Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 62

Thread: Wings and things...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alpharetta, GA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    What's the collective thought regarding petitioning the ITAC to allow IT cars to run rear spoilers? It makes no sense to me that we're allowed to run big old airdams and splitters and yet the cars can't balance the aero with a wing/spoiler on the rear trunk lid.

    Here is an excerpt from the Honda Challenge rules:

    2) Any rear deck spoiler that attaches to bodywork is allowed.
    Rear spoiler may not protrude beyond the overall outline of the body when viewed
    perpendicular to the ground above the part.

    Apparently this simple rule does the trick. I would like to hear everyone's opinion on allowing this in IT. I don't see how this falls outside the intent of the class and these parts are obviously very functional while being CHEAP (please note the Scotsman highlighting the most important part here)

    Thoughts?

    Cheers,
    ...Colin

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    hampden,ma.usa
    Posts
    3,083

    Default

    I remember hearing a story about a competitor calling the chief steward about the size limit on a rear wing in the prototype class for the Nelson Longest Day, the chief steward paused for a second and said well the bridge is 11’…..
    dick patullo
    ner scca IT7 Rx7

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default


    [/b]
    OK, well, that's that...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Arlington, VA USA
    Posts
    515

    Default

    Colin-

    Who needs a rear wing when we can just change the pick-up points for our rear suspension and get better mechanical grip? :P
    Gregg Ginsberg
    '96 Civic EX -- MARRS ITA #72
    WDCR-SCCA Rookie of the Year 2003
    MARRS ITA/T3 Drivers rep

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Eh. The thought has occurred to me but we are ALLOWED to put on a splitter, not REQUIRED to do so. If a car gets all oversteery-scary at speed, take it off. Cost/benefit math isn't clear, to my mind.

    K

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,489

    Default

    how would this make IT a better class?
    Travis Nordwald
    1996 ITA Miata
    KC Region

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Posts
    1,599

    Default

    Cheap speed. I know a guy, former IT competitor, took his ITS BMW over to NASA, bolted on one of those cheap AEM or whatever spoilers offa eBay, and got a second or two at Mid-O.

    Then again, is this really adding something we need to the class? Are we not going fast enough? I can't say that I'm feeling left out...
    Vaughan Scott
    Detroit Region #280052
    '79 924 #77 ITB
    #65 Hidari Firefly P2
    www.vaughanscott.com

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alpharetta, GA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    My reasoning:

    1. It's a standard "race car" part that we're not running.
    2. It's cheap.
    3. It makes you go faster round the track. (proven)
    4. It can make the car handle better.
    5. It makes the cars look better/worse/more like real race cars.
    6. It can help attract a younger/tuner type to the class.

    Honda Challenge has basically stolen a LOT of IT's thunder with the very active tuner crowd. The rules are very similar to IT so why are people running HC and not IT? Engine swaps, spoilers etc. It all adds up to the perception that in HC you get to build a "cool" car and in IT you build an old showroom stock car. Personally I want to see the class grow.

    Does that make the class better? I think so, but I don't make the decisions

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    I don't know much about REAL aero stuff but I bet you a set of tires that if this sort of thing is allowed, it will get REAL expensive. I bet you don't just bolt it on and nail the settings. Testing, testing and more testing. Then equipment changes/upgrades to compensate for the 'new' dynamics you have created. The guys with the know-how and the bucks will make these things sing and the average guy may even slow his car down. Seperation between the haves and the have-nots is what I see.

    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    cromwell ct
    Posts
    746

    Default

    Pimped out ideeea playa!! The Z has no Butt so it would look better. I'm writing my letter.....I'm also goin' for DUBS, Boomin' Systems, those windshield washer light up things, and Fart Cans. IT is gonna be tight yo'

    Bro
    Rob Breault
    BMW 328is #36
    2008 Driving Impressions Pro-ITA Champion
    2008 NARRC DP Champion
    2009 NARRC ITR Champion
    2009 Team DI Pro-ITR Champion

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    MD, US
    Posts
    1,333

    Default



    I dont see how it can help in some cases, FWD I think it would do more harm then good, and what if they show up with this




    sorry couldnt resist.
    --
    James Brostek
    MARRS #28 ITB Golf
    PMF Motorsports
    Racing and OEM parts from Bildon Motorsport, Hoosier Tires from Radial Tires

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Arlington, VA USA
    Posts
    515

    Default

    Honda Challenge has basically stolen a LOT of IT's thunder with the very active tuner crowd. The rules are very similar to IT so why are people running HC and not IT? Engine swaps, spoilers etc. It all adds up to the perception that in HC you get to build a "cool" car and in IT you build an old showroom stock car. Personally I want to see the class grow.
    [/b]
    Colin-

    Not sure what part of the country you live in but I'd suggest that you take a look at NASA Mid-Atlantic's HC participation numbers every year since HC was created in 2002 and tell me if it's really stolen a LOT of IT's thunder. I can guarantee that the MARRS series has picked up and maintained far more IT cars than ECHC. In fact, I think you'll find that most of the IT cars that originally filled the non-H1 ranks (and made up the majority of the entries) have found their way back to IT and have left the series. Things may be different on the west coast, but you'll find only small pockets around the rest of the country.

