May 2011 Fastrack

[JeffYoung]

I do agree with Travis that any car that has gone through the Process has a fighting chance.

After that, while certainly some cars have inherent advantages and disadvantages, for the most part with enough time and money and development and driver skill I think most cars in the ITCS could run up front.

It's just way smarter to push the easy button and get a proven winner.

People told Greg the NX couldn't win. Told Ron the 260 couldn't win. Told me the TR8 couldn't win. I remember when people said the ITA Miata couldn't win on power tracks. People said the 325e couldn't win. People said Corrado and GSR couldn't win in ITS since they were FWD.

Lots of "people saids" that got proven wrong by hard work and development.

[924Guy]

Lots of "people saids" that got proven wrong by hard work and development.

+1 to that - I think my car's another good example.

You can't get to the front, at least on a scene as big as the ARRC, without effort and development on the same level as the other front runners. Just because it seems like a lot to you (addressed generally, not at Jeff) doesn't mean it's on-par with the pointy end of the grid. It takes resources - time and money - knowledge, and talent.

That's why we like it.

(well, OK, so not the money part, but otherwise...)

[JeffYoung]

It is pretty astounding the level of work and effort and development that is required to run up front in IT.

+1 to that - I think my car's another good example.

You can't get to the front, at least on a scene as big as the ARRC, without effort and development on the same level as the other front runners. Just because it seems like a lot to you (addressed generally, not at Jeff) doesn't mean it's on-par with the pointy end of the grid. It takes resources - time and money - knowledge, and talent.

That's why we like it.

(well, OK, so not the money part, but otherwise...)

[Russ Myers]

No jeff. Ain't done all those things yet. Hell, just had the car out for the first time last month at CMP. I will get to them eventually, as time and money permit, but I just like to poke at hornets nests. Gee wilikers, I race a Pinto, for cryin' out loud. Obviously , my self esteem is pretty (high, low). Take your choice.

Russ
ITB Pinto #9

And I have managed to take 10lbs. of ballast off of that adjustable spacer that fits between the seat back and the steering wheel in the last two months.

[JLawton]

It is pretty astounding the level of work and effort and development that is required to run up front in IT.

I think that has been the reason for so much debating on the process. Most people do not understand what a 10/10ths car is. And remember, it's not just a 10/10ths car but a 10/10ths program!

People always blame the car.................

Andy and I have these discussions all the time............


.

[JeffYoung]

10/10ths of truth.

I certainly did not (and still don't fully) but I get it enough to know that most people complaining about someone else's car and how the weighting/classing system is unfair don't really know much about what it takes to make someone else's car run up front.

I think that has been the reason for so much debating on the process. Most people do not understand what a 10/10ths car is. And remember, it's not just a 10/10ths car but a 10/10ths program!

People always blame the car.................

Andy and I have these discussions all the time............


.

[CRallo]

The process didn't fail the Rx7, people did... simply put

Travis - really? You're going to hold up a car that was a full 6 seconds off the leader's time as an example of a car that can be competitive? And as to the RX7, why isn't that a valid example? You guys are saying that every car in IT has a fighting chance at being a front-runner. I'm saying that's not the case. There have been many discussion about the cars at the front of the fields, so I'm not going to touch those, but what about the cars at the other end? What does the process do for them?

And I'll be the first to agree (and this has been stated by many more knowledgeable guys here), in most classes we have seen improvement in the number of cars that can compete at the front; but to say that every car in IT, or even every car that has been through the process, has a fighting chance is just wrong IMO. There are still the cars to have in each class, and there are still the perpetual back markers. I realize that in a class like IT, where there are relatively few cars that are developed to the limit of the rules it is hard to draw conclusions. I also know there are a lot of guys who know a helluva lot more than I do about building winning race cars who would be building some of these other cars if they had any potential at all.

All I'm saying, and it has been stated in numerous discussions before, is that the process does not focus on outcomes, it does not care about results, and it could not and does not attempt to take into consideration every factor that makes one car better than another. And as such it can never be expected to produce results that are equal; and IMO we've already seen examples of that. But, that's another discussion.

[JeffYoung]

Using the Process, it's really a B car. Where it would probably thrive.

