The demise of ITR at WDC

[yannisalex2000]

Marrs 5 came and went without an ITR entry.For the past two seasons at the majority of MARRS events I was the only driver to show up and represent the class.Since I dont intend to bring my ITR car at SP again(unless ITR is moved out of B I am afraid this is the end of the class at the region.


John Alexandropoulos

#53 ITR
WDC Region

[Knestis]

It seems to be WAY to early to call it dead.

K

[RedMisted]

New class featuring many cars that would need to be built in order to race. (Wanna race a car like mine? You'll have to build one yourself, because you're not going to find an already-constructed Mustang V6 unless you offer me a ridiculous sum for mine.) Couple that with the rotten economy and it's easy to see why ITR isn't catching on. My guess is that it'll be a few years before it does, but I'm staying the course...

[benspeed]

I'm with John - classing ITR in Big Bore is a bust. I asked about moving it out before MARRS I this year and was told the rationale for why it runs with Big Bore. Being a good citizen I supported that but after the race I confirmed to the other ITR guys - no thanks, not coming back for more...

[JeffYoung]

ITR runs fine with S and A and IT7 in SEDiv and I would think that is the natural place for it.

[yannisalex2000]

ITR runs fine with S and A and IT7 in SEDiv and I would think that is the natural place for it.

That's why I am going to be racing with you guys really soon.

[Knestis]

I'm with John - classing ITR in Big Bore is a bust. I asked about moving it out before MARRS I this year and was told the rationale for why it runs with Big Bore. Being a good citizen I supported that but after the race I confirmed to the other ITR guys - no thanks, not coming back for more...

So out of curiosity, what was the rationale?

K

[Gregg]

ITR was moved to Big Bore for the '09 season--the same time the MARRS weekend contracted from 10 (yes 10) run groups to eight. The last year that ITR ran with ITA and ITS there was an average of two ITR cars (the same as '08). The faster of the two ITR cars commonly would lap all but one ITA car twice. This was at a time when the ITR field was not running, shall we say top notch builds. The ITR car that commonly won was running slower laps than Ed York's pre-Great Alignment ITS E36.

At the time of the contraction, the ITA/IT7/T3/SRX7 group was averaging over 40 cars (w/ a max of 50), and the ITS/ITB/SS group also averaged over 40 cars. ITR, with only two cars average was placed in BB, which:

• Was averaging < 25 cars
• Was averaging two GT1 cars
• Would place ITR in with speed-comparable cars

ITR remained at a three car average until the owner of one of the cars sold his only race car (he remains of the region's BoD), and one decided to put the restrictor his E36 and run ITS due to the larger (10+ car) fields. The 3rd car is the O.P. here.

The region moved to nine run groups last year in order to split Small Bore and SRF separately, but the number of non-ITR cars in Big Bore has dropped drastically in the past two years. The chief complaint we heard from the few ITR cars running was an issue running in the same run group as American Sedan. We are currently averaging two AS cars in BB.

So to put things in perspective there are really three MARRS run groups that ITR could currently be placed in:

1. ITS/ITB/ITC/SS -- Most of the ITB cars lose at least one lap currently, many lose two. If you place the few ITR cars in this run group, you have what is regularly the largest ITB field in the nation losing three or more laps per race. As for the ITC cars, they would likely encounter the same speed differential to the ITR cars as the ITR cars have with GT1 cars.
2. ITA/IT7/SRX7/T3 -- You will have approx. 20 ITA cars losing at least one lap, and if past history is an indicator, at least 15 will lose two laps per race.
3. BB -- the three current ITR cars would lose, at most, one lap and would be running in run group with far less density than the other two.

For the record, we did not consider placing ITR in the 40+ car SSM run group or the 35+ car SM run group.

Since Day 1 the ITR drivers have pitched the reason to be removed from BB as a safety issue. Given the dearth of GT1 cars running at the regional level (and in the MARRS series in particular), the fact that AS traditionally runs in BB w/ the same lap times w/out a perceived safety issue, as well as the sheer lack of density in that run group, the region's Club Racing Committee (CRC), which is made up of representatives from each run group as well as each of the volunteer specialties, decided to keep ITR in that run group for '11, even with lower overall turnout for events in '10.

