Moving ITB Rabbits to ITC?

[shwah]

People always say that, but the only person I spoke to that actually flow tested, rather than heard what they do, says differently.

[Bill Miller]

Chris,

One of the people I spoke with about this did flow test the manifolds, and said that the A2 manifold flowed better, especially w/ the larger t-body. It was someone w/ significant experience building VW race motors, so I place a lot of stock in what he said. Other reports have been consistent with that. In fact, I've only ever heard one person claim than an A1 intake flowed better than an A2 intake (until now).

[shwah]

Well. I guess we both have conflicting 2nd hand information then. I only have one source though. My info is manifold only - absolutely the TB will flow better on the A2, and I totally forgot that part of the equation.

It would be fun to try and measure this ourselves, but I got a long winter list to make sure I can keep up with the Jones' in ITB next year.

[Joe Craven]

I own(ed) quite a few ITB cars and still race a GTI which is now modified beyond what is legal in ITB. Anyways, lack of power is what makes it uncompetitive with the top ITB cars. Car handles great and the brakes are superb. Here is my list of ITB cars I own and have wrecked/sold in order of performance capability.

ITB 1980 Datsun 200SX, NAPZ 2.0 was powerful! (Could be a front runner)
ITB 1980 Datsun 510 with the L20 motor. light, handled great, good brakes (rare car)
ITB 1971 Ford Capri with the Pinto 2.0 motor. light, handles ok, poor rear brakes, decent power.
ITB 19xx VW GTI - handles great, great brakes but way down on power.
ITB 198? VW Jetta - heavier and slower than GTI

The GTI was at least a second per lap down from the cars above them. 2 seconds or more/lap at a power track like Thunderhill raceway. Add an illegal G-Grind or 1.6 Rabbit cam and the GTI should become more competitive in the ITB class but I'd still go with a Golf given a choice.

[Bill Miller]

Joe,

I had a '72 Capri 2.0 back when I was in college (way back!) Loved the car, and it was pretty quick. Problem was, the cars rotted away in no short order. I bought mine in '79 (only 7 years old at the time), and the rear wheel arches were TOTALLY rotted away. They were fun cars, but just wouldn't last. I seem to remember a R&T article from when they were fairly new, and it compared the 2.0 to the 2.0 510, the BMW '02 and I think the Fiat 131. The Capri won hands down on styling. The other thing I remember, was that the transmissions were pretty fragile in those cars. Tended to eat 3rd gear synchros.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

There is simply no way that even the best prepared Rabbit GTI stands a chance in ITB against a full-tilt A3 Golf. The will be close to 2 seconds a lap slower at an average (~2.5mile) length track. To get any kind of decent top end speed out of the cars, you've got to throw in a R&P that will kill lower end acceleration. I seriously doubt that you'll see one that makes over 100 whp on a dynopak (maybe 95).

[chewy8000]

"There is simply no way that even the best prepared Rabbit GTI stands a chance in ITB against a full-tilt A3 Golf. The will be close to 2 seconds a lap slower at an average (~2.5mile) length track."

I know I don't have much street cred here with only my 1st school under my belt, but I would assume a seasoned driver could take a GTI and do pretty well too. Because I'm cheap and can't afford an A3 I have to remember the real reason my pockets are now empty. It's fun. I enjoy racing old crap and will be happy just to get through school and actually finish a race. I don't care what class the rabbit ends up as long as I'm not in the stands watching.

[Bill Miller]

Chewy,

A max-boogie A3 won&#39;t really cost you that much more to build than a max-boogie A1. In fact, you can probably get an A3 shell cheaper than an A1 GTI shell these days, as those cars have become more popular w/ the &#39;old skool&#39; VW crowd. Five years ago, you could buy Rabbit GTI&#39;s for <$500 all day long. That was for complete, running cars. It was actually hard to get much more than that for just an average car. These days, I&#39;ve seen cars that you would have been lucky to get $300-$400 for going for ~$1000. Interestingly enough though, you can still buy ITB-prepared Rabbit GTI&#39;s for between $2500 and $5000, which is about what they were going for 8-10 years ago.

The problem is, there&#39;s no point in spending the money to build a max-boogie A1 GTI anymore, as it will never run w/ an equally prepared A3, even given the same driver. I&#39;ve been playing w/ one on and off for over 20 years, and I think I have a pretty good handle on what you can get out of one, especially w/in the IT rules.

[tom_sprecher]

Sorry for the OT but...

Joe,

I had a &#39;72 Capri 2.0 back when I was in college (way back!) Loved the car, and it was pretty quick. Problem was, the cars rotted away in no short order. I bought mine in &#39;79 (only 7 years old at the time), and the rear wheel arches were TOTALLY rotted away. They were fun cars, but just wouldn&#39;t last.[/b]

Exactly the same here! I bought it in &#39;79 when I started at Southern Tech. It too had wheel well rot. It was my first car and I did not know how to drive a stick but by the time I got it home I did. It certainly helped I rode motorcycles, though. That car was a blast to drive on the back roads when this area had 1/5 the population it does today.

