Dan, Michael Moorefield's former ITS 325 went 2:11 consistently in the ECR with Michael Skeen (of Setup fame) driving.

Grafton, I've always enjoyed talking to you, but you are just flat out wrong. And it's clear you didn't read the proposal. We provided a matrix with two axes -- on the one side was actual stock horespower (since 2 years ago the actual stock horsepower was in doubt) and on the other was expected IT gain (also in doubt).

WE AT ALL TIMES USED THE PROCESS TO RECOMMEND CLASSING THE CAR. I personally was not sure what the actual "real" inputs were because of the above doubt.

Using that matrix, process weights varied from as low as 27xx to as high as just over 3000. Car came in near the top of the matrix.

I know you guys have some issue with Mazdas; that's fine. I actually hate the buzzy things too. But to say the process was not used in our proposal, and in classing the car, is just wrong. It was. The problem with the ITR RX8 has always been the uncertainity involved w/stock hp and gain on the Renesis.

Quite honestly, given what that unrestricted ITR 325 ran at VIR (in fact, what was essentially an ITS car a few years back), I'd think you guys in the Porsche camp would be far more "Fear the VANOS" than "Fear the Rotor."

Again, nothing personal -- have always enjoyed talking to you, but to say we didn't use the process in the proposal and in classing the car is just wrong. You may disagree with teh inputs we used, and in fact you do, but the process was used.

Quote Originally Posted by GKR_17 View Post
That proposal threw the process in the trash and went for power-to-weight based on competitor supplied dyno data. Now that you're on the ITAC I would expect a little more strict adherance to procedure.

Through the process, this car got the lowest gain multiplier, based on the lowest published stock hp, it got the largest subtractor for low torque (without any adder for the best-in-class transmission), and no adder for double wishbone suspension. I'd say that's about as low as you can go and still claim to have used the process.

The process isn't based on track performance, but if you want to make ajustments after the car is classed, then you need on-track data to justify the change (not to mention the required time frame) as the rules require. Or do we just call this another realignment and change the weight of any car any time we want? If you agree with that, then why bother with the process anyway, because you're headed straight back to the old mystery closed-door system.

I for one, would like to see the process parameters used for each car noted on it's spec line.