Might the number of ITR cars increased w/out the move to BB? Perhaps, but we saw no change in the number of entrants post-move from pre-move and when coordinating our events need to plan for the interests of all of our racers. And frankly, 50 ITA/ITB/ITC/IT7/SRX7 drivers should have the same right to a good racing experience that the three ITR racers do.

[benspeed]

So out of curiosity, what was the rationale?

K

The rationale was that ITR was better suited to run with the big bore cars because of lap times, closing speeds and ITR drivers messing up the S and A races.

After the race I was of the opinion that those should be the reasons to move R back with S and A...can't comment on R guys messing up the races for S and A guys.

But what I respected was they drivers reps were very clear about communicating with me. They were very clear that this run group was the way they wanted it and they weren't changing. Sorta disappointing but hey, no shortage of places to race and it looks like the R guys from Summit have been coming to NJMP which is great for that track.

[erlrich]

New class featuring many cars that would need to be built in order to race. (Wanna race a car like mine? You'll have to build one yourself, because you're not going to find an already-constructed Mustang V6 unless you offer me a ridiculous sum for mine.) Couple that with the rotten economy and it's easy to see why ITR isn't catching on. My guess is that it'll be a few years before it does, but I'm staying the course...

Problem is, there used to be 4-5 ITR cars that ran in the DC region on a somewhat regular basis prior to them moving into big bore. They ran with us in ITA, and with the exception of 1 or 2 individual drivers - which you get in every class - we had pretty much zero problems. Yeah, most if not all of the ITA cars were getting lapped, but hey that's just part of the multi-class racing deal.

[lateapex911]

Every dog wants to be the big dog......
But yea, ITS or the ITA group would be the best fit. Assuming car counts allow it. From what I've seen at Summit, they do. I don't understand the managements reasons for the grouping.

[gran racing]

Earl, that sounds pretty funny. Yeah, 1 or 2 drivers out of 4. LOL

ITR cars are not inexpensive to run or build. When people can run against large competitive fields in other classes, the lure diminishes for ITR. Tristian ran in ITR for a little while but ask him if he missed some of the good ITB races.

The ITS group is okay for ITR cars while there are limited numbers. Increase the fields and now you have two classed right next to each other in speed which we usually try to avoid.

I think eventually ITR will continue to grow but it'll take some time. The grouping? Hell, isn't that the same thing we tell the winged cars often times? Grow your field and you'll be able to get into a different group.

[Ron Earp]

Again, why was ITR grouped with big bore cars in the first place? ITR fits perfectly wherever ITS is, and if the ITR cars are not well developed and driven they'll be slower than the top ITS cars.

Was common sense thrown out the window with grouping ITR with big bore? I attend test days that have "Over 3L" and "Under 3L" classes. I sure as hell don't run my ITS Mustang in the over 3L group although it is at 3.8L. Only takes 10 seconds of speaking with the operating authority of the test day to get that cleared up and the car in the group where it belongs.

[dave parker]

Again, why was ITR grouped with big bore cars in the first place? ITR fits perfectly wherever ITS is, and if the ITR cars are not well developed and driven they'll be slower than the top ITS cars.

Was common sense thrown out the window with grouping ITR with big bore? I attend test days that have "Over 3L" and "Under 3L" classes. I sure as hell don't run my ITS Mustang in the over 3L group although it is at 3.8L. Only takes 10 seconds of speaking with the operating authority of the test day to get that cleared up and the car in the group where it belongs.

Ron
ITR was grouped with Big Bore at the request of its then drivers representative to the CRC, Marshall Lytle. I was not on the CRC at the time so I do not know what reasons were given. Any issue with that should be taken up with either him or the current ITR drivers representative.

ITR is being given a chance to run outside of the Big Bore group (with ITA and SM5) for the IT National Tour event during the Labor Day Double. It was the right thing to do for this race (and for future races IMO).
The ITR drivers are being given a golden opportunity to race at Summit Point and prove to the region leadership that there is a reason to permanently move them out of the Big Bore group. It is their choice.

However, if no ITR drivers run at Summit Point for the Labor Day Double then there is no opportunity to make the change.

I have zero to gain in this scenario other than to move a class from a group that it should not be in, to a group where it fits. However, there has to be some effort put forth by the ITR drivers to prove that they want this change to happen. No effort= No change, pretty simple.


cheers
dave parker