Quote Originally Posted by JoshS View Post
... 2) Everyone should re-read the last two paragraphs of 9.1.3.C. Adjusting car weights based solely on the process is not allowed for in the rules as they stand today.

Note that this doesn't mean that no weights can be changed (again, see those sections of 9.1.3.C) and the current ITAC has every intention of using the process to adjust weights when, in fact, adjusting weights is called for. ...
Thanks, Josh. For reference, that's...

On rare occasion—and only after careful review of the actual racing performance of a particular make/model/year of vehicle—the Club may reclassify a vehicle, revise a vehicle’s minimum allowable weight, and/or in the most extreme situation an intake restrictor may be required. Such an action shall be taken solely for the purpose of restoring equity within the vehicle’s class.

But what we must also remember is that - at least in the time I was on the ITAC - we didn't do "please review" weight changes based on that clause. We did it under Errors and Omissions, ostensibly because we found the weights to be "incorrect." And "incorrect" has to be relative to something, and so - again, based on our practices - that benchmark or reference was the weight resulting from our application of the process. And the CRB voted to approve those recommendations, for example:

Dodge/Plymouth Neon RT & ACR (01-03), p. 365, change the specs to read as follows: Weight(lbs): 2670

We didn't do that because this Neon was a "proven" overdog on the track that rose to the level of the CRX situation, that the Performance Compensation Adjustment allowance (the clause Josh cites) was included to deal with.

...SO based on what we're hearing here, the CRB has used the full nuke offensive on the ITAC, essentially removing from their arsenal any weapon they might use to correct a vestigal weight inconsistency. Put simply, we are now at a place where the only catalyst for ANY weight change in IT would be a perceived upset of "equity" similar to that posed by the CRX or the e36 325 in ITS a few years ago.

We've got cars with weights set by several variants of the process, and a bunch set by who-knows-what system from the olden days, and that's just how they're going to stay - unless someone goes too fast...

...because now, since by definition "right" for the purposes of Errors and Omissions, Competition Adjustments, Clarifications, and Classifications can now only be defined by relative on-track performance "equity," the ONLY CASE that can be presented for consideration is the "he's faster than me" kind of appeal. Those that (1) are so very popular in other categories about this time of year after the RubOffs, and (2) the ITAC until last month didn't even consider, knowing they are fraught with huge evidentiary issues.

Swell.

Hey, members...! Remember those letters the ITAC recommended you write, if you saw some obvious misalignment among car weights? Well, don't send 'em. And (fast forward to the logical extension of this) the VERY second that a weight IS adjusted based on a case made by on-track evidence, we've lost all control. Go fast at an important race? You're a target for a 100-pound lead bullet. Fear of competition adjustments (bleah!) will prevent ANY change, or we're well and truly in Production land. No middle ground like the ITAC has spent a lot of time and energy trying to maintain.

And for the 1000th time, I do NOT blame the ITAC. They got told this is how it was going to be by your club leadership.

K