Should IT be Regional???

[paulydee]

I feel bad deciding to post 7 pages into this thread.

Anyway, here are some of my thoughts whatever they might be worth (nothing at the least)

I would like to be able to drive at a Runoffs "like" event. That is not to say I want to drive at THE Runoffs. For one reason because it is not being held at MidOhio anymore. That is personal preference. I would rather not drive to Kansas flatland country. I would not be opposed the closer scrutineering that goes on at national events.

Another point is that I like is the current double regional format that is being used in my division. So that being said I would not drive the "National" level events for the one race format. At the same time (I am going to contradict myself here) It would be nice to have at least one 20min session to get warmed up before a legit qualifying. But that is getting off topic.

I also agree with the class distinctions being silly. What makes GP or GT3 any different than ITS or ITA that they deserve the National classification. I realize that this was a philosophy that was put together a long time ago, but why won't SCCA keep up with the times?

Did any of that make sense?

[mustanghammer]

I feel bad deciding to post 7 pages into this thread.

Anyway, here are some of my thoughts whatever they might be worth (nothing at the least)

I would like to be able to drive at a Runoffs "like" event. That is not to say I want to drive at THE Runoffs. For one reason because it is not being held at MidOhio anymore. That is personal preference. I would rather not drive to Kansas flatland country. I would not be opposed the closer scrutineering that goes on at national events.

Another point is that I like is the current double regional format that is being used in my division. So that being said I would not drive the "National" level events for the one race format. At the same time (I am going to contradict myself here) It would be nice to have at least one 20min session to get warmed up before a legit qualifying. But that is getting off topic.

I also agree with the class distinctions being silly. What makes GP or GT3 any different than ITS or ITA that they deserve the National classification. I realize that this was a philosophy that was put together a long time ago, but why won't SCCA keep up with the times?

Did any of that make sense?
[/b]

Heartland Park is not flat and neither is the countryside around it. You have to drive 120 miles farther west on I-70 to start to see "flat." And before you see "flat" (out around Salina Ks) you drive through something called the Flint Hills and they REALLY aren't flat! Allot of the flat plains that Kansas is famous for are in Colorado, by the way!

Anyway, I ran the Restricted Regional that was a part of the National at HPT last weekend. The extra track time on Saturday for the practice session was okay but since we (IT drivers) didn't get a National length race on Sunday the extra track time wan't that big of a deal. I prefer a double Regional because the IT car counts are higher, there are more opportunities for points and more chances for Kumho dollars.

I think IT type prep levels in a National Class would be popular. Limited Prep production, while not cheap, does prove this to a certain extent. Look at EP RX7's and FP Miata's as examples of cars that are approachable to many people and therefore popular and numerous. The same could be said for SM even though this class costs more than anticipated.

It has been my experience that many would be racers make race car purchases based on whether or not a car is in a National Class. This is true even if they have no intention of taking the car they are shopping for to the Run Offs. The perception is that a Nationals eligible car is more likely to retain it's value.

I guess I support a lower prep level car classification as eligible for Nationals competition. This could be IT or something new. Anyway it happens to come about it will be popular.