Curious About D.C. Region IT racing

[benspeed]

I have to chime in on the DC Region's desire to run ITR with big bore. It's a deal killer for the ITR class. Guys, take a look at the participant levels of this class which is growing most places but DC. Characterizing the ITR guys as very aggresive is the same thing as saying the Miata guys are wreckers. I call BS on both characterizations.

I think a group of folks has bitched to the powers that be at DC and as a result the ITR guys got screwed. To Andy's point, if ITR was run in the Northeast Region with Big Bore, it would kill the class. Seems to me some guys in DC have dug their heads into the sand and ought poke up and take a look around at places that are doing a great job of growing the class instead of killing it...

[StephenB]

+1

[ajmr2]

Characterizing the ITR guys as very aggresive is the same thing as saying the Miata guys are wreckers. I call BS on both characterizations.

I said some were, which means most were not, and there were only a handful of ITRs at the time. In 2008 the MR2 was in ITA and ITR & ITS were in the same group with us. In my personal opinion, adding ITR to ITS, with the intention of growing the class, would not be a good fit in a group with ITB, ITC, SSB & SSC. A better fit might be running with ITA, since thier lap times have improved dramatically over the last couple years.

Not trying to stir anything up here.

[Gregg]

Since some people here like posting the same things over and over and over and over again, I'll just repost this history of ITR in the MARRS series:

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 on 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.

Here is a sampling of 2011 MARRS Big Bore participation, including the classes most talked about in the previously referenced thread. For the complete breakdown, you can see all of the results here:
http://wdcr-scca.org/ClubRacing/Even...5/Default.aspx

MARRS1 (Total cars: 17 / Finishers: 16)
GT1: 2 (+1 DNF)
AS: 3
ITR: 4 (winner finished 6th)

MARRS4 (Total cars: 12 / Finishers: 11)
GT1: 2 (+1 DNF)
AS: 4
ITR: 1 (finished 7th)

MARRS5 (Total cars: 12 / Finishers: 11)
GT1: 1
AS: 3
ITR: 0

MARRS7 / Labor Day Double (Total cars: 23 / Finishers: 22)
GT1: 3
AS: 4
ITR: 2 (winner finished 11th)

MARRS8 / Labor Day Double (Total cars: 13 / Finishers: 12)
GT1: 1 (+1 DNF)
AS: 3
ITR: 1 (finished 5th)

MARRS9 (Total cars: 19 / Finishers: 18)
GT1: 0 (+1 DNF)
AS: 4
ITR: 0

That said (again), the CRC will be meeting multiple times this winter (next meeting: 12/17/11), and will decide on format and groupings for all 2012 MARRS events. If you drive ITR, and can commit to running multiple 2012 MARRS events, I would strongly recommend that you contact your Drivers' Rep to the CRC.

[jjjanos]

I have to chime in on the DC Region's desire to run ITR with big bore. It's a deal killer for the ITR class. Guys, take a look at the participant levels of this class which is growing most places but DC. Characterizing the ITR guys as very aggresive is the same thing as saying the Miata guys are wreckers. I call BS on both characterizations.

I think a group of folks has bitched to the powers that be at DC and as a result the ITR guys got screwed. To Andy's point, if ITR was run in the Northeast Region with Big Bore, it would kill the class. Seems to me some guys in DC have dug their heads into the sand and ought poke up and take a look around at places that are doing a great job of growing the class instead of killing it...

ITR and ITS were placed with Big Bore when DC Region went from 9 run groups to 8 run groups. At that time, the majority of these cars were running ITB lap times and the drivers suffered from a lack of situational awareness. The class counts, etc made putting them in with Big Bore the only solution in the set of feasible solutions. (The least harm/greatest good would have combined the open-wheel cars into a single group, but these was taken off the table.)

Putting them with Big Bore, rather than ITB/C was a strategic decision. The majority of ITS/ITR cars were, at that time, parking it in the corners and powering down the straights to lap at ITBish times. We had 2 options -- put them were they would fubar the ITB race (and ITB out numbered the combined ITS/ITR by a factor of around 3) or put them with Big Bore where it the rest of the cars had the HP to get past a turn-parking ITS/ITR car.

In the middle of that first year, ITS was moved to ITB and IT7 moved from ITB/C to ITA. There were two reasons for this -- first, the ITA car counts were lower than expected, allowing IT7 to move. Second, the rest of Big Bore were up in arms by midyear over situational awareness issues, erratic driving, etc. and the offending class was moved to ITB.

