Problem Cars

[joeg]

Brakes and gearing also come into play for a lot of cars.

The problem with dropping weights is that a lot of these cars are kind of Porky anyways. I am not sure how you legally pull a couple hundred pounds out of a Saab 900, for example.

It is a "big" car to begin with.

[Knestis]

Understand though, that it's not necessarily the "so far out of line" cars that are the problem. A pretty big part of the motivation to "fix" mis-spec'd cars is the inconsistencies that members see between cars that are ostensibly the same - that should be the same weight but aren't.

K

[shwah]

Understand though, that it's not necessarily the "so far out of line" cars that are the problem. A pretty big part of the motivation to "fix" mis-spec'd cars is the inconsistencies that members see between cars that are ostensibly the same - that should be the same weight but aren't.

K

e.g. VW Scirocco in ITB vs VW Rabbit GTI in ITB
Same everything (literally - engine, brakes, chassis/floorpan, trans, suspension, steering) except the outer body, and the Scirocco came with 13 or 14" wheels, rather than 14" only. Yet the Scirocco weighs 50# more.

[callard]

All Porsche 911s have to add several hundred pounds after the build to meet the process weight and the horsepower can't be upped the magic 25%.
Chuck

[cjb25hs]

How about the other side of the equation. The cars that are very very hard to beat.
For example the ITA CRX/Civic Si's. A well built miata can beat them and of course the driver always is a big factor in any race that you look at, but what other cars are beating the Spec Honda ITA recipes.

Saturn SC2's, some of the Nissan products?

Of course I think a great car for the class is the Focus or Mazda 3's. Especially since now you can build a Mazda 3 with the 2.3 for the class. You are already starting out at IIRC 160HP stock.

[JeffYoung]

Integras....240sxs....Miatas....Nissan SR20 motored cars....I'd love to see a full tilt E30 318is.....Neon maybe...the Saturn....a full on 2nd Gen MR2 whenever someone builds on (Ken!) will be fast I think.

ITA to me, an outsider, really looks like a choose you weapon class. Very balanced. The CRX is a lot like the RX7 or the 240z in ITS -- the secrets of the car have been cracked and it's just a formula to make the car fast.

[dickita15]

Brakes and gearing also come into play for a lot of cars.

The problem with dropping weights is that a lot of these cars are kind of Porky anyways. I am not sure how you legally pull a couple hundred pounds out of a Saab 900, for example.

It is a "big" car to begin with.

Had a new kid this year who bought a 900 in B this year and had never scaled it. Lucked into a 3rd place and came across the scales at 150 pounds light.
But your point may still be valid.

[Bill Miller]

Brakes and gearing also come into play for a lot of cars.

The problem with dropping weights is that a lot of these cars are kind of Porky anyways. I am not sure how you legally pull a couple hundred pounds out of a Saab 900, for example.

It is a "big" car to begin with.

Joe,

If that's truly the case, I would think that car would be a good candidate for a move down to ITC. Look at the case of the VW New Beetle, it's believed that the car can't legally make the process weight that the identical (other than the bodywork) Golf and Jetta can. Therefore, the New Beetle landed in ITC at a portly 28xx lbs (IIRC).

Chris (shwah),

It's my understanding that the difference in the Rabbit and Scirocco weights is based on the perceived aero advantage of the Scirocco bodywork. I am not convinced that there's any aero advantage, but what I've heard, is that is the reason for the difference in weights.

[shwah]

But I have been told that aero is not an input to the 'codefied' process.

Even if it were 50# is a LOT to hang on cars with 90hp stock.

[JeffYoung]

Aero is most definitely not part of the process.

[IPRESS]

Not trying to stir anything up, but why is aero NOT a part? I am not saying it should be, just asking. Guessing that the determination of bad or good aero would take lots of either "track hours" or "tunnel time" (equals $$$$$)?
So from the above posts I am gathering that "B" has some, maybe more, cars that are on either side of the curve, am I right? (I am not trying to push this subject in any direction, I just think it is good to know where the problems are that push the buttons.)
Maybe somebody could make a list.

[JeffYoung]

Marc, that's correct. Speaking for myself (although I think most of the ITAC agrees) there is just no way to quantify aero. Even the "book" numbers for a car are pretty much useless given what we can do with spoilers/splitters.

[Knestis]

Aero drag - negative HP - is a very complicated business and there's no way to accurately determine it with the resources we have. We also dork with the factory body shape a LOT with airdams. Finally, the actual physics is often contradictory to what we *think* we see when we eyeball something asking how "aerodynamic" it is.

K

[Bill Miller]

But I have been told that aero is not an input to the 'codefied' process.

Even if it were 50# is a LOT to hang on cars with 90hp stock.

Chris,

I am only going on what I was told (a long time ago) when I asked why there was a weight difference between the Rabbit and Scirocco, given the same engine. Initially, I was told that it had to do w/ the ITB Mk II Scirocco being classified w/ the RD (103 hp, 10:1) engine. But that was tossed several years ago, so I don't know. Given that both the Rabbit GTI in ITB, and the Mk II Scirocco w/ the 1.8 8v engine saw weight changes as part of tGR, coupled w/ Jeff's and Kirk's comments about aero not being a factor, I have no idea why those cars have different weights. Maybe someone on the ITAC that was involved w/ tGR can shed some light on it.