October Fastrack

[lateapex911]

I......... The point Im trying to make is that a rule about one inch on the width of a rim to most likely keep someone from being a participant is ridiculous. Ive also watched this "club" be more like a business over the last few decades. This is "improved touring", not national racing. This is supposed to be fun, something that all of us need to be reminded of.



Marc Rider
1990 vw gti
Bildon race car [/b]

Your premise is that you will race if the rule gets changed so that you can race the car you want on the old cheap tires you want....because it saves you money...or makes racing financially possible. Other wise, no dice, right?

So, we change the ruleset for the entire category.....and now, guys who think winning is "fun", have to decide, "Do I get/need" 7" wide rims?. Can I FIT 7" wide rims? LOL...guess what? They canNOT...but hey, that other guy, who hasn't got a built engine but runs a solid second CAN fit them, and does, and lo and behold, he's now winning. Before the rule change, the second place car could have competed for, and gotten a win here and there if he had the full package but now that the rim rule changed, his car just became the big dog. So the guy who was winning, and followed the classic path of testing and developing, thinks, "What the hell were those asshats thinking!?!?! Screw this..." and quits.

So we got one guy in, we cost an entire class a redevelopment process, a bunch of wheels and maybe some tires, and we lost a racer or three....

Again, (and I'm sorry to use you as an example, but..) I haven't seen a compelling reason the reason to change the rule.

[vr6guy]

(Moderator note: this conversation may seem to start disjointed; posts were moved from a rules discussion topic to this one, to isolate the debate on wider wheels...Ed.)



If you think that a 15" rim will make a particular car a top dog then give any car that chooses to use the larger wheels a weight penalty. I will come and race, but completely disagree with the rule.

save your breath, no more bashing......

[lateapex911]

Im what you would call a "budget minded racer". With that said, because of the budget that I have,(or lack of) I........ Heres the catch, the tires are 205-50-15. Which means i would have to fork over $299 per wheel for some ssr's in order to take advantage of this opportunity. All that money being spent because in the gcr it states that I can go to a 15" wheel, but it has to be 6" in width. So, that one inch is keeping me from buying a kosei or a kazera at about $109 a wheel(give or take a few bucks). I really would love to come back to racing after sidelining for the past 6 years, but this simple one inch rule is prob gonna keep from re-entering. ................... That is what I call a tragedy, not only for myself, but for scca. [/b]

Maybe I misunderstood, but from this quote, it appears you want the width rule changed to ease your budget crunch. I was pointing out that while it's a shame you have this issue, opening a rule such as this can lead to unintended consequences, which is where the real tragedy ... for SCCA...lies.

[ScotMac]

So, we change the ruleset for the entire category.....and now, guys who think winning is "fun", have to decide, "Do I get/need" 7" wide rims?. Can I FIT 7" wide rims? LOL...guess what? They canNOT...but hey, that other guy, who hasn't got a built engine but runs a solid second CAN fit them, and does, and lo and behold, he's now winning.
[/b]

What? He wins because he fitted 1" bigger rims? Why? Because they are wider? So? He thus has more weight! The tires are not necessarily wider. In fact, we already have restrictions on how wide the tires can be. So, at best this only gives him a better side-wall angle.

[JLawton]

I don't suggest we go there, but IT-B and IT-C are dying now. The rest of you are not far behind. Everyone in the club does not chose to and cannot afford to run $40,000 BMWs in IT-R or whatever. [/b]

We had 62 ITA cars run in the NARRC series this season............62........That doesn't seem to be dying. There is also a winning ITA 240 in the classifieds right now for $5K or $6K.



This whole thread is turning silly.

Is IT perfect? No.......
Have the rules gone where most of us don't want them to go? Yes.....
Do we all spend more money than we would like?? Yes!
We would all love to run a season with $4K and a $2K car, but this is 2007, not 1970. The price of everything is going up, not just IT cars.

