ITB MR2 – straw poll time….

[dickita15]

If these points are generally true, then does the car belong in ITA at all?
[/b]

Because this is not Prod and we do not use on track performance to generate adjustments

Unrestricted ECU is a tide that floats all boats equally, so there is no need to pick on the MR2 in particular.
[/b]

Uh, I do not believe that to be true.

If the ITAC wants a process penalty on aftermarket ECUs, IMO it should be universally applied.
[/b]

Huh

[dazzlesa]

maybe it should be dual. 2550 is alot to hike around.

[Stan]

Dick, nobody mentioned Prod, but it would be incorrect to think that weight (too heavy or too light) or on-track potential are not factors in classifying cars. The ITAC turned down a request this summer to classify a car because the process weight was considered too heavy for the class. Why should "too light to attain" be treated any differently? And the ITAC also turned down a car this summer because even though it met all objective criteria for the class, it was considered too powerful. So yes, on-track potential IS considered when classifying cars.

Whether you or I "believe" an aftermarket ECU helps any particular engine is immaterial. My point was that picking on the MR2 for that is inappropriate IMO. Hence, if the ITAC is concerned about the potential advantage of aftermarket ECUs, they should treat them like any other adder/subtracter in the "process".

Stan

[Andy Bettencourt]

Dick, nobody mentioned Prod, but it would be incorrect to think that weight (too heavy or too light) or on-track potential are not factors in classifying cars. The ITAC turned down a request this summer to classify a car because the process weight was considered too heavy for the class. Why should "too light to attain" be treated any differently? And the ITAC also turned down a car this summer because even though it met all objective criteria for the class, it was considered too powerful. So yes, on-track potential IS considered when classifying cars.[/b]

Let's clarify here. Stan is coming in a little late...

On-track ACTUAL is NOT considered. On-track POTENTIAL is the goal of the Process. How it shakes out in practical application is what it is.

I don't recall car #1. I don't remember EVER thinking that a car was too heavy for a class. I think car #1 and car #2 are the same car in Stan's recollection....car #2 'looked' like it could fit in ITR, but then when run through the process, it was determined that it would need to weigh WAY more than reasonable and what people would even consider reasonable (like +300 over curb weight). The car was an ITR candidate - and would have to wait for a class above ITR - if one ever materializes. So there was no place to 'move it up' to, at a lower weight.

Whether you or I "believe" an aftermarket ECU helps any particular engine is immaterial. My point was that picking on the MR2 for that is inappropriate IMO. Hence, if the ITAC is concerned about the potential advantage of aftermarket ECUs, they should treat them like any other adder/subtracter in the "process".

Stan [/b]

You aren't understanding the context. People are claiming that the car can't make the predicted power that allows it to be fairly classified in IT. No current claims have a programmable ECU (currently legal), so these power claims are 'soft'. When trying to prove or disprove engine outputs, we need to know a 100% effort has been made - and we have not seen that data yet in the MK1 MR2.

[dickita15]

Stan you quoted the following two items from Jake's post:

1. MR2 is classed at 2270lbs in ITA, most cars can’t get anywhere near that weight – the best ones can get within 100lbs.

4. The majority of MR2’s are lap traffic in ITA currently.

It is the second one that we tend to not want part of a IT classing discussion. That is the kind of thing that starts a adjustment discussion in Prod. sorry if my brevity was interpreted as being flip.

Andy handled the second part.

[shwah]

At this point...

15 in favor of moving to ITB at process weight. 16 if I voted.
0 Against.

Interesting that about half the responses are from ITB drivers.
[/b]

Hey we like good competition as much as the next guy. If this move will pull cars that could not make ITA weight (and thus were not able to meet the specified performance envelope they were classed to) out of garages and into ITB, where they can run at their specified weight (and thus on paper will be more competitive with no other changes to prep level), then we get more cars that can contend in ITB. That sounds like fun to me.

[Rabbit07]

1. Where should the 85-89 MR2 go.

A. ITA where it is. (2270lbs)
B. ITB at ______lbs (please fill in weight)

2. Who are you.

A. MR2 driver.
B. ITB driver.
C. None of the above, just want to weigh in.
[/b]

1 B at 2270
2. B

[gran racing]

1 B at 2270 [/b]

[Knestis]

I just noticed that I quoted Dick and while he runs ITA, I obviously run ITB. Do the math, class the car.

K

[RSTPerformance]

I am sure everyone knows my position... Dual Classification at proper weights as per the process and proper wheel sizes... It will allow more options for drivers, and it will allow the actual racers determine what class it should be in.

I am an original ITB driver not an tweener guy whom moved from A

Raymond "I have spun a few times in an MR2 also, sorry dad about the those old dents " Blethen

[AE86ITA]

Hello guys:
While at it why not include the Corolla GTS (84-87) as well? Fun car but no longer competitive in ITA with less powerfull motor that in the MR2.

Thanks,

Efrain

[m glassburner]

1. b at processed weight
2. b


I have also driven one....

[dickita15]

Hello guys:
While at it why not include the Corolla GTS (84-87) as well? Fun car but no longer competitive in ITA with less powerfull motor that in the MR2.

Thanks,

Efrain
[/b]

If the Corolla has a very hard time making process weight in ITA, then yes I could be moved to ITB at process weight.
If however the car just does not live up to expectations of the process then the move would most likely not help it.

[awdbandito]

I say moving it to B at 2450 would be the fair way to start, then adjust weight from that point. Dual class would be great, but I really don't see that happening.

Currently driving an MR2 in ITA.

[Banzai240]

1) Move it to B at Process Weight
2) Former Chairman of the ITAC who fought for this to happen every time it came up!

[pimpm3]

I would like to see the MK1 MR2 in ITB

I am one of the 10 people who drives one.

And as stated before it is impossible to make weight, my car is quite a bit over weight and I can't come up with anything else to remove.

[Chris Wire]

1. ITB at process weight. No 'gimmies' until it is proven warranted.

2. S-car driver

Believe in the process and the notion that the club ought to try to bolster fields through thoughtful application of same. Most new car adds are going to be in the higher classes, let's keep B & C fields full too.

[zracre]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al2rqEltoog yes the MR2 needs to be in B...

ITA driver

[pimpm3]

Didn't that MR2 endup flipping over in the busstop?

[Jake]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al2rqEltoog yes the MR2 needs to be in B...

ITA driver
[/b]

LOL - if only to prevent traffic issues for real ITA cars. (dangerous closing speeds)

At this point, the poll sits at 24-0, all in favor of moving the poor thing to ITB. Hmm....