist. And if it did, it would still only be a MARRS class. It's just like SSM. Only exists in our little patch.

[Gregg]

Do you even read what you type?
And exactly why should it 'go away'? IT7 may not be listed in the GCR, but it has expanded to other regions. IIRC, the WDCR introduced it last year, even though they already had Spec7.
[/b]

Bill-
Just for a point of reference, we had six IT7 cars take the green flag at what is arguably the DC Region's biggest regional of the year, the Labor Day Double, where we had ~340 entrants. That's compared to 28 registered ITA cars. We have averaged 6.5 cars since the class's inception at the beginning of the 2006 season. That's the same 6.5 avg. that we had in 2005 and most of the drivers were not around back then. It's not a case of old cars coming out of mothballs. As the person on whose watch it was as ITA rep (and original IT7 rep) when the class was created, it was, in the words of the driver who submitted the proposal, created so that "RX-7 drivers could win trophies too." I can understand that to an extent, but as opposed to many of the IT7 cars I've seen in the south east, most of ours are not nearly as well prepped or maintained as some of the front-running ITA cars, and the frontrunners are constantly running slower lap times than the Spec7 folks with whom they currently share a run group. And that's fine for them. They're having close racing, but I believe the split has perpetuated the notion that you can be competitive when you run a "junk yard" motor (as I know a few that have been), you can run Toyos vs. Hoosiers (like the front-running ITA cars do)

At the end of the day, it's not always the "process" that dooms these cars and drivers. Many times it's the wants, desires, pocketbook, and on-track skill of the entrants that relegates a car or cars to also-ran/mid-pack status when not running these "splinter" groups. These drivers are having fun, but how many 6-car classes can/should a region support. My local MR2 drivers (of which I have about 5) have been so emboldened by the IT7 situation that they've discussed bringing a proposal for IT-MR2 to our committee. I want these guys to feel like they're getting everything out of the effort they're putting into the car, but soon we'll start looking like another organization I know of, where I always used to chuckle at the number of tropies handed out in 1-car classes.

[Gregg]

Dave,

Pllease. If the RX-7 was as competitive in ITA now as it was 'then', Spec 7 wouldn't exist. And if it did, it would still only be a MARRS class. It's just like SSM. Only exists in our little patch.
[/b]

Andy-

At least as far as the DC Region is concerned, Spec-7 really has nothing to do with IT in the least. It has to do with very inexpensive racing, where full interiors, bolt-in cages, no fuel cell, etc. are the rule, not just the norm. Here are the rules for your perusal:

http://www.wdcr-scca.org/marrs/2006SRX7.pdf

I think you'd be very hard pressed to see an ITA RX-7 converted to Spec-7.

[Bill Miller]

Greg,

I mentioned WDCR introducing IT7 as an example of the increasing popularity (or probably, the increasing disillusionment of the ITA RX7 drivers) of getting the RX7s out of ITA. And let's not get into creating classes for 6 or 7 cars.

It was not that long ago that Spec7 was a very well subscribed class. I remember a few years ago 50 cars entered in MARRS I. And I agree, there's a big gap between a Spec7 and an ITA RX7 (at least based on the WDCR version of Spec7).

Andy,

You may have hit on something there. Things may have gone on for too long, that the IT7 folks may have no interest in running in ITB. But that doesn't do anything for the Regions that don't have IT7.

Travis,

I really didn't think you were such a quitter. I also thought you had a little more conviction in your position. Guess I was wrong on both counts.

[ddewhurst]

***Pllease. If the RX-7 was as competitive in ITA now as it was 'then', Spec 7 wouldn't exist. And if it did, it would still only be a MARRS class. It's just like SSM. Only exists in our little patch.***

Andy, are you implying that Spec-RX7 started in the DC Region? By typing a sentence like this ^ your showing what you don't know about Spec-RX7. If you are saying that the Spec-RX7 class started in the DC Region then I must tell you that your talking out of your a$$. Oh, & I said that with a

Greg, if you saying that Spec-RX7 cars run as fast as your IT7 cars the IT7 must be a bunch..............you know what. Unless you people have basterdized the Spec-RX7 rules.

[seckerich]

With all the realignment of the IT rules in the past few years we came real close to ending IT7 in the southeast this year. I doubt it will survive next year. These classes that exist to give small groups a trophy are fast loosing favor. Look at the classes at the ARRC and see how many are just about the same except for the letters on the car. How many "formula whatever" can you think up for no longer competitive cars. When it gets down to a few cars it needs to go away. Especially if there is another class they can reasonably run. Cold hearted but true.