February Fastrack

[Andy Bettencourt]

WHAT DO YOU THINK?
IMPROVED TOURING
Should the current Improved Touring wheel diameter restrictions be removed or otherwise adjusted? Please let us know your preferences. (Current restrictions on wheel widths would not change.)

[Greg Amy]

I'd be interested in hearing the basis/reason for that request. 15" wheels are probably the most-common, and thus relatively-least-expensive, size in aftermarket racing wheels one can find. You start going to something bigger and you're talking significantly less-available, significantly heavier, and significantly more expensive.

If anything, I'd say dump the width restrictions. But diameter?

[GKR_17]

Some cars may see benefit from smaller than stock wheels - ITB Suzuki Swift for example.

[Greg Amy]

Some cars may see benefit from smaller than stock wheels - ITB Suzuki Swift for example.

Is that the true underlying reason/basis here? To go smaller than stock? I'd find it hard to believe there's enough demand for that to rationalize changing these rules...

Just wonderin'.

[JeffYoung]

It came about this way. Someone with a car (I can't remember make but it is not in ITR) claims that only 16X7s came on the car. So technically he can't run his stock wheel size (I believe only ITR has the allowance for max 17" diamater OR stock, whichever is larger).

That prompted a discussion about wheel size and one of the points made is exactly what Grafton said -- diameter on a wheel is basically cheap gearing.

I'm presonally opposed to the change but willing to listen. Opening up width is where the dollars are in my view. Diameter might have some impact on handling due to sidewall size and strength of various profile tires, but overall, not a lot of change (in my opinion) to performance other than, again, cheap gearing.

I don't see a need, but let's hear what others have to say.

[billf]

It came about this way. Someone with a car (I can't remember make but it is not in ITR) claims that only 16X7s came on the car. So technically he can't run his stock wheel size (I believe only ITR has the allowance for max 17" diamater OR stock, whichever is larger).

That prompted a discussion about wheel size and one of the points made is exactly what Grafton said -- diameter on a wheel is basically cheap gearing.

I'm presonally opposed to the change but willing to listen. Opening up width is where the dollars are in my view. Diameter might have some impact on handling due to sidewall size and strength of various profile tires, but overall, not a lot of change (in my opinion) to performance other than, again, cheap gearing.

I don't see a need, but let's hear what others have to say.

Jeff,

I believe that is incorrect. In Errors and Omissions of FastTrack of October 2010: "Improved Turing ITR #2477 (David Karably) wheel size. The wheel diameter rules have not changed. ITR is allowed any wheel up to 17inch."

GCR IT rules: D 7 Wheels and Tires, a.1 states in the last sentence, "Cars classified in ITR may utilize any wheel diameter up to 17" or retain their stock diameter wheels if larger."

The wording I see allows any size up to 17", including those smaller than stock.

I could be wrong.

Bill

[JeffYoung]

Bill, thanks -- but I think that was my point.

Only an ITR car can run larger than the mandated diameter size wheels if they came stock. For S/A/B, that's 15, and R 17. An R car that came with 18" diameter wheels can run them, but an S car that came with 17" wheels cannot.

There used to be a prohibition on running smaller than stock but I don't think that is there anymore. I'll look -- I think I drafted the first take on it a while back.

Jeff,

I believe that is incorrect. In Errors and Omissions of FastTrack of October 2010: "Improved Turing ITR #2477 (David Karably) wheel size. The wheel diameter rules have not changed. ITR is allowed any wheel up to 17inch."

GCR IT rules: D 7 Wheels and Tires, a.1 states in the last sentence, "Cars classified in ITR may utilize any wheel diameter up to 17" or retain their stock diameter wheels if larger."

The wording I see allows any size up to 17", including those smaller than stock.

I could be wrong.

Bill

[GKR_17]

Is that the true underlying reason/basis here? To go smaller than stock? I'd find it hard to believe there's enough demand for that to rationalize changing these rules...

I bet a lot of folks would like to run really large wheels, if only for appearances. On first thought, I don't have a problem with the idea since I don't think there is much to gain down that route (other than improved gearing options).

[JeffYoung]

Think about it practically as well.

It's probably not easy to find a 18X7 wheel for example.

Kind of "meh" on this one, but let's hear what people think.

