IT Process - Run All IT Cars Through it or not?

[Ron Earp]

The new directive from the CRB states that the IT classification process will not be used to re-run all the cars currently classed in IT, that it can only be used for new cars coming into IT. Some members don't want this to happen and want IT left alone. Some members want all the cars, new and existing, run through the process to level the field and correct possible disparities. What do you think? Let's have a poll....

[gran racing]

Can you add one more option? Run cars through the process which the ITAC receives requests for?

People that care can take a minute or two and write a simple request.
Cars that people don't care about won't consume the ITAC's time.
It allows the ITAC to process requests in the order which they are received with some potential exceptions.

But all of this is meaningless at this point.

[quadzjr]

Agree with Dave.. need a third option.

[gran racing]

Ron, smack me across the back of the head and delete that other option if you'd like. Thought I'd add it before people start answering no based on the orignal options.

[Ron Earp]

Ron, smack me across the back of the head and delete that other option if you'd like. Thought I'd add it before people start answering no based on the orignal options.

Good idea, thanks. No sense in having a poll that forces people to choose an option they don't want. That would be too much like a Presidential election.

[MMiskoe]

Not to nit-pick, but I'd be much more in favor of running all cars but telling people up front that there may not be any changes, especially for any car +/- 50# of its current weight.

Why all cars weren't run through the process aready is a complete mystery to me. I obviously don't get it.

[Knestis]

Can you add one more option? Run cars through the process which the ITAC receives requests for?

People that care can take a minute or two and write a simple request.
Cars that people don't care about won't consume the ITAC's time.
It allows the ITAC to process requests in the order which they are received with some potential exceptions.

But all of this is meaningless at this point.

That reflects what I think is the best answer, and the one I advocated for on the ITAC. At this point though, it's a lost cause unless someone can sway the BoD's thinking and the influence trickles down the the CRB.

K

[JeffYoung]

I agreed with this approach as well. Leave cars untouched unless asked, and then process them.

The CRB sees this as a "comp adjustment" -- I disagree for the reasons Andy set forth above.

However, I do want to say there aren't any black helicopters here. The CRB believes it is doing what is in the best interests of IT. I disagree, and we have a fundamental culture clash (as Andy notes), but I respect their motivatinons, which are well intentioned.

[seckerich]

What the CRB wants is not well served by ignoring all but new classifications. These new cars are slow to get built unless they are a class leader and have little impact on the general IT population. Cars should be looked at on a per request basis to see if they are correctly classed. Not ignored because the current CRB thinks everything is OK so don't mess with it. I understand you might as well have kicked Keane in the head with the Audi deal, but there are plenty of other examples of misclassed cars. Limit the requests to a "rules season" so all changes are set in place by first race of following season. Then no changes until the following year. Gives you 6 months or more to gather data on the requests and make informed decisions. All this is based on still having a viable ITAC in place. We no longer have that.

[raffaelli]

The new directive from the CRB states that the IT classification process will not be used to re-run all the cars currently classed in IT, that it can only be used for new cars coming into IT. Some members don't want this to happen and want IT left alone. Some members want all the cars, new and existing, run through the process to level the field and correct possible disparities. What do you think? Let's have a poll....

You forgot the 'only if it benefits me' category.

[seckerich]

The most recent fastrack should answer this thread. F you, go away. Notice all the proposals out for member input? Welcome back to year 2000 in IT where you have a place to play and anything else is too much of a bother for the CRB or BOD. You could see the brass ring, almost touch it, and then you just went a little too far up the political ladder and the power structure. STU RX8 under construction. Screw IT until we get some of the current CRB replaced. Looking forward to December.

[Knestis]

Whadya mean, Steve? There's nothing in the new Fastrack about IT...

<removes tongue from cheek>

K

[RSTPerformance]

Whadya mean, Steve? There's nothing in the new Fastrack about IT...

<removes tongue from cheek>

K

Am I missing something??? I didn't see anything and I was promised by the CRB chair that I would see something...

Also does this make sense, displacement to power ratio being used to determine a cars competitiveness? <--- Should be displacement to weight ratio, NOT displacement to power.

Raymond

[seckerich]

Welcome to SCCA. You want action then change the wording in the IT specs about no guarantee of competitiveness. This is the BS they always bring up when their ox is gored. Welcome to musical chairs and everyone that matters has a seat. Good luck with the next game. If you call you will be told it somehow was too late to make fastrack. Very convenient how that seems to happen just when time runs out to get anything done for 2010. You have no say in the game so get used to it or work to change the system from the top down.

[JoshS]

Also does this make sense, displacement to power ratio being used to determine a cars competitiveness?

What are you reading that talks about displacement-to-power ratios?