1st gen class change to ITB ------ NOT!

B

Boswoj

New member
I see that the January Fast Track is out and that the request was dismissed in the "Not recommended for implementation at this time" section with the obligatory "The car falls within the performance parameters of it's current class"

ITB is not very popular in the NW with hardly any cars running. I guess it is a bit better in California with some well developed 2002's. With the proper set of specs I think there are a lot of Rx-7's out there that might be enticed to run more than just Pro-7.
 
Just keep on writing the letters and talking to other RX drivers. It's definitely not a move that's going to happen quickly as there are too many issues to be dealt with on the weight (if min. weight moves up, there'll be some illegal cages out there if nothing else is addressed) and wheel width rule.

------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it

Izzy's Custom Cages
 
Regarding the fast track response to reclassing of the ITA mazda to ITB by Boswoj that the request was dismissed in the "Not recommended for implementation at this time" section with the obligatory "The car falls within the performance parameters of it's current class"

This is just Bull****. I do see that Hondas regularly get reclassed. This is a Honda club, bought part and parcel. I have one of the best legally prepared Mazdas out there (fastest lap at ARRC last year but stuck in third at the start) and over the years I have always been consistently 3-3 1/2 seconds down from the ITA leaders. I used to race with an ITB Volvo sedan (this is a sports car?) at Mid-Ohio and I could only occasionally scrape out a lead. With narrower rims I might just be competitive in ITB, but never a dominant car.

As a 31-year member and past member of the Solo Events Board, Race Chairman, Regional Executive, Regional Solo II Chair, Editor, I have tons of experience in this club and this is the biggest screwing I have ever witnessed. I have submitted extensive data analysis, written tons of letters over the last five or six years, and even written the BOD over this travesty and I still cannot fathom the reasons we are treated so shoddily. And in that time I have not gotten one bit of feedback or satisfactory explanation for what is going on.

After more than half a lifetime as a committed member I am ready to hang it up with SCCA over this.

I would advise everyone to write the Comp Board but quite frankly I think it is futule. Don't bother them with the facts, the answer will always be the same.
 
Let me add to my comments. In this club, if you want an assured 1st place car, just buy a Honda. Any Honda. Old or new, sedan, sports car, doesn't matter. Solo II, Club Racing, doesn't matter. This is not coincidence.
 
Are you f'n kidding me? BS! Oh, so the Accord being moved from ITA to B was...what? Do you honestly think that was fair? Oh, but SCCA caters to Hondas, I almost forgot. Give me a break. And what in the world does Honda have to do with the RX7 being moved to ITB? Just how many Hondas were in ITB during the past few years? Gee, it's funny that my Prelude was in ITA at 2,450 with 110 lb hp. Glad to see that originally I benefited from the wonderful Honda break. Oh yeah, but it was moved to ITB in '05 not because it belongs there but because it is a Honda. Thank goodness that Honda still pays the board their monthly dividend checks or I'd be screwed.

If you are going to argue that the RX7 could be in B with the appropriate adjustments, cool. But argue it on the merits of the RX7 not some other garbage. Just because the board says that it is not recommended for implementation at this time does not mean never. Even some of us Honda people have been faced with frustration that in the past the board sees the H on the front of the car, so it must be a fast car. Whatever.
------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[This message has been edited by gran racing (edited November 24, 2004).]
 
Well, what can be added to that?

Just to fill in some blanks for folks who don't know of Jims background.

As I understand it, Jim is a former suspension engineer (the degree carrying kind) with GM.

He enjoys the odd and unusual, and devoted some serious engineering to the RX-7 as an IT racer. He invented the whole "3rd link" concept, then marketed it as the "Trilink", and has a slew of products that match the Trilink geometry and philosophy.

You won't find a more advanced RX-7 suspension than what's under Jims car. He also has done extensive engineering on the engine, and trades emails and calls about it with his buddy Paul Yaw. I wish I was at liberty to tell you a bit of what he explored. Innovative.

Finally, I have 100% confidence that he has never set a wheel on a track for a race in a car that he knew wasn't 100% legal.

If anyone in the country can build a fast, and legal RX-7, it is Jim.

I wasn't surprised to see the Fastrack item, but I am disappointed.

From a large view, I do think a great opportunity has been missed. IT is lopsided. Not may C cars, and to some extent, B is struggling as well. Attrition is taking it's toll. ITA doesn't need field fillers. A car that can compete for trophies could only help ITB. Why wasn't this item considered?

There really aren't many chances to help fill the ITB fields...too bad the ITAC and the CRB passed on this one.

I do wonder what the objection was from the ITAC members who were against?

Empirical data? Opinion? What? Why?


------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
***In this club, if you want an assured 1st place car, just buy a Honda. Any Honda.***

His home track is supported by Honda.......

IIRC the last comments I heard in a conversation about a strut spacer I purchased that didn't fit (different hole centers & I had the only 1st gen RX-7 with different hole centrs) my 1st gen RX-7 was "we'll work with ya piled on top of you are the only customer of hundreds that has a problem".

Is this what's called talking out of both sides of ones mouth.

Nuff said
Retired engineer with degree
wink.gif

David


ps: If I were the VENDOR/manufacture/seller of race parts & I sold a part that did not have the same dimensional specifications as the CUSTOMERS RX-7 I would refund or provide correct parts to the CUSTOMER.
 
Guys, don't give up on the RX7. Especially for the upcoming year, I think SCCA has to be very careful of the moves being made. And as other RX7 drivers have stated several times in various posts, there are some obstacles to overcome. The cage issue is the interesting one. There are also RX7 people who are apposed to the move.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si
 
Originally posted by gran racing:
Guys, don't give up on the RX7. Especially for the upcoming year, I think SCCA has to be very careful of the moves being made. And as other RX7 drivers have stated several times in various posts, there are some obstacles to overcome. The cage issue is the interesting one. There are also RX7 people who are apposed to the move.

Click to expand...
I wrote a letter to the crb and outlined my reasoning for the move.( No fuel injection, no iginiton tuning, 40 overbore etc) If you are in favor write DIRECTLY. IMHO it does no good to compare so&so car at xyz track. Take as series NARRC,NYSRRC. and see the top cars at end of season. I intend to follow up because the reply (fits where it is) is Turkey Poop( in keeping with the Holiday) Remember in Regions that have RX-7 specfic class they are happy. Of course if your against the move you could send a letter also( just don't put a stamp on it
biggrin.gif
) I also suggest allow ITB to use 7" wheels so we did not have to go buy new wheels Not sure where to find 6" wheel (Diamond probably)



------------------
Tom Weaver: Logistics & Technical Support Manager IE truck driver for 1980 RX-7 ITA #63
"Hemi Haulin' Rotary"
 
Let me preface this by saying that to a certain degree I don't really have a dog in this fight. I've moved on to racing my Rx-7 in Production, but I still find a really large amount of good info here on the IT site. Part of the philosophy of the SCCA's class structure is to create a definite path for both driver and car development. Supposedly, an incoming driver can buy a SS car to start their racing experience and advance from SS to IT to Prod to GT. This is accomplished by getting progressively more comfortable with the idea of sqandering their retirement, pissing off the wife, and alienating family and friends by only coming in from the garage for meals, and generally treating a 25 year old car like a devestatingly beautiful and perpetually horny 19 year old mistress. OK the last part was a joke............well, kind of. Anyway, the point I am trying to make (in a VERY roundabout fashion) is that there are certain cars and manufacturers that are vital to the success of the SCCA and several other organizations. I don't think that in general that you can claim Mazda as a manufacturer is really discriminated against becasue the number of Mazdas racing as a percemtage of all the cars raced is really large. I'm definitely agreeing with Mr. Susko that the Rx-7 is seriously outclassed in ITA, and that even exactly as spec'd now it would NOT be an overdog in ITB. That being said, there are a couple of "political" reasons to not reclass the car. Right now, most racing organizations see the promotion of Honda to be an effective way to encourage young people to get involved, as young folks these days are pretty much "Honda Crazy". There is also a desire to not be seen to really favoring any individual Marque, and relocating Mazda to ITB may have a backlash effect of making others, who are just as passionate as Mr. Susko to clain that Mazdas are moved to keep them at the front of the class. Unfortunately, I wqould take the view that ANY move made for "political" reasons (spoken like a dirty word) would be a bad thing. I think that, excepting a really small amount of dissenters, we know that a really top knotch, fully developed 1st gen is really a couple of seconds off the top Hondas in ITA. That is not going to get any better, as I think that we are really out of any miraculous tricks that will open up new avenues of development. Since most new racers are going to start with a car that runs at the front of the pack rather than the back, that means less and less Mazdas. That in turn means fewer and fewer to be developed for Prod etc, etc, etc.

I am really willing to give the SCCA the benifit of the doubt - I think that they are trying to do some things that are long overdue right now, and it's going to take them a while to change the playing field as it's really a big, big job for people that for the most part have homes, families, jobs, and the aforementioned 19 year old mistresses of their own competing for their attention. I'm just hoping they get around to the right decision sooner or later.

Sorry to ramble so muck - Happy Turkey Day to my extended racing family!

Boswoj
 
I think it is pretty obvious that I think the RX7 is a good fit in ITB but that said I like the race group I race in now. There are large fields and good racing and I do own 13 good 7” wheels. I am not surprised that the ITAC did not vote for the change at this time. It is a little like the coyote and the roadrunner. As long as the roadrunner wins the coyote can keep trying, once the coyote wins the game is over. It is much safer to keep the RX7 in A if there is any doubt. There are also a number of cars still in ITA that are slower than the Mazda that should be moved down, though the do not have the numbers needed to repopulate ITB.

On the other hand when the CPA process started the ITAC seemed to make a conscious decision that four classes were enough to make a well balanced IT program not withstanding discussion of a faster class that may be needed in the future. This was followed by quite a few cars moved from the bottom of ITS to ITA. I guess I expected more cars moved into C and B. Now I was not sure if the line between ITA and ITB would be drawn just below or just above the RX7 but I guess I expected more activity.

I understand that caution is needed, after all IT is a very successful category and the club needs to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bath water, but ITC is empty and ITB is lean, so should we not be trying to make a more even distribution if we are going to stick with 4 classes.
Dick Patullo
ITA RX7
NER SCCA
 
I'm completely in agreeance with Dick on this one. A factor that should play no part in this decision seems to be a much bigger deal than I thought. In my conversation with several IT drivers the ego situation ALWAYS comes up. It's as if taking the move from ITA to ITB somehow makes the car slower and less desireable and calls the manliness (or womanliness) of the driver into question. It's almost as if you could eliminate ITC and add ITSS and everyone would be in favor of moving. Somehow, drivers can get behind the idea of having their fast ITS cars "promoted" to ITSS, then fast ITA cars "promoted" to ITS (etc...) but psychologically can't handle the "demotion" from A to B, and B to C. Somehow it's hitting a nerve that is like the difference between being promoted from Varsity to a Select team, as opposed to being demoted from Varsity to JV. You end up playing with guys of similar skill and ability either way, one is just mentally more satisfying than the other.

Just rambling...certainly no offense meant to absolutely anyone.

Boswoj
 
Bos, don't think that this fair to the 7 drivers who opposed this. In the SEDiv, the fastest 7s are far faster than the B cars. They spent a lot of time and money to get that way. They enjoy running with A and S cars. They don't want that changed.

Don't know what is "ego" about that.

And, no offense to anyone, but I still say, before this move is made, someone on the ITAC needs to come see the 7s run at VIR, Roebling or CMP. For whatever reason, they are very competitive with the A cars on those tracks, and it is a pretty big group of cars. That group has found a way to make the 7s run with the front running A cars in this region.
 
Jeff, if Bob Stretch or Anthony Serra showed up and had enough time to learn the track,who would win? An RX-7 or one of them?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Jake, I don't pretend to know. It's never happened. I know you think you know the answer, and I understand the reasons for it -- and I do see the empirical data supporting it. I see something else based on the run group I am in.

I'm going to bow out of this one. Probably should not have stuck my nose in it anyway.

Jake, I've got VIR video now; I'll try to e-mail you something later this weekend or next week. Would love to have you down here sometime, and I need to run Lime Rock.

Jeff
 
jeff...I hope you didn't take that as a wise ass comment on my part. I really am searching for the answer....you're right, the empirical data suggests, to my mind, that the 7 is a better fit in B with some changes.

And I appreciate how the guys like to run in their current group, and thats fine. Just as some other guys don't like their current run group.

For me those are personal reasons, but in the end, I think that the car should be placed where it will benefit the category the most, and where it belongs so that it have a competitive chance. No more, no less.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Originally posted by JeffYoung:
Bos, don't think that this fair to the 7 drivers who opposed this. In the SEDiv, the fastest 7s are far faster than the B cars. They spent a lot of time and money to get that way. They enjoy running with A and S cars. They don't want that changed.
Click to expand...
Jeff That is understandable! They have the IT7 Class. In the frozen north we are in with the ITA class.What does it involve to have an IT7 race group/catergory? is it done by the regions or does it take national approval? As it stands if you run a RX-7 in ITA- NO Impound and no trophys
frown.gif
until the Fuel Injected cars are required to mix one LB of sugar to every gallon of fuel
biggrin.gif
wink.gif
T weaver



------------------
Tom Weaver: Logistics & Technical Support Manager IE truck driver for 1980 RX-7 ITA #63
"Hemi Haulin' Rotary"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top