August Fastrack out!
- Thread starter JoshS
- Start date
Joe Harlan
New member
Chris, I knew what you were saying and completely agree. I have fought hard to keep IT an entry level class for years. I believe that the fight is lost and it is lost to a few misguided folks that would rather let it get out of hand than to admit they are wrong. My money says the next push will be National status and then all hell will break loose when it comes to money spending. Too bad it will actually be like this and in the end I guess Knestis was right when he warned us that touching anything would unlitimatley break it but we charged on with a good process to balance things and didn't listen. K, you can think what you want about the uglyness of some of the players here but the fact is IT used to be a good class for everyone. I will continue to fight this deal but I am doing it from the top now. And fianlly Josh S. I am amazed that you can even defend this. After watching rules creep cause touring to be unaffordable in both money and time for the average competitor you went IT racing instead. I really could care less about the added money as much as I care about the added time it adds to a build for the average racer and those are the ones we loose when mid-pack becomes a couple laps down rather than just a straight away. Hope you guys have a plan to fix it once the number hit the toilet.
SO further F'in up a F'ed up rule is the right thing to do? Please don't try to justify this change because a screwed up rule was written years ago. I don't care what the percentage of the drivers that wrote in said. Sometimes you have to tell the kids NO ITS NOT GOOD FOR YOU. This was and is not part of the IT philosphy period.
costs are basically peaked at 30k at least. for a comparable IT build, you'd be in another 10k by my estimation. and btw, SM motors are more like 6-7k depending on where you get it and what year you're buying.
you mean the $1200 clutches that are perfectly legal for IT?
this isn't completely rumor and speculation, but i can't do much to substantiate this claim either, but i think the vast majority of the cheater stuff was coming from one builder in particular. people have for the most part figured this out now.
if you're a great driver yeah, you can be respectable in a $10,000 IT car. but there's some underlying reasons for this...
1) you might be in a division without much competition
2) the others in your region still have a long way to go on car prep and/or driver
make no mistake about it, a $30,000 ITA car driven decently will destroy a $10,000 ITA car driven quite well. by opening up the ECU rule and making it more accessible, the avg prep level of IT cars just went up, making it more expensive to maintain the current finishing position for all but those who have already spent the coin on a standalone-in-stock-housing.
JeffYoung
New member
Travis, at least here in the SEDiv where SM is very competitive, I sense more frustration among SM drivers than the IT crowd. We (teh IT crowd) are pretty happy with the state of things. We've got big fields, good competition, and the Speedsources/Bimmerworlds/Sunbelts have checked out, for now at least. Not to knock them, but they did some good things.
But right now, I would say you don't need a pro built car or huge dollars to run up front in ITS or A. A well built car with some hard work on your part will get you there.
I don't think that is true in SM right now here in the SE. You must have a pro set up and pro powered car to finish up front. And you have to be part of the clique that gets the best motors and parts. Weird, but true I think.
For me anyway, the changes the ITAC have made to IT have resulted in immediate improvements in car counts and compeittion in my class. So, I guess I am biased in that regard, but right now ITS in the SEDiv is a hell of a lot of fun.
But right now, I would say you don't need a pro built car or huge dollars to run up front in ITS or A. A well built car with some hard work on your part will get you there.
I don't think that is true in SM right now here in the SE. You must have a pro set up and pro powered car to finish up front. And you have to be part of the clique that gets the best motors and parts. Weird, but true I think.
For me anyway, the changes the ITAC have made to IT have resulted in immediate improvements in car counts and compeittion in my class. So, I guess I am biased in that regard, but right now ITS in the SEDiv is a hell of a lot of fun.
Hey, I've spent decades - literally - being the anti-creep poster boy but I'm better now.
I loved the old days of IT, when we could put springs and bars on an SS car, drive it to the track, and be competitive. But those days are long gone. And NOT because rules have opened up. That's flawed cause-and-effect logic. In fact, budget doesn't drive competitiveness - it's more like the other way 'round.
If the fastest ITB cars in Division A can stay up front on junkyard engines, open diffs, and 10 heat-cycle tires, there's little motivation for them to step up their game. That's how it was in my "old days," when racing in the Pacific NW. Fields weren't very deep so we didn't have to stretch very hard. You can find conversations here where this same issue gets played out (e.g., "My ITA car gets beat by those mean old Spec Miatas, so we need to slow them down"). On the other hand, if someone spends the coin necessary to buy new tires, dyno tuning time, really good shocks, driver coaching, and testing time, then they are likely going to win. They DESERVE to win.
What causes budget creep - what Chris and others are ACTUALLY PO'd about, not rules creep - is the perfect storm of a well-subscribed competitive championship and a some entrants willing to spend to keep up with one-another.
IT is still just as entry level as it has always been - unless one wishes to enter the game into the pointy part of the grid. There is nothing keeping someone from building "old school" and getting out there. In fact a large proportion of the average IT grid falls into that category. I buy $80 clutch disks and use stock pressure plates, when I could easily spend a grand to go a little faster. My budget is determined by what I want to spend to reach my goals but the two have to be in line. I know that the driver (me) injects more inconsistency in lap times than the next $5000 would buy, so I am smart enough to not open my checkbook.
If someone want to be able to be competitive without spending to buy all of the advantages that another someone up there is willing to pay for, it's no longer about IT being "entry level" - it's about wanting to be a winner without stepping up to make it happen.
And (for the bazillionth time), this new allowance doesn't give us anything that we don't essentially already have. It just gives it to more people for less money. I am now more likely to commit to a really tuneable option to replace my $90 off-the-shelf chip, because I can do it for less dough and have more control over my destiny than was the case under the old rule.
K
Jeff, am i reading this right? are you saying that SE IT cars aren't really running pro motors anymore and are willingly leaving power on the table? this would go a ways to explain why many of the SM guys can beat on up a good chunk of IT cars.
same is true in MiDiv. if you want to beat Stretch/Drago/Reynolds/James/Daniels/etc....yeah, you better bring a big weapon. and same as in the SE, just writing the check to the builders doesn't mean you're going to get the same power as the 'in' crowd.
what you're describing to me sounds just like SM was THE YEAR BEFORE IT WENT NATIONAL. maybe i've been ruined hanging around SM for 4 years now, and that my assumption of how many people will take advantage of the ECU allowances are too high. but to let this ECU thread overlap into the national discussion, you can bet the last dollar of your 401k that if you guys let IT go national, you absolutely will have to spend the thousands on ECU upgrades to compete.
JeffYoung
New member
Uh, no, still pro motors in IT (although I don't have one...lol). It's just that instead of people buying $40 and $50k ITS cars turnkey, most folks are building their own stuff with a pro motor of some sort (either pro motor with their ecu work, or some combination of parts). But the true "Bimmerworld" or "Sunbelt" ITS cars are gone.
SM has not changed here even with the advent of SM national racing. There are 4-5 guys who run on the regional level, and you have to have a certain plate full of parts to get to that part of the field. The other 20-25 guys don't have a chance.
EDIT -- for what it is worth, I am opposed to IT going national. That is another element of "ITness" that I don't think should be touched.
SM has not changed here even with the advent of SM national racing. There are 4-5 guys who run on the regional level, and you have to have a certain plate full of parts to get to that part of the field. The other 20-25 guys don't have a chance.
EDIT -- for what it is worth, I am opposed to IT going national. That is another element of "ITness" that I don't think should be touched.
SPiFF
New member
YAY!!! A little further then I thought the IT long beards would take it, but it is about time the ECU rules got cleaned up!
For me, OBD2 Honda, this saves me money. The best part is now the rules are even for all (ECU-ed) cars. This will also make it possible for future cars which will need ECUs to be replaced in to order to race them with all the "safety" stuff on new cars.
Renaultfool
New member
I believe that the ITAC did a great job on this rule!
It will allow for a lot of new cars to join the IT ranks.
Lets remember guys, they don't make Pintos and Rabbits anymore. The rules written when these were the main cars in IT just don't address the needs of the more modern car with it's more sophisticated electronics.
There are many less expensive ways to correct the mixture and timing on many current cars that were not allowed by the old rules, or made prohibitively expensive by the old rules.
Sounds to me like the "Haves" just don't want us poor riffraff with our junk yard conversions up there racing with their $40,000 toys. Too bad, more competitive cars make for more fun at the track.
I for one will still run my stock ECU with a couple resistors in the temp circuits. Good enough for me.
Carl "The Renaultfool"
It will allow for a lot of new cars to join the IT ranks.
Lets remember guys, they don't make Pintos and Rabbits anymore. The rules written when these were the main cars in IT just don't address the needs of the more modern car with it's more sophisticated electronics.
There are many less expensive ways to correct the mixture and timing on many current cars that were not allowed by the old rules, or made prohibitively expensive by the old rules.
Sounds to me like the "Haves" just don't want us poor riffraff with our junk yard conversions up there racing with their $40,000 toys. Too bad, more competitive cars make for more fun at the track.
