Quote Originally Posted by jjjanos View Post
Which pretty much solves the problem, doesn't it? If the car is classified correctly, then it's classified correctly. It's no different than classifying the new beetle at Abrahms M1 weight. Heavy, competitive and go through consumables like Patton across N. France.
And that is essentially the same thing as not classing them. Why bother when nobody in his right mind would race one?

I think we need to separate the issues, and deal with each accordingly.

As it stands, when it rains, most IT owners/cars are at a loss as to what to do to optimize for the wet. Sure, we put on rain tires, but very very few of us actually change ride height, springs, damper settings and sway bar rates. Yet, to be quick in the wet, we should. And the result of that is often a complete shake up in the results. Normally dominant FWD cars are ornery beasts in the wet, and usually upper mid pack cars suddenly shine.

And nobody cries that the rules need to be changed to accommodate that. Actually, I think that's neat....that changing conditions need to be dealt with.

So, for me, class AWD just like we do cars now. If it rains, oh well, maybe they'll win. And a normally up front car comes in second or third. Boo Hoo.


Now, on turbos, I would need to see a reliable and predictable method of restriction of power to the appropriate level. That part...(the concept) is easy. The application however, is trickier. It's certainly possible, but we would have some work ahead of us if we chose to go that route.

Down the road, when the current big picture projects the ITAC is working on are done, I can see this being a good move.