Beetle in ITC

G

grjones1

New member
They have got to be kidding! declaring a 2.0 liter, 10:1 compression, 4-wheeled disc braked, aerodynamic, and tri-linked rear suspensioned Beetle an ITC car. What happened to classing new cars in S to observe their potential?
Volkswagen has once again exercised its influence upon SCCA decisions. It's bad enough they get an extra 100 cc's for their Sciroccos and cams that never saw a production Rabbit.
There goes the neighborhood. Anyone want to buy a well developed Fiesta for Driver's school, I have officially become outdated?

G. Robert Jones
And I can't wait to see the results of my 1800-lb. Ford being tagged by a 2800-lb. VW. It should be launch time. Thank you Board, you've once again made a monumentally stupid decision.


[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited July 23, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited July 23, 2004).]
 
Stupid?
Look inward before you look outward.

First, as far a racing with a "2800lb VW" I suppose you never do enduros where you run with 2800lb ITS BMWs. Or maybe you never share the track with any 2800lb ITB Volvos. Well lucky you then because I do it at every single race I enter.

Second, if you're scared of a 2700+ pound car with 115 horsepower... I hate it for you. Personally I don't see this upsetting the apple cart at all. Even if this thing does outrun me top end I'll certainly outbrake the shit out of it at the end of the straight. I only have a... gee whiz... 600lb weight advantage.

I know a good orthopedic surgeon that can help you fix that knee you just completely jerked out of its socket.

Scott, who stands in front of his ITC Civic and says the comp board can class all the 115hp 2700lb cars it wants to in ITC. Bring it on!!!
 
Originally posted by grjones1:
Volkswagen has once again exercised its influence upon SCCA decisions.
Click to expand...

I can personally vouch for the fact that VW likely has NO IDEA this car was even classified in IT! Give me break dude! This car getting classified in ITC is the direct recomendation from the ITAC, so if you have any beef, you'd better start aiming at the source.

There are a hell of a lot of VERY intelligent people on the CRB and the ACs, and there is a lot of LOGIC and real numbers behind the decision to put this car in ITC. It has the same wt/pwr ratio (if you believe that this motor will generate 144hp in IT trim
rolleyes.gif
) as the Rabbits, the 510s, and likely less than the Civics... And all those brakes and tires are certainly countered by the fact that it weighs at least 600lbs more than it's competitors.

The red herring of heavier cars in your "class" has been explained previously, but you might want to start thinking in terms of RUN GROUPS, rather than class... Besides, there are never more than 4 or 5 ITC cars (out here, that would be a total shock...) in a race anyhow, and how often do they really run together?

As for classing the cars in "S and observing their potential"... Whose idea was that? Who would build some of these cars (Neons come to mind) unless they were classed in the RIGHT class in the first place?



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
I think this addition is a great thing for ITC. As mentioned by the ITC numbers it is on the edge of extinsion. This just might be the thing that helps get more participation in the class.

As far as getting beat by the car, how does the ford do compared to the Civic? I'm assuming you're talking about the Fiesta? If so, a guy up in the NER races one and it does very well.

What run group does ITC run with in you're area? If it is B, then you'd still be racing with it anyways. If it is A, there are some fairly heavy cars there as well.

Do car manufacturers care at all about IT? I highly doubt it - but would be curious to know. I haven't seen any factory backed IT cars like WC. There isn't much to gain for VW or any other manu. to get involved in IT.

You might enjoy racing with the Beetle more then you think. Guess you'll just have to wait and see.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER #13 ITA
'87 Honda Prelude
 
Volkswagen has once again exercised its influence upon SCCA decisions. It's bad enough they get an extra 100 cc's for their Sciroccos and cams that never saw a production Rabbit.
Click to expand...


Wow, where did you get this one from??? I'd love to know where you got the information that VWoA has any interest, much less influence in Club Racing. IIRC, VW hasn't promoted thier cars in US racing in almost 20 years (Golf Cup days). I don't recall seeing one ad that mentioned the Corrado winning the SSA National Championship back in the early/mid 90's (I think it was '95 or '96, I'm sure Bill S. can clarify when it was.)

