...are posted:
http://www.scca.com/clubracing/content.cfm?cid=44472
...are posted:
http://www.scca.com/clubracing/content.cfm?cid=44472
January Fastrack Preliminary Minutes/Tech Bulletin
12/09/13- Preliminary Minutes
12/09/13- Preliminary Tech Bulletin
What Do You Think
ITR
1. #11955 (Lee Niffenegger) Move 2006-Up Civic SI from ITS to ITR
The Club Racing Board seeks your input on this question. Please submit responses to crbscca.com. Should the 2006-2008 Civic Si remain in ITS at 3000 lbs or be moved to ITR at 2605 lbs?
ITS
1. #11724 (Willie Phee) Classify Acura TSX in ITS
The Club Racing Board requests member feedback for this question. Please submit letters to crbscca.com. Should the 04-08 Acura TSX remain as currently classified in ITR at 2760 lbs or be moved to ITS at a weight of 3175 lbs?
I sent a letter to the ITAC/CRB (http://crbscca.com/) pointing out that no matter what you do, you're gonna piss someone off, likely someone already running or building a car. So let's stop dancing this silly little "where do you want this car to be?" tango and approve dual classifications in Improved Touring.
Done. - GA
When my "tweener" 99 Civic Si was classed, there was some back and forth between people wanting it in ITA at higher weight, because there were plenty of former SSC cars that could have run without a massive stripping-down effort. After initial claims the car could not make ITS weight, some builds claimed it could, so it was moved to ITS. The argument for that procedure was, as I was told, that "we want every car in the class where it has its lowest attainable weight."
I can see the merit of this approach, but it seems inconsistent with what they do now, ie ask people about their preferences. As Greg said, this approach will piss people off no matter which way it goes; with a consistent "lowest reasonably attainable weight" procedure, there'd be at least a consistent rule to point to that would prevent some of the bickering and arguing, and perpetual requests for reclassifications.
Yes, dual classifications would be the way to go IMO. No violation of the process, with the downside of request for power/weight assessments, special allowances, etc being submitted for the same car in 2 classes; I'd assume the increase of such letters would be rather mild though, since most cars are pretty firmly planted in one class.
EDIT: Dual classifications would also lower the entry barrier for new car builds, and mix up the competition. Beginner car and not worried yet about winning? Leave your fresh build at the heavier weight, leave the sound dampening and nasty underside coating on and the glass in and go racing. Car a bit of an underdog in one class? Maybe try the other; could increase diversity in the fields.
Last edited by Kai Noeske; 12-11-2013 at 11:10 AM.
Astrophysathingy / goaheadtakethewheel.com
99 Civic SI #9 WDCR ITS/STL
93 Corolla / 97 PDX Miata
It would be interesting to see how that played out. I'd be curious at what weight and if my car could be competitive in ITA.I'd assume the increase of such letters would be rather mild though, since most cars are pretty firmly planted in one class.
Dave Gran
Real Roads, Real Car Guys – Real World Road Tests
Go Ahead - Take the Wheel's Free Guide to Racing
Or we could be charitable and assume that they aren't asking who will get pissed but instead are uncertain whether the car can reasonably make the ITR and want input.
I also don't have a problem with dual classifications, especially if a car is being moved from one class to another.
Then since we don't know, let's dual-classify them and let the competitors do all the figuring out for us, instead of using WAG and POOMA.
Open market and all that.
Then write a letter.I also don't have a problem with dual classifications, especially if a car is being moved from one class to another.
http://crbscca.com
Last edited by Greg Amy; 12-11-2013 at 01:37 PM.
I LOVE the off-season. To make things easier for tGA, I have updated my signature.
Demetrius Mossaidis aka 'Mickey' #12 ITA NESCCA
'92 Honda Civic Si
STFU and "Then write a letter. www.crbscca.com"
2013 ITA NARRC Champion and I have not raced since.
RST Performance Racing
www.rstperformance.com
Why not let them race in either class and let the weight decide
Because.
Final is up:
http://www.scca.com/assets/14-fastrack-jan.pdf
Interesting notes:BF Goodrich will continue to sponsor a Super Tour with a subset of Majors events designated as a Super Tour events. Saferacer will continue sponsorship. Of interest to drivers and Region merchandise and Tech and Stewards, there will be new Saferacer Club racing sticker replacing the old SafeRacer national racing stickers and the “plain Jane” SCCA Club Racing” stickers.When we went to Saferacer support a few years ago, we had to replace the stickers for the Nationals, but they gave them away for free. Wonder with this change if we'll charge "Regional" racers for the replacements...?
I've got a short stack of "Classic" SCCA stickers - both Regional and National - that may go for millions on eBay in a few years...Region website landed with KS region live and other regions are evaluating. There are some improvements and updates scheduled for SCCA.com.They're planning on consolidating all Region websites? That's actually a preyty good idea from a marketing perspective. Each time I got to a new website I'm confused by differences in style, location of information, results, schedules, etc. We really do need to make our message(s) consistent.
Rules Season DiscussionA good read for all members. This will give you a rough idea of the guidelines we' follow as rulesmakers throughout the year.
Bookmarks