AWD in IT...

I'll go out on a limb (because MY only chance at another win needs another monsoon!) and choose option A.

Class them so they fit the class, not overdogs or a car that can win on any track if the right car and driver combination shows up, but so that they can win on certain tracks if the right combo shows up. And when it rains? Oh well! See ya!

Look at it another way....you say demand is nil. If classed, then the repercusions will be nil as well, right??
wink.gif


On the other hand, maybe there is latent demand that needs to be developed?

Why not throw it in Fastrack to get a tiny bit of feedback? Say, "The ITAC has requested the CRB to classify AWD vehicles in IT. The CRB requests member feedback on the issue.", and see what comes back.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
I would prefer an ITAWD format - but then the participation rules would have to be more lenient than normal for the first two years. I mean there are few AWD cars set up for road racing today and if there won't be anybody to race against building a class would be slow.

I would rather see them conservatively classed in full IT first and then the participants would build faster. They can then be broken out into ITAWD in the third year.

A Subaru RS would be dead last in ITS in the dry against experienced drivers. My friend building his RS for NASA and EMRA runs close to me in my ITA 240SX. So class it in ITS - if there is standing water on the track OK the one or two cars that are entered may win that race - but they aren't going to be hurting any of your season points in ITS unless we get a really wet year. Better yet class them to run without series points. Just get them racing - if the cars get classed in three years there will be enough to break them out.

------------------
Ed.
240SX ITA

[This message has been edited by turboICE (edited April 20, 2005).]
 
Originally posted by turboICE:
I would prefer an ITAWD format - but then the participation rules would have to be more lenient than normal for the first two years. I mean there are few AWD cars set up for road racing today and if there won't be anybody to race against building a class would be slow.
Click to expand...

That would not encourage the ITAC or CRB to create a class then. The SCCA already has too many classes and too many poorly subscribed classes.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
The best way to handle it Geo is to write a set of rules for the class allow the cars to run in ITE but under the ITAWD rules until the concept catches on. If it doesn't then no harm done.
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
The best way to handle it Geo is to write a set of rules for the class allow the cars to run in ITE but under the ITAWD rules until the concept catches on. If it doesn't then no harm done.
Click to expand...

I would agree with that Joe. I think though that the competitors would need to develop the rules and run their own deal within ITE. If it caught on, the SCCA would likely write a unified set of rules. If not, well, then no big deal.



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Ron,
How would YOU class the cars?
Click to expand...

Simply without a lot of fanfare and rules changes.

I'd pick two AWD cars that have a large following. One of them would definitely be the Subaru RS 2.5L car. Good number built, good following.

I'd research the potential of the car by sampling as much data as I could find. I'd troll boards, talk to owners, separate the wheat from the chaff, and make a decision with respect to weight/hp. I'd be VERY conservative.

With the Impreza as an example you already have some real-world experience provided by Ed above. Taking that into account, and other info I'd class the car.

My personal guess, for this car, is that I'd peg it about 2890 lbs (Wait! That is over its listed curb weight - yeah, well my Jensen is over its curb weight too, so what?) or so, maybe even a tad more.

Just a cursory look around shows this little motor is probably good for 185-190hp with moderate to strong effort in the engine department, torque being similar. I don't see that it is going to be a killer in S since the power to weight ratio is still putting it in the lower quarter on the stock specs of wt/hp.

Nobody would build it because it isn't in the 10 ten on RacerJakes IT Class List? I don't agree. They'll build it.

We've covered this ground in other threads. People build cars for many reasons and having an affinity for a car is a very strong motivator. Do I really think I'll win the championship with a Jensen Healey? No, but I like the car, felt I could live with some shortcomings, capitalize on some strengths, and be competitive. I'm sure folks would look at the newly classed RS the same way - sure it weighs a lot, but has good brakes, AWD, and is a car they like and want to race.