[gran racing]

I do agree with Travis that any car that has gone through the Process has a fighting chance.

Which version of the process? <ducks>

I agree, it has a fighting chance to run toward the front as long as the top choice cars don't exist in quantity, that are also well built and well driven. Regardless, there are still cars which have proven itself to run at the front, and there are cars which do quite well within the confines of the process even if not driven the best.

on the same level as the other front runners.

I've often thought it would be interesting to see a graph that illustrates how driver talent versus the car built (prep level, and car picked) would work out. I know that's not possible to do, unfortunately.

The "process" is FAR from perfect. It only takes a few things into consideration, and not nearly enough to get close to that perfection status. With the number of makes and models out there, that would be an enormous feet. But hey, it's Club Racing and it's too broad of a scope. As it's been said before, it's about getting it close and having a fighting chance. I've always thought that I'm cool with having to be a bit of a better driver than the next guy, but don't put a freakin' anchor on the damn car so there's no way it could win. But of course we'll always want more, after all this is racing.

[Ron Earp]

Using the Process, it's really a B car. Where it would probably thrive.

Was consideration given to putting the 12A RX7 in B? Seems like a perfect fit. Be a bit heavier than it is now in IT7/SRX7 I'd suppose but sure sounds interesting for B competition.

What happens if you run it through the current process (taking into account it is a voodoo motor)?

[Eagle7]

Using the Process, it's really a B car. Where it would probably thrive.

Seems like the perfect candidate for dual classification.

[CRallo]

this is an old issue... a lot of discussion exists elsewhere on the forum for anyone interested in reading up

Seems like the perfect candidate for dual classification.

I agree with this

Was consideration given to putting the 12A RX7 in B? Seems like a perfect fit. Be a bit heavier than it is now in IT7/SRX7 I'd suppose but sure sounds interesting for B competition.

What happens if you run it through the current process (taking into account it is a voodoo motor)?

the issue supposedly was cage rules and the weight it would be in B was an issue for many existing cars :/

I did the math recently and it works out to about a 40 or 45 percent gain IIRC!!! lol

[Greg Amy]

Final is up:

http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...strack-may.pdf

[wepsbee]

My sister and I have Ford Escort GT's in the ITA class. We have been told by a few drivers and builders that this is not a competitive car in ITA. We just keep on trying
and have a bunch of fun along the way.

[rsportvolvo]

Nothing on the Volvo 240 re-process. Any updates?

[JeffYoung]

Still being discussed David - we are looking at all of the ITB Volvos, and still collecting some data. Thanks for your patience on this. I know you have been waiting a while.

[gran racing]

Even I was a bit surprised to hear that the 240 is rumored to gain an extra 130 lbs. Oh well.

[CRallo]

You scared me for a second Dave! lol

[rsportvolvo]

Still being discussed David - we are looking at all of the ITB Volvos, and still collecting some data. Thanks for your patience on this. I know you have been waiting a while.

Thanks for the feedback.

[lateapex911]

Was consideration given to putting the 12A RX7 in B? Seems like a perfect fit. Be a bit heavier than it is now in IT7/SRX7 I'd suppose but sure sounds interesting for B competition.

What happens if you run it through the current process (taking into account it is a voodoo motor)?

The ITAC doesn't like dual classification. It's not my first choice either, but I could be talked into it in certain cases. (ITR cars from ITS, for example).

The RX7: About half the cars, as near as we could tell, would have needed new cages when the move to B was discussed. ALL the cars would have to get rid of their wheels and tires, ($$$) and find new 6 x 13" wheels and tires ($$$)

And, it really isn't competitive in A (except 1 car, of, what, a thousand country wide over the years(?)and even then, there's never been one that ran really up front at the ARRCs, but....)...so applying the same numbers in B would yield the same results.

Now, IF it weren't saddled with the factor it currently has in A when it were to be moved to B, then maybe it could do OK. Right now, a very well driven well prepped 7 is juuuusst ahead of top ITB guys. Add the 350lbs though, and forget about that!

So, when it was discussed, there was the Process issue, and the cage issue, and the wheel issue. In the end, my thinking was, "Why bother jumping through so many hoops at such great expense when the ITAC will just apply the same factor and it will be a backmarker in B?"