AWD in IT...

I've yet to see a LOGICAL argument for banning AWD. Having driven Quattros for some time now I can tell you they hopelessly understeer (worse than FWD) and would not "always" beat an equally powered RWD car or many FWD cars.

The sky is not falling.....



------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2003 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##
 
Originally posted by grega:
What about front-wheel-drive? Wouldn't the Acura GSR have an advantage against the BMW in the rain? Should we therefore de-classify the GSR because of its advantage in the rain?
Click to expand...

Oh Greg. You silly. The GSR should carry 75 lbs of additional ballast in the rain. Of course.
tongue.gif



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Originally posted by Bildon:
I've yet to see a LOGICAL argument for banning AWD. Having driven Quattros for some time now I can tell you they hopelessly understeer (worse than FWD) and would not "always" beat an equally powered RWD car or many FWD cars.

The sky is not falling.....
Click to expand...

Amen again. My everyday street-beater is a Germanic AWD car..seen the track one or twice, when everything else is broken. Big, waddling, pushing, fat scrubmobile.

Sounds like there is a fracture in the Blethen fraternity. This should be fun to watch !!!!!
 
for all those interested in the Blethen debate:
My brother called me this afternoon, I didn't listen to a word as to why he called, but instantly started yelling at him!!!

I do think that the quattro's have an advantage in the rain, but then again everything has an advantage some time or another.

This past season we did not have 1 rain race in the NERRC or NARRC championship so their would have been a 0% rain advantage. Its all part of the gamble.

Do you really think that we couldn't stay up with other quattro's??? I bet if you pushed your street car at Lime Rock it would have been impossible to get into the 1:07's. You kept your street car in a safe zone 108:'s-1:09's (higher?). Remember at one time we had the exact same suspension that is on your street car in our Audi Coupes... Try and think back (first year we raced). how would the cars compare now???

I think you are way off base to say that your street car handles better than your race car. I will put $$$ on it and we can race a time trial next year.

Also don't forget you have/had way oversized tires on your car and you have probably the best aftermarket lowering kit that was available for that car. Your quattro handles unlike any other quattro I have ever been in. Also you need to remember your quattro is no slug, it used to stay up with my 20V coupe that came stock with 171hp. Your car is gifted not to mention it would probably be an ITA car or would have weight penalties compared to a 4000Q. Compair the quattro thing with one of any of the 4000Q's you have ridden in.

I still think that the Audi 4000 quattro's would make a great fit into the ITB field.

Raymond
 
I think if we all look at the situation and be honest with yourself you'll realize this is foolish. It is completly unfair to have a car classified knowing that it has an unreasonable advantage over other cars under any circumstances no matter what the chances of rain. A FWD to RWD is not nearly as much of an advantage as haveing AWD is over either type of car.

The only 2 reasonable things would be to add weight to the AWD in the rain (which I have not nearly enough knowledge to know how much) or the other reasonable thing would be to classify the cars according to there rain capability. This is the only way to be fair to everyone. This would make it fair to current drivers and any drivers that want to race them. (It's fair because then it gives the new driver a choice to make. If you just classify it according to the dry compeditiveness then you are not giving anyone a choice that already is racing instead you are just screwing them in the rain.)

We have made cars make modifications in the past so that they do not have a compeditive advantage...... ex. Antilock brakes


Now to Raymond...

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:

Stephen just doesn't want AWD classified because he knows that I can drive an AWD car better and will woop his @$$.

Also you need to remember your quattro is no slug, it used to stay up with my 20V coupe that came stock with 171hp. Your car is gifted

Raymond
Click to expand...

The only gift it had was that you never touched it which makes your first sentence very far fetched.

When I make the long treck back home this winter we shall go to a rally cross. Me in a AWD and you in a FWD then come back here and say it should be classified together. Better yet if you don't like that lets set up a wet skid pad and a dry skid pad and see what happens. Anyone have a parking lot to do this in?


Stephen


PS: to all we do have a class for AWD...... ITE, SPU, SPO. These classed where made for these situations
 
I'd love to see the 4wd cars run. We as the IT community have to realize that there needs to be some new life into the series. (SCCA sure doesn't relize it or IT2 would be a reality). So, why not start with 4wd??

Hell, my car is so bad in the rain that I couldn't win a Yugo race. (solid axle, welded rear end)

I don't really consider 4wd an advantage (except in the rain) in IT. Someone mentioned the high horsepower/limited traction situation. I agree there (aka Trans-Am Audis). An interesting side bar.. I had an opportunity to speak with Scott Pruett this year. He mentioned that his turbo Merkur was putting down 930 hp. (that isn't a typo). So, if the Audi's were probably close. Definately high power/limited traction.
 
Bump for a good topic! Just for comparision, I have driven my street car at LRP several times. I am not the greatest driver or anything. I was in the 1:10-1:09 range with some speed left to spare in the up-hill and a little in the down-hill. Here are the specs on the car.
-1998 Impreza Wagon
-2.2L
-3.90 gears
-205/55/16 Azenis tires
-STi suspension
-140 crank hp, and 93 whp with nothing happening over 5500rpms
-2750lbs w/o driver
-Top speed before braking into big bend, 100mph

What are the compeditive ITB cars getting?

Later,
Seth E.
 
It's very tough to compaire different cars unless your at the track the same day. I drove my 90 quattro with 130HP (2.3L) in stock form... lowering springs and summer tires. I also had the middle grade porterfeilds in it. I was turning 1:10's with it. With the coupes we turned the same times with the same types of improvments to the cars. the coupes only have 115HP (2.2L) and they are 2WD. I think that in dry conditions the cars would be very very similar if the 2WD had a quaffe, however it's simply not fair to completly outclassify other cars in rain conditions. Hands down the AWD is better in the rain.

Stephen
 
With the Front wheel drive Audi Coupes we are into the low 1:05's (with a quaiffe). We are planning on getting into the 104's this season especially if they do the rumored re-paving. The leading Scott Carlson and Eric Curran Volvo's allong with Jim McMhann's Opel GT are in the Low 104's on a good day. I would expect though on any given weekend the agerage top times are around a low 1:05 and/or high 1:04's in an ITB car...
 
I believe awd is only an advantage in the last half of the corner...if your car is set up right, you will have less mass to slow down into the corner and get set up for the exit. the advantage comes when the power is applied and there are still cornering forces. the awd car may have a better exit speed, but unless its a rally, there are usually long straights after the corner and the advantage is gone with the weight and driveline losses...not to mention the brake and tire wear used to try to use all of the awd advantages in the dry...i guess if you live near rain atlanta...i mean road atlanta, its not the best choice in it...just my opinion.
 
Any news on the possibility of Audi 4000 quattros in ITB? I have a quattro shell all caged up I was going to set up for time trials with a turbo motor.... but I would definatly build it up differently if it could be legal for Improved Touring...
 
There's no "news" because AFAIK no one has requested a change in the rules. SCCA typically doesn't take initiatives like that on its own, it's driven by membership request.

I recommend that you write a request to the CompBoard.
 
Classify those things! We need more cars in IT - pickings are not that plentiful for those of us who abhor FWD but would consider AWD. Like turning a battleship....

------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 a 260Z ITS
 
Becareful what you ask for cause you just may get it. We ran against an EVO at the TH national in the rain. The T2 car was 2.5 seconds faster than anything else on the grid. AWD and Turbo is clearly an advantage. Don't let anyone convince you that it is not. If a car can get doen to minimum weight then a car at weight with AWD is gonna be fast. Then Add a turbo(which the club never learned how to police) and you got a recipe for a catagory killer. I am all for AWD and Boost but lets make a class for those cars to race agianst each other. Call it ITAWDTB and I think you have it covered.
 
Hey, if you're concerned about advantage in the wet, make 'em run one class up in the rain (dry = ITA, wet = ITS )!!!!!!!
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif


What I read between the lines from those who would not classify AWD is that we should not classify any cars that might be competitive.

1) Cars are not all equal. They all have different strengths and weaknesses, not to mention the strengths and weaknesses of the drivers. Bring 'em on!!!!

2) If we were all that committed to winning everytime we went out, we would all be driving the killer cars. We drive different cars for different reasons, even if it is 'just to be different'. Bring 'em on!!!

3) If we can beef up car counts by introducing more current models, I say bring 'em on!!!!! (please remember that I recently stated that the number of classified cars should be decreased for administrative reasons!!!).

'What I say three times is true'
Lewis Carroll - The Hunting of the Snark


------------------
Bill Stevens
Mbr 103106
BnS Racing
83 ITA Shelby Dodge Charger
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
...I am all for AWD and Boost but lets make a class for those cars to race agianst each other...
Click to expand...

At least in NEDiv and CENDiv, it already exists - 'ITE'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top