I for one will still run my stock ECU with a couple resistors in the temp circuits. Good enough for me.
Carl "The Renaultfool"
lateapex911
Super Moderator
This...this exact quote, is, in my eyes, the intent of the new wording.
Kirk has nicely summed up here what drives cost (time, money, or a combination of both) up: Popularity. If nobody really cares to go as fast as possible, the costs reflect that. As soon as two people with the resources decide that THIS class is worth winning on a large scale, kiss bargain basement racing goodby. No rule, in multi marque racing, can effectively police spending, but this one will help to offer less expensive options, and does so without moving the performance target.
BlueStreak
New member
Actually:
http://www.vw.com/rabbit/en/us/
But I do get, and even as a rabbit driver, agree, with your point.
If the status quo wasn't acceptable by most people (and I agree it seemed to be the worst out of the 3 choices), why weren't the choices to go back to stock ECU w/ reflash or full open? That would have been more interesting to see.
As an outsider sitting in the bleachers a few rows behind Travis, I agree with his viewpoint completely.
Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars.
Do you guys know what I think? Look at the cage rules, fire system rules, and now ECU rules...I smell a big realignment of all the classes coming our way. I don't think it's a bad thing either. Pardon me the use of a cliche, but to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs.
As an outsider sitting in the bleachers a few rows behind Travis, I agree with his viewpoint completely.
Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars.
Do you guys know what I think? Look at the cage rules, fire system rules, and now ECU rules...I smell a big realignment of all the classes coming our way. I don't think it's a bad thing either. Pardon me the use of a cliche, but to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs.
seckerich
New member
"Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars."
Do you really believe a car classed in IT should have a rev limiter? Do you also believe it should go into limp mode after sensors that are mandated to be removed make it undrivable. Think about your statement for a minute--sound stupid yet??
This has nothing to do with "the car you decide to race" if it can not be made to run under the rules. Somehow we got alternate carbs in the early days of IT for some cars--wonder why?? The stock unit was unable to be tuned. See anything similar yet.
I still think the rule needs some rewording to severely limit the "new wiring" to the allowed sensors. That will be the next big snafu. Needs to state that the stock harness must remain unaltered except to replace connectors and the wires to the map and tps must be seperate and serve no other purpose.
Do you really believe a car classed in IT should have a rev limiter? Do you also believe it should go into limp mode after sensors that are mandated to be removed make it undrivable. Think about your statement for a minute--sound stupid yet??
This has nothing to do with "the car you decide to race" if it can not be made to run under the rules. Somehow we got alternate carbs in the early days of IT for some cars--wonder why?? The stock unit was unable to be tuned. See anything similar yet. I still think the rule needs some rewording to severely limit the "new wiring" to the allowed sensors. That will be the next big snafu. Needs to state that the stock harness must remain unaltered except to replace connectors and the wires to the map and tps must be seperate and serve no other purpose.
gran racing
Super Moderator
I did the smart thing and decided not to begin reading this thread until I got back to work from vacation. LOL!
Unfortunately I do not feel that moving back to all stock ECUs is feasible, or even best for the category in the long-term. The existing “stuff what you can into the OEM box” has so many flaws to it. There have been several comments made throughout the course of this thread, which I simply don’t agree with and make me wonder if they are just reactions. One argument is that it changes the performance envelope. As a few have stated, these modifications are already possible for people that have the funds. This rule change makes it more attainable for people that do not have the money to go out and buy MoTec or other similar units.
This rule is what makes you think that IT is no longer an entry level class? Really??? What truly makes IT an entry level class is that people can easily go purchase a safe and reliable racecar for under $5,000, then go out on the track and have fun racing. Heck, this Spring a friend and I purchased a fairly new trailer with a nice ex-SSC Neon for $2,000 total that could run somewhere near the middle of an ITA field. Now I realize this is not the norm, but getting into IT certainly is entry level with or without the ECU rule change.
Well, if a person is mid-pack, won’t they still have 1/2 of the field to play with even if they are further back from the leaders? I can next hear someone saying they’d lose track time, but that wouldn’t be the case because if the leaders are finishing races faster, regions would in-turn increase the race lengths. I do not believe the average person needs to add ECU work into their build process just because it would become more accessable.
I am curious to hear what your definition of the “average racer” is, especially since many people probably have different perceptions. Related to that, what level of a car build do you think these people complete?
------------
Many posts ago, Jake mentioned an aspect that plays a vital role in IT - diminishing returns. This is such an important factor. This also ties directly into what Kirk said about directing resources to various areas.
