Quote Originally Posted by JeffYoung View Post
One of the crucial issues for me, and one that I'd like to hear thoughts on, is how bound the ITAC should be by what was done previously.

Right now, we are looking at the Process and how to apply it going forward. One of the key principles of the "old" ITAC -- and one I firmly agree with -- was that we wanted to create a mechanism that "future" ITACs would objectively use to class cars.

Do most of the folks here agree wth that? That the process should essentially be made "rule of law" that can't be changed? Or is it just a tool that "future" ITACs can use/discard/modify?

Note the value of consistency here. One of the big problems we have is reconciling the fact that many of the cars in the ITCS had their weights set via the old "curb weight" formula, and a smaller number via the Process. That creates inequities and inconsistencies that are pointed out to us on a REGULAR basis.

It would seem to me that continuing to modify or alter the weight classification formula is generally a bad idea, as it undercuts consistency, objectivity and repeatability.
Jeff - as an infrequent but interested passer by in this forum I agree with you, but there does need to be a methodology, when good reasons exist, for an "out." That is hard to put in writing. The weight issue was (IMHO) well handled. They took the time and made adjustments on a limited basis, based on good data, to level the playing field somewhat. This benefitted some, me included, making it more fun to race ITS. I don't get my doors blown off as bad as I used to.

As for the motor mounts issue I am really disappointed in the CRB. There is nothing lost in approving the change and it seems to me it is consistent with IT philosophy. It is also consistent with the theme of "affordable" (ROTFL) racing.