I read that math as this:
112*1.25*17+50 for mid-engine.
I read that math as this:
112*1.25*17+50 for mid-engine.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
IMPROVED TOURING
Should the current Improved Touring wheel diameter restrictions be removed or otherwise adjusted? Please let us know your preferences. (Current restrictions on wheel widths would not change.)
I'd be interested in hearing the basis/reason for that request. 15" wheels are probably the most-common, and thus relatively-least-expensive, size in aftermarket racing wheels one can find. You start going to something bigger and you're talking significantly less-available, significantly heavier, and significantly more expensive.
If anything, I'd say dump the width restrictions. But diameter?
Some cars may see benefit from smaller than stock wheels - ITB Suzuki Swift for example.
It came about this way. Someone with a car (I can't remember make but it is not in ITR) claims that only 16X7s came on the car. So technically he can't run his stock wheel size (I believe only ITR has the allowance for max 17" diamater OR stock, whichever is larger).
That prompted a discussion about wheel size and one of the points made is exactly what Grafton said -- diameter on a wheel is basically cheap gearing.
I'm presonally opposed to the change but willing to listen. Opening up width is where the dollars are in my view. Diameter might have some impact on handling due to sidewall size and strength of various profile tires, but overall, not a lot of change (in my opinion) to performance other than, again, cheap gearing.
I don't see a need, but let's hear what others have to say.
NC Region
1980 ITS Triumph TR8
Jeff,
I believe that is incorrect. In Errors and Omissions of FastTrack of October 2010: "Improved Turing ITR #2477 (David Karably) wheel size. The wheel diameter rules have not changed. ITR is allowed any wheel up to 17inch."
GCR IT rules: D 7 Wheels and Tires, a.1 states in the last sentence, "Cars classified in ITR may utilize any wheel diameter up to 17" or retain their stock diameter wheels if larger."
The wording I see allows any size up to 17", including those smaller than stock.
I could be wrong.
Bill
Bill Frieder
MGP Racing
Buffalo, New York
Think about it practically as well.
It's probably not easy to find a 18X7 wheel for example.
Kind of "meh" on this one, but let's hear what people think.
NC Region
1980 ITS Triumph TR8
Interesting requests to move down to ITS from ITR (MX-5 and Boxter). I think the Mazda is right in ITR, but can see why the question was asked, but the Porsche? Come on, no question that one belongs in ITR.
LOL If the MR2 ever got to 2260, I'd dump my car in a heartbeat and would begin an MR2 build.1. - the MR2 weight change. great to see motion on this. unfortunately, while a 95# drop is good, by "process" it's still very heavy. I'm affraid that some motion in the right direction might end up keeping it from getting all the way to where it "belongs" in terms of hp/weight as it will be seen as "fixed." the car "should" be 2260# - i think we would all be happy at 2350, or 5hp optimistic.
Dave Gran
Real Roads, Real Car Guys – Real World Road Tests
Go Ahead - Take the Wheel's Free Guide to Racing
Untrue Ron. To me, it looks like guys with actual knowledge of MX-5 Cup and GAC cars have written in and asked that the MX-5 be put in a class that it can actually make weight. That IS the classing philosophy and it applies to the MX-5. It will be a pig, but it will be a pig that can make weight.
The Boxster was just Ben having a brain-fart.
What was the website again to give member feedback?
Personally I see no performance impact from removing the restriction on wheel diameters. Different overall diameters to adjust gearing are already allowed, if the desired aspect ratio is available for that particular width. Bigger rims are heavier and slower, by all means allow them. Allow them for the same reason that big brake kits were allowed for solo/autocross competition. No performance advantage, potentially a performance disadvantage. But it increases the appeal to the tuner crowd who struggles to understand the arcane SCCA rules.
I would love to run a 13 on my 84 GTI.... Cheep, I have wheels, and I might be able to use 5th.....
______________
Waterhaus Racing is Back!
NRSCCA Competition Chair
BOG Member
"Nebraska organizing committees
to race in Iowa & Ne board thing "
Still working on a name...
X-MVRG Member...
ITB Rabbit/ITA Miata
for those running stiff rear springs, the added rim diameter would EDIT: RAISE the spring rate of the tire by reducing sidewall.
Last edited by mossaidis; 01-21-2011 at 12:24 PM.
Demetrius Mossaidis aka 'Mickey' #12 ITA NESCCA
'92 Honda Civic Si
STFU and "Then write a letter. www.crbscca.com"
2013 ITA NARRC Champion and I have not raced since.
ITx comments only - I'll go vent in the ST areas as needed.
1. - the MR2 weight change. great to see motion on this. unfortunately, while a 95# drop is good, by "process" it's still very heavy. I'm affraid that some motion in the right direction might end up keeping it from getting all the way to where it "belongs" in terms of hp/weight as it will be seen as "fixed." the car "should" be 2260# - i think we would all be happy at 2350, or 5hp optimistic.
2. - wheel sizes: the ITC VW beetle is the most discussed of the new breed of small cars with big wheels. find a >15" diameter x6" wheel. currently, going smaller is not allowed, so such cars would be stuck with rare/custom ($$$$) or stock (###) and also have to run larger ($$$) tires than much of their competition. obviously, this is more true for ITB/C. in all classes, the ability to pick wheel sizes is "cheap gearing". again - it can go sideways here, like anywhere else, if someone is willing to throw down the moolah. so it goes in racing. I say open it up.
and on EP - Greg Ira wrote in requesting a re-weigh and the response is "no, but we'll adjust this stuff instead..." I laughed for about 5 minutes before I could get to reading the list. -50# to a bunch of stuff.
Greg asked that the Miata have 113 pounds ADDED. Instead, he got 50 pounds REMOVED from 4 cars, and 100 pounds removed from the 260Z. I THINK Greg's a Datsun guy, and it's a memory stretch, but I think he's a 260 guy, so if my very hazy memory is correct, he kinda sorta got what he wanted, well, within 13 pounds, LOL
Regarding the MR2-. Andy's math is no doubt correct, and well, I think there is no way, nada, zilch, zeeeero, zed chance that the 25% factor will get lowered for that car, even if god himself presents dyno sheets from 5 engines and all ITAC guys witness the builds and dyno runs.
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
Bookmarks