IT going National - your opinion
- Thread starter Andy Bettencourt
- Start date
Bill Miller
New member
James,
Did you read the B/D Prepared specs? Alternate material body panels, sequential transmissions (w/ a weight penalty), alternate suspensions
Those classes are so far removed from IT, it's not even funny. In some cases, they're beyond Prod. The only thing that even closely resembles IT prep is the DOT tires.
mustanghammer
New member
Bill,
Ditto on this and everything else in your well thought out and worded post. Thanks for posting this.
Z3_GoCar
New member
Well Bill,
I just went back and reread the prepared rules and it looks like D-Prepared is not that far from my car as it sits in my garage. The hood's carbon fiber, and if I went with sperical suspension mounts the lolliepop bearing on the lower arm's are offset so I guess that would be a moved suspension mount within the allowed 6mm. To make the rear adjustable requires welding new mounts on the rear sub-frame, which is allowed in Prepared but not IT. I can use aluminum arms from the M3's too. All I need is a used 29mm SIR plumbed in behind my air filter, anyone know where I can find one of those cheap??
You've got to use the crank and rods the factory gave you, so no I think the motor prep maybe slightly more than IT, but it's no Prod build either. With a 250hp limit imposed by the SIR, I'm already there. I will need a hardtop and to get my lights wired up, I kind of like the open top experience though. My car could really use seam welding especially with it's reputation of dropping the differential, crossmember, and trunk floor. Making the required 2700 lbs will also mean adding about 100lbs of ballast too. So if I really wanted to go to the run-offs I'd be right there. Problem is I'm a rookie and I've just got my novice book signed. I'm not ready to go to the run offs for a couple of years, then why would I be interested in a national level class?? Because I'm not. I don't have an enclosed trailer or a truck that can haul four in comfort while pulling 10k pounds of trailer. I can't afford to live out of motels two weekends a month, and I'm not planning on two new sets of tires per event along with two sets of rains JIC. It's out all out of my pocket, I have no major sponsors to please yet and provide any real support. Still I'll watch this class.
James
I just went back and reread the prepared rules and it looks like D-Prepared is not that far from my car as it sits in my garage. The hood's carbon fiber, and if I went with sperical suspension mounts the lolliepop bearing on the lower arm's are offset so I guess that would be a moved suspension mount within the allowed 6mm. To make the rear adjustable requires welding new mounts on the rear sub-frame, which is allowed in Prepared but not IT. I can use aluminum arms from the M3's too. All I need is a used 29mm SIR plumbed in behind my air filter, anyone know where I can find one of those cheap??
You've got to use the crank and rods the factory gave you, so no I think the motor prep maybe slightly more than IT, but it's no Prod build either. With a 250hp limit imposed by the SIR, I'm already there. I will need a hardtop and to get my lights wired up, I kind of like the open top experience though. My car could really use seam welding especially with it's reputation of dropping the differential, crossmember, and trunk floor. Making the required 2700 lbs will also mean adding about 100lbs of ballast too. So if I really wanted to go to the run-offs I'd be right there. Problem is I'm a rookie and I've just got my novice book signed. I'm not ready to go to the run offs for a couple of years, then why would I be interested in a national level class?? Because I'm not. I don't have an enclosed trailer or a truck that can haul four in comfort while pulling 10k pounds of trailer. I can't afford to live out of motels two weekends a month, and I'm not planning on two new sets of tires per event along with two sets of rains JIC. It's out all out of my pocket, I have no major sponsors to please yet and provide any real support. Still I'll watch this class.James
Bill Miller
New member
James,
All I was saying is that B/D Prepared are a loooonnnnggg way from IT. Go look at what it costs to build a WCT car. And I know people will say that you can buy used ones for cheap. Well guess what, if IT going National is going to drive up costs, get ready for people to build new, max-boogie B/D Prepared cars. Will people take the 100# penalty for a sequential box? You better believe it. The boxes alone will cost more than any ITB or ITC car out there, and more than likely more than quite a few ITA cars. Top-level D Prepared cars will be pushing 6-figures, if not more. The B Prepared stuff is going to be even more rediculous.
And nothing against you or your car, but if you think some parts catalog build is hardly going to compete w/ a purpose-built WCT car, you're mistaken. Could you go to the Runoffs w/ it? Sure, but you're not going to be competitive.
