So about these Pony Cars for ITR...

[CRallo]

I was keeping my fingers crossed waiting for the 2009 GCR, but no such luck...

What is the status of the "Pony Car" Proposal? When can we expect somesort of news? Is there anything we can do to help it along? Anyone else out there waiting for this? any other random thoughts?


thanks!!

[Mike Guenther]

Chris,
in the 2009 GCR on page 344, listed in ITR, is the 1999 - 2002 Ford Mustang with V-6, 3797cc engine displacement at 2670 lbs minimum weight with driver. At 3797cc and 2670 pounds it is the best engine to weight ratio in ITR.

It should be a blast to drive. I'll bet there are several built in the next year or two.

Compare that to the following;
Porsche 911S Carerra at 2687cc and 2400 lbs.
Porsche 944 S2 at 2990cc and 2810 lbs.
Porsche 911 SC at 2994cc and 2630 lbs.
Ford Mustang at 3797cc and 2670 lbs. (Wow! )
B M W 325iS at 2494cc and 2765 lbs.
B M W Z4 at 2494cc and 2795 lbs.

[Ron Earp]

Chris refers to the V8 Pony Car proposal that was put in sometime ago.

I think the 99-04 would be fun car for ITR but not in the same realm as BMWs and other multivalve per cylinder cars with overhead cams. Next year the new body style Mustang should be available for ITR. It uses a SOHC 4L motor at 210 stock hp, should be perfect for ITR. Better suspension than the eariler cars (as good as live rears get), better brakes, more flexible power plant, and even better looks, if that means anything. I'm definitely going to ask to have it classed. Sooner or later the old Z will bite the bullet.

The V8 cars in the proposal were recommended at a much higher weight than what is discussed here. Basically the proposed versions averaged around 3200 lbs including the adder for torque but no modifers for suspension geometry or brakes.

[quadzjr]

However every other car in that list have much better suspensions suited for racing and have more of an aftermarket following. (Headers, CAI, etc..) Still woudl be a lot cheaper to run. If I could afford it I would build one... But then again I enjoy building anything and watching people do well in them.

edit: damit Ron built me to it.. ditto

[Mike Guenther]

It seems to me that the V-8 cars should have a new IT class (ITV), or be satisfied in AS or Touring. It doesn't make sense to me to put V-8 cars into a class with a significant percent of 4 cylinder motor cars, like the 1796cc Toyota Celica GTS. They all become back markers unless they are moved down into ITS or ITA. It'll be a V-8 and V-6 class.

[Knestis]

It's a little bit of an overstatement but it's kind if interesting to me that people tend to fall into one of two camps on this question - they either think the V8 ITR cars will suck, or they'll dominate.

Work continues on the details, guys. For the reason I mention above, it's been challenging, and I *personally* don't expect the conversations to get any easier as it moves to the Board and membership...

K

[cjb25hs]

be satisfied in AS or Touring.

I feel very strongly about the above statement. All of the V8 pony cars have a place to run currently in AS or SS or IT as far as on a regional level. Why are they even being considered for ITR. I believe that it will just disturb the class structure.

If you take a say 1979 to 2002 fox body mustang and prep it for ITR, how much difference would there be in lap time performance versus an ASedan car. Probably less than second. Of course that would really depend on what the weight the car was set at in ITR.

[lateapex911]

I feel very strongly about the above statement. All of the V8 pony cars have a place to run currently in AS or SS or IT (??huh) as far as on a regional level. Why are they even being considered for ITR. I believe that it will just disturb the class structure.

WHY!?

First, I'm confused witrh your IT reference, but...

Lets remember, and understand one thing: IT is a popular category because of two major factors...the ruleset, and stability.

Ruleset: A good level of mods. not to much, not too little.
Stabilty: The ARRC winner doesn't get weight tossed on.

Are we going to say that 5 cylinder cars can only race in IT5? Not SS? it's not about the engine folks, it's about setting cars in a ruleset so that they compete fairly. They'll be good or great on some tracks, not so much on others. Just like any car.

Question: Would all you V8 haters deny a 928 classification? What if there were a car in the class that had equal engine performance? Should it be denied?

[cjb25hs]

WHY!?

First, I'm confused witrh your IT reference, but...

i.e. ITE of course the ruleset varies mostly by division and region for ITE but any of the Escort, Firehawk i.e. IMSA or older SSGT mustangs, camaros and firebirds can run in ITE so why do we need to creat an ITV class or look at putting them in a newer IT, i.e. (ITR) class that has a great start at being of another awesome class like ITA and ITS!

