AWD in IT...

Originally posted by rlearp:
Costs in IT? Well, the latest issue of Sportscar has a well known BMW 325 that was owned by a well known driver. Price? $37.5k asking. And this is IT?????????????? I imagine the car was $60k new since it was (as I understand it) bought from a company and not built by the owner. And the car did a lot of winning too, with a rookie driver, seems to suggest money can buy wins.

I don't want to digress on that subject since there is a lot there, but price for IT, well, it is not cheap, at least in S and pretending such doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct Ron that costs are climbing (although they seem to have stopped a bit lately) and we have no control over what someone spends.

However, if someone will spend $60 for a car, do we want to double that to $120k for a wet and dry car?

Bill, I know you are correct. There probably already are people who bring two cars to the track with different set-ups. But the only advantage of that is time to switch over from dry to wet (which is virtually impossible at the track with a 944 due to rear torsion bars in my case), but at least those wet set-up cars don't have an inherent advantage like an AWD car does.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Originally posted by Geo:
You are indeed correct Ron that costs are climbing (although they seem to have stopped a bit lately) and we have no control over what someone spends.

However, if someone will spend $60 for a car, do we want to double that to $120k for a wet and dry car?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not actually complaining about costs, just merely pointing out that they are not low now and they will never be low to win. It costs money to run up front and that won't change.

Heck, I stopped counting at $15k on the JH and we don't even know if it'll be worth a damn. Or if the driver is either! ;-)

Seriously, I don't see how having AWD cars or even multiple wet/dry cars as some (I doubt there would be many) changes anything for those that "are just out for fun". If you are just out for fun and some racing then it doesn't matter what the Jones do - you're just out to run and have a good time. Doesn't matter if they spent $60k on a car and you spent $3k, if you are REALLY out there just for fun, club racing, a good time, etc. - then it won't matter to you.

I really don't care if someone has $120k in two cars - bring'em on! I'm still racing and having fun and so are you. Plus, every now and again, the high dollar racer gets trumped by a backyard bomber and that has to be fun to see.


------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 260Z ITS

[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited April 19, 2005).]
 
I am by no means innocent of the same behavoir but there are a lot of assumptions here:

There is no interest. (On the part of whom, potential participants or SCCA committees?)

AWD would be so dominant in the rain, that it would have to be weight penalized in the dry to the point of uselessness. (If AWD has not been raced within IT how was this determined? How were the STi and Evo able to be classed in T2 then and still have competitive enjoyable races with 2WD cars?)

I think there is a lot of fear of the unknown and new in many of these responses.

If there is something inherently non-IT about AWD I certainly am not able to discern it from the GCR. How was the club able to handle the inherent differences in how FWD performs when it was added to IT?

Yeah there are a lot of cars listed, but if someone is going to run for fun - why not allow them to do so in the car they would want to? Many of the listed cars no one wants to run, but they are listed while cars that people do want to run are not.
 
I agree with andy on this entire thing.... He has made it very simple for everyone and already told you to run your AWD in IT. Listen to him......

Make your own class. ITAWD It's that simple. you can even go to the comp meetings and ask for the class to be run wiht the other IT cars. You get 1 year freebie for your participation numbers to reach 7 once they do that you jsut have to sustane that average. then your home free. Improved Touring AWD

I think it is a great idea to have them run. they should not run in the ITS,A,B,C classes because they have abvious advantages and it like others said people may build two cars ect. ect. Cost does matter and should always matter for an entry level class like IT. Yes you will always have people that dedicate there life or have tons of money to spend 20+ on an IT car but we don't want to automatically double that buy haveing those with that kind of money buy 2 cars.

Good luck and I hope somebody goes to there local comp board meeting and asks for them to class ITAWD so we can all see what happens in the next year!!

