THE BACK ROOM or ....

[ner88]

Why would you think it's real?

[JeffYoung]

I'm on the ITAC. Yes, it is real, and I'm glad to see it published, although I thought it was going out through an "official" channel first.

Why would you think it's real?

[lateapex911]

Why would you think it's real?

It's real.
I have a copy of an earlier and more simply worded version.

[gran racing]

I would LOVE to have seen this from the actual source, though, not leaked as it appears to be.

Agreed and a part of me wanted to delete this thread not because it should be a secret, but those involved should of had the honor to post it.

[Knestis]

...a recent classification change to the MR2 shows that indeed an incredible amount of data is needed to budge the ITAC from the assumed gains of 30%.

There's two issues there. On the one hand, it SHOULD require a really compelling stack of evidence to deviate from standard practices - hence the 75% confidence expectation. On the other, standard practice for ITB multivalve cars should *not* be 30%.

If that's the biggest glitch in how the ITAC is currently doing business, I'll take it.

K

[dickita15]

I do not believe it is leaked I believe it is in the file cabinet with the rest of the manuals on the SCCA web site. If you believe that this document should be publicly available so people can read it and understand the process then thank the brave folks of the ITAC and CRB who are trusting you with this knowledge. Use this knowledge wisely for it could be the first step of a revolution of attitude in the way rule processes are done. Misuse this tool and we will enter another thousand years of darkness.

[mossaidis]

Bravo!!!!!!!

[lateapex911]

I do not believe it is leaked I believe it is in the file cabinet with the rest of the manuals on the SCCA web site. If you believe that this document should be publicly available so people can read it and understand the process then thank the brave folks of the ITAC and CRB who are trusting you with this knowledge. Use this knowledge wisely for it could be the first step of a revolution of attitude in the way rule processes are done. Misuse this tool and we will enter another thousand years of darkness.

That's excellent Dick. I looked everywhere I could, and logged in, wen to the file cabinet and looked at every category, opening several in the Club Racing category, but didn't find it.
I assume it's on it's way.
Either way, good job to the ITAC for staying the course, and it's great news to hear that it is intended for public consumption.
As soon as it's posted officially, one of us mods will sticky a post here with a link.

[jjjanos]

So let's do some math....

Formula: HP * P2WRatio*FWD*ITGain +/- Adders = minimum weight?

A mid-1980s FWD Studebaker with factory-rated HP of 91 in ITB.

91 * 17 * .98 * 1.3 = 1971 rounded to nearest 5-pound increment of 1970?

Anything wrong with that math?

If said car is currently classified at 2200lbs, then it "should" be run through the "process" and lose over 200 pounds of ballast?

Am I understanding this correctly or is this car forever doomed to carry the excess weight but similar cars will get classified at the lower weight?

[gran racing]

Is this the first category which has released publicly it's classification process?

[lateapex911]

jjjjjjanos-
no. hp x gain = base weight.
Base weight then gets FWD applied, then adders.

[JeffYoung]

If a request is made to do so, we have the ability to "process" cars that were not processed before and/or cars that had errors made during processing.

If you want us to look at a car, write in.

Thanks.

Jeff

So let's do some math....

Formula: HP * P2WRatio*FWD*ITGain +/- Adders = minimum weight?

A mid-1980s FWD Studebaker with factory-rated HP of 91 in ITB.

91 * 17 * .98 * 1.3 = 1971 rounded to nearest 5-pound increment of 1970?

Anything wrong with that math?

If said car is currently classified at 2200lbs, then it "should" be run through the "process" and lose over 200 pounds of ballast?

Am I understanding this correctly or is this car forever doomed to carry the excess weight but similar cars will get classified at the lower weight?

[dickita15]

That's excellent Dick. I looked everywhere I could, and logged in, wen to the file cabinet and looked at every category, opening several in the Club Racing category, but didn't find it.
I assume it's on it's way.
Either way, good job to the ITAC for staying the course, and it's great news to hear that it is intended for public consumption.
As soon as it's posted officially, one of us mods will sticky a post here with a link.

Jake the links were a little screwed up but I think they are all fixed now. Log in at SCCA.com tab resources and file cabinet. Look for CRB and Advisory Committee operations manuals. It is right there for any member.

[robits325is]

I think its great that this information has been shared. Someone with more time than I have could create a Car Classification Weight calculator online to determine which car would be best to build.

A couple of questions pop into my mind:

1.) What constitutes abnormally large or small brakes?

2.) Dyno sheets have too many variables and should not be used at all (my opinion)