AWD in ITR or ITS?

Not sure - the screaming after the race might alert tech - those Hoboken girls just might have guns too :-)

Andy - I just looked at the updated Sept GCR: looks like there is more room :-)
Ballast may be used. All ballast shall be located in the front
passenger footwell/seating area, aft of the firewall and any
footwell angle, and forward of the aft-edge of the forwardmost
passenger door opening, unless otherwsie specified on​
the vehicle’s spec line. OEM front passenger seat location
 
Last edited:
benspeed said:
I curious what folks consider silly amounts of ballast - I've just finished adding more weight to my car to offset the lightweight rims - I'm carrying 85 pounds in the footwell. hardly fits!
Click to expand...


I have over 250# of lead in my ITB 914. That is beyond silly that is crazy.
 
Greg Amy said:
Yes, but that was just a computer change plus a couple other things that are legal to change in Improved Touring (exhaust, intake routing). Thus, the ITAC will classify it using the lower horsepower rating.

Right...?
Click to expand...
im not sure of the difference between the r32 240 and the TT vr6 250 3.2 it might just be the programming for the brand change VW vs Audi i think its the same drivetrain i dont know enough about the r32 to say for sure
 
It would have to be different hp rating on the same car for it to be considered at the lower horsepower. Though what you suggest - comparing it to the R32's otherwise-identical horsepower rating as an illustration of what only an IT-allowed mod will produce - certainly brings up interesting points vis-a-vis how to rate the engine's power for IT classification...tent, meet camel...
 
How about an AWD car that has:
a curb weight of 3428
A 3.2L 6 Cyl with 250HP
17Inch wheels
13.1" Vent. Front Brakes
10.4" Vent. Rear Brakes

What else do you need to help decide if it would fit in ITR??
Stephen
 
StephenB said:
How about an AWD car that has:
a curb weight of 3428
A 3.2L 6 Cyl with 250HP
17Inch wheels
13.1" Vent. Front Brakes
10.4" Vent. Rear Brakes

What else do you need to help decide if it would fit in ITR??
Stephen
Click to expand...

Well, info about the car that would go on the spec line (like, say, make and model) would be a good start. But it seems like no problem for ITR. Of course, to assign a weight we'll have to come up with a process (adder?) for AWD cars. We have the go-ahead to do that now but it's a required step.
 
What kind of tq? How much weight can it lose? And, don't be coy, we all know what car that is. Silly boy, it will be a looong time before that's even on the track, much less at the front of the grid. ;)

(even if we classed it today, but send that request in and get the ball rolling. Why not, you guys love stirring up trouble, LOL))
 
Marcus,

That was what I was kinda wondering is if a 250 HP car could be classified. Jag X-type may still be my 1st choice but If I am going to spend that much money maybe I should take a little longer and build the Audi... My brother and I also already have ,sitting outback now, the Audi coupe Quattro from 1990 that may fit into ITA??

Jake, Is tourque part of the process?

And yes it is the TT 3.2! I personally can't do this now but I would love to dream... IF I took the next 2 years off from racing I could build it... I would be just as happy doing a few autocrosses and maybe some kart stuff to keep me occupied. The only reason I have been waiting for the past year or so is to see the dust settle...

Stephen
 
StephenB said:
Marcus,

That was what I was kinda wondering is if a 250 HP car could be classified. Jag X-type may still be my 1st choice but If I am going to spend that much money maybe I should take a little longer and build the Audi... My brother and I also already have ,sitting outback now, the Audi coupe Quattro from 1990 that may fit into ITA??

Stephen
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm with you.. I guess not knowing how AWD fits in the classificaiton matrix/schema (I just can't call it a process), hampers us, but I would believe the weight would have to be extraordinarily high. As Andy told me in one of htese threads recently, ths HP ceiling isn't a ceiling, but a guideline in terms of fitting cars in at appropriateweights for the chassis and class. (paraphrased in my own language)
 
Subie

I've been watching IT for a while, thinking about getting back into it since AWD is allowed. I've been very interested in building a Subie 2.5RS for some time as a fun track-day car, why not take it all the way to race prep if it can???

So - where is it going to end up? 2 door and 4 door versions, but I prefer the 2-door.
 
Wish we could give you an informed estimate re: classing and weight. Three members of the IT Ad Hoc committee (charged with making recommendations to the club racing board about stuff like this) who were among the most active here have left the committee - myself included. A couple still post here so I'll let them chime in.

KK
 
This one is ready to go, all we need to get the classing complete is a VTS sheet. If you'd be willing to fill one out and submit it quickly, we'll try to get it addressed and listed at our next call (but probably couldn't be published until the April Fastrack in late March). I'm sure it will end up in ITS but I'm not sure of the weight right now.

I personally have taken the action item to try to get that VTS completed but if an interested member would be willing to do it instead, that would be awesome! Please let me know.
 
JoshS said:
This one is ready to go, all we need to get the classing complete is a VTS sheet. If you'd be willing to fill one out and submit it quickly, we'll try to get it addressed and listed at our next call
Click to expand...

How is that feasible since half the ITAC has resigned, is the ITAC even fully functional at this time?

Not trying to be obtuse but is AWD IT really on the short list? If it is on the short list by some chance, at this point in time, then IT racers should be more concerned than they already are.
 
Last edited:
Yes and yes, Ron. But there are 5 ITAC members right now, and there's a pretty long agenda. I'm confident that this has been well-enough vetted to complete.

Really, I'll say it again. Things are nowhere near as broken as the idealigues are making them out to be. There are practical and workable solutions and IT is not going anywhere.
 
JoshS said:
Things are nowhere near as broken as the idealigues are making them out to be.
Click to expand...

You mean the former ITAC members?

I agree, IT isn't going anywhere different in the short term. But I think the long term rules and class stability is what most folks are worried about.

Time will tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top