Stephen
ITB 2WD Audi


PS in the dry a 2WD Audi (with a quaffe)will beat the 4WD audi strictly because of the weight and the loss of power in the power train. Been there, tested it and done it. In the rain it's a hole different story.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">PS in the dry a 2WD Audi (with a quaffe)will beat the 4WD audi strictly because of the weight and the loss of power in the power train. Been there, tested it and done it. In the rain it's a hole different story.[/B]</font>
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I thought - power loss of AWD is going to hurt them and not make them the class overdog in ITS.

I accept the fact I'll get my ass handed to me by FWD cars in the rain. But, I see no reason RWD/FWD/AWD cannot be competitive with each other in the dry. Are FWD car folks afraid of AWD now due to rain advantages? I have to accept that I've got a big disadvantage as a RWD driver in the rain.

ITAWD won't go anywhere, not enough of them. Enough to add to current classes and have a nice time, I think, but don't see the formation of a entire class as the way to go.



------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 a 260Z ITS
 
Originally posted by rlearp:
Are FWD car folks afraid of AWD now due to rain advantages? I have to accept that I've got a big disadvantage as a RWD driver in the rain.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the potential for wet/dry cars exist within the current listing! That is a poor argument, there are already cars with condition advantages over others and not just weather conditions. Some cars are better on technical, some better on open, some better on long. Some people change rear end ratios, springs, entire set ups for different tracks - but I still haven't seen anyone bring a wet/dry car combination despite there being cars that are already inherently better in the wet than others.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">ITAWD won't go anywhere, not enough of them. Enough to add to current classes and have a nice time, I think, but don't see the formation of a entire class as the way to go.</font>
Click to expand...
At least not initially, no one builds cars before they are classed and has a place to race. People can point to the success of SM - but the fact is they had a place to race first and then broke off. Why would anyone build a car that can not be raced? And I am sorry no one should have to race a 2.5L NA AWD with under 200hp in ITE to show interest. Class the cars, they will be built.
 
Originally posted by rlearp:
... Are FWD car folks afraid of AWD now due to rain advantages? ...
Click to expand...

Heck, yeah. The difference is huge - far greater than between RWD and FWD in the rain (in FWD's favor), or RWD and FWD in the dry (advantage rear-drivers).

K

Edit - the Quattro is not in the weeds in the dry, in SWTC this season. If they run a rain race, there is NO question what will happen.

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited April 20, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited April 20, 2005).]
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
Heck, yeah. The difference is huge - far greater than between RWD and FWD in the rain (in FWD's favor), or RWD and FWD in the dry (advantage rear-drivers).
]
Click to expand...

Afraid? Why? If everyone is truely here to have fun then it doesn't matter who wins or what car has an advantage. Advantages exist already, big advantages, this is just another aspect of advantages and I, along with some others, appear to welcome it. They've got good traction, but, they are going to have high weight and more drivetrain loss plus more complexity to deal with than the rest of us.

Class that later model Subaru 2.5L RS car, class it up at 3000 lbs and see what happens. It makes 165hp stock and that should not scare anyone in ITS given what is running out there now.

Scared of a modern AWD cars? Class one of those old XT6 cars from the mid to late 80s. I think the best ones had 145hp, class it up about 2900lbs and let it have a go.

If they run away with the field (which they won't at that weight) then PCA them as was done with the BMWs (ooops, not as the BMWs, they should have gotten a "real" weight not a restrictor).

Talking about it will only result a lot of chatter and not much happening. Get the cars considered, get one classed, and then see how it goes. I don't want to build one at all, just want to see IT become more diverse and maybe attract some new folks, ideas, competitors, and prove that it is adaptable.

------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 a 260Z ITS
 
Originally posted by rlearp:
If everyone is truely here to have fun then it doesn't matter who wins or what car has an advantage.
Click to expand...

Everyone isn't here to have fun, some of us are very competitive and see the competition and success in that environment as the fun.
 
Originally posted by rlearp:

I accept the fact I'll get my ass handed to me by FWD cars in the rain. But, I see no reason RWD/FWD/AWD cannot be competitive with each other in the dry. Are FWD car folks afraid of AWD now due to rain advantages? I have to accept that I've got a big disadvantage as a RWD driver in the rain.
Click to expand...

