IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?

Jeff, what I'm saying is that what we're reacting to NOW is complete vacuum information...

And I see people say things that are just wrong, even in the vacuum, LOL.

I want to pull from this solid reasons what IT racers want/don't want/why they race, what they feel the best things about IT are, and use that info to inform the CRB in whatever discussions they are having, and hope that affects whatever proposal we might see in the future.

Honestly, there may be scenarios where everyone can win, but going into any discussion assuming that there is no possible positive outcome is counter productive.

At that point, I want the IT drivers to read it, contact their knowledgeable friends, and consider the action with an open mind, and inform themselves of the situation, then vote.

But, honestly, if I get a letter that says "I don't support the XX action because I don't want to put windshield clips on my ZZ racer", (When there is no requirement to do so, and it's never been a discussed item) I have to look at that letter and wonder how to weight it.
 
Question for those who feel the uninformed masses are voting on this issue without knowing all the pertinent details: why WOULD any of us have any reason to believe the proposal entails anything more than just making IT another national class?

Yes, I agree those who don't understand the difference between regional and national classes should become a little better informed, but I have (want) to believe that the majority of us do have a fairly good understanding of what those differences are. Is there something more going on here? ARE there major changes looming on the horizon, that will make going national something more than what it is now? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
erlrich said:
Question for those who feel the uninformed masses are voting on this issue without knowing all the pertinent details: why WOULD any of us have any reason to believe the proposal entails anything more than just making IT another national class?
Click to expand...

Cuz ONE guy asked ONE group of racers a question. No more information that that???? I mean there's GOT to be more to the story...there better be....

Yes, I agree those who don't understand the difference between regional and national classes should become a little better informed, but I have (want) to believe that the majority of us do have a fairly good understanding of what those differences are. Is there something more going on here? ARE there major changes looming on the horizon, that will make going national something more than what it is now? Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...

I boldened your key word. Up the line we read how many guys have no IDEA that they had to (insert rule change like adding door bars) do XYZ change to their car because they pay little to no attention to even their own world! How can we assume they have a clue as to other categories, and how the National system operates?

Is there something more going on? Honestly, I don't have any facts other than there are discussions, and what CRB member Dave Gromberg posted above. I HOPE theres more being discussed, and I assume there is, because a simple change like throwing IT into the National program in and of itself isn't going to balance the ship.
 
Dave Gomberg said:
questions answered. Data provided
Click to expand...

Dave, thanks for the info. Having this out there lessons the likelihood that someone can pull the conspiracy card.

I've been trying to make sense of the car participation numbers. After reviewing it, all I can say is...

Yech.

There are 74 classes there, not counting vintage and the very tiny ones that are lumped into the "other" category. No wonder categories are croaking - we don't integrate cars into the existing categories, we just make a regional-only class for them!

Some of the this is because what's called X in one place is called Y in another. For example, SPO and GTA are pretty close. For example, GTA is old stock cars and slightly more restrictive than SPO.

Questions, questions, questions... what the heck is the difference between Pro IT7 and SRX7? Now that the weights have been realigned, why carve out a niche for certain ITA cars and call it IT7? Why don't we have a Category/class where the Porsche Club classes can fit almost seemlessly and then don't have to carve out yet another regional class for them?

Seems to me that if the club is looking at what's wrong, what's right, how do we save National racing and what to do about regions/divisions with low participation numbers, we need to look at the rules of other sanctioning bodies - PCA, BMW and (shudder) NASA - and seek harmonization or at least singing just a couple of flat notes in the chorus instead of having everyone singing a different song.

The easiest and best source of new drivers for the SCCA isn't the guy who doesn't have a racecar yet. It's the guy who has one, but doesn't race with us because his car either isn't legal or gets shunted into a class where it is 100% uncompetitive.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
I think we can all agree that the guy who thinks IT cars will have to add a fuel cell and lexan in order to be a 'national class' is misinformed. Or NOT-informed. I have read quotes from 3 seperate guys on 3 seperate boards who think this.

All I want if for everyone to have the same proposal before them before anyone decides what majority is for what.
Click to expand...

The reality on most of the other boards is they all think IT should be national and melt into their catagory. They miss the fact (I hope) that IT has a very popular, desireable, stable rule set and provides some of the closest racing in the country. Look at Grand Am ST series to see how popular our rule set is in a pro series. Almost identical except for shocks and seam welding. World Challenge would be a lot better as just new versions of IT cars and age them out to IT like showroom stock. Perfect feeder system. Most of the newer suspensions hate slicks and production car setup anyway.
 
Knestis said:
For example, we've instituted a process whereby the actual math behind every new classification and adjustment to the process is recorded. If we can codify our practices, assumptions, etc. we decrease the chance that the ITAC can be misappropriated.
K
Click to expand...

Hooray. :happy204: I think I've seen that idea somewhere. Now if you'll just make it available on-line in a database for people to see.....

Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion. I voted no because, as has been said many times, nobody has stated what problem IT going national solves. Some people want to go after the OGM. Ok, fair enough. Is that a problem? IMO, no. If you wanted the OGM, why did you *choose* to race in IT? Nobody made you race IT and you knew coming in that you wouldn't be going to the [insert your name here]offs.

If the national level classes like prod and GT are so fubared that nobody wants to race in them then fix those classes.

If the problem is club membership and somehow IT going national is part of that solution then I'd like to see the whole plan before it gets enacted. Don't go making IT national as part of some half-baked plan that then doesn't work and now there's no way of going back.

I think I'm pretty representative of an average IT racer. Maybe even on the higher side financially. I bought a full-prepped car because I would someday like to actually win a race. I race in the SE and there's no way that would be possible without a top car. My main goal is to have fun however. And that's the reason I race. I wouldn't care if I'm racing for 10th place instead of 5th place, but I WOULD care if the overall attitude of the people in the class changed. I have concerns that IT going national would have that affect. Maybe it wouldn't, but to us "regional folk" the national weekends seem to have a different ambiance.

I can also see how there is some resentment towards HQ in Topeka. IT has been the red-headed step-child for a long time, but with IT being popular HQ now, all-of-a-sudden has thoughts of making IT national? I can see how there's plenty of skepticism. Something that harms IT, but is overall better for the club is not something that is going to get a lot of support from IT people.

David
 
To the earlier questions about CRB members and thier racing habits - one of the active racing CRB members started racing in ITA in a Rabbit GTI, has raced IT continously since then, and today runs a full regional season in ITB and a full national season in H Production. I think we are lucky to have someone with Chris Albin's specific range of racing history (and racing present) in that position, as he is very aware of the 'situation on the ground' in IT, and very fond of the class, AND he has first hand experience with the situation in Production that so many are afraid of.
 
Knestis said:
PCA has more than 30 classes.

K
Click to expand...

And we have 74(!). Since the prod and GT rules already are Byzantine, you cannot tell me that a little tweaking here and there of those rules wouldn't get a large chunks of those cars into our classes.

They (Prod/GT) already are trying to put lipstick on a pig with their rules. Nobody is going to notice another layer. E.g. PCA MACH5 class... too fast for EP, too slow for FP. Slap a restrictor on it or raise its weight.

Either the issue is pulling Nationals/Runoffs fat out of the fire or its about trying to right the capsizing ship of Club Racing. If it's the former, cut the mast and let the debris sink. If it's the latter, then moving IT to Nationals just makes us more top heavy.

Shifting IT will add an insignificant number of total entries to calendar year car counts and will have an even smaller impact on the number of participants. The manna from heaven are guys who already have cars and either cannot or will not race with us. Moving IT won't add these people. They've already made their choice - to race a car that doesn't fit into our Categories.
 
I'm starting to wonder if this isn't someone's twisted idea of a joke; I can just see a couple of board members sitting around one evening, smoking cigars, scotch in hand (anyone watch Boston Legal?) and one of them saying "you know what would be funny..."
 
jjjanos said:
Now that the weights have been realigned, why carve out a niche for certain ITA cars and call it IT7? .........

The easiest and best source of new drivers for the SCCA isn't the guy who doesn't have a racecar yet. It's the guy who has one, but doesn't race with us because his car either isn't legal or gets shunted into a class where it is 100% uncompetitive.
Click to expand...

You answered your own question.

IT rules are about the category as a whole, and car specific "breaks" aren't given. The process works well for most cars, yet fails the 1st gen RX-7 due to that cars unique characteristics. It was given a weight break in the great Re org that was deemed barely possible, but it is attainable..yet it's not enough. The cars aren't ITA front runners, plain and simple. So, to tap the source of garage bound former active cars owned by disenfranchised members, classes like IT-7 spring up. The perception is that there are a significant number out there, and they aren't being raced as often (or at all) because of dissatisfaction with the perceived competitiveness. If the region forms a class, and 5 cars show up, it nets the region hundreds of dollars profit (fixed costs are what, $30 bucks for a couple trophies?)
 
erlrich said:
What I've taken from the discussions here, and on other forums, is that those who are against IT going national all have one ultimate viewpoint; IT is a great place to race just the way it is, and if you take it national you're just going to f**k that all up. The reasons why are varied; it will make racing more expensive, there will be constant comp adjustments, it will dilute the regional fields, the same people who f**ked up prod, and touring, and ss will now start f**king with IT. But it all boils down to that one sentiment - if IT ain't broke...don't make it national.
Click to expand...

I think this is a pretty good summarization of people's thoughts. People are scared of having something screwed with that seems to be doing just fine and dandy currently. Somebody would have to convince me that IT going national is not going to mess with all the things that currently make IT a fun place to race. The risk vs reward is just to great IMO otherwise.

