IT Car classifications now online w/stock HP

This is ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE!! You have done an amazing job. This is not “my” spreadsheet, it is all of ours. Anyone can take it, copy it, use it, or whatever. I’m glad you decided to share all your work so we can all benefit. If you want credit or a link on my website, let me know!

I’ve added all your changes and the list is looking very complete. I’ve color coded the classes and added another worksheet named “sorted” which lists all cars in order of their stock hp/wt. I encourage all to scan through it and take note of the company different cars keep. I think many things speak for themselves.

Before anyone says anything: yes there’s more to the story than stock power/weight, different cars get different benefits from IT engine mods, manufacturers under/overestimate, I can’t get to minimum weight, my car has a solid rear axle and no aftermarket support, etc. etc. Again, PLEASE let’s keep debate and chatter out of THIS thread so we can use this thread to just continue to refine the data. Let’s open another thread if we want to draw conclusions, argue, etc. Thanks!!!
 
Originally posted by Jake:
This is not “my” spreadsheet, it is all of ours. Anyone can take it, copy it, use it, or whatever.
Click to expand...

I'm playing around with a MySQL database and some PHP scripts that will allow the data to be imported from .CSV files, then queried from a web site. It's easy to set up a table definition that will work for a straight import using the LOAD DATA syntax and I've got that working. I need to make a script that will install a (new) set of data.

From that point, it's easy to do the PHP scripts that will query the table and display the results, as long as it's not fancy with tons of options and things.

The tricky part is converting the table structure to make searching easier (like converting 'vehicle' to 'make', 'model', 'start year', and 'end year'). I'm working on this but it's going a little slowly because I don't have a ton of time to put on it right now.

When I've got it working, I'm going to put it up on our web site under the GPL, so anyone can use it. Using it, though, requires having MySQL and PHP running within a web server.

The plan is to get it up on a web page. Unfortunately, my ISP wants a lot more money than I'm currently paying for an account that will let me run my own PHP code. So I'm hoping that once I post the code, someone will host it on a public server and let us all know where it is.

------------------
Doug "Lefty" Franklin
NutDriver Racing
 
Jake

I feel combining all the classes in the sorted file distorts the picture. If your going to sort them have 4 files one for each class. Just because the Mustang in ITS is down with the front ITB cars in power to weight does not mean it needs to be moved out of ITS. (I know you didn’t say it. But the data...)

Let people compare them on their own merits within their own classes.

TO ALL:

This is just a quick look at a car’s possibilities. Do not make ANY judgments. The real picture is far more complex.
 
That would be great to get this into a proper html. I would also like to see it so people could sort by HP, displacement, weight, manufacturer, or class.

SS - as I said, there is more to the story than the data you see. But honestly, the Mustang you mention may be good candidate to move to ITA at a slightly elevated weight. Would a 145lb, 3100lb Mustang V6 dominate ITA in your region? Or might it bring more domestics and potentially new blood into IT? Mustang are cheap and plentiful and mostly absent from IT. In fact I think we should take a LONG look at ALL the ITS cars that are lower than the top ITA car, and consider what would happen if they were to be moved to ITA (potentially with a bit of extra weight)
 
Looking at the sorted list again:

How many of the ITS cars below the ITA Integra (line 44) could work in ITA?

How many of the ITA cars below the ITA CRX Si(line 103)could work in ITB?

How many of the ITB cars below the ITC Ford Fiesta (line 206) could work in ITC?
 
Originally posted by CaptainWho:
The plan is to get it up on a web page. Unfortunately, my ISP wants a lot more money than I'm currently paying for an account that will let me run my own PHP code. So I'm hoping that once I post the code, someone will host it on a public server and let us all know where it is.
Click to expand...

I can probably help you with this. Drop me a line at diane *at* mathermotorsports.com if you're interested.


Diane
#21 ITB Escort
 
Jake,

Line 195, Plymouth Horizon TC3 1.7, hp should be 75 (same as the Horizon, and the 1.7 VW's, as it's a VW motor).

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

There seem to be some "problems" with the .XLS data file that are making it really hard to parse. In particular, a number of the "Vehicle" fields seem to be missing spaces between the make and the model (e.g., most of the Mazda entries in ITA). Is this in the original or is it my copy? I'm reading the files with Microsoft Works instead of Excel.


------------------
Doug "Lefty" Franklin
NutDriver Racing
 
Hey Jake. Nice job! I think I have one correction for you and one question. Line 248 wheel diameter should be 13." Also, I thought the base Geo Storm was ITB as well as the GSi. Is it truly an ITC?

Jive
 
Line 195, Plymouth Horizon TC3 1.7, hp should be 65 (not 76, it's the 1.7 VW motor, but carbuerated for a loss)

Ln. 216 Golf GT/GL/GTI, 102-105hp (102 was the max for cis-E, 105 was the max for digifant)

Ln. 218 Jetta GL/GLI, 102-105hp (102 for the best 86-87 CIS-E, 105 for the best iteration of Digifant)

Ln. 291 and 292 Rabbit and Scirocco 1.6, hp should be 76 (not 75, i know, it's just 1 hp, but every little bit helps
wink.gif


Ln. 222 and 223 Scirocco 1&2 1.7, 71 (not 76, less than the 1.6 with the stock log-type exhaust, 71 is for CIS, only 65 when carbureted (Rabbit only), although the same engine in the 83 Rabbit pickup was rated at 78 with CIS and a unique factory dual-downpipe exhaust)

Ln. 217 Jetta 1.7, 71 (not 76, see Scirocco 1.7)
 
The VR6 GTI/GLX (lines 63/65) should not say "DOHC". They are actually 2xSOHC, as VW finally admitted in 1996/7 when they deleted the "DOHC" from the valve cover and literature. Only some of the newest 2004 VWs have a real DOHC VR6 (for a total of 4 cams).

Edit: Okay to disregard this post since the original error is in the ITCS.

[This message has been edited by Eric Parham (edited June 24, 2004).]
 
Eric,

I think some of the Alfas are the same way, DOHC, but still only 2 valves per cylinder. I know most people think DOHC means 4 valves per cylinder, but it doesn't have to. And then, you've got the 3-valve configurations (Nissan, etc.)

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Eric, thanks for the VW fixes, but I think you gave me the wrong row numbers. I don't want to change them unless I'm sure I'm doing the right one. Either give me the right row numner, or the complete vehicle name in the classification.

Bill + Eric + others,

Stuff like DOHC/SOHC wheel size etc were errors that came from the GCR. If you really want to fix those errors, I'd suggest contacting the SCCA.
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Eric,

I think some of the Alfas are the same way, DOHC, but still only 2 valves per cylinder. I know most people think DOHC means 4 valves per cylinder, but it doesn't have to. And then, you've got the 3-valve configurations (Nissan, etc.)
Click to expand...


Bill, not to confuse the issue, but I believe that the 4-cyl ALFAs truly are DOHC. DOHC is not defined by the number of valves, but rather by the number of cams operating any valve for a given cylinder. That is, if one cam operates the only intake valve, but a different cam operates the only exhaust valve in that same cylinder, then it truly is a DOHC irrespective of only 2 valves per cyl.

The differentiation between SOHC and DOHC becomes very important in IT (where only stock spec cams are permitted), since various tolerances can be used to advantge in most DOHC cases to obtain better valve overlap, which is not possible with a SOHC.
 
Originally posted by Jake:
Eric, thanks for the VW fixes, but I think you gave me the wrong row numbers. I don't want to change them unless I'm sure I'm doing the right one. Either give me the right row numner, or the complete vehicle name in the classification.
Click to expand...


Jake, sorry about that. Here are the correct line numbers for the 71 hp CIS-injected VW 1.7 engine:

220 -- Jetta 1.7 -- 71 hp (not 76)
222 -- Rabbit 1.7 -- 71 hp (not 76)
225 -- Scirocco I 1.7 -- 71 hp (not 76)
226 -- Scirocco II 1.7 -- 71 hp (not 76)

For the Golf 1.8 and Rabbit 1.6, perhaps we shouldn't bother with the corrections of +/- 1 or 2 since sources do vary.

Also, I'm now questioning my own conclusion regarding the hp for Plymouth's use of a carbuerated version of the VW 1.7. The VW version did make just 65 hp when carbuerated, but Plymouth may have used a different carbuerator (and/or cam).

Thanks,
Eric
 
Originally posted by Eric Parham:

Bill, not to confuse the issue, but I believe that the 4-cyl ALFAs truly are DOHC. DOHC is not defined by the number of valves, but rather by the number of cams operating any valve for a given cylinder. That is, if one cam operates the only intake valve, but a different cam operates the only exhaust valve in that same cylinder, then it truly is a DOHC irrespective of only 2 valves per cyl.

The differentiation between SOHC and DOHC becomes very important in IT (where only stock spec cams are permitted), since various tolerances can be used to advantge in most DOHC cases to obtain better valve overlap, which is not possible with a SOHC.
Click to expand...


Eric,

So, the VR6 would still be a DOHC. It's not really a true 'V' configuration, as it has only one cylinder head. Also, I know there's a 24v VR6 out there, but I don't believe it has 4 cams (how the hell would you get them all in one head?).


------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Interesting. I did not know that about the 2004-up VR6 24V (that it only had two cams). As for the 1994-2003 VR6 12V, one cam operates the 3 intake and 3 exhaust in one bank of cyls, and the other cam operates the 3 intake and 3 exhaust in the other bank of cyls. Therefore, SOHC (x2). In this case, it does not matter that they managed to form the 2 cyl heads as a single head, as no valve phasing can be used to advantage since each cam is still operating only the valves for the 3 cyls in its own bank.
 
Quote from same article:

Valve Gear

The first generation VR6 has 2 valves per cylinder, single overhead camshaft (sohc) serving each bank just like any conventional 2-valve V6s, although the 2 camshafts are so close that they look as if a twin-cam design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top