Mine had a tendency to wear out points even after replacing the condenser. I remember filing them, setting the dwell and then the timing or visa-versa. Can&#39;t remember the details; too many keg parties watching the bathtub races on campus. I do remember the rear side windows poping out, too.

I saw a red one at Rd ATL last year. For some reason it seemed so small even when compared to my RX-7. I guess that&#39;s one reason why it&#39;s in ITB.

[Bill Miller]

Tom,

I learned the hard way that you NEVER let anyone open the rear pop-out windows!!! All I can say, is thank God that the pop-out lock was as strong as it was, otherwise, I would have had no window at all on the rear of my passenger side.

Great car, lots of cool memories, and a car I would have again.

[JLawton]

There is simply no way that even the best prepared Rabbit GTI stands a chance in ITB against a full-tilt A3 Golf. The will be close to 2 seconds a lap slower at an average (~2.5mile) length track. To get any kind of decent top end speed out of the cars, you&#39;ve got to throw in a R&P that will kill lower end acceleration. I seriously doubt that you&#39;ll see one that makes over 100 whp on a dynopak (maybe 95).
[/b]

I have to disagree Bill, although I have no data to back up my assumptions, only lots of seat time in both. Yes, I&#39;m sure on the longer tracks the aero might have a big impact, I think the GTi is light enough to run at the front of the pack most places.

Hmmmm, I smell a GRM test...............

Also, the big difference is you can buy a built GTi for a lot less than a built A3.

[Joe Craven]

Bill is giving you his multiple years of experience and you already know I agree. It is a power thing, there just is no way that I know of to get legal competitive horsepower. The GTI handles and brakes great, it just gets pulled by 3 car lengths on a typical long straigt section of a track.

-joe

[Bill Miller]

I have to disagree Bill, although I have no data to back up my assumptions, only lots of seat time in both. Yes, I&#39;m sure on the longer tracks the aero might have a big impact, I think the GTi is light enough to run at the front of the pack most places.

Hmmmm, I smell a GRM test...............

Also, the big difference is you can buy a built GTi for a lot less than a built A3.
[/b]

Look around the country Jeff, just how many Rabbit GTI&#39;s are running &#39;at the front&#39;? They will probably do ok at places like LRP or Beaver Run, but they&#39;re just not going to get it done on the longer, more wide-open tracks. I agree with Joe, they are nimble little cars that have pretty decent brakes (losing 100# helped that). But that is not going to make up for the 25-30 whp that they are down to a full-tilt A3, even if the A3 is 270# heavier. Take another 100# out of the Rabbit, and maybe it will run near the front.

And there&#39;s a reason that you can buy a built GTI for a lot less than a built A3. It&#39;s because the GTI can&#39;t run at the front. You know as well as I do, that cars that are at the pointy end of the grid bring more than mid-pack cars. What you can&#39;t do is build a built GTI for a lot less than you can an A3. Some of the stuff will cost you the same, for either car. Cage, suspension, motor, and trans will be pretty much the same. Wheels for sure will be the same. The only area where you&#39;ll really be able to spend more money on the A3, is on the engine mgmt system (and maybe some uber-pimp headlights ). And the whole reason behind the new ECU rule is to bring the cost of the engine mgmt. system down.

Put 150-175 lbs on the GTIs and move them to ITC. Dump the VIN# rule, and all of the current ITC Rabbits could upgrade to 1.8 motors w/ close-ratio boxes and vented rotors (along w/ some lead), if they wanted to. There&#39;s a whole lot more 1.8 8v blocks out there than 1.6 blocks.

[rudevr6]

anyone want to weigh in on the gen2 8v scirocco? i had been saving up parts to build a GTI, but when i discovered all my stuff fit on the scirocco and one popped up rust free, and cheap, i jumped on it!

are there any pros/cons to the 8v scirocco v. the gti?

[shwah]

All the same topics apply to the Scirocco, but it needs to weigh 50# more than the Rabbit.

[shwah]

I always assumed that the weight difference between Rabbit and Scirocco of the same specification (engine, trans, brakes, suspension) were simply driven by percieved aero differences by the rule makers. Does anyone know if this is in fact the case, and does anyone know if this is based on data, or perception?

I just wonder if it is fair to penalize the Scirocco racers with an extra 50#.

[Knestis]

You presume that the difference is purposeful, rather than being a leftover of previous &#39;systems...&#39;

Not necessarily the case.

K

[shwah]

I did make the assumption that the Scirocco was run through &#39;the process&#39; because it did lose weight when the Rabbit lost weight a few years ago.

You are right, the first question is - has the ITB Scirocco been run through the process?
If so, what is the reason for the weight difference, and is there data to support this?

[Campbell]

Actually I thought (not correctly I guess) the weight difference between the Scirocco and Rabbit was "purposeful". I requested a couple years ago that the weight difference be eliminated since the drive trains were the same. The response I got was that the answer would be published in the Fastrack. Never did see a response and kind of forgot about it.

[shwah]

Write another letter Bill.

[Campbell]

Will do!