Changing the width of the wheel on one car is not going to kill IT. Should we change the rules just because four cars don't want to buy new wheels? Give me a break, I spend more on fuel in a season than the cost of 8 new lightweight wheels.


Silly, silly, silly.........


Hey, if you don't like the way things are running in IT, be part of the process.

[Knestis]

Thank you Kirk. I believe that's probably the number one justification among those supporting an open ECU rule, is that it will cost people less than it does today.[/b]

As someone who is totally OK with the new ECU rule, I see it a little differently: The new rule just allows everyone a much more equitable opportunity to spend the big money.

Honestly, I could go out and win ITR right now for less than it would cost to win ITB. Seriously. Why? Because it's less popular right now. Thats what drives costs...popularity. It's like an auction. You need two people who want to win. Then it's a spending race. Until then, it's easy and cheap pickings.[/b]

THAT is a great analogy. Thanks, Andy.

I CLEARLY remember when the state of the art was such that we could bolt on a set of OTS Konis and a sway bar or two, bolt in a rollbar (cages weren't required), and competitively race IT cars. Then someone got a header and let slip the dogs of the spending war...

I remember when the first 'real race car' showed up in IT: It was an e30 325 from California, that seriously upped the ante with (gasp) coilovers! The quote when we looked it over was, "Dude - that's real race car shit, there" or words to that effect.

Times have changed but the tension comes from walking the fine line between accepting that reality and letting things change too much. The ECU rule is an anomaly that policy realities made impossible to avoid.

K

[RacerBill]

Sorry - my error. Please disregard any arguments based on that assumption!

K
[/b]

No problem. You were refering to a larger group of cars, and I am very close to one particular case.

Again, no matter what, I understand both sides of the issue, and will live with whatever shakes out.

[lateapex911]

.......

THAT is a great analogy. Thanks, Andy.


K [/b]

Actually, I think it was me, not Andy, who wrote that, but I can see the how easy it is to make that mistake. Some say that it's impossible to tell myself, Andy, and the Stig apart......

BTW, that is the best one line summation of the ECU thing that I've seen....

[RacerBill]

Hypothetical question - slightly off thread, but still concerning rules, and oh yeah it is on thread because it concerns the Oct. Fastrack.

What if the rules had not changes a couple of years ago allowing B & C to use 15" wheels. Could the Shelby been moved from A to B seeing as the spec line called for wheels that were not allowed in B?

Kind of like the case of my 944 that came with 8" wheels in the rear. But there are plenty of 16x6's (I would imagine).

[bldn10]

Andy, I guess we'll just have to disagree on his one.



"We had the debate here in this forum and there were arguements on both sides of the issue (I thought they did NOT meet the rule)."

First of all, no one should confuse informal discussions on this board, monitored by a small fraction of the IT community, as satisfying any GCR requirement or SCCA custom for member input prior to changing a rule.



"When a request came in to clarify (Greg Amy IIRC), the CRB was asked specifically what they wanted the rule to encompass because it was grey. We wanted to clarify the rule to say exactly what they wanted it to say. We did just that. A clarification."

Of course, neither I nor lots of drivers here think the rule was grey. Allowing a SB (w/ welding) in place of a bushing under the guise of free bushing material was a joke. It was simply not a clarification but a fundamental change in the rule. IMO what happened was that Jeremy unilaterally let this cat out of the bag, and by the time it came before the CRB it was either too late to put it back and/or they wanted to back Jeremy and save face.

[gran racing]

I really would love to come back to racing after sidelining for the past 6 years, but this simple one inch rule is prob gonna keep from re-entering.[/b]

The point Im trying to make is that a rule about one inch on the width of a rim to most likely keep someone from being a participant is ridiculous.[/b]

Marc, remember there’s a difference between being able to race and having optimum equipment. What rims did your car come with stock? Are you truly not able to buy rims from a junk yard that will fit your car, even if that means 5”, or 5.5”? I drove my Prelude in ITA with 5.5” rims. Actually, I started with 5” rims then upgraded to the 5.5” VW rims. Never did I use rim sizes as a reason that prevented me from getting out there and having fun. In fact, I now use those 5” rims for my rain tires. I have a very tough time hearing this as the sole reason someone doesn’t start / re-enter racing. If that is what a person is stating the reason is, there’s usually a lot more to it.

