ITB MR2 – straw poll time….

[Jake]

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.

[gran racing]

1. Option B - at process weight.
2. B - ITB driver.

do to the fact that the MR2 may benefit from mid-engined configuration. If the MR2 was FWD, the number would be around 2450.[/b]

May benefit? You said no debating, and I won't. There's NO debate that the MR2 DOES benefit from the having the engine in there rear of the car and being RWD.

[924Guy]

Same answers as Dave - put it in B, at the process weight, and I'm a current ITB driver

If someone would actually put an ECU in it EVEN UNDER THE CURRENT RULES and prove no improvement, then I'd be willing to consider a lower-than-current-process weight. Till that point, it's kinda hard to really argue a full 10/10ths build, even if the motor internals have been done.

[dickita15]

ITB at process weight, or Dual Classed both at process weight.

C: ITA Rx7 driver who cares about the integrity of the IT Rules

trust the process

[dazzlesa]

make it a B at 2550. i had a mr2 and a corolla gts. i always felt that the mr2 was way more dificult to drive then anyother race car i have driven. i race A and B

[JamesB]

Dual class or ITB at process weight. ITB driver.

[Dave Zaslow]

1. B at process weight. Adjust later if needed.

2. ITB driver

Note 1: I did my drivers schools in an MR2 (circa 1989-90) and have spun them at Pocono and Nelson Ledges ;-) . If you can cope with that polar moment, more power to you.

Note 2: I raced a VW Rabbit for many years. It originally was an ITA car then was moved to B. It has also had a number of weight changes; lightening the car to keep it semi-competitive.

DZ

[erlrich]

1. Ask the MR2 drivers (all 10 of them) what they want. If they all want to move to B then let them go there at 2450 lbs.

2. C; ITA driver.

[Doc Bro]

B
2500-2550


ITA driver...just barely

R

[Knestis]

ITB at process weight, or Dual Classed both at process weight.

C: ITA Rx7 driver who cares about the integrity of the IT Rules

trust the process
[/b]

Eggs-actly.

K

[steve b]

1.
Note 1: I did my drivers schools in an MR2 (circa 1989-90) and have spun them at Pocono and Nelson Ledges ;-) . If you can cope with that polar moment, more power to you.

DZ
[/b]

Option B, process weight, then take a look at that mid engine adder if necessary.

I'm starting IT in an MR2 next season.

[mustanghammer]

ITB at process weight, or Dual Classed both at process weight.

C: ITA Rx7 driver who cares about the integrity of the IT Rules

trust the process
[/b]

Ditto

[JLawton]

1) A - at the process weight or duel class. But would be interested in seeing the results of a 10/10ths build.

2) C - No horse in this race..........


Jake,
For being a survey with no debate, your throwing in a few "extras".

"Currently most MR2s are lapped traffic"??? (sorry, was having trouble with the quote button on edit......)

You're going back to on track performance. Every Ford Escort I know gets lapped (true fact). Every Laser I know gets lapped (true fact) I also lap most of the RX7s, Integras and Miatas I run with in the Northeast. Maybe we should do comp adjustments for all of them??

[Jeremy Billiel]

1) A - at the process weight or duel class. But would be interested in seeing the results of a 10/10ths build.

2) C - No horse in this race..........
[/b]

Ditto on this sediment.

Why shoudl the MR2 get anything other than the process wieght? IF the car is still not competive with a 10/10ths build (which has still not been done IMO) then we can talk about the Mid Engine Adders/subtractors.

[JamesB]

Jeremy my thoughts exactly. if process says 2550 let it be that.

[gran racing]

For being a survey with no debate, your throwing in a few "extras".[/b]

LOL, I was thinking the same exact thing.

[shwah]

Put it in B at process weight. Don't dual class. Any changes to the process overall (ie if down the road adders are revisited for any aspect of an ITB car - mid engine, suspension design, # of valves, etc.) then apply that to this car as well. Don't make a special consideration for one single car.

ITB driver here.

[Jake]

I edited to the first post to remove debatable topics since this isn't about debates....

[Stan]

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.[/b]

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

2. It’s been argued that the MR2 doesn’t make much power in IT. Best dyno’d example to date makes 109rwhp, but had a stock ECU. The new ECU rule may unlock more power.[/b]

Unrestricted ECU is a tide that floats all boats equally, so there is no need to pick on the MR2 in particular. If the ITAC wants a process penalty on aftermarket ECUs, IMO it should be universally applied.

Stan (C...no dog in the fight)

[Jake]

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.