RS too much? Class the XT, it'll be built by the same people with less risk to the class. I just don't see a huge risk. If there is, then take one of the other suggestions use parts of it. But I don't think IT AWD is the way to go - there aren't enough to have their own class. Be like saying we'll have ITOT (Open Top) - there just aren't enough open top cars to have their own class, and no need to either, they'll fit fine in the current framework.

------------------
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 21, 2005).]
 
And if there was more than ONE letter written over the past 3 years requesting that a certian (or ANY) AWD car be classified, it might be a good idea, I still say no.

"Class it and they will come" doesn't hold water. "Come and they will class it" is the way it will be successful. Spec Miata was built this way...prove you have the numbers - and the SCCA will accommodate you - and be happy to.

And the letters that come in, should be from people who are willing to invest some skin in the game.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
Ron,

Thanks. I appreciate the well thought out response. Let's agree to disagree.

If you class it heavy, top examples by top drivers will never be built - and a following will never develop because it "can't" win.

If you class it well, it will become the car to have in wet-weather areas and/or a second car for those who can at top events.

With no demand, it just doesn't make sense to POTENTIALLY wreck class structures. If I am wrong, and there are a pile of AWD freaks out there just waiting for the green light, then speak up - IT-AWD can run with ITE until you make the numbers.

AB

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

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.
Click to expand...

Yeah George, I guess that includes the current SCCA Club Racing CRB, BoD, and the TAC (Touring Advisory Committee). And I'm sorry, but you can't really compare Regional Club Racing to any number of pro series with paid drivers, factory involvement, and significant sponsorship money. I'm pretty sure that the pressure to change things, where AWD cars were dominant, came from external forces (i.e. teams not driving those cars), rather than from w/in the sanctioning body.



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
And if there was more than ONE letter written over the past 3 years requesting that a certian (or ANY) AWD car be classified, it might be a good idea, I still say no.
Click to expand...
I agree whole heartedly, if members won't be active enough to generate correspondence then their silence doesn't deserve action. But then again I know every WRX and STi owner got a free SCCA membership and they don't renew because they don't feel as if the SCCA is inclusive to their interests. Yet they show up in droves to NASA events.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">"Class it and they will come" doesn't hold water. "Come and they will class it" is the way it will be successful. Spec Miata was built this way...prove you have the numbers - and the SCCA will accommodate you - and be happy to.</font>
Click to expand...
I don't think that is a fair comparison or logical. There was a place for Miatas to race before SM was developed. Outside of the high end of Touring there is no place reasonable to race these cars. If there is no class for them to race in then what do they build them to?

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">And the letters that come in, should be from people who are willing to invest some skin in the game.</font>
Click to expand...
From me it is. I didn't want to start club racing in T1 (at the time), so it made no sense for me to build my STi that I have tracked extensively. I would have liked to have built an RS in a regional class instead. I could have done that with NASA and EMRA and just be done with it. My decision instead was to get to the racing first and so I bought an ITA car so I could run at basically any race by any group in the area that fit my schedule. I chose to race first and hope for preferred cars later, there are those who want to race in the only cars that they have ever had on track.

And there are those in the SCCA that know there is AWD interest. Track days are filled with AWD vehicles. The tri-region is on the largest Subaru board advertising their PDE because they know Subaru people will come out to track days. What do they tell them when the people get hooked at the PDE and time trials and they ask about racing their RS?

I know I am being a hard case about this. There are several reasons. I know there is interest. However much as myself, none of us really know how to pursue that interest because we do not have enough experience with the SCCA to even know how to proceed. Most of us haven't been active beyond Solo or just getting into club racing. Some see their car not classed and figure there is no point in pursuing it, that the SCCA doesn't care (I disagree). Some aren't willing to put their skin in the game with a classed car in the hopes that the car they want is classed later. I decided to, but I also had the means to do so. At the same time by going with my current ITA car - the budget for another car even if AWD gets classed was knocked back at least a year. Unfortunately I am not one of the ones that can have 2 IT cars that there are apparently so many of.

