A friend called me tonight and asked me if I had seen this, I said no, he told me what was going on and my reply,
'that's absurd!"
Please, for heavens sake, cars racing in IT should be prepped and protested under IT rules.
The first time I see a SM racing in ITA under this allowance, I'm going to urge ITA competitors to protest it, for anything it doesn't matter what, I'll pay the $25. When the Stewards have to deal with this catastrophe they will not be happy either. I think this should be rescinded with the quickness! Please, I hadn't totally lost faith in the process, save me before it's too late.
[/b]
I know you may have changed your position, but I did want to point out... The Stewards would have to find the car legal as it would be concidered legal in the Rule Book... That doesn't mean that I or any steward agrees with the rule, but we do have to govorn by the rules that are in place.
I think that the IT in ITE originated from a requirement that the ITE car must meet "IT" safety standards.This is a good argument, I like it.
Can we please get all of the regions to change the name of ITE?
[/b]
As for all the rest of this thread and the "dual classing" of cars. I am ALL FOR dual classing of cars, however I feel that the cars must meet both class rules/requirements. Basically I think that Prod/IT rules should be modified to allow cars to be legal in either/both classes (obviosly an IT car would not be competitive in Prob if it also was meeting the more strict rules of IT). If SM needs to be allowed in IT, then change the rules for all of IT to allow such modifications that are allowed in SM or change the SM rules to meet IT rules. If some of the SM rules do not meet the class "philosophy" (to lazy for spell check tonight) then either those rules need to be changed or the IT philosophy needs to be changed for ALL cars/classes.
Raymond "JMO (Just My Opinion)" Blethen
Bookmarks