Teach me about ITR 325's

[dickita15]

My opinion is when you can change so many pieces and create a parts room model that exceeds the model that was classified then there should be a re-evaluation. I think that some of these RX-7 models should be on an individual spec line just like the 92 325i should be on a different spec line from the 93-95 325i

All that would do is split out the 86-88 Rx7s which would have to be at a lower weight due to the lower horsepower.

[Andy Bettencourt]

All that would do is split out the 86-88 Rx7s which would have to be at a lower weight due to the lower horsepower.

Yup - 146hp. 2450 in ITS (never get there) or 2750 in ITA!!! Now THERE is an interesting idea...

[robits325is]

Yup - 146hp. 2450 in ITS (never get there) or 2750 in ITA!!! Now THERE is an interesting idea...

According to post #76 the horsepower on the "lesser" models is the same? or did I read that between the lines?

[JeffYoung]

Rob, the early 2nd Gen RX7s made 146 hp.

The later ones 160 hp.

All of the later model GL/GXL/GTU/GTUs made 160, which is I think what Andy was saying.

[Andy Bettencourt]

According to post #76 the horsepower on the "lesser" models is the same? or did I read that between the lines?

The 1986-1988 NA RX-7's all had 146 stock hp. The 89-91 NA RX-7's all had 160 stock hp - regardless of model. They are many mechanical differences in the motors. Nobody runs a 146hp motor in ITS.

[robits325is]

The 1986-1988 NA RX-7's all had 146 stock hp. The 89-91 NA RX-7's all had 160 stock hp - regardless of model. They are many mechanical differences in the motors. Nobody runs a 146hp motor in ITS.

If the 86 is 146hp and the 91 is 160hp then why are they on the same spec line?

[Greg Amy]

The 1986-1988 NA RX-7's all had 146 stock hp. The 89-91 NA RX-7's all had 160 stock hp - regardless of model. They are many mechanical differences in the motors. Nobody runs a 146hp motor in ITS.

And, if they were split out, then they'd also not have the bigger brakes, the rear wing, and the trick 5th gear, yes? Their only "parts bin" advantage versus the current ITS rocket is the lack of power steering.

Honestly, at the right weight, I think that would be a fine addition to ITA. And, it would give members the opportunity to race the 2nd-gen car competitively with minimal changes. A win-win as far as I'm concerned, and a great illustration of why it's a bad idea to put significantly different cars on the same spec line.

If the 86 is 146hp and the 91 is 160hp then why are they on the same spec line?

Same reason as the ITA 1.8L Miatas, and the E36s, and several other cars are: someone thought it was a good idea, that it would make for simplicity. In the end all it does is force preparation to the highest level in order to be competitive.

And that's not really what Improved Touring is supposed to be about.

GA

[Knestis]

Seems to me that a pretty good argument can be made in both of these examples (2nd-gen RX7 and the e36 325) to have multiple spec lines. But the simplicity argument has merit, too. Looking at first principles, which way do we think the scales tip? I ask because others might agree with Greg's contention of "what IT is supposed to be about..."

(FWIW, I personally tend to agree with his thesis, even if ITAC practice typically leans the other direction.)

KK

[Andy Bettencourt]

And, if they were split out, then they'd also not have the bigger brakes, the rear wing, and the trick 5th gear, yes? Their only "parts bin" advantage versus the current ITS rocket is the lack of power steering.

Honestly, at the right weight, I think that would be a fine addition to ITA. And, it would give members the opportunity to race the 2nd-gen car competitively with minimal changes. A win-win as far as I'm concerned, and a great illustration of why it's a bad idea to put significantly different cars on the same spec line.


Same reason as the ITA 1.8L Miatas, and the E36s, and several other cars are: someone thought it was a good idea, that it would make for simplicity. In the end all it does is force preparation to the highest level in order to be competitive.

And that's not really what Improved Touring is supposed to be about.

GA

This is a very interesting discussion and it really does follow the principles of IT. Breaking cars out and giving people more options is good.

For the record on the RX-7's: Many of the parts you see on ITS cars are NOT rare. The brakes also were available on the 86-88 cars as was the rear wing. The GXL and GTU were very common cars that had these items. There was no aluminum hood or 'better' 5th gear on any of the 86-88 cars as far as the documentation I have shows. The SE of that gen was a 4-lug, smaller brake car and was very entry level. It was not nearly as popular as the 3-4 other models.

It would be real interesting to have a 146hp S4 2nd gen car in ITA. If you extrapolate the power gains the S5 gets, I bet it could make 155whp (~30% gains) and about 125ftlbs. Around 2750lbs in ITA would make it interesting. Not my first choice, but certainly an option. I have never seen anyone 'IT-ize' the 146hp lump. The rotors have less compression.