All I was saying is that B/D Prepared are a loooonnnnggg way from IT. Go look at what it costs to build a WCT car. And I know people will say that you can buy used ones for cheap. Well guess what, if IT going National is going to drive up costs, get ready for people to build new, max-boogie B/D Prepared cars. Will people take the 100# penalty for a sequential box? You better believe it. The boxes alone will cost more than any ITB or ITC car out there, and more than likely more than quite a few ITA cars. Top-level D Prepared cars will be pushing 6-figures, if not more. The B Prepared stuff is going to be even more rediculous.
And nothing against you or your car, but if you think some parts catalog build is hardly going to compete w/ a purpose-built WCT car, you're mistaken. Could you go to the Runoffs w/ it? Sure, but you're not going to be competitive.
I believe that that IT is best served by staying out of the "National Realm" and its associated nonsense.
There already is an IT national championship, the ARRC which I would submit is as hard to win as any national class, and it is run on one of the premier tracks in North America.
Just getting a regional win in the south and east (and probably most other areas) is quite an accomplishment as there are just so many well prepared, expertly driven cars there. If you can beat the Van Steenburgs, Chet Wittel, Carlos Garcia, Irish Mike, John Dean, Evan Darling and a host of others you are a tough customer. These guys run super competitively on a regular basis and would be a handful for any top national level driver to beat.
Many national drivers run only enough races to qualify for the runoffs and win races in poorly subscribed classes. I am not saying they aren't super talented, but I think it is much more impressive to go to Road Atlanta and beat Wittel, or to Daytona and beat Irish Mike, or Sebring and beat Carlos.
Some of the best Pro Racers went from IT to pro, ie: Randy Pobst, David Haskell, Sylvain Trembly to name a few.
IT racing has gotten a bit too expensive, but it is as TOUGH as anything out there.
"Bosco' Logsdon
There already is an IT national championship, the ARRC which I would submit is as hard to win as any national class, and it is run on one of the premier tracks in North America.
Just getting a regional win in the south and east (and probably most other areas) is quite an accomplishment as there are just so many well prepared, expertly driven cars there. If you can beat the Van Steenburgs, Chet Wittel, Carlos Garcia, Irish Mike, John Dean, Evan Darling and a host of others you are a tough customer. These guys run super competitively on a regular basis and would be a handful for any top national level driver to beat.
Many national drivers run only enough races to qualify for the runoffs and win races in poorly subscribed classes. I am not saying they aren't super talented, but I think it is much more impressive to go to Road Atlanta and beat Wittel, or to Daytona and beat Irish Mike, or Sebring and beat Carlos.
Some of the best Pro Racers went from IT to pro, ie: Randy Pobst, David Haskell, Sylvain Trembly to name a few.
IT racing has gotten a bit too expensive, but it is as TOUGH as anything out there.
"Bosco' Logsdon
Z3_GoCar
New member
Bill,
I realize that I'd not be competitive, put me in the best car in the field and I'd not be competitive. The nut behind the wheel needs tightening first. So I'm in a car that doesn't really fit any class running ITE because:
1) It get's me out there
2) My car's over prepared for ITR and would need another cash infusion to dial back to the point that I'd be legal. Probably more money than an ITB or ITC cost at this point.
With time the cash infusion / neccessary parts will come, and I'll make my choice. Untill then I'll run ITE / DM and be happy for the little races in the bigger race, learn the craft of driving, and above all have fun.
James
Well, from one perspective, I don't really care but here's some thoughts anyway:
> IT was always supposed to be regional. Now we are totally chaning the class intent, why not look at the entire rules set.
> It will cost more money to be competetive - just look at "showroom stock" which is anything but.
> I just want a place to have a reasonable chance to enjoy my car (but being a Toyota, thats slim anyway).
Overall, there haven't been too many options other than the SCCA, but I'm going to veer off topic and say what I wish IT were:
> Overall IT rules basically ok, but I see no need for coilovers or adjustable threaded perches etc.
> Should be able to totally gut the interior of the car. - Lighter = faster = more fun.
> Any cage beyone the minimum you want as long as over min weight.- why not?