    As for your other arguments:

    1. I think we can find many a race car where it isn't a standard part.
    2. It's cheap if you don't have to engineer a custom mount for your car, because until you put the car in a windtunnel you'll never know if the cheap stantions that you get off ebay are the right height for your car or if they position the wing in a place where it makes the wing very ineffective
    3. If angled incorrectly, it can make you much, much slower (proven)
    4. If angled incorrectly, it can make your car handle much, much worse (proven)
    5. My car has numbers on the side, is wrinkled and has a crappy paint job--therefore it already looks like a race car.
    6. Inexpensive racing can keep drivers in a class. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find HC drivers who stick it out for more than a year. In addition, most of them have come up thru NASA's HPDE ranks. Hopefully our PDX programs will have the same effect.


    Gregg Ginsberg
    '96 Civic EX -- MARRS ITA #72
    WDCR-SCCA Rookie of the Year 2003
    MARRS ITA/T3 Drivers rep

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alpharetta, GA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    All excellent points. So I have to ask this...

    Why then are airdams and splitters allowed? Every point made so far, while 100% valid, can be applied to airdam/splitters also. If the IT ruleset deems them allowable then the precedent is already set and there is no reason why a rear spoiler allowance would be any different.

    Andy, 5 degree wing angle is the sweet spot on a Miata

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Basking Ridge, NJ, USA
    Posts
    267

    Default

    I think the allowance of wings has the potential to get pricy but then again it could be a great recruiting tool for the tuner crowd. I swear the two most common things i hear when i tell people i race is.. how fast do you go?? and, do you drive a car with like a big wing and decals and stuff??

    I for one choose IT soley because it is what i considered to be a "tuner" class, meaning that i could choose which parts and which brands to run on my car. -personalize it in a way, as opposed to a spec class where there is a lot less fun to have under the hood.

    the "tuner crowd" has the same mentality, and there are a lot of potential racers who just need to get hooked. Personally when i made it out to the track the first time and saw the flashy cars flying around i needed to get a piece of it. Younger car enthusiasts these days place a very heavy weight on appearance especially after having watched the fast and the furious trilogy 100 times over. Where i dont think we should have quadruple deck 10 foot superstructures on the backs of our cars, I think we should consider that there might be something to gain from allowing something in the arena of a spoiler, canard, carbon fiber accent, or otherwise.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Why then are airdams and splitters allowed?[/b]
    Adding *any* aerodynamic downforce results in *significant* increase in expense. Proven.

    Splitters were never "allowed" in IT; show me where they're explicitly addressed? We had this conversation on this forum a year or so ago, but splitters showing up in I.T. were as a result of the evolution of cars in the 70s and 80s from those with detached metal bumpers to those in the 90s incorporating integral bumper covers. Within the confines of your typical IT-legal car back when the rules were written, splitters were virtually impossible to make (and not thought of; I don't think I saw one on a pro race car until maybe early 90s in WTCC or BTCC?).

    Enter the integral bumper cover and now you've scads of horizontal space to mess with behind the vertical nose, coupled to graphic examples in Pro racing to emulate and - voila! - splitters show up in Improved Touring.

    Besides, adding a rear wing to a street car is just simply gay. Or ricer, though in some cases I fail to understand the differences...

    And what of the FWD disadvantage? Adding a rear wing to a FWD car is PAINFUL, especially if you can't install the mega-buck remote reservoir shocks you're going to need to control the springs you're going to need to setup the car stiff enough that you're going to need to take advantage of the wing.

    However, I can be convinced: I propose that we allow unlimited wings in Improved Touring, with an automatic 10% weight penalty. That should even it out. Maybe.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Colchester, CT, USA
    Posts
    2,120

    Default

    More speed = more $$$

    More brakes, more tires, etc...........


    Just becasue some mistakes were made when setting up the rules years ago doesn't mean we should continue with the trend.

    - Anybody up for using SIRs for adjustments??
    - What GM product was allowed to upgrade to rear discs? Should everyone be allowed better brakes?? It would make us faster........And those big red calipers would certainly be cool looking!!

    OK, so I can't think of any other examples off the top of my head, but you get the point.

    I've seen ITE cars with wings. And SPU and SPO cars. Maybe you should make your Miata an SPU car??

    Jeff L

    ITA Miata



    2010 NARRC Champion

    2007 NERRC Championship, 2nd place
    2008 NARRC Championship, 2nd place
    2009 NARRC Championship, 2nd place

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Lilburn, GA
    Posts
    597

    Default

    I'm not sure I'd call IT a tuner class. Although with the impending ECU rule change it will be more so. okestick: Wings would just add another element for people to have to spend money on to tune correctly. And, as Greg said, I think splitters are technically bumper covers that just happen to be really, really thin.

    Sure, we like our cars to look good, but it ain't a priority. The first time you bust up that nice carbon fiber hood and tear off those side skirts going over a curb you're going to regret it.

    David
    ITA 240SX #17
    Atlanta Region

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    Testify to it Brother Dave.

    Wings seem like high dollar trouble to me. Hell, I just spent a LOT of time fabricating something that works up front.

    I want no part of that stuff.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    cromwell ct
    Posts
    746

    Default

    Two thoughts (more serious than my last post);

    1. If it doesn't provide downforce (or lift conversely) then it provides drag. Aero(hydro)dynamics 101. You must have enough forward speed to realize the gain and not the loss (ie drag). An aereeeoplane traveling at sixty miles per hour (on land) will take less work to propel without the wings than with.

    2. Why do we always bring up the "tuner crowd" segment? Wings are not keeping them away from sports car racing...access to it is, be it money or time or information or distance.

    R
    Rob Breault
    BMW 328is #36
    2008 Driving Impressions Pro-ITA Champion
    2008 NARRC DP Champion
    2009 NARRC ITR Champion
    2009 Team DI Pro-ITR Champion

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •