August 2010 Fastrack

seckerich said:
Good. No SCCA National class is complete without the ability to hand out candy to your friends.:rolleyes: You have already started down the slippery slope with "special" exemptions.
Click to expand...

DING DING DING.

The problem is the same ole same ole. Heck, look at it now, it's laughable to think that all cars are included because from the napkin math shown so far, not much can actually stand a chance at the theoretical front row, except for a few Honda cars...

So spec lines are promised to equal the chances? Making it up as we go along.

Sadly, IT has been rejected as a national class, and sadly the PTB don't trust a policy and a process ....and custom spec line adjustment rears it's head again. How very Prod like.

Greg, all that super cool alternate control arm stuff is great.....for you....and I'd suggest that your choice of car is WHY this is a cool concept......to you.

But, to suggest this is a category with multiple models that are getting the same treatment is far fetched from what I'm understanding. (I know you aren't saying that, but the creators have set it up that way..) Sure, I CAN put control arms on my Durward, but I'll be fabricating them. (If Greg gets his way) Understood, I chose the wrong car.... if i wanted to go cheap racing i should have chosen a Honda product. The point isn't that I hate Hondas, it's that it's a category for multiple models, but it seems like it's really catering hugely to a very limited selection. heck it could be catering to BMWs or whatever, it would be no different.

I still haven't heard one big picture coherent policy explanation of what the larger intention is, and why this is the best solution.
 
Last edited:
lateapex911 said:
I still haven't heard one big picture coherent policy explanation of what the larger intention is, and why this is the best solution.
Click to expand...
Show me one class - absent Spec Miata and Spec Renau...uh, Ford, where this is the case? And "best solution" to what, Jake? This is not a "solution" to a "problem", it's just another alternative. If you don't like it, don't enter it; if no one likes it, it dies. You were given the option of Spec/IT-7 (I don't recall being given opportunity for feedback or input on that one and on how it dilutes Improved Touring A...?) Let others have that option to whatever they might be looking for.

And, Jake, I don't recall you getting bent all out of shape as I was having to singularly fabricate everything on my NX2000 in order to make it a competitive car. If that was the case, why were you not there side-by-side with me trying to get all the IT rules changed in regard to things I had to pay for fabrication for Improved Touring A? Why were you not there with me in regard to "multiple models that are getting the same treatment"? Or does that ideal of "should be easily available before approved" only apply to classes other than ITA? If I were to do a search on this board for "warts and all" and "username=lateapex911" any wonder what I'd find...?

You guys are really getting your panties all in a wad here...and I just don't understand why. It's not like the IT forum has been given the prerogative of deciding the long-term big-picture strategy for all of Club Racing or anything, that's the responsibility of the BoD...so let the market decide, and you can direct that course through your input to the CRB and your BoD member; let THEM both know what you want. But honestly, I like the option, and will use my economic voting ability accordingly.

:shrug:
 
If one class pulls from another, it just means that is a better option for THOSE people. If more than half move, it would seem that it is a better class for the club. How many people are running LP vs. full-prep in prod anymore?

I think the PTB should be commended for trying out ideas that try and grab the current state of the market. Whether this one hits the mark is yet to be determined. The REAL challenge for SCCA is to identify the classes that are simply not cutting the mustard and eliminate them.

I stand by my assertion that a displacement-to-weight class with stock intake and throttle-bodies will quickly result in HUGE under and overdogs. THEN you can really feel the shit-storm if traditional comp-adjustments are used to compensate. No thanks.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
I stand by my assertion that a displacement-to-weight class with stock intake and throttle-bodies will quickly result in HUGE under and overdogs. THEN you can really feel the shit-storm if traditional comp-adjustments are used to compensate. No thanks.
Click to expand...

which is why the rules need to be addressed NOW in their proposed state to avoid said shit storm.. everyone knows that honda will dominate in a class based solely on displacement - their USDM heads are typically the best available. JDM and European market stuff would change the balance but no one wants to entertain that idea. that doesn't make the intent of the rules and the class any less attractive - they simply need to iron out the lack of thought that went into writing them.
 
