IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?

[JoshS]

Time constraints: DC Region's National typically has 225+ cars over 8 groups. Where are we going to fit the extra cars? Run ITC in small bore with an 11+second/lap difference between ITC and EP and a 9+ second difference between B and EP? That's more than the ITC/ITS gap and we've already realized that it doesn't work for a decently subscribed sprint race group. remember, National track sessions are longer and must be adhered to. No shorting sessions because the day is running long.

I understand the concern about fitting extra cars into an existing well-subscribed national. If your track isn't long enough to handle the additional cars in your existing race groups, I can see that you might have a problem. But if there's room on the track, then go for it.

I don't understand the concern about the lap time differences. Yes, the slower cars in a group might get fewer laps than the faster cars (because they get lapped), but guess what? Apparently that's okay, because this routinely happens at the west coast Nationals. We have huge speed differentials, and guess what? The drivers are smart enough to handle it. Even in our REGIONALS, we run *all* of the IT classes together, including ITR. No problem. This isn't spec racing. This isn't the Runoffs. We run multiple classes together. We live with it. We even like it.

So I think this whole speed differential thing is a red herring. It's not a big deal. We do it all the time out here, at both regionals and nationals. And yes, we have very full fields, with 50-60 cars on track together at pretty much every race.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Let's assume that the National/Regional thing goes away and every GCR-recognized class is eligible for the Runoffs - here is what I would do:

'Reward' the top 10-15 classes in average participation with their own Runoffs run-group. The bottom 'half' still get a chance to run for the gold, but they must do so by sharing a track with someone else. Split starts a must...but until numbers warrant it, you pay the price of getting invited by having to share the track with another class or classs.

This way you can fit the Runoffs into a more compact time frame, which is a common complaint.

[JeffYoung]

+1. I like that idea.

[ITC Racer]

I don't see any reason/benefit to make IT national. If anything, I would perhaps eliminate the National/regional distinction. I like the racing and prep level of IT currently and am happy with the ARRC and newer IT Fest.

[jjjanos]

What is broken that I see this fixing? My desire to build, maintain and race a car with the ruleset and cars I think are the best fit for me - for a SCCA National Championship. Yes, I can go National racing in Prod, GT, SM, SRF, etc...but those classes don't interest me as much. I like to upgrade - but not to the tune of Prod, so IT is perfect for me.

And your IT vehicle, with a minimum of 3 minor safety modifications - cell, tabs, system - is capable of contesting an SCCA National Championship - Production and Prepared. It might not be competitive, but that would be consistent with the philosophy of the ruleset and cars that you think are the best for you. "not be guaranteed the competitiveness of any car.."

I would like to compete for an SCCA National Championship in a prototype equipped with unlimited boost, full ground effects including skirts and traction control. Yes, I can go National racing in S2, CSR, DSR etc.... but those classes don't to interest me as much. I like to upgrade.

I understand the concern about fitting extra cars into an existing well-subscribed national. If your track isn't long enough to handle the additional cars in your existing race groups, I can see that you might have a problem. But if there's room on the track, then go for it.

There isn't room on the track for that mix of classes.

I don't understand the concern about the lap time differences. Yes, the slower cars in a group might get fewer laps than the faster cars (because they get lapped), but guess what? Apparently that's okay, because this routinely happens at the west coast Nationals. We have huge speed differentials, and guess what? The drivers are smart enough to handle it. Even in our REGIONALS, we run *all* of the IT classes together, including ITR. No problem. This isn't spec racing. This isn't the Runoffs. We run multiple classes together. We live with it. We even like it.

And having perused the results at SFR, it is clear why there is no problem - the slower IT classes effectively do not exist. 2 ITC cars, 2/3 ITB cars. We regularly put more ITC cars on track for a Regional than SFR's combined ITB+ITC count.

In short, the problem doesn't exist because the solution created a new problem. This is the equivalent of people saying 'we' don't have a 'problem' combining all of the Formula classes. Of course it isn't a problem! The Vees just stop showing up and instead of having 12 to 15 of them at a race, you get 3. Shoot, I could put a single ITC in a field of Grand-Am Bash'em DPs and the ITC wouldn't be a problem, but get enough ITC cars out there to have a field and their own race and it does become a problem.