While I am on my soapbox, where are the younger racers in our club? There aren't any because they cannot afford a $40,000 race car. Make them a place and they will come.[/b]

As Jake mentioned, the reasons are not that simple. NASA has a young membership base. Then there’s drifting. Part of it is marketing, and making more young people aware that it doesn’t have to cost a ton to race. PDXs will be one key element to all of this.

If you want to make it work get rid of IT-R because it is pricing IT out of the original intent of the rules.[/b]

I look at it a bit differently. There are plenty of people who spend a fairly significant amount of money racing in IT. It seems that those people are not so interested in racing in the “lower” classes. ITR gives those people a place to race cars, and may actually help keep them out of some of the lower classes which inturn keeps costs down there.

Hey, can I do one of those “you meant this” quote thing?

People who already own cheap economy cars aren't racers yet. They only own those cars because it's all they can afford now.[/b]

Did I do that right Greg?

Honestly, Jeff hit the nail...people buy cars like that because they are cheap transportation.[/b]

True, people buy cars like those because they need cheap transportation. Going back to my college days, my now wife bought an inexpensive car that we looked at together. We (alright, really me) wanted something with more power but couldn’t afford it so an ’87 Prelude it was. A bit later on in life, we still had the Prelude and a bit more money, which eventually allowed me to get into racing. Cheap economy cars later in life can mean a car that the owner would be willing to risk damage to, now they own a more expensive car. Don’t discount those people.

While I did complete the classification docs for my car, I found it very challenging and intimidating especially as someone new to SCCA and racing.

[Greg Krom]

Hypothetical question - slightly off thread, but still concerning rules, and oh yeah it is on thread because it concerns the Oct. Fastrack.

What if the rules had not changes a couple of years ago allowing B & C to use 15" wheels. Could the Shelby been moved from A to B seeing as the spec line called for wheels that were not allowed in B?

Kind of like the case of my 944 that came with 8" wheels in the rear. But there are plenty of 16x6's (I would imagine).
[/b]

15" wheels have always been allowed in ITB and ITC, but only when available as OEM.

The rule change of a couple of years ago allowed all cars that came with 13" or 14" wheels OEM to up size to 15".

[vr6guy]

After reading more and more on this subject of the rim diameter and width, I can see the points on both sides. i guess Ill have to bite the bullet and either use what i have or upgrade to the 15" rims. Either way Ill hopefully be racing with all you guys in ITB next year!

[mom'sZ]

I've read this entire thread... whew... it is gut wrenching. I feel sorry for folks who can't find cheap lightwieght wheels for their car. But changing the entire class rules so a few obscure models can save a few bucks on racing wheels is, as Lawton says silly, no silly isn't a strong enough word RETARDED!!! Such a change would throw the entire 'process' into question. An entire reprocessing may need to take place. So a few guys can spend a few less dollars for wheels, come on... spend some of the effort you have used pummeling the ITAC with stupid suggestions backed by rediculous arguments on trying to find a sponsor to help you pay for some bling wheels instead.
My hat is off to every member of the ITAC who worked so hard to bring IT racing to it's current state. Things have never been fairer. The racing seems more competitive with different models winning. This is a tough job, to balance so many models. But for those of us that don't want to race a spec me otter it is the best. THANK YOU guys!!! Just know that the few vocal ingrates are just that, the FEW. The vast majority of guys love what you have done.
Everytime a prickly rule has come up, I've quietly watched. Each time in my mind I've decided what I thought would be most fair for everyone. And each time the ITAC has made the same choice. I wouldn't change a thing. Some folks are scared of open ECU rules. They are computer illiterate and wish we all could be made to use carbs. But this is 2007, all cars have computers on them, we all don't want to race thirty year old junk (see production racing) It's not going to be the death of IT. Coil overs gave us the ability to change spring rates (one of the most basic handling adjustments) with cheap model non-specific springs. At first it must have been scary. But now kits are available for most every car and we think nothing of adding a coil over kit to our racers. Does it cost a few bucks... sure, this is racing. It ain't cheap.
After the all out war that was the debate about our recent restructuring, just prior to the 'process' being applied, I thought we would never hear the end of people whinning about how they had to add wieght to there car and now it's not competitive anymore. But as the season started, all was quiet. The world didn't end. Cars that were overdogs seem slightly reined in, cars that were also rans are coming out of barns and new ones are being built. Everyone seems to agree it was for the overall good of the class. Job extremely well done. Thank you guys thank you thank you.
Jake, the way you sit and calmly reply to each of these posts without going ballistic is admirable. Repeatadly explaining the logic behind each decision, you sir have my vote for president of earth.