And by no means am I a v-8 hater! I would love to be running a Mustang in AS instead of a Neon in ITA! And for the 928 reference,would love to see more Porsche's running in IT. Having grown up with a father who had over 30 Porsche's in his lifetime all I can say is "Porsche there is no substitute!"

[JoshS]

I've been an ITR driver exclusively for the last 2 years, and I say, bring 'em on! Whatever will get turnouts higher, I want more cars in ITR!

I agree that lap times for ITR are similar to AS and T2, both places where V8 mustangs are already classed (although newer ones in T2). But the rulesets are different. And since those are national classes, their turnouts seem to lag at regionals.

Does it matter that they already have a place to play? Trust the process! The weights will be set such that, in IT trim, they aren't overdogs.

[lateapex911]

i.e. ITE of course the ruleset varies mostly by division and region for ITE but any of the Escort, Firehawk i.e. IMSA or older SSGT mustangs, camaros and firebirds can run in ITE so why do we need to creat an ITV class or look at putting them in a newer IT, i.e. (ITR) class that has a great start at being of another awesome class like ITA and ITS!

ITE!?! Where the biggest wallet wins? For a guy that wants to race in a reasonable prep level multi marque class, that's a bad solution. Again, IT is about the ruleset, and I think it's ridiculous to segregate classes due to cylinder number. or is it something els? I must be because....

And by no means am I a v-8 hater! I would love to be running a Mustang in AS instead of a Neon in ITA! And for the 928 reference,would love to see more Porsche's running in IT. Having grown up with a father who had over 30 Porsche's in his lifetime all I can say is "Porsche there is no substitute!"

So a German V8 is ok, but an American isn't?? Make sense of that for me please...

[Mike Guenther]

Kurt,
I'm not necessarily against the V-8 cars in ITR. I don't know all the facts about HP vs weight and all of the other performance factors that the ITAC and CRB considers. But it just seems to me like the V8s are capable of a lot more power than anything currently in IT, and there's already an AS class or other classes where they fit in. If the Toyota Celica GTS is 1796cc and the Mustang V6 is 3797cc, then how much bigger is the V8? 3 times as much as the Celica?

Does it make sense? Or do these cars need another class because of some other problems or costs associated with running in AS or Production classes?

I won't get upset if V8 cars start to take over the ITR class because I will have a blast racing against the ITS car that's in front of me or behind me. I'm in this for the adrenalin and the camaraderie. The adrenalin comes from racing with cars that are in my vicinity on the track and the camaraderie comes from friends in the paddock or on IT.com. I appreciate all the work and time spent by board members and club volunteers who make all the efforts to make our events safe and fun. Thank you!

I only add my comments because I'm in the ITR class and I don't understand the reasons that this class is preferred over AS for these American Sedan muscle cars. Thank you ITAC and CRB members for trying to keep the IT classes up to date by classing more cars. I appreciate all that you do for our club.

[cjb25hs]

ITE!?! Where the biggest wallet wins? For a guy that wants to race in a reasonable prep level multi marque class, that's a bad solution. Again, IT is about the ruleset, and I think it's ridiculous to segregate classes due to cylinder number. or is it something els? I must be because....



So a German V8 is ok, but an American isn't?? Make sense of that for me please...

It is not about whether it is German or American. I feel that the V8 cars already have a place to play so why change things.

[Z3_GoCar]

I'm a little more reticent about classing the v8 pony cars. With the large displacements that they possess, and installing option factory camshafts, that can't easily be policed or enforced leads to gains that can't be predicted by the process. Since I ran in the same group as AS, and having been lapped by Bill Schepergerdes' Camero, which is the same generation as is being discussed, I've seen these cars in action putting in lap times similar to Super Prodution former Southwest Tour cars, even after being punted off track and taking major body damage. Lastly, I probably feel this way because of the nature of all of the track in my region favor cars that have superior straight line handeling. Actually, the v6 pony's would make an excellant choice here in So-Pac.

[JeffYoung]

With all due respect, there is some seriously screwy V8 stuff in this thread.

1. The AS and IT rulesets are completely different. Please spend 5 minutes reading the AS rules and you will see what type of power potential we are talking about -- heads, cams, carbs, compression, etc.

2. No "factory optional" camshafts are available that I am aware of. If you are aware of one, give us the information on it.

If anyone wants to see the V8 proposal, let me know. Ron did the hard work on it, and it pretty clearly lays out the case for these cars in ITR.