I do not see the problem with spec lines,E prod has been one of the most successful classes and the cars are equalized by the spec lines. I know it will take a few years but everybody bitches about a car not having a chance in IT, this is what spec lines will hopefully fix over time. If the Hondas run away with everything they can actually add weight, add restrictors etc. In the end if done correctly you will have many manufacturers able to have a chance.

matt
 
Greg Amy said:
Show me one class - absent Spec Miata and Spec Renau...uh, Ford, where this is the case? And "best solution" to what, Jake? This is not a "solution" to a "problem", it's just another alternative. If you don't like it, don't enter it; if no one likes it, it dies. You were given the option of Spec/IT-7 (I don't recall being given opportunity for feedback or input on that one and on how it dilutes Improved Touring A...?) Let others have that option to whatever they might be looking for.
Click to expand...

I'll start with IT-7, which was a response to classing issues made by the PTB long before there was an IT-7. When the yardstick was moved in ITA, many stakeholders were displaced. Those guys decided that they were a large group, and took it upon themselves to create their own class....regionally. That class was the poster child for the failings of leadership. That was the problem: unfair classifications. And I resisted NER creating an IT-7 class for years, while I worked from within the system to make a better IT category. In the end, I screwed my own car with my votes as to how to form performance envelopes that framed the classes. I never once suggested that the class be slowed down enough that the RX-7 would be competitive. When the classes were settled, I supported NERs adoption of IT-7, and the Region benefited because while they lost 1 or 2 ITA entries, they gained 4-6 IT-7 entries at every event. I doubt any ITA competitor really cared. I would have far preferred the car was competitive in ITA, but....
And, Jake, I don't recall you getting bent all out of shape as I was having to singularly fabricate everything on my NX2000 in order to make it a competitive car. If that was the case, why were you not there side-by-side with me trying to get all the IT rules changed in regard to things I had to pay for fabrication for Improved Touring A? Why were you not there with me in regard to "multiple models that are getting the same treatment"? Or does that ideal of "should be easily available before approved" only apply to classes other than ITA? If I were to do a search on this board for "warts and all" and "username=lateapex911" any wonder what I'd find...?
Click to expand...
I came into ITA and joined the ITAC when the category was FIFTEEN years old! I DID work hard to equalize things as much as possible for all makes. I wrote the initial motion to get ECUs made available to you and anyone who couldn't fit them in their box. If I had been around earlier, I would have resisted certain allownces, but once the genie is out of the bottle it's tough to get it back in. This situation is the creation of a category, with a clean sheet of paper, and we sure seem to be forgetting lessons that we should have institutional memory of.
I'm suggesting that I think that your desire to run alternate bits isn't ideal for a category that has been said by it's makers as a place for IT drivers to take their cars. By definition, that suggests many makes and models, so to me, I think restricting allowable mods is wise. The harder it is to construct a race car, the more narrow the possible audience is. It's not a coincidence that we see 2 or 3 GT2 or GT3 or GTL cars at an event and 10 or 20 times that in the SRF or SM classes.
You guys are really getting your panties all in a wad here...and I just don't understand why.
Click to expand...
Reread my comments. I'm looking big picture. WHY are we doing something? Will it help the club? How? I know I can, or can chose not to run the class. My questions have nothing to do with me and my car, they have to do with the bigger picture promises and realities. If we are just moving guys around, and entries and entrants aren't rising, then I'd say we are worse off then before. If we are attracting new racers to the club, and they stay, great!!
It's not like the IT forum has been given the prerogative of deciding the long-term big-picture strategy for all of Club Racing or anything, that's the responsibility of the BoD...
Click to expand...
Of course we, as a board, haven't been charged...but we ARE members and I think our thoughts DO matter. Any rule change gets vetted before the membership.... So, was the BoD involved? IS there a big picture strategy? Is that really wrong to ask?
 
Last edited:
xr4racer said:
I do not see the problem with spec lines,E prod has been one of the most successful classes and the cars are equalized by the spec lines. I know it will take a few years but everybody bitches about a car not having a chance in IT, this is what spec lines will hopefully fix over time. If the Hondas run away with everything they can actually add weight, add restrictors etc. In the end if done correctly you will have many manufacturers able to have a chance.

matt
Click to expand...
How long have you been in the club??
EVERYone in IT bitches in IT?
(wow, that's a 180 from just a few months ago)
How will they decide to add weight? how much weight? What kind of restrictors? Based on what, from where, when? By who? These are fundamental questions that are very difficult to answer on a large class.
 
xr4racer said:
I do not see the problem with spec lines,E prod has been one of the most successful classes and the cars are equalized by the spec lines. I know it will take a few years but everybody bitches about a car not having a chance in IT, this is what spec lines will hopefully fix over time. If the Hondas run away with everything they can actually add weight, add restrictors etc. In the end if done correctly you will have many manufacturers able to have a chance.

matt
Click to expand...

