Originally Posted by
Ron Earp
Additional examples:
*ITS Jensen Healey - has more factory cams than the engine has valves. Lots of parts.
*ITB Mustang - lots of heads, cams, induction changes, etc.
*ITS Mustang - many parts, not ITB Mustang status though
*ITR Mustang V6 - similar to the ITS Mustang
*ITS TR8 - Convertible, coupe, FI, carb all on one line
I do understand the ITAC not wanting to repeat process mistakes made in the past. But it doesn't appear that we're in danger of creating a problem with the RX8. Indeed, if we were to assume that we have created problems in the past, for example, the ITB Mustang classing is what we're trying to avoid, what was the impact on SCCA ITB racing of that classification?
Exactly. IMHO the ITAC is worrying about a problem that doesn't exist here. Relatively substantive changes between model years is very normal, and has been something that has been looked past through 30 years of classing cars. It's the whole reason the update/backdate rule exists. In the case of the RX-8 the changes for the 09' model year just don't seem all that significant, especially when compared to other classed cars that have never become overdogs themselves via update/backdate.
Chris Carey
Central Florida Region
ITS/Vintage Datsun 240Z
Favorite tool to remove undercoating---- A curb!
"Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car and oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car.
Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall, torque is how far you take the wall with you."
Bookmarks