pweishaupt
New member
the more people i talk too, the less inclined i am to try IT with the targa - perhaps move to an mr2, boxster or 944..
1988 Porsche 911
- Thread starter pweishaupt
- Start date
the more people i talk too, the less inclined i am to try IT with the targa - perhaps move to an mr2, boxster or 944..
Super Swift
New member
Old School bias
Jeff is right the 924 is classed well in ITB. But, Mr. Parker’s point that Historically Porsches are classed poorly is also correct. However I do think most of the Improved Touring biases have been corrected.
20 years ago in ITS: 944 (8v) was the heaviest car classed @ 2720lbs (add the current 180lbs driver = 2900lbs) …now a fair ITS car @ 2575lbs…
also back in the day in ITS: 924 (2.0 L) was classed @ 2520lbs (2700lbs w/ driver) …now a great ITB car @ 2495lbs…
In ITA: 914 (1.7L) was classed @ 1900lbs (2080lbs w/ driver) …now a bad ITC car…
Just for prospective here are 3 other cars classed in my old school ITCS… for ITS. Porsche’s weren’t the only one’s getting hosed.
240Z @ 2250 (2430 w/ driver) I bet they could find the parts to run back then…wish they still could
RX-7 (12A) @ 2200 (2380 w/ driver) runs so bad in ITA they made IT7 poor guys started in ITS
RX-7 ( 13B ) @ 2500 (2680 w/ driver) This car is still taking names.
Pete… If you want to race IT I would love to see you in ITR. Still the best class in IT despite the bad blood between Andy and myself. (Read the latest fastrack this isn’t the venue for that topic where I got lambasted.
Needless to say I am on Grafton’s side. 
)
Pete… I would also recommend buying a used racecar instead of building one. The deals are out there: cents on the dollar. Pick a class, research the rules, research the cars, and then shop around.
Hope to see you on the track in ITR!
Benjamin Robertson
944 S2 ITR
Jeff is right the 924 is classed well in ITB. But, Mr. Parker’s point that Historically Porsches are classed poorly is also correct. However I do think most of the Improved Touring biases have been corrected.
20 years ago in ITS: 944 (8v) was the heaviest car classed @ 2720lbs (add the current 180lbs driver = 2900lbs) …now a fair ITS car @ 2575lbs…
also back in the day in ITS: 924 (2.0 L) was classed @ 2520lbs (2700lbs w/ driver) …now a great ITB car @ 2495lbs…
In ITA: 914 (1.7L) was classed @ 1900lbs (2080lbs w/ driver) …now a bad ITC car…
Just for prospective here are 3 other cars classed in my old school ITCS… for ITS. Porsche’s weren’t the only one’s getting hosed.
240Z @ 2250 (2430 w/ driver) I bet they could find the parts to run back then…wish they still could
RX-7 (12A) @ 2200 (2380 w/ driver) runs so bad in ITA they made IT7 poor guys started in ITS
RX-7 ( 13B ) @ 2500 (2680 w/ driver) This car is still taking names.
Pete… If you want to race IT I would love to see you in ITR. Still the best class in IT despite the bad blood between Andy and myself. (Read the latest fastrack this isn’t the venue for that topic where I got lambasted.
Needless to say I am on Grafton’s side. )Pete… I would also recommend buying a used racecar instead of building one. The deals are out there: cents on the dollar. Pick a class, research the rules, research the cars, and then shop around.
Hope to see you on the track in ITR!
Benjamin Robertson
944 S2 ITR
Last edited:
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Still the best class in IT despite the bad blood between Andy and myself. (Read the latest fastrack this isn’t the venue for that topic where I got lambasted.
Benjamin Robertson
944 S2 ITR
No bad blood bro. That why I took the time to try and explain the logic behind the correction. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean there is an issue. Your car gets the benefit of a non-standard IT-multiplier too ya know...
Ron Earp
Administrator
Just for prospective here are 3 other cars classed in my old school ITCS… for ITS. Porsche’s weren’t the only one’s getting hosed.
240Z @ 2250 (2430 w/ driver) I bet they could find the parts to run back then…wish they still could
Not sure I follow you on the 240Z as I don't think they have a weight disadvantage at all.
The current weight for them is 2430 lbs, with driver, and they are extremely competitive in ITS at that weight. They can meet weight with a 200 lbs driver. Same for the 260Z at 2480lbs and 280Z at 2530 lbs, although the weight is a bit more challenging.
Okay to keep beating the horse, my 1972 2.4 liter 911E (165 crank HP) was first listed in the PCS at 2200 lbs (plus driver = 2385). By the time I sourced a 1972 VIN chassis and built it, the PCS has bumped the weight 100 lbs - TWICE. New weight with driver 2585 lbs. Several letters to the IT committee protesting the 25% adder for a car that came from the factory with headers did no good. A good IT engine builder should be able to get 205 HP according to them. (The factory is still looking for that engine builder.) The only way I was able to get that HP on the dyno was with much much higher compression, cosworth pistons, high lift cams and bigger valves.
