December Fastrack is out!

[GKR_17]

Not true completely. The 2005 RX8 is now able to be classed with proper data so they were free to look at the numbers.

That's about as weak a justification as I've seen. Even so, that year isn't classed so it's clearly not true.

[Ron Earp]

I think a lot the ITR cars are under "tired" for their weight. I never understood why the BMW's 8.5 wide rims were arbitrarily choosen for the class size. They may be common for that car but 9" rims would have been cheaper and more widely available. .

Yes, that is one aspect of compromise with ITR. When drafting the proposal we were told the 325 was the target car. That was bad in one respect for the wheel width, but more importantly it limited the hp and wt for the entire class. 189 stock hp was a bit "low" for the class and sort of forced ITR to be limited in scope.

In hind sight I'd have pushed (although I have zero influence) to keep the 325 in ITS at the correct weight, about 2800-2900 lbs, and left it out of ITR entirely. Heavy (relatively, but still very racable) in S would have only affected the BMW, but light in R limits the R class.

Wheels could still be opened up. Not enough R cars racing to matter. Write a letter.

[Andy Bettencourt]

In hind sight I'd have pushed (although I have zero influence) to keep the 325 in ITS at the correct weight, about 2800-2900 lbs, and left it out of ITR entirely. Heavy (relatively, but still very racable) in S would have only affected the BMW, but light in R limits the R class.

Try 3170lbs in ITS.

[Ron Earp]

Try 3170lbs in ITS.

Aren't you on a call?

Really, that high? I've not done the arithmetic for a few years but that seems a bit excessive, especially when considering the weight people wanted to put on the car years ago and "only" end up at 2900 lbs, without restrictor. Man, people were way more wrong than they thought.

3170 in S or 26XX in R? 500lbs difference?

[Cheyne]

Want to race a V8 Mustang? Race the SN95 chassis and like it, they are damn cheap to purchase. Just impossible to please all the people all the time.

I have decided to build a ITR Mustang and will be using a SN95 that I just bought for the project. I should have it out sometime this summer. I do wish 17x9 wheels were a choice instead of 17x8.5 since the 17x9 is the common Mustang wheel. BTW I you are correct they can be had cheap. Found mine just south of Iowa City on Craigslist and paid $1200 for a 1995 Mustang GT with 95,000 miles. I figure it should cost me around $6k to $7k which is a lot better than the $90k I spend on my WCGT Mustang.

Cheyne Daggett

[Andy Bettencourt]

Aren't you on a call?

Really, that high? I've not done the arithmetic for a few years but that seems a bit excessive, especially when considering the weight people wanted to put on the car years ago and "only" end up at 2900 lbs, without restrictor. Man, people were way more wrong than they thought.

3170 in S or 26XX in R? 500lbs difference?

2765 in ITR and 3170 in ITS using the same projected hp levels. Just a difference in power to weight targets of the two classes.

[robits325is]

Try 3170lbs in ITS.

How can it be so high? At that weight the 325 wouldn't even have a chance against the RX-7.

[JeffYoung]

It has between 30 and 40 more wheel horsepower.

[Andy Bettencourt]

How can it be so high? At that weight the 325 wouldn't even have a chance against the RX-7.

170lbs more than your car Rob, and how much more power?

[924Guy]

Thanks Andy, I knew the spec 944 was making an honest 200+ and figured more from the 944 in IT build.

Seriously??? RWHP?? Are you talking about a 2.7L??

[Andy Bettencourt]

Seriously??? RWHP?? Are you talking about a 2.7L??

I was talking about the ITR 944 S2

[Dave Gomberg]

Greg:

FYI, prior to 2004, the fee for a ruling was $650. In 2004 it was lowered to $250 to encourage people to use the process. In 2008, when the process was changed to allow the member to choose to halt things after the first court's decision, the total fee went to $300. As I said already, the number of times the process was stopped before going to the CoA turned out to be so small that the CoA did not think the delays introduced outweighed any perceived advantages.

Dave

[924Guy]

I was talking about the ITR 944 S2

Ah, OK, thanks - thought you were talking about 2.5L Spec 944's! :eek:

[Fastfred92]

Ah, OK, thanks - thought you were talking about 2.5L Spec 944's! :eek:

No Vaugahn, the 944 NA is in permanent IT purgatory because it does not wear a Mazda badge on it's hood.....

[Knestis]

Fred's back! Hey, Fred...

Kirk

[Fastfred92]

Hello Kirk, Fred here continuing to lurk with economically clipped wings

[billf]

I have decided to build a ITR Mustang and will be using a SN95 that I just bought for the project. I should have it out sometime this summer. I do wish 17x9 wheels were a choice instead of 17x8.5 since the 17x9 is the common Mustang wheel. BTW I you are correct they can be had cheap. Found mine just south of Iowa City on Craigslist and paid $1200 for a 1995 Mustang GT with 95,000 miles. I figure it should cost me around $6k to $7k which is a lot better than the $90k I spend on my WCGT Mustang.

Cheyne Daggett

Chenye,

I too am building an SN 95, 2002. Also hope to have it ready for the coming season. We should talk, to compare notes? I have had extensive experience with a Fox or two, and now will put it to good use in the SN 95.

write me at [email protected]

Bill

[Z3_GoCar]

Aren't you on a call?

Really, that high? I've not done the arithmetic for a few years but that seems a bit excessive, especially when considering the weight people wanted to put on the car years ago and "only" end up at 2900 lbs, without restrictor. Man, people were way more wrong than they thought.

3170 in S or 26XX in R? 500lbs difference?

Then where does this leave my 189hp car that's saddled with the weight of the follow on 194hp brother? Seriously, they're different blocks heads and intake manifolds, the only thing I can use between them is the head bolts. If you can tell it's a different motor just by opening the hood, shouldn't they be on a seperate spec line? Given that the VIN rule's no longer applicable, you'd think the motor is what determines the cars weight...

[Ron Earp]

Chenye,

I too am building an SN 95, 2002. Also hope to have it ready for the coming season. We should talk, to compare notes? I have had extensive experience with a Fox or two, and now will put it to good use in the SN 95.

write me at [email protected]

Bill

I'm happy to hear about all the Mustangs coming into ITR. I have heard of two ITR Camaros too. It means we did the right thing with the class and the SCCA has been hard headed for many years about domestic cars in IT. Ruin the look of R my ass........

Then where does this leave my 189hp car that's saddled with the weight of the follow on 194hp brother? ..

Well, that leaves you with deciding if you can get by with the lower displacement engine or if you'd like to step up to the other engine on the spec line. Or alternatively maybe you can write a letter and get them separated out into two weights. It is Christmas time you know.

[JoshS]

Then where does this leave my 189hp car that's saddled with the weight of the follow on 194hp brother? Seriously, they're different blocks heads and intake manifolds, the only thing I can use between them is the head bolts. If you can tell it's a different motor just by opening the hood, shouldn't they be on a seperate spec line? Given that the VIN rule's no longer applicable, you'd think the motor is what determines the cars weight...

James, write a letter, we'll see what we can do.

For those who are wondering, the '97-'98 Z3 2.8 used the E36 328i motor (189hp), but the '99-'00 Z3 2.8 used the E46 328i motor (193hp), which is a different engine, albeit the same bore/stroke.