Please help me understand the Audi issue...

[lateapex911]

If you honestly ask me I would say the GOLF and Prelude are the two cars to have in ITB that are the current overdogs based on on track performance... both driven by CRB members.... how is it that 2 CRB members, of the what 6 or 7, drive in ITB and an ITB car F'd up the entire process?

Stephen

Albin drives A Golf. Not sure which Golf you are referring to. And no ITAC or CRB member drives a Prelude.

[IPRESS]

Albin drives A Golf. Not sure which Golf you are referring to. And no ITAC or CRB member drives a Prelude.

I tried not to post, but Jake, the pitch you threw was a 80 mph fastball with no movement.
CORRECTION: "Albin drives the F'ing wheels off a Golf."

[lateapex911]

Albin drives A Golf. Not sure which Golf you are referring to. And no ITAC or CRB member drives a Prelude.

Just rereading this. I think you are insinuating that they blocked the weight change based on personal gains. (As in you won't beat them if you are overweight)

I don't think I buy that. I think the CRB honestly looked at your car and thought, "Isn't that car pretty darn fast as it is? 200 pounds? Seems like a lot. Doesn't pass the sniff test. No"

Pursuant to that thought process is that many other cars seem to have been dropped from the agenda that were up for adjustment as well, and ALL weren't ITB cars.

I don't honestly know what's up with those cars. It could be that they just didn't get on the list, or that they got dropped or who knows. Hopefully we'll find out.

[seckerich]

Call the CRB head and find out, pretty simple. Why do we wait another 30 days to find out what they should be communicating to our adhoc?

[benspeed]

The men or women racing in IT who are in positions of authority or power over IT rules should recuse themselves from any rules changes effecting the classes in which they race.

That's just common sense in my opinion.

[gran racing]

So where does that put the ITAC Ben?

I don't think it's a bad thing to have IT people involved with where the future of the category goes. Like ITAC members do, they take themselves out of conversations dealing with cars they personally race.

[DavidM]

The old saying is "Horsepower sells engines. Torque wins motor races." Peak horsepower is not directly related to how well a car accelerates.

And that saying seems to be something of a misnomer. There was a good discussion on here about the affect of gearing on acceleration. High hp/low torque cars that rev high can still generate good torque/acceleration at the wheels via appropriate gearing. High torque cars typically don't rev that high and thus gearing has less of an effect. At least that's how I interpreted the discussion.

The men or women racing in IT who are in positions of authority or power over IT rules should recuse themselves from any rules changes effecting the classes in which they race.

That's just common sense in my opinion.

I definitely think this is what should happen, but since we don't have access to records of CRB votes we don't know. Unfortunately, I don't think this was done.

David

[lateapex911]

And that saying seems to be something of a misnomer. There was a good discussion on here about the affect of gearing on acceleration. High hp/low torque cars that rev high can still generate good torque/acceleration at the wheels via appropriate gearing. High torque cars typically don't rev that high and thus gearing has less of an effect. At least that's how I interpreted the discussion.

David

Yup, there are a lot of factors. I linked an article that showed how it all works. But, in the end, if tq was the be all end all, the Cummings diesel would be faster than an F1 car.

[Jeremy Billiel]

Yup, there are a lot of factors. I linked an article that showed how it all works. But, in the end, if tq was the be all end all, the Cummings diesel would be faster than an F1 car.

Speaking of Audi's and Diesel's... They are pretty fast!

[trhoppe]

Could this be that a CRB member has an ITB car???

:black helicopter:

[jjjanos]

Just rereading this. I think you are insinuating that they blocked the weight change based on personal gains. (As in you won't beat them if you are overweight)

Not saying that this happened this time, but it wouldn't be the first time that self-interest entered into what was decided by the various SCCA boards.

That was the nice thing about "the process." It was all laid out and you would know why a car got a specific weight.

[Andy Bettencourt]

That was the nice thing about "the process." It was all laid out and you would know why a car got a specific weight.

And even if you thought it was heavy or not 'the' car for the class, you (the collective you) are ok with that right? Better to be transperant and consistant than try and 'wiggle' the right number with no backup...because at the end of the day, neither are gonna be right.

[Knestis]

>> The MAJOR ISSUE I HAVE is that CRB/ITAC/BOD members all say, we do not classify cars based on "on track performance."

The ITAC has said that. The fundamental issue is that the CRB has said exactly the opposite.

K

[StephenB]

Just rereading this. I think you are insinuating that they blocked the weight change based on personal gains. (As in you won't beat them if you are overweight)

I don't think I buy that. I think the CRB honestly looked at your car and thought, "Isn't that car pretty darn fast as it is? 200 pounds? Seems like a lot. Doesn't pass the sniff test. No"

Jake,

YES and No... I don't think they think I personally will be faster in the future and that they want or need to protect themselves but I think they do wonder what if that car was classified with 200lbs less all those years ago... I wouldn't have had a chance against them. Basically I think the 1 weekend, 1 session, 5 years ago at 1 race they made an observation and are sticking with it. I think that if I did not go to those 2 events things would be different. So YES they have formulated the opinion of the potential of the car because they raced with me and now they are reluctant to change things and no I dont think it is to protect themselves on track, afterall I never plan on going down that way with my current career expectations.


Matt... Very difficult to get 200lbs out. we do have lead inside and we do have power windows and a spare in it but with all that I am guessing only a 100lbs or so. I do think you are on to something and will most likely try it next season. I have run 50lbs light and up to 75lbs heavy and it didn't seem to make a difference.

Dave and to all others... Sorry about mistaking the prelude and Accord. they look like the exact same car to me. What is the differences? what are the wieghts of each? Was the prelude classed after the flip flop of the Accord?

Raymond you are forgetting about your 20V head you stuck on yours aren't you? Actually you really are forgetting about the early coupe mechanical head vs our heads Ours is much better which was used from I believe 82.5 through 87.5 on various models of cars.


Stephen


PS: I still am fine with the decision not to process ANY of the cars currently classified, at least it is a decision which the CRB hasn't had the balls to do all year. If other cars do get reclassified then all hell will brake loose and I will be pissed.

[Bill Miller]

Just rereading this. I think you are insinuating that they blocked the weight change based on personal gains. (As in you won't beat them if you are overweight)

Well Jake, you were on the ITAC when Albin claimed that a Rabbit GTI could make 100 whp w/ no other documentation.

As far as him driving the wheels off his Golf, yeah, looks like he can do that, right into the side of another car.