Ron, that's an interesitng statement. And on the surface, it makes sense. Here's a quick example of how you might be wrong.

At NHIS this summer I was 9th on grid in a fiels of about 25 ITA cars. As I sat on grid, it suddenly monsooned, and we were all given 10 minutes to change to rains.

At the start of the race, 2 guys near the front decided it was not to their liking and bailed, but I was able to make inroads. By the 3rd lap I had moved up to 2nd, and going into the heavy braking area, I went as deep as I thought prudent, and was impressed by the leaders capability to go deeper. Then he hit the wall. After that I was able to pull away from guys who are normally much faster...guys who run top 10 at the ARRCs, guys in FWD cars on Hoosier Dirt Stockers, and was lucky enough to wreck three times a lap without hitting anything, and take the win.

Skill?? I wish! No, I think that the fast FWD guys set their cars up with HUGE springs....and we are talikng in the thousands of inch rates, and the shocks are dialed to accomodate. In the rain, they were just not set up right. Now, of course, if they had the time, they COULD be set up better, but....and this is the key to the concept, track conditions are constantly changing in wet situations.

But dry situations are much less variable.

In most parts of the country, rain races are very rare, and even when it DOES rain, sometimes it's not really wet for much of the race.

Yes, AWD WOULD be a nice thing in the slippery conditions, but we just don't see enough of those to make me worry about a few AWD cars in IT.

I need to give this some more thought, but while there ARE a lot of choices of cars to race, many just don't count. (AMC products????)

It might be cool to throw some current AWD cars in.... especially if they show up!

(I have always wanted the classing "ideal" to be that on any given day, any given car MIGHT have a chance at a win if driven brilliantly...and I have no problem if the AWD guys "given day" requires weather intervention)



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
Ron, that's an interesitng statement. And on the surface, it makes sense. Here's a quick example of how you might be wrong.
After that I was able to pull away from guys who are normally much faster...guys who run top 10 at the ARRCs, guys in FWD cars on Hoosier Dirt Stockers, and was lucky enough to wreck three times a lap without hitting anything, and take the win.
Click to expand...

And this very thing happened at CMP a month ago too in that RWD cars did reasonably well in the rain against the FWD cars. I really didn't think that my analysis was 100% all the time, but it is the general impression by most, including me, that a FWD car has the advantage most times in the rain, when in reality it might not be true.

And, along the same line of though, AWD might not run away with the race in the rain either. It'll damn sure help though!

No matter, every dog has his day and I would like to think that is true in IT - that On Any Sunday a given IT car can take the class if the stars are in alignment.

Having no IT AWD cars classed will for sure keep away anyone who wants to run an AWD car. Hell, class one. If nobody shows up I'll build the damn thing, I promise. But I'm certain I won't have to do it, every region will have at least on inside of a year I think.

I'm a non-front wheel drive liking fellow, I like RWD cars. I think you fellows who drive those puller cars are crazy. But I'm certain there are those out there that think we're all nuts and AWD is the only way to go.

I just don't see a big risk to class one conservatively as a trial. Takes a little discussion on the board, few hours to research power potential, more discussion, then class it up with whatever formula is in vogue with some extra weight. Always take it off later if the damn things can't get out of the way, or, if you don't feel like doing that you can use the old line "no guarentee of competitiveness" as an out.

There are a bunch of cars that would be popular in IT I think:

Subarus for the import crowd - 2 I mentioned above
BMW for the BMW folks - 325xi
Audis for the Audi folk - lots here, but I don't know how many non-turbo cars

------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 a 260Z ITS

[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited April 20, 2005).]
 
Ron I give a slight advantage to FWD in the wet mostly because the average driver can go fast in them. I would put my self up against a FWD car any day in the wet given a full wet setup on my RWD car.

