Adjustments

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 27 2005, 12:48 AM
Funny, sure seems like race results weighed in pretty well with the e36 changes. Results that seem to include one particular orange car that runs alot at Road Atlanta <_<

[snapback]66721[/snapback]

Wow Fred, how many times do Darin, Andy, Jake, et. al have to come on here and say that the process numbers on the E36 make it light, at its current race weight, and that the race results simply support that? Not to mention that they&#39;ve gotten dyno numbers from E36 owners that also support the fact that they car is too light, based on the process. I&#39;m sorry, but exactly what part of that don&#39;t you get?

Also, you have to remember, that they (the ITAC) did not suggest the restrictor (nor did they think it was the right decision), but that it was selected and implemented by the CRB.

It never ceases to amaze me that some people will totally ignore the facts, just to perpetuate a conflict.

[Knestis]

In Fred&#39;s defense, this is what can happen if the people applying the new system cite finishing positions or lap times as support for that system.

ITAC dudes - you give people a wedge to drive into your efforts if you get pulled into conversations like that.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 27 2005, 11:07 AM
In Fred&#39;s defense, this is what can happen if the people applying the new system cite finishing positions or lap times as support for that system.

ITAC dudes - you give people a wedge to drive into your efforts if you get pulled into conversations like that.

K

[snapback]66742[/snapback]

I agree Krik, but the key word you used is SUPPORT. Dick and Bill have it nailed above. Very few people have the ability to put their own toys down and look at the entire playground.

I am just the kind of person who feels the need to post and defend because I hate silence...because sometimes it can be deafening.

AB

[charrbq]

Word to the wise. Never get any opinion or judgement that isn&#39;t spelled out exactly in the GCR or Fast Track without putting it in print. I&#39;ve had to use an opinion from the National Office to save my buttocks more than once. I had it in print that the appropriate person gave me his judgement on the matter.

[Knestis]

That is VERY interesting because it ain&#39;t s&#39;posed to work that way.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Knestis@Nov 28 2005, 07:20 PM
That is VERY interesting because it ain&#39;t s&#39;posed to work that way.

K

[snapback]66882[/snapback]

Probably wasn&#39;t used AS the ruling but used as a factor in MAKING a ruling.

[charrbq]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 29 2005, 01:49 AM
Probably wasn&#39;t used AS the ruling but used as a factor in MAKING a ruling.

[snapback]66887[/snapback]

At that moment in time...same difference. Rule was later clarified in Fast Track, and my problem was verified as legal. No, it&#39;s not suppose to happen that way, but I&#39;ve learned that tech inspectors and stewards don&#39;t always have the same opinion about the same thing from race to race. Having an over ruling (clarifying) opinion in hand is better than a phone call to national on Monday.

[lateapex911]

There are a ton of rules in that thick book. I can see many instances where a steward might read the rule, and think..."Hmmmmmmm"...then get the supporting evidence and say, "Ahhh...I see now".

Supporting evidence shines a a different light on things.

On the other hand, the steward could read the rule and say "Ah ha.", then see the supporting evidence and say, "BS...but nice try".

YMMV...

[Fastfred92]

Wow Bill, ease up... I don’t have a dog in this (e36) fight but I have seen the rules process evolution with respect to the Bimmers and THEY WERE weighted with race results. Andy Darin et al have all but spelled out that the Bimmerworld guys, York and Chet&#39;s results played a part in the changes. I agree that the e36 might have been lite from day one but from my southeast division view the RX7 and Z car guys are right there. The ARRC is often pointed to as a bench mark for IT but that does not work b/c that is sunbelt / Chet’s home track, elsewhere Andy&#39;s guy Nick (RX7)wins about every race I have seen him in even with 325&#39;s... My real grip is that the system is broken and until the boards address the problems these little changes will not fix it. Cars should not be classed (initially) in a place where they stand no chance to be competitive ( development yada yada ), put them in a class where they will and adjust down from there (adjustment down is a lot easier than up ). I still think the 944 is a A car, the Protégé is a B car, the GSR should weigh 100 lbs less in S and the 325 should be 3000 without a plate in S. IMHO the RX7 guys drive ITS rules, the CRX guys drive A and the VDubers drive B. I do not advocate rewards weight but you must admit the SPEED WC guys get a nice level playing field; we could do that in IT with the right rules package and or classes..

[Geo]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 30 2005, 09:47 AM
Wow Bill, ease up... I don’t have a dog in this (e36) fight but I have seen the rules process evolution with respect to the Bimmers and THEY WERE weighted with race results. Andy Darin et al have all but spelled out that the Bimmerworld guys, York and Chet&#39;s results played a part in the changes.

[snapback]67045[/snapback]

Fred, what you will find is we have said that results support our evaluation of the E36 using the process we have put every car through. I personally am TOTALLY against adjustments based upon results and I think I can speak for the rest of the ITAC that we all agree on this matter.