What exactly do you mean by?
It's bad enough they get an extra 100 cc's for their Sciroccos...
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the movement of the 1.7 cars from ITB to ITC, I'm pretty confident that VWoA could care less about cars they haven't made in over 20 years. Especially in SCCA Club Racing. AFAIK, that was a member-initiated request for a move (I wrote the orignal letter that was shot down.)

As far as the G-grind cam goes (I can only assume that's what you're referring to), it's my understanding that all the paperwork and documentation were in order to get that allowed. If it's the only part they (VW) offer for the car, what's the problem? (Disclaimer: That being said, if the same is true of the Datsun cam, it should be allowed as well.)

As far as the weight issue goes, people make valid points about run groups, enduros, etc. My contention is, those cars are not typically racing amongst themselves. The weight difference may be a non-issue, but I think it sets a bad precedence by classing cars that appear, on paper, to be beyond the performance envelope of a given class, in that class at a significantly higher weight. It will be interesting to see where the Golf IV 2.0 falls, when it is classified. With the NB landing in ITC, I don't see how they could put the Golf anywhere but ITC. Same chassis, same motor/drivetrain, same suspenion/brakes, different bodywork.

I see the potential for some of the same complaints that were voiced against the limited-prep Production cars. You have cars that will have better acceleration/top speed, but poorer braking/cornering capability. They'll outrun them (the 'traditional' cars) on the straights, only to hold them up in the corners. Granted this is an inherint (sp?) characteristic of racing in non-spec classes. Some cars do better at different points on the track/types of tracks, than do others.

Darin,

Have you had a chance to run those numbers I asked you for? Also, are you able to share the formula that was used on the NB w/ us?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Spec Bug. Mark my words, in a few years this will be a class. Part of the rules would be the vase and flower have to remain in the car, and the paint jobs alll have to be based on ladybugs. Now that would be fun to see.
 
Besides, there are never more than 4 or 5 ITC cars (out here, that would be a total shock...) in a race anyhow, and how often do they really run together?
Click to expand...

There you go again Darin, over-generalizing. I just looked at the results of the last MARRS race at Summit Point, and there were 12 ITC cars listed, 10 finishers, and 2 DNS. Same numbers for the race before that, only 1 DNS though. There were also 12 cars at the first MARRS race, w/ all of them starting and finishing.

ITC has been a healthy, and competitive class in the MARRS series for the past several years, and I can't see that changing in the near future. Not sure why it isn't as well subscribed in other parts of the country.
confused.gif


/edit/ Side Note: Mr. Jones was on the podium in ITC, in all of the above mentioned races.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited July 24, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
rolleyes.gif


This is the kind of attitude that gets to me everytime.

AB
Click to expand...

The answers are as follows:
1) When I race against a much heavier car, like a Volvo, he/she's's in a higher class and we are less likely to dice for position (and he is less likely to be in the heat of battle during which time he is less likely to pop my rear end.)
2)Wait until you attempt to brake with those four wheeled, oversized and vented front brakes (2800 lbs or not, the Beetle will outbreak any pre-nineties car on the road.
3) Wait until you try to power with your 1500-1600 cc against 2.0 liters of IT "breathed upon" horsepower. (How many horsepower and how much torgue do you think balanced and blueprinted, recurved induction 2.0 liters with 10.5:1 compression will make compared to your 1.5/6?
4) And wait until you try to corner with the new state of the art suspension.
You guys really don't see what you are up against.
5) And as far as VW not caring about IT, why did they go to the trouble of creating a G-grind and getting it through the rules when no other OM has bothered to participate in an updated parts program?

Excuse me but when one make begins to gather favors: G-grind, 1.7s, then 2.0s, I begin to smell a rat and this rat is disguised as an insect.

I welcome new blood in IT as much as the next guy, but there are plenty of 1.6, front disced/rear drummed and inexpensive suspensioned post 80's models running around to introduce to C. We don't need to bring in a class beater to further VW sales.

G. Robert Jones
 
VW couldn't give less of a rip about club racing. A LOT of people - myself included - have been trying to change this since the mid-'80s, to no avail.

K
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:

If it's the only part they (VW) offer for the car, what's the problem? (Disclaimer: That being said, if the same is true of the Datsun cam, it should be allowed as well.)

Bill,
Try buying any part for a Fiesta at a Ford dealer. Evrything is NLAed. Does that mean I can use any aftermarket part? I can't even get people to allow a head that is identical to the stock head, because it doesn't have the right numbers on it.
G

[/B]
Click to expand...
 