There were (are?) several classes in California like this for old Corollas, RX-7 and so on, and thats where the real fun is IT style. If IT goes national, its just Produciton light to me, only in newer cars.
> IT was always supposed to be regional. Now we are totally chaning the class intent, why not look at the entire rules set.
> It will cost more money to be competetive - just look at "showroom stock" which is anything but.
> I just want a place to have a reasonable chance to enjoy my car (but being a Toyota, thats slim anyway).
Overall, there haven't been too many options other than the SCCA, but I'm going to veer off topic and say what I wish IT were:
> Overall IT rules basically ok, but I see no need for coilovers or adjustable threaded perches etc.
> Should be able to totally gut the interior of the car. - Lighter = faster = more fun.
> Any cage beyone the minimum you want as long as over min weight.- why not?
There were (are?) several classes in California like this for old Corollas, RX-7 and so on, and thats where the real fun is IT style. If IT goes national, its just Produciton light to me, only in newer cars.
Bill Miller
New member
Rob,
I know the ARRC is a tough race, and if some are comfortable w/ calling it the "IT National Championship", that's fine. Doesn't mean it really is. How many guys do you get from West of the Mississippi? It's most of the SEDiv folks, and a lot of the NEDiv and CENDiv folks. Is it a tough race to win? Sure. Is there a lot of serious talent (and $$) there. You bet. But, I see it as more like the June Sprints than the Runoffs. Prestigious race that a lot of talented people run, but not really a true championship.
James,
Not really sure who we went from talking about IT going National, to how your car fits in ITR or B/D Prepared.
Spinetti,
That was an artificial constraint that was imposed by people long before a lot of today's racers were even a glimmer in their father's eye, much less thinking of going IT racing. Times change. If it's not what the members want, why shouldn't they be able to change it? PCAs were arguabley the most significant changet to the IT philosophy since it's inception. The general response is that it's made IT better. BTW, dual-purpose (street and track) cars were also part of the original intent of IT, and that offcially went away 6 or 7 years ago.
And it doesn't matter if you can gut the car or not, you've still got to make minimum weight, so while lighter = faster, you can't just make your car as light as you want. And it's interesting that you want to make the car faster by being able to gut it, but that you would slow it down by not being able to put a proper suspension under it.
And I just don't understand how people will say it will cost more to be competitive (unless they're running in a poorly subscribed area where people aren't running max-boogie cars). I, and several others have said it, if you're running a top effort now, it's not going to cost you any more money. Sure, there will be increased costs associated w/ travel and National entries, but that's a personal choice that you get to make, if you want to run those races. You get to still run Regionals, and more than likely will see more light at the front of the grid, as the top guys have gone National racing.
I just don't get it. People seem to think that either they'll have to run Nationals if IT goes National, or that you'll get a huge influx of $$$ from more people building max-boogie cars to run in Regionals. Nobody can make you run Nationals, and there are too many other examples that indicate that people interested in running Nationals are not going to incur the added expense of running Regionals.
I know the ARRC is a tough race, and if some are comfortable w/ calling it the "IT National Championship", that's fine. Doesn't mean it really is. How many guys do you get from West of the Mississippi? It's most of the SEDiv folks, and a lot of the NEDiv and CENDiv folks. Is it a tough race to win? Sure. Is there a lot of serious talent (and $$) there. You bet. But, I see it as more like the June Sprints than the Runoffs. Prestigious race that a lot of talented people run, but not really a true championship.
James,
Not really sure who we went from talking about IT going National, to how your car fits in ITR or B/D Prepared.
Spinetti,
That was an artificial constraint that was imposed by people long before a lot of today's racers were even a glimmer in their father's eye, much less thinking of going IT racing. Times change. If it's not what the members want, why shouldn't they be able to change it? PCAs were arguabley the most significant changet to the IT philosophy since it's inception. The general response is that it's made IT better. BTW, dual-purpose (street and track) cars were also part of the original intent of IT, and that offcially went away 6 or 7 years ago.
And it doesn't matter if you can gut the car or not, you've still got to make minimum weight, so while lighter = faster, you can't just make your car as light as you want. And it's interesting that you want to make the car faster by being able to gut it, but that you would slow it down by not being able to put a proper suspension under it.