I am not certain why ITR was not moved as well.

As for growing ITR by putting them with ITB -- pffffft. Go and change your maxipad. The gap between a regional-running GT1 car and an ITR car is around 10 seconds. The gap between an ITR car and an ITC car is the same.

You are suggesting that the Region grow ITR on the backs of the ITB/ITC drivers. If the ITB drivers (who greatly out number the ITR drivers) do not want them, then they can stay with Big Bore. Thank you, but no. I don't see why the ITB/ITC drivers wouldn't accept ITR, but if they don't want ITR, they should have ITR shoved on them.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I think the cars should be classed based on the leaders speed and how they interact. If the ITR guys are telling you that they hate BB, out of towners won't run races there because of the groupings and cars just aren't being built, I fail to see the harm in moving 2-3 cars and seeing if that fosters growth.

This is SCCA, we run mixed classes all the time, but GT-1 with an S2000? No way. They don't even corner at the same speed. THAT is a major problem. Most all IT cars have the ability to have similar corner speeds.

[ShelbyRacer]

Personally, my bigger issue is with SSC with ITB. Lap times are similar, but with very different dynamics.

If by some chance more than one SSC car showed up, and they were on pace, they'd be duking it out right in the middle of the not-quite-ready-for-top-3 crowd.

I'd rather deal with ITR than SSC, but perhaps I'm in the minority.

Unfortunately, to trade, you'd have to throw SSC into Big Bore I guess Now THAT would be interesting.

[Butch Kummer]

To say that you won't race your ITR car in a group that averages less than 20 cars per race because you're worried about two (2) GT-1 cars is the very definition of a red herring. And to say an S2000 doesn't belong on the same track with a GT-1 car is almost as outrageous. T-2 runs in the BB group regularly here in SEDiv and I've done test days in my (3000-pound, 160 mph) GTA car with Spec Miatas at Roebling Road and Road Atlanta without killing anyone.

It all gets back to having respect for your fellow racers REGARDLESS of what they're driving!

[Andy Bettencourt]

To say that you won't race your ITR car in a group that averages less than 20 cars per race because you're worried about two (2) GT-1 cars is the very definition of a red herring. And to say an S2000 doesn't belong on the same track with a GT-1 car is almost as outrageous. T-2 runs in the BB group regularly here in SEDiv and I've done test days in my (3000-pound, 160 mph) GTA car with Spec Miatas at Roebling Road and Road Atlanta without killing anyone.

It all gets back to having respect for your fellow racers REGARDLESS of what they're driving!

Well GT-1 is obviously different sizes in different Regions. Between ITE, SPO and GT1, you have a group that isn't appealing for IT guys. Test days are totally different animals with different expectations and behaviors.

Just saying that having to run with GT1 and SPO would suck in my area.

[Greg Amy]

Here's my last -- and hopefully my LAST -- time doing a test day at the same time as GT1:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qTzoUleoVY[/ame]

Too bad there was no sound...and that wasn't the only incident that day; I stuck the camera in for this session because of the shenanigans...

Absolutely I don't blame an entire group of people because of this. But it's just that we're not used to driving with such a significant speed differential between ourselves, so it creates conflicts (e.g., I should have recognized the GT1 car coming and signaled sooner, while he should have recognized I was taking the normal and expected line out of the corner upwards towards the wall and reacted accordingly.)

I done shat my pants more than once that day.

GA

[JeffYoung]

Whoa...did you signal him right and he went left?

[Greg Amy]

Whoa...did you signal him right and he went left?

Uh-huh. I guess he'd already committed left into a seriously-decreasing margin of space (which was the totally wrong thing to do, on multiple levels). I'm betting there was all of "1GT+2RCH" space left there, and rapidly decreasing...and note this was Pocono, a very wide NASTYCAR track.

Like I said: I shat myself purdy good that day.

[JeffYoung]

Not cool. Dude could have hurt you.

[StephenB]

to be fair to him at that closing speed he was probably already committed to the outside line. to expect him to pinch it down under you after you gave your hand signal would not be realistic.

I know that nobody wants to hear this but I'm going to say it anyway. weather anybody admits it or not the majority of us like IT. in my region ITR runs with other IT classes. if ITR ran with the big bore group then I would not have built an ITR car. I want to continue to run with other people that are interested in the same form of racing and modifications that I am.