The SEDIV typically sees around 5 to 7 ITC cars per weekend. Not bad, but it could certainly be better.

And really, drop the weight thing. It'll be no more dangerous than the current situation given that I already race closely with ITB Volvos nearly every weekend and have ITS BMWs passing me at a 20mph closing speed. I'm wayyyyy more worried about getting collected by a 2800lb, 220hp BMW that is lapping me than I am about getting tangled up with a 2800lb, 115hp Beetle. Seriously guys, think before you type.

And the Golf???
Go ahead and class it in ITC at 2700lbs. I have no problems with it. Hell, take about half the cars currently in ITB and add 250lbs to them and put them in ITC. Again, no complaints from me.

I'm very happy that Mr. Jones is not on the comp board. I assume attitudes like his are what got IT so goobered up in the first place. "When in doubt, panic and put it in ITS." Excellent. Thats just excellent.

Scott, who also finished on the podium at his last ITC race with 10 cars in class (not that this means anything, but since it was mentioned above I thought I'd throw that in there <shrug> ).
 
It seems that teh majority thinks this is a good idea. I certainly do.

- ITC is poorly subscribed accross the country. To Bill, if you can get 10 cars in a MARRS race, how does that compare to the other IT classes in a MARS race, percentage-wise? In the Northeast, 25 + in both ITS and ITA, 20 + in ITB and 5-8 in ITC. New blood may revitalize this class.

- We could have put the NB in ITB - at a weight we felt it really could never have acheived. Then we would have had people clammoring that it just got stuck in there as fodder. I swear that if I gave some people on the board $1M in a suitcase, you would complain the suitcase was too heavy.

Let's see how it works out, and adjust if we need to.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
1) When I race against a much heavier car, like a Volvo, he/she's's in a higher class and we are less likely to dice for position (and he is less likely to be in the heat of battle during which time he is less likely to pop my rear end.)
2)Wait until you attempt to brake with those four wheeled, oversized and vented front brakes (2800 lbs or not, the Beetle will outbreak any pre-nineties car on the road.
3) Wait until you try to power with your 1500-1600 cc against 2.0 liters of IT "breathed upon" horsepower. (How many horsepower and how much torgue do you think balanced and blueprinted, recurved induction 2.0 liters with 10.5:1 compression will make compared to your 1.5/6?
4) And wait until you try to corner with the new state of the art suspension.
You guys really don't see what you are up against.


Nice try, but...

1. At VIR 2 months ago I spent the entire race swapping positions with a Volvo. He was battling for 4th in ITB and I was fighting for 1st in ITC. As a result, we were not giving each other anything more than if we were in the same class. This happens all the time, everywhere, everyweekend, somewhere.
2. My '91 Civic has been in ITC for several years. It has vented front brakes, the exact same units that are on the ITA cars. My brakes are very good, but because I outweigh them by close to 200lbs I can't really brake very much deeper than the earlier Civics with tiny, solid front rotors. Weight kills, just ask Bill Auberlin.
3. That VW will have to make about 145 HP at the crank to have the same P/W ratio as the typical current frontrunning ITC car (about 23 to 25). It'd need even more than that to get what the 20 year old Scirroccos are already getting. If you truly believe that someone can legally get more than 30hp with IT prep on that car then you have an argument here. IF you believe that.
4. Again, my Civic, which you've been classed against for quite a while already, has a 4 wheel independent double wishbone suspension. I believe I can corner with that VW.

Sorry, thems the facts.
 
That VW will have to make about 145 HP at the crank to have the same P/W ratio as the typical current frontrunning ITC car (about 23 to 25).
Darin,
I too have diced with Volvos and BMW 2002s recently, and thank goodness those guys didn't throw their weight around. I'll concede the "weight" point, but again with a computer chip, that I beleive is now legal in IT, 10.5:1, and VW's penchant for building "replacement" parts, and headers, do you really not conceive of 145 HP for the Beetle? And did you happen to look at the gearing on that 5-speed? It's a close ratio racing box compared to my 4-spd with overdrive fourth. And C is a long way from S! Why not B, where the 2.0s now reside and see what it can do? Then move it. Why put a car with 400 cc's more than has ever been in the class? I too am glad I'm not on the Board, I prefer people who can think beyond their first impulse: "Let's throw in the Beetle in C and stir up new interest! (And of course outclass every car in the class." Brilliant!
Keep this post, 2 years from now ITC will indeed be "Spec Beetle."
G

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited July 24, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
VW couldn't give less of a rip about club racing. A LOT of people - myself included - have been trying to change this since the mid-'80s, to no avail.