And I just don't understand how people will say it will cost more to be competitive (unless they're running in a poorly subscribed area where people aren't running max-boogie cars). I, and several others have said it, if you're running a top effort now, it's not going to cost you any more money. Sure, there will be increased costs associated w/ travel and National entries, but that's a personal choice that you get to make, if you want to run those races. You get to still run Regionals, and more than likely will see more light at the front of the grid, as the top guys have gone National racing.
I just don't get it. People seem to think that either they'll have to run Nationals if IT goes National, or that you'll get a huge influx of $$$ from more people building max-boogie cars to run in Regionals. Nobody can make you run Nationals, and there are too many other examples that indicate that people interested in running Nationals are not going to incur the added expense of running Regionals.
As much as I'd like to call the ARRC an IT National Championship, (and have before), it just isn't. When the SCCA dumped the old IT Festival after '93, we ceased having a national championship. Atlanta Region took up the reigns after the SCCA dumped Road Atlanta for Mid Ohio the same year. The ARRC's original concept was to be an IT "championship" that included other "regional only" classes to fill out the entry. However, that's now morphed into including a number of non-IT cars and has been diluted to something (as written before) more akin to the June Sprints.
As long as it remains a race where the only entry requirements are a car, the bucks, and the desire to compete, it will never be a true IT National Championship. If the drivers, and regions, and divisions wanted to make it as such, and if the administration of the event wanted to come up with a qualification program such as that of the Runoffs, then it could be considered an IT National Championship.
But it would have to loose all the other local and regional only classes to do so. Atlanta region doesn't want to do that, and we'd have a better chance of finding a living mastadon than getting all the particular divisions to agree to it.
If that happened, then the next round of complaining would come from the ITS and ITA classes that are more fully subscribed against those of us in ITB and ITC. Things like it being harder to qualify for them, needing to go deeper into the divisions for entries as there are more cars, having to spend more to go fast than the lower classed cars, etc. You know, all the things that the big boys do at the Runoffs when they compare the price of their "gofasts" to the little guys.
As long as it remains a race where the only entry requirements are a car, the bucks, and the desire to compete, it will never be a true IT National Championship. If the drivers, and regions, and divisions wanted to make it as such, and if the administration of the event wanted to come up with a qualification program such as that of the Runoffs, then it could be considered an IT National Championship.
But it would have to loose all the other local and regional only classes to do so. Atlanta region doesn't want to do that, and we'd have a better chance of finding a living mastadon than getting all the particular divisions to agree to it.
If that happened, then the next round of complaining would come from the ITS and ITA classes that are more fully subscribed against those of us in ITB and ITC. Things like it being harder to qualify for them, needing to go deeper into the divisions for entries as there are more cars, having to spend more to go fast than the lower classed cars, etc. You know, all the things that the big boys do at the Runoffs when they compare the price of their "gofasts" to the little guys.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Sorry I missed the post explosion, I am in AZ on business with limited access to e-mail...
Chris: I would change 'theaters' because the chance to play the option to try out for a part on Broadway has it's appeal to me. Even though the local theater may be great, you only get better when you get whooped.
Trav wrote:
This confuses me. It's how it is now. It's personal. B and C have cars in them that have cult-like following, no?
Bill, I am not hanging anyone out to dry with the suggestion. It could be just ITR, it could be ITR and ITS. It's an interesting way to get the ruleset that we all know and love on the National stage while AT THE SAME TIME keeping a pocket 'protected' from the real or perceived evils of National status. I like the whole category going National.
Dick wrote:
This is 100% correct and is a valid concern. Our ruleset does rely a lot on stock parts, unlike Prod.
Kirk wrote:
That is like saying Solo is a stepping stone Regional Road Racing. It's not, it's just different. The cost escalation is there so a pereceived value may come into play in some ways...
Excellent discussion. Seems like the group is split almost 50-50. Bottom line for me? I love the ruleset and I will run IT no matter where it goes.
AB
Chris: I would change 'theaters' because the chance to play the option to try out for a part on Broadway has it's appeal to me. Even though the local theater may be great, you only get better when you get whooped.
Trav wrote:
This confuses me. It's how it is now. It's personal. B and C have cars in them that have cult-like following, no?
