AWD in Improved Touring

[ScotMac]

Greg that to me would be throwing the whole process out the window, I say class em with the process with a "as determined by the ITAC adder" and call it a day.

I agree. It doesn't make sense at all to put them in their own class, since all the other things are much more variable and indicative of their performance. ie, hp, weight, handling, aero, etc. So, figure out an adder (or subber) for awd, and put them in a class, and go racing. I would love to see an mk4 r32 get classed.

[dj10]

No advantage until it rains.

[RSTPerformance]

I fully support AWD cars in all IT classes. *I completed the Mt. Washington "Climb to the Clouds" several times with my ITB Audi Coupe and I was very competitive in rain, dirt and tarmac with the other non-turbo AWD cars including the AWD versions of my Audi.

AWD does not have a benefit (at IT HP levels) over non AWD cars and should not be excluded from competition. *This is especially true with so many AWD followers whom could build our member base.

With potential members in mind;

Raymond Blethen
SC270386*

[Knestis]

Playing devil's advocate then, Raymond - why would anyone want to run, say, a 4000 Quattro rather than a Coupe?

Seems like, if there's no perceived advantage, folks won't run one. If people don't want to run them, why list them...?

K

[dickita15]

For the same reason as most of the other oddball drivers. Devotion to the make/model.

[JeffYoung]

Dick, exactly. And we do have a request to class the Subaru 2.5RS already. SOMEONE wants to build them, at least one. Unless it wrecks the class, I don't think our reasons for saying no (may dominate in the rain) to date are justified.

[Ron Earp]

Playing devil's advocate then, Raymond - why would anyone want to run, say, a 4000 Quattro rather than a Coupe?

Some say love. I say it could be hate.

I'm a Ford guy, would like to race a Ford in IT. I think the SVT Focus looks pretty cool. But, it is FWD and I will not use my money to build a FWD race car. It is just wrong. Now, if the Focus was AWD, well then I'd consider building an AWD SVT Focus for IT.

And yes, I know all about the AWD systems that might default to FWD and so on. But hate is irrational and so might my reason for considering building an AWD version of a car but not the FWD counterpart.

I say let us some AWD cars in IT. You guys can debate relative merits on the interwebz all day long but I don't think you'll find a clear solution until you class some AWD in IT. Besides, we're talking about a handful of eligible cars here and the ITAC now has the power to correct mistakes.

How many cars are we talking about that are 1) NA, 2) aren't forced induction, 3) Have hp that fits in the IT framework? Four? Five? Three? Class em up.

Ron

[cjb25hs]

Some say love. I say it could be hate.

How many cars are we talking about that are 1) NA, 2) aren't forced induction, 3) Have hp that fits in the IT framework? Four? Five? Three? Class em up.

Ron

Probably somewhere between 20 to 30 mostly variants of Subaru, Audi/VW and a few off the wall hard to find Japanese cars like the AWD protege and ????

[RSTPerformance]

Playing devil's advocate then, Raymond - why would anyone want to run, say, a 4000 Quattro rather than a Coupe?

Seems like, if there's no perceived advantage, folks won't run one. If people don't want to run them, why list them...?

K

Every Audi nut in the world wants to race AWD... That is what makes an Audi an Audi. The front wheel drive cars are just for us that have settled on the best we could get.
I don't think it is an advantage and could be a disadvantage but sometimes we race cars we love and do the best we can do with it.... Goes back to were not all in it to win!

*I know, LMP cars are not AWD and yes somehow all the Audi people look past it!!!

Raymond