I have not met ONE person who agrees with, understands how it was determined, or thinks it's fair - when THEIR car gets weight added.

I have not met ONE person who doesn't agree with, gives a crap how it was figured out, or think it was enough - when THEIR car gets weight taken off.

I have a Sunbeam Tiger street car. I have been following Tom Patton and his GT2 effort for decades. He developed and developed and drove his ass off...and finally won one. Poof! Smaller carb the next year and had no prayer. Teeny-tiny give-backs since then...THAT is not a class I want to live in when it's MY money and effort they can legislate to the back with a stroke of a keyboard. Was it the car? Did he just outdrive everyone? Ugh.

IT is one of the biggest categories in SCCA. It was on the path to really being top dog until the CRB went haywire 9 months ago. It's a solid recipe.
 
As far as comp adjustments go, that is one benefit I see to ST in general. The future as I would see it could use SIR's, different adders for certain cars ect. The SIR's that are being used by GT are great for caping HP. This would a great way to slow some down. It's always easier to bring some back than speed others up. Really folks, if you don't like it, know one says you have to run in the class. However, keep in mind that there are many who really like this idea. The simple terms for STL is to allow a lower prep level (IT Plus) to run in ST and not have to run STU. There is all this talk about expensive cars. You are sadly mistaken if you think that there aren't super expensive cars in IT right now.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
I have a Sunbeam Tiger street car. I have been following Tom Patton and his GT2 effort for decades. He developed and developed and drove his ass off...and finally won one. Poof! Smaller carb the next year and had no prayer. Teeny-tiny give-backs since then...THAT is not a class I want to live in when it's MY money and effort they can legislate to the back with a stroke of a keyboard. Was it the car? Did he just outdrive everyone? Ugh.

.
Click to expand...

First off I would like to acknowledge that the Tiger is one of my all time favorites. What you mention here happens often in the club. It is sometimes difficult to tell the difference between the car and driver without hard evidence. This is why the CRB started using data boxes in the vehicles at the Sprints and RunOffs to help determine what is going on. Still subjective to an extent, but this is the same process that Pro racing uses aswell.
 
Rabbit07 said:
As far as comp adjustments go, that is one benefit I see to ST in general. The future as I would see it could use SIR's, different adders for certain cars ect. The SIR's that are being used by GT are great for caping HP. This would a great way to slow some down. It's always easier to bring some back than speed others up. ...
Click to expand...

When competition adjustments get framed as a "benefit...?"

Have fun with that, Chris. You'll think it's the best thing in the world right up to the point where you get screwed or your competition gets a gimme - that is, until you find yourself on the outside of the circle.

...The simple terms for STL is to allow a lower prep level (IT Plus) to run in ST and not have to run STU. ...
Click to expand...

Wrong. That's not the strategy behind creating the class. That's a rationale for creating a class that ALLOWS cars prepared to lower levels to be eligible to participate. IT cars were already allowed to "run in" STU, so STL offers nothing that wasn't already available. Delve deeper into your own thinking, young Jedi - what do YOU want the category to accomplish? You have a reason. What is it? Is it of value for the Club Racing program as a whole?

K
 
Rabbit07 said:
As far as comp adjustments go, that is one benefit I see to ST in general. The future as I would see it could use SIR's, different adders for certain cars ect. The SIR's that are being used by GT are great for caping HP. This would a great way to slow some dow...
o...... There is all this talk about expensive cars. You are sadly mistaken if you think that there aren't super expensive cars in IT right now.[/QUOT

DP started out with the SIR, and if it's brought back it will kill 80% of the people running the class, because where do you find an SIR?

Second, a top build car will be expensive, have you priced a six speed sequential transmission, how about converting a solid axle or trailing arm suspension to multi-link?
Click to expand...
 
Z3_GoCar said:
DP started out with the SIR, and if it's brought back it will kill 80% of the people running the class, because where do you find an SIR?

Second, a top build car will be expensive, have you priced a six speed sequential transmission, how about converting a solid axle or trailing arm suspension to multi-link?
Click to expand...