[Z3_GoCar]

The ITA four cylinder Z3 only came with 16x7 rims in this country, and it's been allowed to run that size in ITA. The problem is that 16" tire choices are limited when compared to 17" tire choices...

Was probably one of the newer ITB chassis. If it's just one more example, I say add a spec line exception.

[GKR_17]

Interesting requests to move down to ITS from ITR (MX-5 and Boxter). I think the Mazda is right in ITR, but can see why the question was asked, but the Porsche? Come on, no question that one belongs in ITR.

[Ron Earp]

Interesting requests to move down to ITS from ITR (MX-5 and Boxter). I think the Mazda is right in ITR, but can see why the question was asked, but the Porsche? Come on, no question that one belongs in ITR.

Based on who asked it looked like the SM guys want to race elsewhere. None of those cars belongs in ITS.

[gran racing]

1. - the MR2 weight change. great to see motion on this. unfortunately, while a 95# drop is good, by "process" it's still very heavy. I'm affraid that some motion in the right direction might end up keeping it from getting all the way to where it "belongs" in terms of hp/weight as it will be seen as "fixed." the car "should" be 2260# - i think we would all be happy at 2350, or 5hp optimistic.

LOL If the MR2 ever got to 2260, I'd dump my car in a heartbeat and would begin an MR2 build.

[Andy Bettencourt]

LOL If the MR2 ever got to 2260, I'd dump my car in a heartbeat and would begin an MR2 build.

If you worked backward 110whp you would get 2250. 115whp you would get 2350.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Based on who asked it looked like the SM guys want to race elsewhere. None of those cars belongs in ITS.

Untrue Ron. To me, it looks like guys with actual knowledge of MX-5 Cup and GAC cars have written in and asked that the MX-5 be put in a class that it can actually make weight. That IS the classing philosophy and it applies to the MX-5. It will be a pig, but it will be a pig that can make weight.

The Boxster was just Ben having a brain-fart.

[Greg Amy]

Untrue Ron. To me, it looks like guys with actual knowledge of MX-5 Cup and GAC cars have written in and asked that the MX-5 be put in a class that it can actually make weight.

You mean like SM5 and/or STL...?

The Boxster was just Ben having a brain-fart.

<chuckle> He's trying to get us to allow the 3.2L Boxster S into STU, too..

BEN, GO SEE A PSYCH ABOUT THAT A-ADDS*!

GA

* Automotive Attention Deficit Disorder Syndrome. That guy's got more car racing ideas than Roger Penske...

[JeffYoung]

GUys with actual knowledge of the 1st gen RX7 also said it could never make its new ITA weight. Until Dick proved them wrong with an actual build.

The race weight in R is close enough to the curb weight that it looks possible.

Untrue Ron. To me, it looks like guys with actual knowledge of MX-5 Cup and GAC cars have written in and asked that the MX-5 be put in a class that it can actually make weight. That IS the classing philosophy and it applies to the MX-5. It will be a pig, but it will be a pig that can make weight.

The Boxster was just Ben having a brain-fart.

[GKR_17]

Untrue Ron. To me, it looks like guys with actual knowledge of MX-5 Cup and GAC cars have written in and asked that the MX-5 be put in a class that it can actually make weight. That IS the classing philosophy and it applies to the MX-5. It will be a pig, but it will be a pig that can make weight.

Aren't the MX-5's 2200 lbs in GAC? Sure the MX-5 Cup cars are 2600 lbs, but they already turn times not that far off ITR with a good bit more to gain under the IT rules.

[GTIspirit]

WHAT DO YOU THINK?
IMPROVED TOURING
Should the current Improved Touring wheel diameter restrictions be removed or otherwise adjusted? Please let us know your preferences. (Current restrictions on wheel widths would not change.)

What was the website again to give member feedback?

Personally I see no performance impact from removing the restriction on wheel diameters. Different overall diameters to adjust gearing are already allowed, if the desired aspect ratio is available for that particular width. Bigger rims are heavier and slower, by all means allow them. Allow them for the same reason that big brake kits were allowed for solo/autocross competition. No performance advantage, potentially a performance disadvantage. But it increases the appeal to the tuner crowd who struggles to understand the arcane SCCA rules.

[Lael Cleland]

I would love to run a 13 on my 84 GTI.... Cheep, I have wheels, and I might be able to use 5th.....