March 09 Fast Track

[Ron Earp]

We really need more cars if ITR is to survive.

If the V8 Mulletmobiles were classed and you'd increase ITR counts more than with any other car classifcation. The support was very strong for those vehicles.

R

[lateapex911]

,......Should I change my sig to "on life support" instead of RIP???

LOL..I wish i knew.

Remember Steve, we are constrained by larger picture issues. We need to be very very careful when it comes to using "what we know"...because that little trickle that seems innocent today can become a flash flood instantly, and suddenly we are back to where we started, with the membership feeling like there is backroom dealing and a lack of transparency, and that creates a level of mistrust.

As a group we've worked hard to earn trust, and i think we're in a better position now than 5 years ago in that dept.

So, anything we do that treats a car "specially" needs to have a strict framework, and consistent evidence standards that can be applied fairly across the broad spectrum of IT cars.

I imagine you might see that such a thing isn't easy.

But, we meet in 15 minutes and the entire call will be discussing large picture items such as those I listed above.

We're trying, man!

[gran racing]

What I don't get is why someone would be a 10/10ths car, especially with that type of build before it gets classed. While the ITAC has done a great job and continues to better the process (I hope), there are still cars to have and ones not to have in each class. The process still has holes in it where not all cars are going to equally competitive.

[Andy Bettencourt]

What I don't get is why someone would be a 10/10ths car, especially with that type of build before it gets classed. While the ITAC has done a great job and continues to better the process (I hope), there are still cars to have and ones not to have in each class. The process still has holes in it where not all cars are going to equally competitive.

It is certainly a risk. This car is like the S2000 in that it just doesn't make the expected 25% in IT trim. The issue is collecting enough data on a new listing that proves the negative. This car was a BIG risk when you factor in those issues.

[seckerich]

It is certainly a risk. This car is like the S2000 in that it just doesn't make the expected 25% in IT trim. The issue is collecting enough data on a new listing that proves the negative. This car was a BIG risk when you factor in those issues.

Actually quite a few cars on the ITR list are a big risk. The E36 is the target and therefore the poster child of fast. The other BMW and Porsche makes are also a shoe in with big HP and Torque with nominal weight. The others are either big HP and stupid high weight, or front drive/tire limited. Some are both. Somewhere common sense and the process will hopefully meet. Don't get me wrong, you guys are doing your best given the tools you have. I hope you do get a repeatable, defendable solution.

And to Daves post: If there is a "car to have" the ITAC has failed and the process is a joke.

[Greg Amy]

What I don't get is why someone would be a 10/10ths car, especially with that type of build before it gets classed.

So they go through a 7/10s process (or 8/10s, or 9/10s), at that point have the ability and experience to recognize that the car will not be competitive (starting to sound a tad bit familiar?) and then make requests for adjustment, only to be bitch-slapped with "hey, until you commit the time and money to build a 10/10s car and prove to us otherwise, stop complaining. It's obviously not the car, it's the driver."

Starting to sound REAL familiar?

Can't win with you guys...

[Andy Bettencourt]

So they go through a 7/10s process (or 8/10s, or 9/10s), at that point have the ability and experience to recognize that the car will not be competitive (starting to sound a tad bit familiar?) and then make requests for adjustment, only to be bitch-slapped with "hey, until you commit the time and money to build a 10/10s car and prove to us otherwise, stop complaining. It's obviously not the car, it's the driver."

Starting to sound REAL familiar?

Can't win with you guys...

How did this become about us doing a bad job?

PS: There have been NO REQUESTS FOR ADJUSTMENTS. Must have missed your letter...

[gran racing]

Steve, I said carS to have. That could mean 20 cars yet there might be a few that for what ever reason, the process doesn't get them to where they should be in terms of real world competitiveness.

[tom91ita]

How did this become about us doing a bad job?

PS: There have been NO REQUESTS FOR ADJUSTMENTS. Must have missed your letter...

Andy,

I sent a letter to the CRB November 23, 2008 for reviewing IT weights in general and used my 1st gen CRX si ITB car as a specific example.

has that letter ever been received? if there was a "further review needed" or "weight is correct as classified" type of response, i must have missed it.

tia, tom

[Knestis]

>> He was just tweaking you guys with the ITS request to show the insane logic that has a car with 25% less torque, and less HP classed 200+ pounds heavier than other cars in the class.

I'll be more pointed in my response: Given the degree of responsiveness and transparency that the ITAC is TRYING to have, "playing the game" a la BS data, sandbagging, snarky comments, back-channel communications to board members, and all that old school smoke-filled rooms crap is to say the least UNHELPFUL.

If the ITAC is going to be collaborative, we absolutely need the membership to enter into the process in the same spirit. As my friend Greg is fond of saying, y'all will get the IT you deserve and the most surefire way to jam us up is to dick with openness when we're first learning how to use it.

K

[seckerich]

As I said before Kirk. Just my OPINION about what Buzz was doing. Contact him directly before yoiu get on your high horse and lecture me. He may very well think you are that far off with the car. After all, he is the ONLY one to actually build one. Might just have a better grasp on the situation. Get over yourself. I am into very pointed responses as well.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy,

I sent a letter to the CRB November 23, 2008 for reviewing IT weights in general and used my 1st gen CRX si ITB car as a specific example.

has that letter ever been received? if there was a "further review needed" or "weight is correct as classified" type of response, i must have missed it.

tia, tom

If it was an e-mail, you should have gotten an immediate auto-gereated response when it hit the inbox. Items from Nov are on the December list and we didn't have a Dec call due to the holiday. We are in a temp holding pattern on all reviews and new classifications because we are defining, documenting and ironing out the process in order to move forward in a productive way. And I didn't mean to imply that we hadn't receive ANY letter, just not a letter from Greg (or anyone on FWD adders) who seems to be implying that we aren't listening.