I will not say the same about AWD. I have seen it first hand to many times. I like the way you tink about racing for fun and I wish at times that were true. Most of us say that's why we race but it's not exactly the truth. I race to win and I race hard everytime I get in the car. Again sad but true. I think there are a lot more like than just here getting laps and hangin out. The only issue I have about classing these cars and relying on PCA's to fix them is that the process takes way to long.
smile.gif
 
I hear you Joe, ask Jeff what happens everytime I get into the car and say "I'm taking it easy this time, I got good times last session and I'll just drive around."

Read carefully - I said "If everyone is here to have fun" - I didn't state my intentions. I'm out there to win, don't get me wrong. I'm highly competitive and it shows in the things I do, racing is just one of them. I say I'm here for fun, but I want to win and will do what it takes to get to that point - I'm a newbie so it'll be a long while. I just don't think a couple of heavy AWD cars are going to prevent me from winning if I am able, and, that is not my first thought when considering their classification.

I also want to see new things happen to the SCCA and some new folks, new thinking, new ideas, concepts, and competition get into the game. I don't think you'll be down to any AWD cars with your level of skill, so you shouldn't be worried. As a newbie, I'm not worried, I have faith if they are classed it'll be conservatively and there will be plently of chances to increase their performance if needed.

Of course, I don't know how the system works and it might be as you say, way too long - but I am young and gullible and have faith it'll be done right.

------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
1/2 a 260Z ITS


[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited April 20, 2005).]
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I don't think you'll be down to any AWD cars with your level of skill, so you shouldn't be worried.</font>
Click to expand...

Ah but I am worried. Being competitive is not always a matter of driving the car. The rules have to work out to allow equally prepared and driven car be competitive. Now this is not just theory for me it is real world. The T2 350z that I built will be running against EVO and STI's all year. From what I have seen so far there is no disadvantage in the dry to AWD and there is a huge benefit to AWD in the wet. I think we need to see how the CRB handles the T classes before we even think about heading down that path. That being said if it were to happen this ADHOC would be the best to do it but I fear if anything were to change the current dynamic we would be in trouble again.
 
Ron,

How would YOU class the cars? I see a couple of options:

1. Class them "dry". Make the best effort to have them competitive. Result? They are a viable option but have a HUGE advantage in the rain.

2. Class them heavy in dry form to limit their wet prowess. Result? Nobody builds them because they would be handicapped more than 50% of the time - so they would be a statistical underdog.

There is so little demand that it is a lose-lose IMHO. I do think IT-AWD could work because it takes this advantage/handicap out of the equation.

What would ya'll do?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Ron,

How would YOU class the cars? I see a couple of options:

1. Class them "dry". Make the best effort to have them competitive. Result? They are a viable option but have a HUGE advantage in the rain.

2. Class them heavy in dry form to limit their wet prowess. Result? Nobody builds them because they would be handicapped more than 50% of the time - so they would be a statistical underdog.

There is so little demand that it is a lose-lose IMHO. I do think IT-AWD could work because it takes this advantage/handicap out of the equation.

What would ya'll do?

AB
Click to expand...

Andy, I'm with you 100% in what you said above. In the end NOBODY would be happy.

Another way I look at this...

A lot of professional organizations with full-time technical staffs with people far smarter than any of us on the ITAC have tried to balance AWD cars in classifications have all have thrown in the towel in frustration. I don't think the ITAC can do any better than the FIA, SCCA Pro, and IMSA have done.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Originally posted by rlearp:
I also want to see new things happen to the SCCA and some new folks, new thinking, new ideas, concepts, and competition get into the game.
Click to expand...

Actually Ron, what you have seen happening is new blood and new thinking in IT. The current ITAC has really made some very important changes in this category. I don't think there are many people who wouldn't agree with that.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Andy I am all in on the ITAWD and T

I would be happy to help you write the rule set for it. When are you gonna be in town again BTW....There are some dancin girls that are requesting you stop by and visit.;0)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top