If I knew how to go about running an unofficial ITAWD within an ITE run group I would even consider pursuing that. Though I have to say I am not sure how good that would be for ITE to have a 3-5 cars with half the potential running as moving chicanes around a track - especially one like lime rock.



------------------
Ed.
240SX ITA
 
Ed,

I don't consider you being a hard case. Your insight is valuable.

I think the SCCA is just catching up with its new on-track programs. Solo has great places to play for the Sti and WRX right now - in PRO SOLO, they are consider top tier cars.

Unfortunatly, Turbo + AWD is REALLY outside the box in IT. That is why you can develop an external set of rules that NA cars and turbo cars can compete together with handicaps.

The 2.5 RS WOULD bring new people in...but at what cost? I still submit the balance of IT can't handle it.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
Originally posted by turboICE:
I don't think that is a fair comparison or logical. There was a place for Miatas to race before SM was developed. Outside of the high end of Touring there is no place reasonable to race these cars. If there is no class for them to race in then what do they build them to?
Click to expand...

I think it is more fair than you think. IT Miata's were not perceived to be competitive. SM was created, not using IT parts, but an entirely engineered kit that must be used in whole. IT cars CAN NOT cross over. SM cars can cross to IT however - and frequently do for additional seat time. So they didn't build them to IT sepcs, they created their OWN.

Then a couple of guys developed the class, promoted the hell out of it and helped Regions get it approved for competition. 1000 cars later, it's not only it's own class, it's going National in 2006 as we all know.

If the demand is there for AWD, it can happen.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
I will add that if being competitive is not an issue then AWD and Turbo cars already fit into ITE in most regions.

Ron, in reading all of your posts the last couple of years I will say this. Right now you say you are doing the JH for fun and because you are a JH lover. Most start out this way. I contend that if you JH is not competitive in ITS you will not be satisfied in the end just to make laps. You will either A: try to get the car adjusted or B: try to get the car moved. This is not a slam in any way. You posts indicate that you are a driver in the true spirit of the word and I take from that that second is not much of an option for you. I think the idea if class it out of spec and adjust is what kills most of the new cars in IT. Looking at the new found interest in the NEON, SER, NX2000's should be an indicator of that. Once they were classed proper there is now cars being built.
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Unfortunatly, Turbo + AWD is REALLY outside the box in IT. That is why you can develop an external set of rules that NA cars and turbo cars can compete together with handicaps.

The 2.5 RS WOULD bring new people in...but at what cost? I still submit the balance of IT can't handle it.
Click to expand...
On the first I absolutely agree outside of ITE, IT is not setup for turbos. On the second I should at least acknowledge to myself that I don't really have enough experience in competition to fully appreciate the impact on balance and should defer to the experienced on that.

IT is the right level for me and I really would have liked to have run an RS now and then do an STi in T2 or a new production class in 4 or 5 years. But I wasn't going to be so stubborn as to stay away due to classing. Racing the 240sx has been fun since I started competing wheel to wheel in it last year with NASA and EMRA and with my second SCCA school coming in May, I look forward to the real education that the ITA drivers on the east coast are sure to give me. It isn't going to hurt me any to be racing the RWD rather than doing nothing because the car I want isn't classed. But I still would like to pursue a way to get them classed to race. And I do equate the potential to be competitive as part of the fun.

I know miatas struggled as classed, but they were classed close to the realm of feasibility. At least close enough that cars were being built and raced. It is just easier to get people building cars when they are classed. Also the miata is perfect for spec building with their production numbers, used cost and ease of maintenance. Spec classing an RS or other NA AWD would be tough. Heck just getting a bone stock RS that is straight and just caging and other "race ready" requirements would likely run in the $17,000-$19,000 range. And that would be using the 75k-150k mile motor that came with it. ECU tools only exist for the turbo versions of the Subaru, so tune would pretty much have to remain stock until someone figured out that aspect (currently all tuning on the RS is accomplished by means that would not be IT legal like piggy backs or full replacement without stock harness). I can see a few coming out regularly but a far way from being able to get 10 RS's to come out regularly to each event.



