August 2013

[pfrichardson]

...are posted:

http://www.scca.com/clubracing/content.cfm?cid=44472

[Chip42]

Thanks Pam!

[erlrich]

Interesting that they are even considering moving the TSX from R to S, given that a previous request to move a car with identical HP was shot down with the rationale that 200 stock HP was "too much power for ITS".

The Boxter looks interesting, although at the same weight as the S2K I'm not sure it will be a better pick. Is the flat 6 expected to make more than the 25% power gain?

The Tiburon looks great, on paper at least. That one has me checking the want ads....anybody want to buy a nice Camaro?

[Greg Amy]

We're way past time for allowing double listings (a la BMW E36). Let the competitors decide, not those on top of the ivory towers.

But I ain't gonna waste my breath requesting it again. - GA

[Chip42]

Interesting that they are even considering moving the TSX from R to S, given that a previous request to move a car with identical HP was shot down with the rationale that 200 stock HP was "too much power for ITS".

The Boxter looks interesting, although at the same weight as the S2K I'm not sure it will be a better pick. Is the flat 6 expected to make more than the 25% power gain?

The Tiburon looks great, on paper at least. That one has me checking the want ads....anybody want to buy a nice Camaro?

it's being requested, it was a bit of a debate in the first place, we put it to the members. its not just about power, it's also about achievable weight. we think this car can get to ITR weight, and it overall seemed a better fit there, so there it went. if membership comes in and says "no S!!!" then we can move it. being above 2700 lbs (thicker cage) in either listing makes this decision easier. anything that crosses that threshold when changing classes (by gaining weight) makes us prefer to stay in the faster class so that any existing builds or cars don't need to re-cage.

[Ralf]

Hopefully the cars will be listed in the right blocks when final. Currently the way it shows in the prelim, the Boxter has ITS listed above it and the Mitsubishi Lancer has ITB above it in the chart. Should be ITR and ITA, correct?

[Chip42]

Hopefully the cars will be listed in the right blocks when final. Currently the way it shows in the prelim, the Boxter has ITS listed above it and the Mitsubishi Lancer has ITB above it in the chart. Should be ITR and ITA, correct?

The Lancer goes to B and the boxter to R. I've already called in the mitsu, missed the boxter. Thanks for letting us know.

[Ron Earp]

Interesting that they are even considering moving the TSX from R to S, given that a previous request to move a car with identical HP was shot down with the rationale that 200 stock HP was "too much power for ITS".

No kidding. If they want to move that car to S then that'll open up reprocessing for a number of 190-200hp cars to move to S. I'll be requesting some myself.

R

[pballance]

No kidding. If they want to move that car to S then that'll open up reprocessing for a number of 190-200hp cars to move to S. I'll be requesting some myself.

R

+1 to that

[JeffYoung]

No kidding. If they want to move that car to S then that'll open up reprocessing for a number of 190-200hp cars to move to S. I'll be requesting some myself.

R

Not just about HP, also about achievable weight.

But as stock curb weights and achievable race weights rise, so too will the "stock hp range" of cars in each class. So look not only at stock hp, but curb weight before submitting the request.

[Ron Earp]

Not just about HP, also about achievable weight.

Yep, I'm aware.

I was considering the ITR V6 Mustang. The ITR weight is 2670 lbs with 190 stock hp. We've proven that the car cannot get down to 2670 lbs and the best I think it can do is about 2800 lbs.

If the car was placed into ITS then its weight would be:

190 x 1.25 x 12.9 = 3063 lbs.

3063 lbs certainly obtainable, but I'm not sure it'd be very happy on the 15x7 tire rule. I've no doubt the car would end up being the hp leader in ITS with a 100% build (these engines have more potential than the 3.8L single ports we use and we're doing very well for power), but I believe we're already at the limit of a 15x7 wearing a 245 and 27XX lbs.

Bad idea.

[JeffYoung]

Interesting that they are even considering moving the TSX from R to S, given that a previous request to move a car with identical HP was shot down with the rationale that 200 stock HP was "too much power for ITS".

The Boxter looks interesting, although at the same weight as the S2K I'm not sure it will be a better pick. Is the flat 6 expected to make more than the 25% power gain?

The Tiburon looks great, on paper at least. That one has me checking the want ads....anybody want to buy a nice Camaro?

No, we ran the Boxster at 25%. Are you taking about the request to move the ITR Camaro to S? I think that was a combination of attainable weight and HP. It's weight in S would have been ridiulously high. The TSX has a stout curb weight to start with and seems to fit better in S, and may not have made the R weight.

[bamfp]

Interesting that they are even considering moving the TSX from R to S, given that a previous request to move a car with identical HP was shot down with the rationale that 200 stock HP was "too much power for ITS".

The Boxter looks interesting, although at the same weight as the S2K I'm not sure it will be a better pick. Is the flat 6 expected to make more than the 25% power gain?

The Tiburon looks great, on paper at least. That one has me checking the want ads....anybody want to buy a nice Camaro?

It is a little on the heavy side. 216hp stock and gets 45# more weight then a 240hp car. Still waiting to dyno my 2.5 Boxster to see what it makes. Stock computer for now but will have a programmable one soon.

[Chip42]

It is a little on the heavy side. 216hp stock and gets 45# more weight then a 240hp car.

what 240hp car?

[erlrich]

what 240hp car?

s2k