GMs in IT

[JoshS]

While on the ITAC I lobbied the CRB for a new faster IT class which would fit the M3 and the C4 Corvettes. Unfortunately only the '84 is likely to fit decently into ITR and that's not a very desireable package compared to the later cars.

[Ron Earp]

While on the ITAC I lobbied the CRB for a new faster IT class which would fit the M3 and the C4 Corvettes. Unfortunately only the '84 is likely to fit decently into ITR and that's not a very desireable package compared to the later cars.

The 1984 C4 fits into ITR. While maybe not as desirable as later model C4s, it'd be possible to class it as is in ITR. Over 51000 1984 examples were built so there is plenty of race car fodder out there for cheap prices. Probably even get a leather jacket and gold chain to go with it.

[joeg]

No love for Fieros, Citations or Chevettes?

[Ron Earp]

No love for Fieros, Citations or Chevettes?

Au Contraire, I love Fieros. I still think a full on 100% Megasquirted built to the max Fiero could do some damage in ITA. Still haven't seen a 100% build yet, or close to it.

Those other two, no, no love there despite the common DNA with the Fiero.

[chuck baader]

Look at the intake manifold/ports on the Fiero and you might change your mind. cB

[CRallo]

I like the ideas. Good thinking.

3.4 needs a torque adder? What else does? Where is the line drawn?

[TomL]

"Torque adder"? Is that still around? I'll say it again. Horsepower counts, torque doesn't. "Torque monster" is noting but a synonym for "revless wonder". I wonder why things like torque adders are still even discussed, much less used. Color me disappointed.

[Gary L]

Look at the intake manifold/ports on the Fiero and you might change your mind. cB

Put one on the track and you might change it back. I've posted this story on these pages before, but what the Hell...

In 2004 I took a nearly stock (I've owned it since new, so I know what's been monkeyed with and what hasn't) '88 Fiero GT to Hallett and did a few track days. The car had the muffler removed (converter still installed), was lowered an inch or two by chopping the stock springs, and had orange Koni street shocks front and rear. We mounted some used Hoosier SM's on 7" Kosei K1's, decambered it front & rear and went at it. We ended up 3.5 seconds off the ITA lap record, held at that time by Bob Stretch in the Nissan 240S. This was with nothing done to the engine - and I do mean nothing whatsoever; no chip, no headers, no tuning of any sort. Oh, yes... about the weight... we were 300 pounds (three hundred - it's not a typo) over current ITA minimum for the car. And remember, we're talking about a 2900+ lb car on used 205/50 15's!

I'm not saying it's an overdog in ITA, but I sure wouldn't dismiss it as an also-ran; in full prep and the right hands, the car is a potential front runner IMO.

[TomL]

Josh - I realize that high torque has sometimes been taken as an indicator of wide torque band. For a specific engine, I don't doubt that is the case. However, I have serious doubts that this is true across the huge variety of engines that are found in IT. Admittedly, I haven't seen a huge number of dyno sheets to confirm my impression, but I'll take that as true until I see otherwise.

Have you all done a systematic survey of all the data you have to demonstrate that peak torque is a reliable indicator of power band width? Is so, could I see it? I've been thinking about writing a paper on the whole torque vs. HP question, and would like to see what anyone else has discovered. Alternatively, could I get access to a selection of the dyno graphs the ITAC has so I could do my own analysis? This is a topic which has bothered me for years, and I'd like to see a definitive resolution.

Thanks