So I think this whole speed differential thing is a red herring. It's not a big deal. We do it all the time out here, at both regionals and nationals. And yes, we have very full fields, with 50-60 cars on track together at pretty much every race.

And GT1 on course with GT5 use to be viewed as safe too.

[JoshS]

And having perused the results at SFR, it is clear why there is no problem - the slower IT classes effectively do not exist. 2 ITC cars, 2/3 ITB cars. We regularly put more ITC cars on track for a Regional than SFR's combined ITB+ITC count.

In short, the problem doesn't exist because the solution created a new problem. This is the equivalent of people saying 'we' don't have a 'problem' combining all of the Formula classes. Of course it isn't a problem! The Vees just stop showing up and instead of having 12 to 15 of them at a race, you get 3. Shoot, I could put a single ITC in a field of Grand-Am Bash'em DPs and the ITC wouldn't be a problem, but get enough ITC cars out there to have a field and their own race and it does become a problem.

I'm not just talking about the region's IT group, I'm talking about lots of different groups at lots of different races, including nationals hosted by different regions with different race groupings. We routinely see lap time differentials of 10+ seconds between the LEADERS of different classes on track together. When I was in SSC doing nationals, we were grouped with T1 at nearly every race. We're talking about 160hp FWD cars on track with 400hp monsters. I just don't see the issue. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Andy Bettencourt]

And your IT vehicle, with a minimum of 3 minor safety modifications - cell, tabs, system - is capable of contesting an SCCA National Championship - Production and Prepared. It might not be competitive, but that would be consistent with the philosophy of the ruleset and cars that you think are the best for you. "not be guaranteed the competitiveness of any car.."

I would like to compete for an SCCA National Championship in a prototype equipped with unlimited boost, full ground effects including skirts and traction control. Yes, I can go National racing in S2, CSR, DSR etc.... but those classes don't to interest me as much. I like to upgrade.

I don't think you understand my position. I like the EXTENT of the IT rules. I like to upgrade (over SS, SM) to the stuff that I think makes IT cool. Shocks, bars, limited engine prep - but some, etc.

Your definition of 'contesting a National Championship' must be different than mine. Having a car that has the potential to WIN is what I want. The IT rules provide me with the best solution for my situation (budget, desire, etc). I can run in DP RIGHT NOW without changing a thing but there is difference in 'no comp adjustments' and 'not a chance in freaking hell'.

Bottom line? I like the IT rules the best of any class. I want that class to be able to run for a Gold Medal.

[shwah]

In Cen-Div we run with ITR, ITS, ITA, ITB, ITC, SSB, SSC, T2, T3, SMT in one group.

We don't really have any ITC guys, but have a range of ITB cars, and it seems to work just fine. It does get difficult when you have a race after a school and some of the slow cars are extra slow, but otherwise it works out just fine, wether on 4 miles at Road America or 1.9 at Blackhawk.

Our biggest regional classes are SM and SRF.

I'm with Andy on the why go national. I would like to race for a championship (which is why I like the ITCC - it is closer to a championship than we have been in the past), and really like the IT rule set. However I am willing to build a Prod car if I need to. It will just be a few years down the road, while I would run nationals right now in my IT car.

[JeffYoung]

A fair position to take. On my side, I wouldn't (personally) sacrifice the large fields and good racing we are seeing right now for a shot at a Gold Medal.

However, I think getting rid of the National/Regional distinction and going with the top 12 classes single run group, others mixed, at the BoreOffs is a great idea. With my limited knowledge of Topeka though, I think the chances of that happening are far less than just IT becoming "national" which on its own I don't support.

I don't think you understand my position. I like the EXTENT of the IT rules. I like to upgrade (over SS, SM) to the stuff that I think makes IT cool. Shocks, bars, limited engine prep - but some, etc.

Your definition of 'contesting a National Championship' must be different than mine. Having a car that has the potential to WIN is what I want. The IT rules provide me with the best solution for my situation (budget, desire, etc). I can run in DP RIGHT NOW without changing a thing but there is difference in 'no comp adjustments' and 'not a chance in freaking hell'.

Bottom line? I like the IT rules the best of any class. I want that class to be able to run for a Gold Medal.