------------------
Ed.
240SX ITA
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
Ron, in reading all of your posts the last couple of years I will say this. Right now you say you are doing the JH for fun and because you are a JH lover. Most start out this way. I contend that if you JH is not competitive in ITS you will not be satisfied in the end just to make laps. You will either A: try to get the car adjusted or B: try to get the car moved. This is not a slam in any way. You posts indicate that you are a driver in the true spirit of the word and I take from that that second is not much of an option for you. I think the idea if class it out of spec and adjust is what kills most of the new cars in IT. Looking at the new found interest in the NEON, SER, NX2000's should be an indicator of that. Once they were classed proper there is now cars being built.[/B]
Click to expand...

Well, I haven't been around here that long....Only since last August. But, you are correct. I like the JH, I like doing things that are hard, I like the challenge, and I enjoy having something that isn't seen everyday. And yes, I won't think it too cool to lap the the track at the end of the pack if the JH won't hunt.

But, I'd like to think that I did my research and picked something that can win although that wasn't my primary concern back then (now if I selected I might choose differently). It is the lightest car in ITS, it has reasonable power, but it is delicate and the Lotus engine puts off many a builder I'm sure. It has been hard and had I decided on something like I might pick today, a 240sx, 240z, or ITS Miata 1.8 then I'd been driving that joker back in December!

I think if the JH is a poor S car then it has options for adjustment (it races higher than curb weight) or moving (power puts it solidly in A, but I like S). A mis-classed AWD car has the same possibilities. But, I'd probably drive the thing to death and pour more development into it before I'd admit I made a poor choice - I'm stubborn sometimes. I'd hate to see the car moved to A - I just like S and trying to make a little seen car run with serious contenders like BMW 3s and the like is a big challenge.

Still, I think it possible to carefully class an AWD car in IT and not have disasterous effect. Might not bring people in droves, but it might bring more than a few. And I'm sure some folks would pick up the AWD torch to push for wins in S, regardless of if they start with a disadvantage or not. There are a lot of cars that were not front runners that became so with a lot of work.

The arguments I've seen for and against the AWD cars on this thread have been civil and insightful - more so than on some threads we get into. In the end, I'm just a guy who would like to see them race but I'm not the one who is going to build one (unless you guys class one and nobody else builds one, then I'm sticking to my promise). It appears it'll take a few interested parties to write some letters and get the ball in motion if it is ever to happen.

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

[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited April 21, 2005).]
 
Ahhhh,,,and there lies the problem...

Who is the AWD audience? Mostly younger gen guys....who don't write ...what did you call it??? ..a "letter"????

Is is possible to IM the ITAC???

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
I don't have time to actually read all the posts in the section and I have been trying to find the time as I would love to see AWD cars classed into our current IT classes. I know many here don't like that idea because of "rain" races, however in the few rain races that the speed GT cars had the past few years did the Audi's dominate anymore than they did in the rain??? NO, I think RWD BMW's actually even won at Lime Rock, and I don't think you can say that is driving skill or prep as Audi has/had plenty of $$$ to get all the right stuff... For other examples look at the European touring series... I have seen a few rain races with Audi's on TV and they don't seem to dominate their in the rain anymore than they do in the dry. (Sorry to keep mentioning Audi but Audi seems to be the only manufacturer dumping boat loads of $$$ into road racing with AWD).

Raymond “I want my 1990 20V Audi Coupe in ITS, but I am an IM guy
frown.gif
” Blethen

PS: Jake, where have you been we all miss you
frown.gif
 
I'm just poping in to say that i'm building an 2004 WRX for ITE and its planned to be racing by either mid/late season 2007 or in 2008.

It should be fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top