No disagreement with Chip's point above, but...
...please don't fall in love with this. This was a committee oversight and is very likely to be "corrected" soon.Originally Posted by Chip42
Cue whining.
GA
Administrator
No disagreement with Chip's point above, but...
...please don't fall in love with this. This was a committee oversight and is very likely to be "corrected" soon.
Cue whining.
GA
Senior Member
Opinions aside, at least we know it's coming and being 'corrected'.
Senior Member
*whine*
Chris Rallo "the kid"
-- "wrenching and racing" -- "will race for food!" -- "Onward and Upward"
Senior Member
Administrator
My personal opinion on the matter - please reread the bold part, and if you missed that, please read my signature - is that it makes absolutely no sense to classify an alternate-category car in Super Touring that may have a chance to be competitive. As much as 99.99% of the people on this board wish otherwise, the Super Touring Category prep specs are the whole point of Super Touring, and everything else is "grid filler".
[waving finger] Oh no you didn't say that!!! [/waving finger] Yup, I did. Tell me you're shocked. We - sorry, I - really do mean that part where it says:
While IT cars may not be competitive in the ST category,
their inclusion in the category will allow regional competitors to
participate in national events.
Improved Touring was, as I recall, the very first "inclusion" category added to the STCS, and we've consistently added more upon request since. Note that each one of those has more than a sprinkling of "sure, come play in the sandbox, but please don't expect to have a big chance of winning." This cannot be news to you...
The deal with the ITR cars is simple: I blew it. I personally authored and sponsored changing the rules last year to explicitly allow 2L IT cars into Super Touring Light, knowing that the performance level STL is probably going to be around ITR times. At the time, I was thinking about ITS-level performance and completely and totally forgot to look through ITCS and see that there was, in fact, three ITR cars of less than 2L displacement.
Simply put, it is not my personal intention to classify alternate-category cars into Super Touring that have a reasonable chance of winning against full-up-built ST cars. I can't think of any other category in any other organization that would stand for that.
I am speaking only for myself and can only infer that the rest of the STAC and the CRB is on board with that intent.
Hey, "my bad".
GA
Senior Member
I just think it's odd. even <2.0L ITR cars should be at a disadvantage to full prep STL cars. too many exceptions. yeah, I know they are SUPPSOED to be field filler, but note where the quoted STCS text says "may not be competitive" - my impression was that it's not expected, but hey, good on ya if you are.
of course, now that weight is being added to the class as a whole, the ITR cars look even more attractive. so now I can see where you might want to say only ITS/A/B/C cars of <2L can play. heck, I'd make it ITS/A below 2.0L and any ITB/C cars of 1985 and newer...
I'm not trying to dump all over STL. I like the idea of the class. but all of the arbitrary "lines in sand", talk of a higher RWD adder, exlusions and inclusions and partial exceptions etc.. have made it 1 - very confusing to the competitors and officials who spend less time worrying about it than a relative few, and 2 - seemingly non sensical AND exclusionist to cars that "should" be the target players.
I say move your lines up a bit, let in the ITR/S2000 in with a cam detune to the current 11:1, 0.425, etc.. rules, allow all <2.0L IT cars, and allow specline approved non-USDM motors (i.e. case by case). adjust weight equations on the class so that this works (so an STL tegR should be lighter than an ITR tegR, STL S2000 lighter than ITR S2000, etc..). ignore pending bspec cars because they aren't going to be competitive anyhow (even with a motor swap. they are breadvans with rudimentary suspensions). leave the RWD adder alone (for now, at least, which is what I think you have said is being done). remove the 4cyl limit. keep everything else unchanged (in reality, these proposals affect 2 paragraphs of the STCS). end the whining, grow the class.
free advice, worth what you paid for it.
Last edited by Chip42; 02-27-2012 at 06:18 PM.
Senior Member
Of course they will be! Even the top ITR car on paper is a dog compared to this 175whp 1.6L monster. It's not even close!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks