Beetle in ITC

Originally posted by badal:
So if the G grind is the standard, I guess it is conceivable an original stock cam could be not legal.

A very nice try, but no (OK, there may be some weird exception).

When a manufacturer supercedes parts, the original part number is usually listed. All supersession parts with be listed as well and in a notes area of the original part, all supersession parts are usually listed. ALL of those part would be legal.

Hold on, I have to adjust my Reynolds Wrap while popping bubble wrap....

OK, I'm back.
wink.gif


Originally posted by badal:
And if you have a Fiat or Fiesta, apparently you can run any cam you please as there are no Fiat Dealers or Ford stock cams available. GRobert, shame on you for not picking up on this and keeping your mouth shut!

No habla Ingles.
wink.gif



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
If I were racing an A1, I'd use the good hubs and whoever protested me could suffer the ostracism and ridicule he deserves.

Why would someone that protests illegal parts 'deserve' [sic] ridicule and ostracism? This kind of attitude is a) pretty disturbing, and B) one of the reasons why we keep hearing that everyone in IT is cheating.

And yes Robert, I was part of the hub discussion. In fact, I asked the question about the Olds/Pontiac Quad 4 hubs then, and got no answer. Darin/Andy/George (and any of the other ITAC/CBR members that may be lurking), how about some info on this? This seems like a major exception to the rules. And, I don't think GM listed the Saturn hub as a replacement/superceding part for the other cars.

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

I don't think the Olds hub was a little problem like A1 rabbit hubs are. My A1 rabbit would go 20 races or so on a hub (as long as I used GOOD quality OEM German hubs, not mexican!). I think the olds might not have lasted nearly as long. But that was miles ago.

Of course, if we are talking about saftey, then pinto's would be required to run a fuel cell, right?

Alan
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Why would someone that protests illegal parts 'deserve' [sic] ridicule and ostracism? This kind of attitude is a) pretty disturbing, and B) one of the reasons why we keep hearing that everyone in IT is cheating.

Bill,
It's kind of like driving from your house ten miles in any direction without breaking a traffic law, almost impossible. For example, how many people give a turn signal before turning out of their driveway? We went through all this and I have a feeling you are baiting me in an attempt to have me say cheating is OK, and I'm going to quote Thomas Jefferson:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. ..."

No, Bill, I don't think cheating is OK, but I do think that when rules are inadequately prescribed and rulesmakers refuse to go to the effort to perfect them, they must be dealt with in whatever fashion reasonable men find available.

Who decides when they are inadequate and establshes the available means? The community that must operate within those rules.
GRJ

In the words of the indomitable Bad Al Bell,
"Class dismissed." (Which I consider the best line in this whole harangue.)
smile.gif


[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by apr67:
Bill.

I don't think the Olds hub was a little problem like A1 rabbit hubs are. My A1 rabbit would go 20 races or so on a hub (as long as I used GOOD quality OEM German hubs, not mexican!). I think the olds might not have lasted nearly as long. But that was miles ago.

Of course, if we are talking about saftey, then pinto's would be required to run a fuel cell, right?

Alan

Fuel cells are highly recommended and allowed. Heavy duty hubs are considered illegal.
GRJ


[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]
 
The "try it in ITC" approach might actually fly since it sounds like the current ITAC has the stones to work to undo something if it appears to be a mistake.

This will of course require that the CRB step up as well and maybe the hub gimme on the Olds would be a good test case to see if the system at large is willing to change something back, in the face of objection from a small opposition with a vested interest to lose.

Maybe it gets put in broader terms as a recommendation from the ITAC to scour all of these oddball allowances out of the ITCS.

K

EDIT - it's embedded in this suggestion that I agree with others here that asking for specific allowances using "safety concerns" as a rationale is a terrible idea.

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited August 06, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by Knestis:


EDIT - it's embedded in this suggestion that I agree with others here that asking for specific allowances using "safety concerns" as a rationale is a terrible idea.
K,
In this instance, you really disappoint me. But I am thouroughly aware, you will lose no sleep over it.
GRJ
 
Originally posted by Geo:
Sounds an awful lot like crinkling Reynolds Wrap too.
biggrin.gif


Now this is the kind of attitude that gets to me. It just occurred to me that beyond my own ramblings how much shorter this thread would have been without the insipid aluminum foil quips. (And I'm calling the quips insipid, not the quippers. (See, nice.)
GRJ

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]
 
I'd argue loudly that I'm among the most pro-safety club racing drivers around.

I wear a four(!) layer suit, use multi-layer gloves and socks and a skirt on my closed-face helmet, buy only the best harnesses and seat available in the world, and have just received my Isaac head and neck restraint system. Don't go suggesting that I'm a shirker on this front without looking at the amount of time, money, and *weight* that I have invested in my rollcage.

It's not that I don't believe that we can make IT cars safer - I do. I just don't have any faith in the motivations of racers as a group. I have seen WAY too many changes suggested nominally for the good of "safety" that are either thinly-veiled arguments for (a) a competitive advantage, (B) a general increase in speed of the category as a whole, or © some sense of what "race cars are supposed to look like."

We are allowed to remove interiors and headliners because someone made the case on the grounds that they are a fire hazard. (I was around when this change happened.) What has the savings been in real terms, thanks to that change? How many fires in IT cars have made it to the passenger compartment while the driver was still in the car? How many cases of fire in classes where the interiors must remain have been aggravated by these materials?

It's like political arguments that get put in terms of "what's good for kids." You CAN'T argue against KIDS, can you? If someone is worried about their Olds hubs, they need to replace them.

Argued to its logical extreme - always an interesting exercise - we can make every IT car infinitely more safe by requiring that they stay locked in garages. Heck - they'd be safer not even being built, since people hurt themselves in their garages.
smile.gif


K
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
I'd argue loudly that I'm among the most pro-safety club racing drivers around.


It's not that I don't believe that we can make IT cars safer - I do. I just don't have any faith in the motivations of racers as a group. I have seen WAY too many changes suggested nominally for the good of "safety" that are either thinly-veiled arguments for (a) a competitive advantage, (B) a general increase in speed of the category as a whole, or © some sense of what "race cars are supposed to look like."

Argued to its logical extreme - always an interesting exercise - we can make every IT car infinitely more safe by requiring that they stay locked in garages. Heck - they'd be safer not even being built, since people hurt themselves in their garages.
smile.gif


K
K,
I'm somewhat vindicated in seeing that I'm not the only one who loses his objectivity, when he's made angry. And I thought I was the only one on this thread who could exhibit so little faith in his fellow man as to beleive that every call for a safety consideration hides ulterior motives. Sounds like mine is not the only house visited by the black helicopters.

It's great that you use all the latest safety equipment, but you also drive a car that has well-designed front hubs, so you don't have to worry about your wheels falling off. Evidently the A1 people do have a problem.

Now, please explain to me with other than the concern for precedence argument and your abject cynicism, what possible speed advantage a heavy duty hub provides. What possible motive would I have other than keeping my wheels on the car?

And please don't begin with the "wart" argument. No one could possibly predict which cars are going to exhibit design flaws until they are raced. (And I'm not suggesting all design flaws must be considered, only those which are obvious safety hazards and can be corrected without giving a performance advantage.

And, K, cages don't necessarily have to be "heavy" to exhibit structural integrity. And one fire in one car is enough of an argument to get rid of flammable material. Talk to Earnhardt, Jr.

GRJ

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by grjones1:
Now this is the kind of attitude that gets to me. It just occurred to me that beyond my own ramblings how much shorter this thread would have been without the insipid aluminum foil quips. (And I'm calling the quips insipid, not the quippers. (See, nice.)
GRJ

[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited August 06, 2004).]

GR, it's just an attempt to make people laugh amidst the arguing. In my case, I thought Greg was being funny and tried to respond in kind. I don't see any harm being done and I must say, Greg's comments are the only ones in this thread that truly gave me a chuckle.

I don't know that Greg directed his fun any anyone in particular. Now, I'd buy you both a beer, if I could only get his damned foil out of the pitcher.
wink.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 Geo:
GR, it's just an attempt to make people laugh amidst the arguing. In my case, I thought Greg was being funny and tried to respond in kind. I don't see any harm being done and I must say, Greg's comments are the only ones in this thread that truly gave me a chuckle.

I don't know that Greg directed his fun any anyone in particular. Now, I'd buy you both a beer, if I could only get his damned foil out of the pitcher.
wink.gif


George,
I've initiated so much diatribe, I'm assuming every jab is aimed directly at me. But anyone who is willing to buy me a beer is OK in my book. (Boy, am I easy.) And believe it or not, I do appreciate the humor.
G.
 
Originally posted by Geo:
...and I must say, Greg's comments are the only ones in this thread that truly gave me a chuckle.

Well thanks!

Okay, I will admit that Greg's sense of humor is razor sharp and delivered with a hair trigger, but don't I at least get honorable mention? Or how about Jake? He is always good for a grin, not to mention unbounded insight.

Did someone say "beer"? TGIF.

Gregg
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
I'd argue loudly that I'm among the most pro-safety club racing drivers around...buy only the best harnesses and seat available in the world, and have just received my Isaac head and neck restraint system.

I also feel like I am one of the most pro-safety racers around too.

Since this thread has been all over the place, I don't mind initiating another hijack.

What seat do you have? Recaro, LaJoie, Racetech, or ? Did you research the various FIA certification standards to decide which FIA seat was better than the next?

My current car (Formula Ford) has a Pennon Composite IndiBead seat in it. I love it and feel pretty darn safe. Many of the open wheel guys sit right in/on the aluminum pan and firewall bulkhead over the fuel cell.
eek.gif


I will be in another car sometime soon and will be purchasing a seat. I have yet to do much research and am interested in what you found.


------------------
Daryl DeArman
 
Originally posted by grjones1:
...what possible speed advantage a heavy duty hub provides. What possible motive would I have other than keeping my wheels on the car?

I can't speak for Kirk, but I'll offer my opinion on the matter.

If I could run heavier duty hubs I could stress them more without worrying about failure.

Maybe it would be more desireable to have heavier spring rates, stiffer bar rates, wider track, stickier rubber or other brake compounds which equate to higher temps.

I could utilize the money normally spent replacing the weak hubs on fresh tires on a more regular basis.

Allowing me to upgrade to heavier duty hubs will allow me to go faster than I otherwise could. The hubs themselves will not make me faster but will allow me to utilize other legal components which will.



------------------
Daryl DeArman
 
Originally posted by Geo:
.... and I must say, Greg's comments are the only ones in this thread that truly gave me a chuckle.


NOW I'm pissed!!!!!!!!!

First, I take the "You're no man" crap GRJ hurls at me, THEN I go to the MAT for you ITAC guys defending your very integrity, (and take even more derision and suggestions of a personal agenda), then I even post a semi funny "Awards" post, just to lighten things up...and THATS the thanks I get???
"Gregs the only guy to give..." you even a chuckle?? Well, say no more!

rolleyes.gif


------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited August 06, 2004).]
 
First - I'm a whole long way from angry. You haven't SEEN angry. I'm not even mildly pissed off. (Note the use of the smiley face, Darren!) My objectivity remains intact and I'd remind you that the fact that one doesn't agree with another's position makes it niether wrong nor irrational.

Originally posted by grjones1:
Now, please explain to me with other than the concern for precedence argument and your abject cynicism, what possible speed advantage a heavy duty hub provides. ...

What Daryl said so well. I don't have anything to add.

D - I have a Recaro SPG Racer.

itcockpit2.jpg


I did a lot of shopping around and since I absolutely wanted head restraints and was on SOME budget, my options were limited. I've used Recaro seats since the early '90s and am impressed with their strength - plain and simple, they are stouter than the other options.

K
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
NOW I'm pissed!!!!!!!!!

First, I take the "You're no man" crap GRJ hurls at me, THEN I go to the MAT for you ITAC guys defending your very integrity, (and take even more derision and suggestions of a personal agenda), then I even post a semi funny "Awards" post, just to lighten things up...and THATS the thanks I get???
"Gregs the only guy to give..." you even a chuckle?? Well, say no more!

rolleyes.gif



I'm embarassed and must now walk over to the wall to have rotten tomatos hurled at me.

I forgot about your post Jake. Of course, it's been hard to keep the 300+ posts in this thread together in my head. Launch away!


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Nahhhhh...I was kiddin'!

Just thought the thread had been lacking some irrational emotions and some misplaced anger, so i threw that in...

Sorry about forgetting the smiley a few carriage returns down!

No worries! And no tomatoes!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Back
Top