[Eagle7]

As several have commented, that point-by seemed much to late to me based on the closing speed. Not saying he picked the wise line, but at that point he had committed, and if he had attempted to change at that point we might not have this video to watch (would have been destroyed in the ball of fire).

But lets keep in mind that a point-by is ADVISORY, not mandatory. I think of it as "if you take this line I promise to give you room". I still have a responsibility to maintain awareness of what line the passing car is taking. Looked to me like Greg was on top of that.


There are several reasons why a point-by must be advisory.

• Depending on a lot of factors, including lighting, we often can't see into the other car. He might be pointing, but I don't know it.
• As previously mentioned, the point-by might be too late.
• The point-by line might be disadvantageous to the passing car. The passee doesn't have the right to direct traffic.

One incident sticks out in my experience. I (ITS) was passing a B car at the end of a long straightaway (fairly high speed differential). He was running down the middle of a wide track. I had enough time to clear him before the next turn-in, so I took the outside line. When I reached his quarter-panel he veered to the outside, putting me into the grass at 110 MPH. After the session he came running up to me in the paddock - "I'm so sorry", etc. Said he had pointed me to the inside. Then I guess he stopped watching his mirrors. I could not see into his car, so I picked the line that worked best for me. Even if I had seen his point-by, I may have picked the outside line, because it worked best for me and, at the time, seemed to be not disruptive to him.

[Andy Bettencourt]

For those of you who have not driven Pocono, Greg basically had 1 car-width to his left and SEVEN to his right.

I am betting that at that rate of close, there may not have been an opportunity to see his point-by...meaning if it came early enough, the GT1 car would be too far away to see, and if it came 'in time', there was no way to change the committed position.

Hence the problem with 500+hp tube-framed, winged and slicked cars running with production cars with 200hp on Radials.

[Butch Kummer]

In Atlanta Region we run ITR with ITS, so I DO support the idea. All I'm saying is DC Region has what they believe are valid reasons (mainly a well-subscribed ITB class) to not do that. In addition, Summit Point is a whole different ball game relative to closing speeds than Pocono.

[benspeed]

Since some people here like posting the same things over and over and over and over again, I'll just repost this history of ITR in the MARRS series:


Here is a sampling of 2011 MARRS Big Bore participation, including the classes most talked about in the previously referenced thread. For the complete breakdown, you can see all of the results here:
http://wdcr-scca.org/ClubRacing/Even...5/Default.aspx

MARRS1 (Total cars: 17 / Finishers: 16)
GT1: 2 (+1 DNF)
AS: 3
ITR: 4 (winner finished 6th)

MARRS4 (Total cars: 12 / Finishers: 11)
GT1: 2 (+1 DNF)
AS: 4
ITR: 1 (finished 7th)

MARRS5 (Total cars: 12 / Finishers: 11)
GT1: 1
AS: 3
ITR: 0

MARRS7 / Labor Day Double (Total cars: 23 / Finishers: 22)
GT1: 3
AS: 4
ITR: 2 (winner finished 11th)

MARRS8 / Labor Day Double (Total cars: 13 / Finishers: 12)
GT1: 1 (+1 DNF)
AS: 3
ITR: 1 (finished 5th)

MARRS9 (Total cars: 19 / Finishers: 18)
GT1: 0 (+1 DNF)
AS: 4
ITR: 0

That said (again), the CRC will be meeting multiple times this winter (next meeting: 12/17/11), and will decide on format and groupings for all 2012 MARRS events. If you drive ITR, and can commit to running multiple 2012 MARRS events, I would strongly recommend that you contact your Drivers' Rep to the CRC.

Email sent

[Gregg]

Email sent

Thank you.

[Drew M]

Oh boy. I didn't think my question would spark such a debate. I don't understand why ITR,ITS,ITB wouldn't all run together. It's always one of the most exciting races both for the drivers and the fans. It's why I chose the class.

If I can go back to my original topic....

This company I'm working for really wants me to move soon. Problem is, I haven't had the time/money to fix the car after hitting the barrier at WGI. Now that I do, I was about to fix the car and try to improve the setup. I was going to work with a knowledgeable friend to get the car setup correctly. It has been oversteering like crazy since I bought it. I don't know enough about suspension setups to feel confident making my own adjustments. Is there anyone in the DC region that would be willing to help me get the car setup right? I had big plans for this winter and I'm very hesitant to move at this point. Last season was a bust. I'm not interested in letting that happen again.