What gets bassakwards is when we say the results support our view of the car, people think it&#39;s based upon results. Not so. If a car is too light and many well prepared examples exist, one would expect the results to support the evaluation, don&#39;t you think?

[Bill Miller]

Fred,

Yes, results played a part. They validated the model. And rewards weight works in WC because you have the same group of guys racing each other. I could see this working in Club Racing in say, the MARRS or SARRC series. J. Fangio and his Puddlebee Special get 50# when they run in their race series. But they get to pull that out when they run a race outside their series. NOTE: I don&#39;t support the idea of rewards weight in Club Racing, but do see a case where it MIGHT be able to be implemented.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 30 2005, 04:47 PM
... but I have seen the rules process evolution with respect to the Bimmers and THEY WERE weighted with race results. Andy Darin et al have all but spelled out that the Bimmerworld guys, York and Chet&#39;s results played a part in the changes.

[snapback]67045[/snapback]

NO, they were NOT... If we had NEVER SEEN an E36 on the racetrack... If the car were being classified for the VERY FIRST TIME today... it&#39;s weight would be set at around 3150lbs...

If you&#39;d like evidence that this is STRICTLY based on the classification process, then look at the E46 classification... It makes LESS stock HP but is classified at 3000lbs... NO RACE RESULTS REQUIRED... THAT is simply what the numbers say it should weigh...

The only mention of race results by Andy, George, or myself, were in light of providing some level of actual evidence to validate what we already suggest is the case...

We are in the "business" of classifying cars... not trying to equate drivers, checkbooks, etc... so, as far as I&#39;m concerned, race results don&#39;t mean that much in the overall scheme...

But, this is NOT a new revelation... it&#39;s what I&#39;ve been saying all along, so I don&#39;t know why someone would make the statement you&#39;ve made above... It&#39;s simply not the case...

[Fastfred92]

Guys, don’t take this personally! I am just venting as a long time club racer who has always wondered how in the hell some things get classified as they do… If there is a formula then share it !!!! I remember years ago reading that the Porsche 914/6 was turned down for ITS because of the famous” too much potential”, this is a car that stock weighs 2200 lbs and has 120 hp / 133 tq stock and a torsion bar front suspension (18.3 lbs / hp ) and we just moved a VW GTI 16v 2.0 from ITS to A with a 18.2 lbs /hp. The e36 318 in ITA has to weigh like 2750 but stock it has 142 hp and weighs 2860 (20.1 ) and you tell me the e36 in ITS should be 3150 when stock it has 189 hp at 3086 ( 16.3 ) and the e46 listed at 3000 and stock is 170hp at 3150 lbs or 18.5 slightly more lbs per hp stock than the 16v GTI ??????? And the 944 ??? It fits nicely with the Integra and 240sx’s of the ITA but it has some mysterious “too much potential” syndrome ?? Don’t flame on me just tell us ( the club racing community ) what formula is used to classify cars, this does not need to be a black art or hidden science, it just needs to be uniform and public. My .02 for the day as I am heading to the PRI show so you won’t be annoyed by me for a few days!

[Banzai240]

Fred,

You are quoting a lot of cars that the ITAC doesn&#39;t feel are classified correctly either... We&#39;ve gone over this many times here... We are working on getting this fixed...

It&#39;s going to be up to the CRB to decide whether or not they wish to "reveal" any classification process... What we are using is in their hands in a VERY formal format... It&#39;s up to them from there...

Personally, I would have NO problem backwards engineering based on recent changes to figure it out... but then, I&#39;m privey to it, so maybe my view on that is skewed...

As for the 914... I&#39;ve never seen this request, and I&#39;m pretty sure it would be classified today if it were brought across our desks... It sounds like a good ITA or maybe light ITS car to me... Depends on what the "potential" is...

The bottom line is this... RELAX for a month or so and let&#39;s see if our plan gets accepted and put into action... I think you&#39;ll see that many... MANY... if not MOST, of these issues have been addressed...

I&#39;m sure we&#39;ll find out we&#39;ve missed a car here or there, but we have done our best to really address ALL of IT... just has to get accepted and put into print...

RELAX! AND... enjoy the PRI show!!

[Gary L]

Darin,

Can you tell us what is proposed, if anything, to allow for antique (SAE gross) horsepower ratings vs newer (SAE net) numbers? And if this is part of the process, at what year model is the line in the sand?

Thanks!

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Gary L@Nov 30 2005, 07:57 PM
Darin,

Can you tell us what is proposed, if anything, to allow for antique (SAE gross) horsepower ratings vs newer (SAE net) numbers? And if this is part of the process, at what year model is the line in the sand?

Thanks!

[snapback]67072[/snapback]

Gary, that is something that is folded into the discussion when cars of that vintage come up.

As far as I can recall, the majority of specs changed in the &#39;73 range, but those were weird times...emission controls were doing strange things to engines, and the ratings were fudged from the factories in some cases.

As such, each car that comes up from that vintage gets a discussion with those factors in mind. The key, of course, is to understand what the car can do in race prep. Whenever possible, that information is used.