Any news on ITB weights???

[AE86ITA]

Just out of curiosity, Anyone knows how the ITB weight recalculation is going?

Any hints,

[Chip42]

I'd like to tell you it's nearly done, but it is not. expect some updates soon, I promise.

[ShelbyRacer]

Yes, what he said.

I will freely admit that I've spent more time on my own car than on that project. Sorry.

I would think that any reprocess would probably not be implemented until 2014, pending completion by us and approval from the CRB. That said, I'd like to see it done during this year, so it can be put in place ASAP.

[Terry Hanushek]

Matt / ITAC

I would think that any reprocess would probably not be implemented until 2014, pending completion by us and approval from the CRB. That said, I'd like to see it done during this year, so it can be put in place ASAP.

I would think that to make it effective in 2014 that it should be approved by the BoD no later than their December meeting. Given the necessary competitor review time, CRB deliberations, negotiations, etc., there does not seem to be that much time to dawdle.

Terry

[Greg Amy]

Note that weight adjustments are allowed within the rules year.

- GA

[ShelbyRacer]

At this point, our plan is to go through the class in phases and discuss each item, and we've been gathing info to do that. We populated a spreadsheet a while back (thanks to previous ITACers for giving a decent starting point with an archive of info!) and have been trying to fill in the holes, using the divide and conquer method. I believe we'd like to send it to the CRB in packets so as not to overwhelm anyone and also to handle similar cars together for efficiency.

While I know we can adjust weights at any time, I (and I believe the rest of the ITAC) would prefer to do it between seasons if possible, so as to minimize any disruption for competitors.

Looking at what we have, I'd say we're about 25-30% done.

I'll try to update things as possible, as I'm not sure if our work would be noted at all in FasTrack until it's complete.

[Terry Hanushek]

Note that weight adjustments are allowed within the rules year.

I am aware that a weight adjustment is not a rule change subject to the rules season. It can be helpful to make a necessary adjustment to a car weight in real time. However, a project to review / adjust the weights of all of the cars in a class with its potential shift in class balance should be announced / approved at the end of the year for implementation in the following year.

This is simply an observation, not a suggestion that the ITAC is not making good project. It is a complex task.

Terry

[Kendall17]

I hope the Audi Coupe loses some weight since its original weight was based on 120hp which the car never had here in the States. Stock form in the USA is 110hp.

Ken

[Chip42]

as said previously, the problem currently is the scope of the ordeal and the umpteen different specs and tech levels we're trying to wrap our heads around. that the bulk of the actively campaigned class ISN'T hondas and toyotas and other beaten to death horses means that this info is not readily available in many cases. until everything is balanced to an agreeably objective level, the changes will not be released to the CRB. THEN you can call your black helicopters and stuff but for right now, save the fuel for the racecar.

if the car you are looking at is a modern one, chances are good the weights are going to stay as published currently as those have available published numbers that work with the process.

If it's a non MR2 4AGE toyota, you can run the numbers based on the MR2 (less50# for AE86, that x0.98 for the FX16). The audi thing might get political, can't say as we haven't gotten to it. but it did before. there's a dark cloud over it and I personally don't like that.

[RSTPerformance]

Ken- are you racing an Audi??? If so contact me, been through this and I can tell you it's not worth it... I would love to see it fixed but I have learned to just enjoy the car for what it is and have fun racing for a podium

Raymond

[lateapex911]

as said previously, the problem currently is the scope of the ordeal and the umpteen different specs and tech levels we're trying to wrap our heads around. that the bulk of the actively campaigned class ISN'T hondas and toyotas and other beaten to death horses means that this info is not readily available in many cases. until everything is balanced to an agreeably objective level, the changes will not be released to the CRB. THEN you can call your black helicopters and stuff but for right now, save the fuel for the racecar.

if the car you are looking at is a modern one, chances are good the weights are going to stay as published currently as those have available published numbers that work with the process.

If it's a non MR2 4AGE toyota, you can run the numbers based on the MR2 (less50# for AE86, that x0.98 for the FX16). The audi thing might get political, can't say as we haven't gotten to it. but it did before. there's a dark cloud over it and I personally don't like that.