K,
Beleive me, VW is interested when they are assured a VW win. Observe the Rabbit/Bilstein Cup, Formula V, etc. It's only when there's a chance of their getting their rears kicked they don't want to get involved.
Am I prejudiced, yes.
G
Click to expand...
 
Robert,

I'll concede that you're prejudiced, but it's clouded your objectivity. VW didn't 'create' the G-grind cam for club racing in the US. It was a European spec part that game in the European GTI's. Also, VW didn't initiate getting the G-grind cam allowed in IT, that was member driven.

The Rabbit/Bilstein Cup is almost 20 years old, at its youngest. VWoA hasn't taken any interest in racing since then. As I said, they didn't play up the fact that the Corrado was a National Championship car, or that VW cars would good race cars. They haven't played that in almost 20 years. And FV? Please. While I'm not an aircooled guy, I would guess that most of the FV stuff is supplied through the aftermarket.

And back to the 1.7's being moved to ITC. Do you really think those cars belonged in ITB? Do you really think a 1.7 Rabbit @ 2000# is a match of an A2 GTI @ 2280#, must less a Volvo 142E?

I'm not so sure that the NB belongs in ITC, but to say that VWoA is pulling strings or calling in favors to get it there, makes the black helicopter crowd look sane.

Andy,

Since Darin doesn't seem to be around, can you run those numbers for me?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Robert,

I'll concede that you're prejudiced, but it's clouded your objectivity. VW didn't 'create' the G-grind cam for club racing in the US. It was a European spec part that game in the European GTI's. Also, VW didn't initiate getting the G-grind cam allowed in IT, that was member driven.

And back to the 1.7's being moved to ITC. Do you really think those cars belonged in ITB? Do you really think a 1.7 Rabbit @ 2000# is a match of an A2 GTI @ 2280#, must less a Volvo 142E?

I'm not so sure that the NB belongs in ITC, but to say that VWoA is pulling strings or calling in favors to get it there, makes the black helicopter crowd look sane.
Click to expand...
___________________________________________
OK Bill, VW is an innocent bystander, just allowing the little people to play. (And VW had stopped selling the Corrado by the time it was a champion. Why promote a car you dont't sell any more?
But then, if the G-grind was in a European car and never sent here in a car, how are we allowing it in IT? Except for the fact that the VW boys can't run down to their dealer and buy an original cam? I and many others are in the same boat (Fiats, Escorts, Toyotas, etc.) So why does VW get preferential treatment? If I put the XR2 (Euopean Fiesta) cam in my car I'd be protested in a minute.
And most of your points are made for underdogs that should not have been classed or at least raced to begin with. Whatever happened to the old "We don't guarantee the competivness of a particular car." If someone makes the wrong choice to begin with, do we now penalize the class below him to make him competitive? I guess we do and now we go beyond that and put in the biggest motor we can find among the smallest motors remaining on the racetrack. It just doesn't make sense. New cars yes: Hyundais, Kias, Suzukis, Geos, and many others with 1600 motors. But not 2.0 VW's - they are not C cars! Thanks for allowing me to vent, but as you know I've been chasing better cars for a long time and now another apparently unsurmountable model has been thrown at us. Guess I'll have to find a way to out drive them.
G


[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited July 24, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Since Darin doesn't seem to be around, can you run those numbers for me?
Click to expand...

Sorry guys... I've been sick in bed for a couple of days now, and haven't had steady access to the keyboard...

Bill, to answer your question, the numbers come out about the same. If the Golf makes 115hp stock, then, assuming a 25% increase in power, it should be in ITB at 2450 or so... Since it's there at 2350lbs, I'd have to say that it should be a great car in ITB... That being said, we'll have to see how Chris Albin and others do with them before we'll know for sure... It's within a 100lbs or so of where it should be. Since I don't have all the numbers for the rest of the class, it's hard to say for sure how it will measure against the Volvos, etc... Maybe you VW guys can tell us...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top