[Greg Amy]

How did this become about us doing a bad job?

PS: There have been NO REQUESTS FOR ADJUSTMENTS. Must have missed your letter...

WITF are you talking about, Bettencourt? You need to get that defensive chip off your shoulder, son.

Gran said it was stupid (OK, sorry, "I don't get it") to build a 10/10 car that's not classified yet (or, more inferentially, is not classified "well"). I pointed out that if he HADN'T done that, then you (as in YOU, Andy Bettencourt) would have been all up in his face complaining that he's got nothing to stand on since he hasn't built it 10/10 yet.

i.e., "Sound familiar?"

So, someone gets his panties in a twaddle when someone DOES take the initiative to 10/10s build a car, and someone else - usually Andy Bettencourt - gets his panties in a twaddle when he DOESN'T.

e.g.: Lose-Lose with "you guys."

Just sayin'. Sheesh.

My "even cheaper shot": it's a Mazda, so I'm pretty sure it'll get classified pretty damn well, eventually. So maybe the guy's not too stupid after all...

[ddewhurst]

****If it was an e-mail, you should have gotten an immediate auto-gereated response when it hit the inbox.****

Andy, a word to the wise. The SCCA auto answer system is a bit lame to say the least. As an example back when the BoD member ran his/her mouth to a Mazda employee I sent an e-mail & NEVER received notice that the e-mail had been received. During that time the SCCA pres stated that the SCCA had received 31 BoD/Mazda e-mails. What is worse than an automated system, is an automated system that may never be checked to see if it's functioning correctly.

[Andy Bettencourt]

WITF are you talking about, Bettencourt? You need to get that defensive chip off your shoulder, son.

Gran said it was stupid (OK, sorry, "I don't get it") to build a 10/10 car that's not classified yet (or, more inferentially, is not classified "well"). I pointed out that if he HADN'T done that, then you (as in YOU, Andy Bettencourt) would have been all up in his face complaining that he's got nothing to stand on since he hasn't built it 10/10 yet.

i.e., "Sound familiar?"

So, someone gets his panties in a twaddle when someone DOES take the initiative to 10/10s build a car, and someone else - usually Andy Bettencourt - gets his panties in a twaddle when he DOESN'T.

e.g.: Lose-Lose with "you guys."

Just sayin'. Sheesh.

My "even cheaper shot": it's a Mazda, so I'm pretty sure it'll get classified pretty damn well, eventually. So maybe the guy's not too stupid after all...

Do you ever read your posts outloud before you send them? I have no right to get defensive when you write the stuff you do? You say 'sound familiar' like you have actually made a request. Your post reads like you have gone through the 7/10ths motions when you haven't followed through and sent in some information. The request from a 10/10th car owner was to drop it to ITS at a lower weight than it is listed now in ITR based on on-track performance at one event. It had no real information other than how much he 'lost' to an E36 by and his statement of RWHP (with no supporting documentation).

It's hard not to read all the sacrasm and BS you write and not get defensive...especially just coming off a 4 hour con-call last night in which I committed to put together a proactive proposal for changes in the FWD adders because nobody has written in yet and gotten it on an agenda.

But I guess ignorance is bliss.... Just sayin'.

More edit - do I overreact to your posts? Maybe - but it ain't like you aren't trying to get a rise out of us. Probably just me...but it is what it is.

[tnord]

Greg & Andy are both right.

1) It's a big gamble, if not foolish, to build a car before you even know what your starting point/weight will be. Espeically with something like the RX-8 where there are a lot of variables working against it that other cars don't have to deal with.
2) If you're going to do it, and essentially be the first one, you better do it all-out because if it's not "competitive" and not a 10/10ths build, the data point is dismissed.

[Andy Bettencourt]

****If it was an e-mail, you should have gotten an immediate auto-gereated response when it hit the inbox.****

Andy, a word to the wise. The SCCA auto answer system is a bit lame to say the least. As an example back when the BoD member ran his/her mouth to a Mazda employee I sent an e-mail & NEVER received notice that the e-mail had been received. During that time the SCCA pres stated that the SCCA had received 31 BoD/Mazda e-mails. What is worse than an automated system, is an automated system that may never be checked to see if it's functioning correctly.

I have sent two or three letters in this year and have always received the auto-response.

[Super Swift]

I only know of Buzz Marcus competing in one race with his RX-8: Homestead in June 08. He seemed to be off his game as he crashed out early however he was 4 seconds faster than the quickest ITS car and within 1/2 sec of the ITR track record. Doesn't seem like a dog to me.

Ben Robertson

[Knestis]

As I said before Kirk. Just my OPINION about what Buzz was doing. Contact him directly before yoiu get on your high horse and lecture me. He may very well think you are that far off with the car. After all, he is the ONLY one to actually build one. Might just have a better grasp on the situation. Get over yourself. I am into very pointed responses as well.

I wasn't lecturing you about his response, Steve - just making a general statement in response to it.

K

EDIT - ...and yes, I admit to being frustrated by some of the conversations that have happened around the RX8. That's influencing my attitude. I felt like I was (personally and as a member of the ITAC) acting in good faith, and post hoc, conversation surfaces that sounds a little like maybe I/we were getting gamed. It bothers me.

[Greg Amy]

Andy,

Easy there, Einstein, no need to go off on a bender. Take it or leave it, feedback is part of the process of being in charge. If it bothers you that much...?

GA

P.S., in reference to "do you ever read your posts before sending" shot, I much preferred your initial "it's obvious you don't have a clue" one-liner post...