Unfortunately I do not feel that moving back to all stock ECUs is feasible, or even best for the category in the long-term. The existing “stuff what you can into the OEM box” has so many flaws to it. There have been several comments made throughout the course of this thread, which I simply don’t agree with and make me wonder if they are just reactions. One argument is that it changes the performance envelope. As a few have stated, these modifications are already possible for people that have the funds. This rule change makes it more attainable for people that do not have the money to go out and buy MoTec or other similar units.
This rule is what makes you think that IT is no longer an entry level class? Really??? What truly makes IT an entry level class is that people can easily go purchase a safe and reliable racecar for under $5,000, then go out on the track and have fun racing. Heck, this Spring a friend and I purchased a fairly new trailer with a nice ex-SSC Neon for $2,000 total that could run somewhere near the middle of an ITA field. Now I realize this is not the norm, but getting into IT certainly is entry level with or without the ECU rule change.
Well, if a person is mid-pack, won’t they still have 1/2 of the field to play with even if they are further back from the leaders? I can next hear someone saying they’d lose track time, but that wouldn’t be the case because if the leaders are finishing races faster, regions would in-turn increase the race lengths. I do not believe the average person needs to add ECU work into their build process just because it would become more accessable.
I am curious to hear what your definition of the “average racer” is, especially since many people probably have different perceptions. Related to that, what level of a car build do you think these people complete?
------------
Many posts ago, Jake mentioned an aspect that plays a vital role in IT - diminishing returns. This is such an important factor. This also ties directly into what Kirk said about directing resources to various areas.
benspeed
New member
I believe this rule change is appropriate. Without programmability it is very difficult to try and tune a car for optimal performance. The guys with the big bucks are already spending to do this and had to comply with the old rule and burning up extra dollars uneccesarily. Now more people can take a shot at enhancing performance and it gives the mechi-nerds more stuff to play with on their cars.
Somebody else already said it - this new open ECU rule will allow more racers on smaller budgets the CHOICE to upgrade their ECUs and achieve modest gains that before were much more costly. This in many regards levels the playing field in favor of the less well healed.
The new rule will allow folks to better understand what their cars are doing. We predict there will be many folks in the same competing classes helping out each other on what is the best program to run and what to adjust based on the weather, temp and other factors. Some folks will bitch that its yet another thing to worry about and fiddle with on race day. That would be me - but I will still do it because I seek every little advantage I can get.
We have huge sympathy for the E46 guys up here in the NE - cannot imagine what they spent on fighting the OBDII stuff that this rule likely fixes immediately.
Cars are newer - rules must keep pace.
PS - the important rule change was really about the Fiero being put on the same spec line as the '88 year car - now I get ventilated brakes and better suspension
Somebody else already said it - this new open ECU rule will allow more racers on smaller budgets the CHOICE to upgrade their ECUs and achieve modest gains that before were much more costly. This in many regards levels the playing field in favor of the less well healed.
The new rule will allow folks to better understand what their cars are doing. We predict there will be many folks in the same competing classes helping out each other on what is the best program to run and what to adjust based on the weather, temp and other factors. Some folks will bitch that its yet another thing to worry about and fiddle with on race day. That would be me - but I will still do it because I seek every little advantage I can get.
We have huge sympathy for the E46 guys up here in the NE - cannot imagine what they spent on fighting the OBDII stuff that this rule likely fixes immediately.
Cars are newer - rules must keep pace.
PS - the important rule change was really about the Fiero being put on the same spec line as the '88 year car - now I get ventilated brakes and better suspension
Whether it was the intent of the ITAC, the CRB, the OIC, or whoever, the changes recommended will help enable the newer, higher classed IT cars to go national. That is the desire of more than one ITAC member, so I've been told. It's not going to boost production car numbers. As it is, the SCCA would like to get rid of production and lower classed GT cars. The idea behind the motivation is to get national racing to be more current model cars. Then they can make use of manufacturer's money as was done in the Trans Am series. As it is, the SCCA has no real stake in any pro racing anymore. It's name is mentioned in the paper work, but only as much as needed.
Those of us in ITB and ITC will soon join ranks with GTL, F.G, and HP in a regional only series, while those in the newer classes will spend their buns off going national racing. I wish them luck. See you in retirement.
Those of us in ITB and ITC will soon join ranks with GTL, F.G, and HP in a regional only series, while those in the newer classes will spend their buns off going national racing. I wish them luck. See you in retirement.