Bill, I am not hanging anyone out to dry with the suggestion. It could be just ITR, it could be ITR and ITS. It's an interesting way to get the ruleset that we all know and love on the National stage while AT THE SAME TIME keeping a pocket 'protected' from the real or perceived evils of National status. I like the whole category going National.
Dick wrote:
This is 100% correct and is a valid concern. Our ruleset does rely a lot on stock parts, unlike Prod.
Kirk wrote:
That is like saying Solo is a stepping stone Regional Road Racing. It's not, it's just different. The cost escalation is there so a pereceived value may come into play in some ways...
Excellent discussion. Seems like the group is split almost 50-50. Bottom line for me? I love the ruleset and I will run IT no matter where it goes.
AB
Z3_GoCar
New member
Bill,
I'm sorry to move this discussion, that way, my point is that B/D Prepared is not that far from IT as you and other have expressed. If you disagree with me on that point fine, but the fact that the stock crank and rods are kept, and the mod's allowed are in line with IT with up grades. Actually I see the D-Prepared rules very close to the BMW club's IT equvalent of Prepared, with the exception of the ecm and SIR of course, a JP BMW would actually be very close to a D-Prepared car as it now stands.
James
not surprising, i usually only type out about 30% of the thought process in my head.
if R, S, and A go National, and B and C are left for regional, that essentially means B & C are our new points of entry for new drivers. and if i'm a new driver looking for a regional class to race in SCCA, B & C doesn't get me very excited.
i know, you can still run R, S, or A in regionals only. i admit, my statement doesn't hold as much water as i originally thought it did.
so......is IT going national good for the health of IT as a whole? is it good for the health of the club as a whole?
bldn10
New member
"That was an artificial constraint that was imposed by people long before a lot of today's racers were even a glimmer in their father's eye, much less thinking of going IT racing. Times change. If it's not what the members want, why shouldn't they be able to change it?"
Bill, have you checked this admittedly unscientific poll's results? Most of the members DON'T want to change it!
I am now able to run w/ the top (and only) tier IT cars and am able to be a front-runner Divisionally and mid-packer afar. I am content w/ that. As I have said, and I make no apologies for expressing my thoughts on this, I would not be content running Regional IT in a 2-tier class even if it made me a big dog. [I agree w/ you that prep levels and expense in Regional would not go up - just the opposite.] There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the level of prep in ITS on the National side would go up. It absolutely would cost me more money to achieve the same local finishes I do now. I don't really care to do that. And neither apparently do most of us.
Bill, have you checked this admittedly unscientific poll's results? Most of the members DON'T want to change it!
I am now able to run w/ the top (and only) tier IT cars and am able to be a front-runner Divisionally and mid-packer afar. I am content w/ that. As I have said, and I make no apologies for expressing my thoughts on this, I would not be content running Regional IT in a 2-tier class even if it made me a big dog. [I agree w/ you that prep levels and expense in Regional would not go up - just the opposite.] There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the level of prep in ITS on the National side would go up. It absolutely would cost me more money to achieve the same local finishes I do now. I don't really care to do that. And neither apparently do most of us.
Bill Miller
New member
Bill,
Belive me, I've been watching the poll results. While interesting, I'm not sure 60 or 70 people should speak for the hundreds (thousands?) of IT racers out there. Something from my stats classes about a significant and representative sample.
And just so I understand your position. You like running at the front, don't want to run Regionals if the top guys (in your area) aren't there, you think it will cost you more to get the same results against a broader group of front-runners (National racers), and you don't want to spend that extra money.
Does that about capture it? If so, you get counted in that group of people that like running up front w/o having to bring a max. effort.
It would sure make my job a hell of a lot easier if that were the case.
The "30" (or 32?) magic number is generally accepted for engineering statistics, where you are dealing with values x and some function f(x) but not for human perceptive studies. There is no such thing as a mean of these responses, so it's not OK to base you sampling strategy on a theorem that assumes that there IS one.
Ultimately, it depends what kind of analysis you are doing but the above just isn't an accurate representation of the complexity involved in this kind of thing.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion.
K
Bill Miller
New member
I'm not sure I follow your logic on this one.
And if all you need is a sample size of 30-32, I guess that means the exit pollers will get to go home early this Nov.