BUT, the chief 'enemy' of the Audi has left the CRB, so the whole "I have decided I don't like the Process, I want displacement to be a factor' issue might have left the building. Or not., (As I don't know the mindset of the current CR

[Chip42]

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[AE86ITA]

as said previously, the problem currently is the scope of the ordeal and the umpteen different specs and tech levels we're trying to wrap our heads around. that the bulk of the actively campaigned class ISN'T hondas and toyotas and other beaten to death horses means that this info is not readily available in many cases. until everything is balanced to an agreeably objective level, the changes will not be released to the CRB. THEN you can call your black helicopters and stuff but for right now, save the fuel for the racecar.

if the car you are looking at is a modern one, chances are good the weights are going to stay as published currently as those have available published numbers that work with the process.

If it's a non MR2 4AGE toyota, you can run the numbers based on the MR2 (less50# for AE86, that x0.98 for the FX16). The audi thing might get political, can't say as we haven't gotten to it. but it did before. there's a dark cloud over it and I personally don't like that.

Chip;
When can we see exactly that put in black and white before the end of this year? (ie Fast Track)

[Chip42]

Chip;
When can we see exactly that put in black and white before the end of this year? (ie Fast Track)

efrain,

write another letter and I'll see if I can get the guys to agree to this. should be pretty simple.

[jjjanos]

I bet the real reason our President resigned was in protest of the CRB interfering with the process!

[Rabbit05]

I hope the Audi Coupe loses some weight since its original weight was based on 120hp which the car never had here in the States. Stock form in the USA is 110hp.

Ken

Hi Ken !
I had taken this up in the past, after the Blethen's did . This is well known fact through out the world the HP of the KX is 110. (( owners manual , Factory Manual, and I managed to get my hands on some internal advertising bits from Audi all stating 110hp))...Except a privileged few have seen, heard of , or mentioned a "secret Audi microchife" saying otherwise.(que the "copters"!) And have processed the Audi using inaccurate information. Henceforth the extra weight.

I am optimistically pessimistic that the Audi will ever change.. considering that it was mentioned politics are also involved....

(sorry all I saw the word Audi and couldn't help myself.... )

<back to lurking mode>

[Ron Earp]

Holy shit this ITB debacle is legendary.

How much money would you Audi folks need to put push the cars off a cliff so this topic will disappear? It's clear the ITAC isn't going to doing anything about it, but if the price was right maybe I could help out.

I'm mostly kidding, at least about the cliff and the money.

[JeffYoung]

We reduced the weight on that car once, if I recall correctly. The documentation on stock hp is contradictory although most evidence is 110. That said, none of the owners/drivers (all of whom I like) would produce IT build dyno sheets which we could have used to help solve the problem. This was in marked contrast to the MR2 situation where I think we had 5 or 6 IT build dyno sheets to use to show the car couldn't hit a certain target percentage.

In other words, and with all due respect to the Audi drivers, we didn't get much help from them except to complain. While their cars were competitive on track, which didn't help the case.

The amount of time the ITAC spent on the ITB Audi v. the number of these cars actually running on track is insane.

[StephenB]

We reduced the weight on that car once, if I recall correctly. The documentation on stock hp is contradictory although most evidence is 110. That said, none of the owners/drivers (all of whom I like) would produce IT build dyno sheets which we could have used to help solve the problem. This was in marked contrast to the MR2 situation where I think we had 5 or 6 IT build dyno sheets to use to show the car couldn't hit a certain target percentage.

In other words, and with all due respect to the Audi drivers, we didn't get much help from them except to complain. While their cars were competitive on track, which didn't help the case.

The amount of time the ITAC spent on the ITB Audi v. the number of these cars actually running on track is insane.

I agree with all that.

Stephen,
the owner of the fastest ITB coupe in the country without a stand alone ECU. which now lives in the woods...

[Ron Earp]

The amount of time the ITAC spent on the ITB Audi v. the number of these cars actually running on track is insane.

That's got to be true. Seems I've been reading about ITB on this site for five years.

What's the SCCA scairt of with fixing these cars according to the process? What is the WORST that could happen? Some people race their Audi Coupes and win a regional race the SCCA doesn't care about anyhow?

Scary stuff.