SIR= www.raetech.com

The other items you speak of are for STU only, which is one of the reasons for STL. Higher dollar mods like that were left out.
 
Chris, tell me why the class is so lopsided? Why have a class where there are really only a couple cars that can win?? PK has acknowledged this.

IT "plus".?..... but already there is serious talk that brakes will be opened up, and other people want more. (if the 'more' works for their car, of course).

Listen I SEE a rational for the concept. But I wish it were simpler: Allow IT cars to run in a class where they could actually have a chance, without changing the car so much that they can no longer be IT cars. Things that can get changed at the track. Wings? Fine, take them off, swap the springs, and reset tha dampers...thats not an impossible task in order to run in two goups with the same car and have a chance to be competitive in each class. But really, while this allows IT cars, most won't have a chance against a real deal STL car.

And let's not fool ourselves about SIRs. yes, they can work, BUT, they need to sized correctly, and that's not that easy, in spite of what the gurus say. (see E36 ITS SIR implementation issues). And tuning for one, and setting the car up for one, is expensive. Here's why what you just said makes me scared of the class: I build a car, get my gearing and trans all set up with my chosen wheels, I develop my engine and my cams and my ECU etc, and, finally I'm doing well, just as my math predicted i would when I chose my car for the class. Then BAM, 'sorry buddy, but you're too fast down the straight'*, here's a 28mm SIR!. Great, now I get to go fabricate a whole new cold air box, and I get to go back to they dyno to recalibrate the ECU, and really, I should look at a different cam, and all the changes that go with that, and maybe the gearing is wrong now as well.

Sure, it's simple to FIND an SIR, but it's thousands to USE an SIR.

* That is, if I'm dumb enough to GO to the big dance where they'll be looking at my car. I COULD stay local and under the radar, and play the game to keep my 'overdog'.

** Further, it's a box, it records data.....the analysis is the important aspect....what if i was running around in a draft that session and i was 3 or 5 MPH faster than I'd ever been? Or there was a tailwind? Or .... or..or... I know, no worries, people will realize that stuff and it'll be ok. Uh huh.
See history.....
(yes, I know, history is full of successes too, and we can't win if we don't try. I like the initiative and the attempt at moving the club forward, but, I think we need to come to grips with what we are fixing, ...every time a 'reason' is provided, (it gives you a chance to run nationals, It gives more double dip chances, it attracts new members) it implies that the lack of those things is a problem, and htat this is the best solution to those problems...)

You mention that Pro manages WC with data, etc. Yup, they do, but the difference is that they have what, FIVE models to balance? A staff dedicated to the job, AND they see those cars at 10 tracks a year? That's a tenth (or less) of the cars, with five times the data...WAY different.
 
As Jake mentioned, trying to extend the WC model doesn't really work. In WC, you've got essentially a finite number of cars, and that's a pretty small number. Not to mention that you pretty much get to see all of them at every race. What you're talking about would be much more like setting the ITA rules based on what the guys running ITA in the NARRC series are doing. If the goal is to get IT cars to the Runoffs, no need for all this jumping through hoops and creating new classes, just include IT. My personal take on this, is that the various ST classes are probably the future of Prod. I know I'll catch flack for that from the Prod guys, but I think you stand a better chance of bring new racers into something like ST than you do bringing them into Prod. Slice it a little finer (i.e. add another class or two), and you'll have a pretty attractive category for the folks that want to build and prep to a level beyond IT, but not all the way to a tube-frame GT car. Jake, The problem is that you're not the only one that would get that 28mm SIR. Every guy running that same Puddlebee GXR would get it. Chris, ST sounds like a good idea. But don't try to sell it as "IT-plus". I believe Kirk used the appropriate term before. Disingenuous.
 
Here's my $0.04 from a guy that started in SCCA BECAUSE of the STU ruleset.
7-8 years ago, I bought a cheap 240SX for $1400 with a blown engine and put it together to run DEs... I built it the way I wanted. Cheap, reliable, and fun on track..