The only real "issue" with them is torque. All of the proposed cars make less or equal hp than, say, a 300zx or a 330i or a S2000.

[Mike Guenther]

Jeff,
Please send me that proposal. I'm interested in how these cases are laid out and how the Mustang and Camaro cases are presented.
Send it to fastflames at tampabay dot rr dot comm.

Thanks Jeff.

By the way, how much HP do you expect the V8s to make? I will seriously consider a Mustang for the future. They are fun cars to drive. Torque = adrenalin.

[ekim952522000]

I've been an ITR driver exclusively for the last 2 years, and I say, bring 'em on! Whatever will get turnouts higher, I want more cars in ITR!

I agree that lap times for ITR are similar to AS and T2, both places where V8 mustangs are already classed (although newer ones in T2). But the rulesets are different. And since those are national classes, their turnouts seem to lag at regionals.

Does it matter that they already have a place to play? Trust the process! The weights will be set such that, in IT trim, they aren't overdogs.

<----Building a ITR car and says run them through the process and class them.

Besides it's a win win situation for me.

If I win I get to say "haha I beat you with a little 4 cylinder Honda"

If I lose I get to say "yeah but you have a V8"
(I mean come on how many cars do you get to race that have a built in excuse)

=) Seriously though I say "bring 'em on!" as long as the weight is right what's the big deal.

[ekim952522000]

With all due respect, there is some seriously screwy V8 stuff in this thread.

1. The AS and IT rulesets are completely different. Please spend 5 minutes reading the AS rules and you will see what type of power potential we are talking about -- heads, cams, carbs, compression, etc.

2. No "factory optional" camshafts are available that I am aware of. If you are aware of one, give us the information on it.

If anyone wants to see the V8 proposal, let me know. Ron did the hard work on it, and it pretty clearly lays out the case for these cars in ITR.

The only real "issue" with them is torque. All of the proposed cars make less or equal hp than, say, a 300zx or a 330i or a S2000.

I would like to see it jeff ekim952522000 "at" gmail "dot" com

Thanks

[lateapex911]

Guys, with all due respect, every argument I hear is ill informed. You're arguing against something because you fear it will make power...but you have no facts. Not to mention, have you driven one of these? Live rear axle? Choked motors? big weight?

If you're cool with the Porsche, you should be REALLY cool with these....

just sayin-

[cjb25hs]

It is not about whether it is German or American. I feel that the V8 cars already have a place to play so why change things.

ITE!?! Where the biggest wallet wins? For a guy that wants to race in a reasonable prep level multi marque class, that's a bad solution. Again, IT is about the ruleset, and I think it's ridiculous to segregate classes due to cylinder number. or is it something els? I must be because....



So a German V8 is ok, but an American isn't?? Make sense of that for me please...

With all due respect, there is some seriously screwy V8 stuff in this thread.

1. The AS and IT rulesets are completely different. Please spend 5 minutes reading the AS rules and you will see what type of power potential we are talking about -- heads, cams, carbs, compression, etc.

2. No "factory optional" camshafts are available that I am aware of. If you are aware of one, give us the information on it.

If anyone wants to see the V8 proposal, let me know. Ron did the hard work on it, and it pretty clearly lays out the case for these cars in ITR.

The only real "issue" with them is torque. All of the proposed cars make less or equal hp than, say, a 300zx or a 330i or a S2000.

So what year cars and models are we talking about. I would assume that we are talking 80's to early 90's fox body mustangs and camaros with 302's and 305's then. Because any of the later cars due in fact make more HP then the cars you mention above. You take say a late 80's or early 90's notchback mustang with a 5.0 build it to IT rule set with balance, blueprint say 20 over, headers open exhaust gut it per the rules due all the suspension modes per IT rules and on tracks such as M-O, Nelsons, WGI, I would be willing to bet that they would have not much trouble being at the front of the field. In american sedan trim that car is listed at 3080 lbs. A stock 1995 Mustang GT made 285 ft lbs at the crank, assuming say 20% loss that takes it down to 228 ft lbs in stock trim. And IIRC all of the Mustangs came with 4 wheel disc brakes after 1993

Take for example the track records at Nelson Ledges. In 1993 when the track was slower and tires were slower Bob Strange turned a 1.17.03 in a 1LE Camaro. This year Dan Jones turned a 1.14.709 in an ITR BMW. I would bet that the track and tires alone would be good for say 1 to 1.5 seconds alone in that Camaro with no other mods.