Camaros and Firebirds in ITR

Ron Earp

Ron Earp

Administrator
Jeff Young and I recently submitted a proposal to the ITAC to class Pony Cars, V8 Camaros, Firebirds, and Mustangs, in ITR. Clearly the years classed are somewhat limited due to horsepower concerns for ITR. The year breakdown is roughly:

89-93 Mustang GT/LX 5.0L
87-92 F-Body
94-95 Mustang GT

I feel the cars will certainly increase the ranks in ITR and give enthusiasts of these cars a place to race in IT. If you are interested in racing one of these cars in the future please write a letter to the Board of Directors ([email protected]) indicating your position.

Thanks,
Ron
 
I must add that I have received the proposal, and Mr. Earp and Mr. Young have done an excellent job. Now it's up to the ITAC and the CRB, and that means YOU! If you have issues with the idea, hit "compose" and send an email to "[email protected]'.......... likewise, if you support the idea, we need to hear from you!

This is a club about the members...the ITAC tries to do right by you, and we don't always agree, but, without input, we don't even know if we do..or don't.
 
I sent in my input to the CRB (I was in favor). I did not mention that the inner redneck thought it would be cool to run these cars.

Jim
#11 IT7 - MARRS
 
Amen bro, I've got one of those (an inner redneck) around somewhere, but he/it wants to build a Mercury Capri. How come now classy?
 
Is this mixing apples and oranges. As an owner of a type r integra, I gotta believe that the on track performance will in now way similar to the mix of the vast majority of ITR high rpm 3 liter range engines.

If we need another V8 class besides American Sedan, then create it. I suspect the whole of ITR would be outraged if V8 iron is lumped into the class.
 
I don't have much to say about this thread

since they won't be in my (IT7) run group other than I really like Jake's avitar. :)
 
Whoa guys, I am not so sure this is a good idea, better you should run in ITO (SEDIV class for unlimited IT cars similar to SPO). I love the Pony cars, but, as a Steward, the disparity in weights and horsepower make me nervous, and the idea of an ITC/ITR pony car clash is not a pleasant one. Give it some thought, ITO could be a lot of fun.

Krys Dean
 
????
Huh?
I must be missing the point, because, that comment makes no sense to me, sorry.

Fact: The Pony cars are being considered at weights that are within the limits of ITR, and there are cars listed at similar weights already. So, calling "foul" on the weight thing is a non issue. Especially when I look around and see some of the run groups I've seen!

Fact: The Hp levels are (again,) through the magic of proper classification, within the scope of ITR, and match well against..you guessed it, cars listed already!

Specifically, the cars submitted for classification are not the Cobras and the Zo6 engined V8s that I think people assume they are. These cars are 195 Hp cars, limited by heads or cams or weird injection in the motor department, and by live axles and possibly sketchy brakes in the other areas.

The key to classing them properly is to make sure the strengths offset the weaknesses. They WON'T be putting down AS level power...FAR from it...AS is a completely different engine ruleset. Will they be quick at the start of the straight? Yup, they DO have tq. Of course, they have live axles, so getting going at the begining of the straight will be tricky at certain courses. But...they don't rev to 7K, much less 9K! So, they will top out sooner, and brake sooner. Having these cars in the class looks to me like a classic battle, David vs Goliath, if you will.

They will require racecraft and skill to get around...which is EXACTLY what multi marque racing is all about.

( I think the litmus test, in my mind on whether a car is a good fit in a class, is when I look at the listing I don't think to myself." Now THIS car could rock", then go right to ebay!)
 
krysdean said:
I love the Pony cars, but, as a Steward, the disparity in weights and horsepower make me nervous, and the idea of an ITC/ITR pony car clash is not a pleasant one.

Krys Dean
Click to expand...

As Jake mentions, the weight issue isn't a valid argument when discussing ITR cars. There are already cars in ITR that weigh as much as the Pony cars would. Besides, ITC doesn't run with ITR anywhere that I am aware of except for the 13 Hour Charge of the Headlight Brigade enduro. And, even there, the ITR cars aren't the fastest cars running the race, so the ITC vs ITR argument doesn't hold water in that instance as there are faster cars to be concerned with than ITR.

If "the weight issue" were to be forced as an argument then it would setup an problem within ITR itself. We'd have to remove the light-weights from the ITR class, the Celica and Integra Type R, to make ITR consistent with "the weight issue". Celica is in the class at like 2300, about the weight of some C and B cars, while the BMW 330 (in class now), 300zx (in class now), and the proposed Pony Cars are all at about 3300 lbs.
 
Last edited:
ITC will be running with ITR here in the San Francisco Region in 2008. Prior to that, ITS was the fastest class in that race group.

But that group hardly has the widest speed differentials -- another group has ITE and SSC, not that regionals ever have more than 1 SSC car.

I have run National races with GTL and T2 in the same race group, which has big speed and weight differentials too. The drivers can handle big differentials.

Bottom line, it's of no concern for me, and certainly not something we should base classing decisions on. If the race officials want to change groups if class compositions change, that's up to the race officials.
 
I intend to add the "Japanese Car Catcher" nose plow to my 89 ITR Mulletmobile and go Teg and 240sx hunting in the braking zone for turn 1 at VIR next year. Miatas are too small game. Not enough meat on the bones. CRXs don't even qualify as cars.

Hmmmmm.....I love the smell of cracked rotor in the morning. Soldier, you WILL trail brake that corner!
 
Amen Bro! What IS a Teg by the way? Is that like Tegma, you know dick cheese or something?

My Beyatchin' Maro is going to refight WWII in every braking zone at CMP. Land of the Rising Sun my 305 cubic inch ass!

[p.s. -- no offense to the Teg boys, just riffin' here]
 
Well, don't punt my Land O the Rising Sun Z car off at turn one with your 305 inch Mulletmobile. It is likely I'll still be racing it for some time to come.

Especially if my alternative is to drive a Teg.
 
Chuckle all you want but regardless of how good the idea is, or how well presented the proposal, I've come to the conclusion that there are just some folks who have fundamental biases against the idea of 'merican iron soiling the Deutcheswundersautosundtourenwagen class.

I haven't seen another proposal in recent memory that is so buried in red herrings.

K
 
JoshS said:
ITC will be running with ITR here in the San Francisco Region in 2008. Prior to that, ITS was the fastest class in that race group.

But that group hardly has the widest speed differentials -- another group has ITE and SSC, not that regionals ever have more than 1 SSC car.

I have run National races with GTL and T2 in the same race group, which has big speed and weight differentials too. The drivers can handle big differentials.

Bottom line, it's of no concern for me, and certainly not something we should base classing decisions on. If the race officials want to change groups if class compositions change, that's up to the race officials.
Click to expand...

That's nothing for a speed/weight differential. I have video from a race at Willow Springs. In my run group, Andy Potterfield in his GT-1 Camero and two H-Production Sprites. Slightly slower, but heavier than Andy were several Super-Production cars inclusing a Ranger Pickup. BTW, we have an IT only run group. So in So-Pac ITR runs with ITC. The only IT cars not to run in this group is ITE, which runs with GT/SP/AS/RS/B-GP.

James
 
Last edited:
We understand. I think the humor on our side comes from seeing no other way to deal with irrational (red herring) arguments about why these cars should not be in R. Hell, I remember one comment during the initial ITR discussions about them that went something like "I had one when I was sixteen and that thing would lay a 100 ft. wheel -- no way is that car in ITR with a Hondura Tegma 2000."

Silliness. The cars clearly fit by the numbers, most people want them in, TONS of folks are interested in buidling them (I am not by the way) and yet there is a debate?

Total screw up by SCCA leadership if this does not go through for the reasons I've heard to date.

Knestis said:
Chuckle all you want but regardless of how good the idea is, or how well presented the proposal, I've come to the conclusion that there are just some folks who have fundamental biases against the idea of 'merican iron soiling the Deutcheswundersautosundtourenwagen class.

I haven't seen another proposal in recent memory that is so buried in red herrings.

K
Click to expand...
 
Knestis said:
Chuckle all you want but regardless of how good the idea is, or how well presented the proposal, I've come to the conclusion that there are just some folks who have fundamental biases against the idea of 'merican iron soiling the Deutcheswundersautosundtourenwagen class.

I haven't seen another proposal in recent memory that is so buried in red herrings.

K
Click to expand...

It's the lay of the land, Kirk. And it's OK that way. Sometimes things need explanations...the opposition needs awakening, or enlightening. And that's fine. It makes me do my homework, understand the big picture, forces me to think outside the box, from another point of view, and to look for ways to explain things differently.

I've certainly been guilty of reacting to proposals without thinking them through completely, then changing my mind as I researched them. (just ask Dick, who's probably changed my mind...or should I say "opened" it, with one statement more than most people i know)

In the end, when reason is discussed, prejudices should fall away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top