[jjjanos]

Really, think about that more critically....you'd take the KIA because of parts availability? Be serious! What cage would you use? Dampers? Bushings? anti roll bars? a header? Aftermarket support, Honda to Kia is not even comparable. You're right though, that for the cost of a KIA race ready, you could buy a one class up, already built, 20 year old................Honda.

YOU might race a KIA regardless of it's cool factor, but the market won't.
[/b]

I bet they said the same thing about alot of the cars that are at the pointy end of IT, but when someone demonstrated the car was raceable, the market responded with all of the extra go-fast bits.

Two guys- one builds a racecar out of a never before raced model and the other buys his parts off the shelf and swaps them into a tub he has stripped - which of the two is actually building a race car?

[JamesB]

they both are since the end goal is the same thing. One takes more custom fabrication then the other.

[Ron Earp]

Two guys- one builds a racecar out of a never before raced model and the other buys his parts off the shelf and swaps them into a tub he has stripped - which of the two is actually building a race car?
[/b]

Having done both I know which one leads to more racing!

I think mom'sz comments are right on.

Ron

[RacerBill]

15" wheels have always been allowed in ITB and ITC, but only when available as OEM.

The rule change of a couple of years ago allowed all cars that came with 13" or 14" wheels OEM to up size to 15".
[/b]

Thanks, Greg!

[Andy Bettencourt]

IMO what happened was that Jeremy unilaterally let this cat out of the bag, and by the time it came before the CRB it was either too late to put it back and/or they wanted to back Jeremy and save face.
[/b]

Bill,

I explained to you how it happened. The ITAC asked the CRB if they felt that SB's met the intent and asked them if they wanted them legal. They said yes. We made the wording more clear. Did I agree with the decision? Nope...but I suck it up and move on.

[ScotMac]

I've read this entire thread... whew... it is gut wrenching. I feel sorry for folks who can't find cheap lightwieght wheels for their car. But changing the entire class rules so a few obscure models can save a few bucks on racing wheels is, as Lawton says silly, no silly isn't a strong enough word RETARDED!!! Such a change would throw the entire 'process' into question. An entire reprocessing may need to take place.
[/b]

You are assuming that the 1" wider wheels gives a performance benefit. It does not, in any appreciable manner, and thus no impact to the process...see my previous post on this:

Because they are wider? So? He thus has more weight! The tires are not necessarily wider. In fact, we already have restrictions on how wide the tires can be. So, at best this only gives him a better side-wall angle.
[/b]

This is not just about a couple of cars. Finding suitable racing wheels in 14x6, or worse 15x6, size is difficult for many of the B and C cars, and is only getting worse. Again, if you read the entire thread, go back and read my message on availability. That information is not for a particular car (bolt pattern), but are for all available wheels.

Maybe you should work on your reading skills? And who exactly are you calling retarded?