Moderate engine mods: ebay Intake, early-model OEM cams, aluminum flywheel & crank pulley, Hotshot header, cheap aftermarket ECU, catback exhaust.. (All of these bought USED, btw)
moderate coilovers ($1k Japanese stuff built for the drift crowd),
$110 wheels from Discount tire, and a $400 set of used 5Zigen wheels for spares. Used Take-off R888s on both. full tread all-seasons on the stock wheels for rainy days.
A smallish (11.5") custom brake setup so I can run Wilwood Dynalites where pads are $56 a set and rotors are $60 each (and have lasted me over a year and I still have 1/2 the pad left!),
Sus Tech sway bars,
ebay rear upper control arms to adjust rear camber

That's the MINIMUM I expect to be done to a Nissan 240SX to make it decently quick on track. There are all kinds of JDM turbo engine swaps that can put you at 400+hp for a couple grand.. but I'm keeping the stock engine for cost and parts availability. You can go to any Autozone (or dealer) in the country and get a waterpump or a clutch for reasonable cost.


Fast forward 5 years and 100+ HPDEs and I want to go REAL racing- not just putting around the corners waiting for the point-by from the old fart in the vette in front of me that thinks we're drag racing.

I don't want to DE-mod my car. I want to put a roll cage in it and go play and see how I really stack up.

Now.. I go look at the SCCA ruleset and where can I compete? I have a car that won't fit (or be competitive) in Production or IT... I'm not going to go buy narrow 15" wheels (WTF mate?!) and cantilever slicks and stick the stock brakes back on... The factory anchors are junk and pads are >$400 for a full set. That's stupidsauce.

Sooo, SCCA is out.

I take a look at NASA's ruleset. Performance Touring is perfect! I can mod the car the way I want to, and tally up the points. blammo, there's my class. I'd run in PTD given my current setup.

Throw in a back injury and life outside of racing delays things a couple years. Now I've got the money for the cage in my budget, permission from the wife, and the time to do it.

I start looking at rulesets again and voila! SCCA has created this thing called Prepared/Super Touring. My car drops right in, and I can add cool stuff like wings and splitters when I'm ready to go faster, and it's not insanely expensive to run since I can run a stock engine and still be competitive locally (based on current lap times & race results).

Given my current lap times during HPDEs and lapping days, I'm competitive with the rest of the local guys running STU cause their car won't fit anywhere else. Go to a nationals weekend and I'll get my butt kicked- by about 2 seconds a lap given the nationally-prepped cars that have run here. But I don't really care about that right now- I want to get out there and race. IF I win, great! If not, well I was out there trying. And I did it in the car I built the way I wanted. :)

As for local participation, there are cars built specifically for STU and a bunch of IT and SM guys double-dipping, plus a Don Istook in his VW GTI coming over from T3. He's coming to STU because it's cheaper to run there than it is to run in Touring. so I'm not sure why people are complaining that STU is a money class...

You can run in it cheap or you can out-money the next guy, but you're still out there.
even in SSB/SSC, you can always be out-monied so why worry about it? go out there and race. If you lose, drive better next time. ;)
 
lateapex911 said:
Out of curiosity, where do you run, and what are your times?
Click to expand...

I'm in Houston Region. Texas World Speedway, MSR-Houston, Eagle's Canyon, etc.
At TWS 2.9 setup I run a 2:02 fast, 2:04 average. At MSRH I run a 1:52 average, 1:48 fastest lap.
I just got through driver skool so haven't run any races yet, but my average lap times are good enough to finish top 3 in most of the races with STU entrants.

Also note I haven't purchased a set of NEW tires in years. I run used R888s so if I were to throw on a set of new Hoosiers I can probably knock off a couple more seconds.. But that's of course armchair conjecture. ;)

Here's the local race results for the last umpteen years..
http://www.sowdivscca.org/raceresults.aspx

As you can see in the last couple races, STU is really picking up in attendance. Many of those are double-dippers running IT during Regional and STU on National races, but a few are nationals cars from out of region and/or Touring guys double dipping.
 
>> ...my average lap times are good enough to finish top 3 in most of the races with STU entrants.

Also note I haven't purchased a set of NEW tires in years. ...

In before Jake.

Those two statements illustrate clearly that you are not in a competitive region. It is *not* reasonable to ask for Club Racing policy decisions to be based on a case like that. Put differently, any policy based on that kind of thinking will almost certainly come up short of expected outcomes or result in unanticipated consequences when (if...?) it gets competitive.

K

EDIT - ...and under WHAT conditions is it less expensive to race the same GTI in STU, than it was to do so in T3...? This stuff just doen't compute, guys.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top