As much as I support the process, the 911 is hurt by it. It would take several independant dyno runs of various other engines to support the fact that the 911E won't produce the 25% HP gains expected. Oh and the engine has to be built by a professional IT engine builder. Not some hack like me who has only screwed together several hundred Porsche motors and logged a few hundred hours on an engine dyno testing and tuning.
Since the 911E has been reviewed by the committee and turned down for a weight reduction, I submitted a request to classify the early 1970s 911S (185 crank HP) back in November. Here it is in February and I've received two notices that the request has been tabled. So much for planning for this coming season. f the CRB wants to classify by displacement, I guess the weight should remain the same.
But I'd be happier if they would just beg Kirk, Andy and Jake to come back and sort it out.
As much as I support the process, the 911 is hurt by it. It would take several independant dyno runs of various other engines to support the fact that the 911E won't produce the 25% HP gains expected. Oh and the engine has to be built by a professional IT engine builder. Not some hack like me who has only screwed together several hundred Porsche motors and logged a few hundred hours on an engine dyno testing and tuning.
Since the 911E has been reviewed by the committee and turned down for a weight reduction, I submitted a request to classify the early 1970s 911S (185 crank HP) back in November. Here it is in February and I've received two notices that the request has been tabled. So much for planning for this coming season. f the CRB wants to classify by displacement, I guess the weight should remain the same.
But I'd be happier if they would just beg Kirk, Andy and Jake to come back and sort it out.
Super Swift
New member
You got it Ron
Ron,
I was only trying to point out that the first gen RX-7 also started out very bad.
The 240z has always been stupid fast as with the second gen RX-7.
Ron,
I was only trying to point out that the first gen RX-7 also started out very bad.
The 240z has always been stupid fast as with the second gen RX-7.
Super Swift
New member
That got me thinking... about way back when...
Does anyone remember the days of Nick Craw (club prez) going around the country running his ITS 240z to the tune of "Beat the Boss"?
wow that feels like a long time ago...
Does anyone remember the days of Nick Craw (club prez) going around the country running his ITS 240z to the tune of "Beat the Boss"?
wow that feels like a long time ago...
pweishaupt
New member
Jeff is right the 924 is classed well in ITB. But, Mr. Parker’s point that Historically Porsches are classed poorly is also correct. However I do think most of the Improved Touring biases have been corrected.
20 years ago in ITS: 944 (8v) was the heaviest car classed @ 2720lbs (add the current 180lbs driver = 2900lbs) …now a fair ITS car @ 2575lbs…
also back in the day in ITS: 924 (2.0 L) was classed @ 2520lbs (2700lbs w/ driver) …now a great ITB car @ 2495lbs…
In ITA: 914 (1.7L) was classed @ 1900lbs (2080lbs w/ driver) …now a bad ITC car…
Just for prospective here are 3 other cars classed in my old school ITCS… for ITS. Porsche’s weren’t the only one’s getting hosed.
240Z @ 2250 (2430 w/ driver) I bet they could find the parts to run back then…wish they still could
RX-7 (12A) @ 2200 (2380 w/ driver) runs so bad in ITA they made IT7 poor guys started in ITS
RX-7 ( 13B ) @ 2500 (2680 w/ driver) This car is still taking names.
Pete… If you want to race IT I would love to see you in ITR. Still the best class in IT despite the bad blood between Andy and myself. (Read the latest fastrack this isn’t the venue for that topic where I got lambasted.
Pete… I would also recommend buying a used racecar instead of building one. The deals are out there: cents on the dollar. Pick a class, research the rules, research the cars, and then shop around.
Hope to see you on the track in ITR!
Benjamin Robertson
944 S2 ITR
thanks for the encouraging words. guess i'll have to sell the targa and pick up an itr prepped 944
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Thanks, but, we left because the CRB is in direct opposition to our "vision" or "direction". It was clear after the last con call that the CRB considered me a thorn in their sides.
Super Swift
New member
Read the IT vin rule
Pete,
If you really want to race an ITR 944 S2 notice the vin number rule for improved touring... I think but only in the 90% range.... you could get a 951 racecar ie 944 turbo and stuff in an S2 motor... the fastest ITR 944 S2 I know of (Kip's) started life as a 944s.
ITR is a young class so most any car you buy will need "tweaking". Someone else already said something about the cage & seam welds... (so echo that point)
Good Luck!
Benjamin Robertson
Pete,
If you really want to race an ITR 944 S2 notice the vin number rule for improved touring... I think but only in the 90% range.... you could get a 951 racecar ie 944 turbo and stuff in an S2 motor... the fastest ITR 944 S2 I know of (Kip's) started life as a 944s.
ITR is a young class so most any car you buy will need "tweaking". Someone else already said something about the cage & seam welds... (so echo that point)
Good Luck!
Benjamin Robertson