I see the elimination of the national/regional delineation as a little different because that evens the playing field for all classes. It isn't just IT specific, though it may have some of the same effects as IT going national.

David
 
JeffYoung said:
True, to a certain extent. But the specifics have not been worked out. Don't you agree that there will be pressure from some to have an IT fuel cell requirement, for example, if we go national?
Click to expand...

I don't think that. Why would that be? Showroom Stock and Touring cars have even fewer safety requirements than IT. Stock fuel tanks, stock glass all around, full interiors, hand-held extinguishers, no requirement for a kill switch, no requirement for steering lock removal. Those are National classes. Many of the cars are MUCH faster than the fastest IT cars.

So I don't know why anyone thinks safety requirements would have to change.
 
jjjanos said:
And we have 74(!). Since the prod and GT rules already are Byzantine, you cannot tell me that a little tweaking here and there of those rules wouldn't get a large chunks of those cars into our classes.

.
Click to expand...

Large chunks?? You want to change our rules and categories, to align with another club, in the hopes that we get some cross over?

Hmmm....piss off the existing subscribers
Hope for MORE new subscribers...other wise we are just "squeezing the balloon" as you said...

Reasons Porsche guys might not race with us:*

-They race under a 13/13 rule. We do not.
-They perceive SCCA racing as more reckless and more likely to result in damage
-They are distrustful of the leadership, and feel powerless to defend their cars best interests (multi marque vs single marque interests)
-They like racing against their own.

Now, from my point of view, there are plenty of reasons TO race with SCCA, but before you go and change something on a gamble, it's best to understand how the other half thinks.

*these reasons are from discussions I have had with Porsche Club racers.
 
I had to pull this from another board....

Quoted for truthfulness:

chois - 2008-05-02 3:00 PM

IT does not allow alternate cams - period. Why would that change if the words 'regional only class' were removed from the ITCS?

IT does not allow competition adjustments (argue semantics if you want, but I am refering to 25# changes to balance a 40yr span of automotive technology on the head of a pin ala Production). Why would that change if IT became a national class?

I don't buy that allowing a class to qualify for and race at the runoffs automatically means there will be frequent rules changes. I don't buy that it will cost any more to get on the podium at a regional race, unless you are racing against just 2 guys and due to class popularity you start getting to run against 5 or 10 guys (which is bad how?).

The 'N' word scares people, but whenever they try to describe why they either blurt "Spec Miata!" or "Production" and start to lament how winning at Nationals will require more money (also known as fully prepping a car to the rule set), and the rules will change every month and we will end up with carbon fiber bodied silohette cars within a decade. Sorry but I don't see a lot of logic behind those arguments. IT is a different animal than SM, though they share some similarities. The simple fact that so many more items are open to choice allow you to create a better mousetrap to be fast, whether than buying 10 gross of everything and testing them to find the magic set and go race. Yet it is more restricted than Prod and you don't have to re-engineer the whole car to make it work - AND - the rules do not allow tweaking one car at a time (outside of checking it against the process used to class cars) to create 'perfect' balance.

I would race IT National. I am not decided whether it would be better or worse for the club for IT to be National, mostly because there are other issues that could impact how it is implimented - such as national/regional distinction itself. If it does not come to be I will eventually build a Production car, but I honestly like the IT rules better and would love the chance to race under them at the Runoffs.
Click to expand...
 
After much thought, here's what I see:

There are many good reasons both for and aginst IT becomming a National elegible class. Kirk has a point that the rules for IT will change if this goes through, some of the most likely are removing the five year cutoff for classing cars and instituting a cutoff for aging out cars. Involvement of factory backed teams will change IT rules from the top down. I think that this is a great concern for everyone who currently runs in IT, because the factory team can do things like design a special hub and give it a factory part number (Neon ACR), but basically it's unavalible to eveyone else, or equip a car with four-way adjustable remote resovoir shocks and give them a factory part number, or sell the car with special delrin motor mounts to the factory team members only. Basically, the whole Solstice hardtop/ Miata MS-R/ Z4 hardtop debacles come to mind. Corporate manufactures can be huge 1600lb gorilla's when they're looking for advantages.

However; I think the intentions for doing this are with the best interest of us the racers/club members. Here's a whole section in the GCR that doesn't get invited to the big event, even thought we're bigger than most that do. The big event has issues with getting attendance, can we help with the numbers if this changes? If Mr. Julow didn't ask these kinds of questions I'd think there's something wrong. I think the search is on for a type of cost containment in sedan type racing in the national amature level, and a form of IT would probably work very well, excepting my concerns listed above. Most likely it should be the same rules but classing newer and cutting out older cars, with a regional IT crossover for cars older than five years but young enough to still compete ( say 20-25 years ).

I've not yet voted but I'm leaning slightly for making IT national.

James
 
Z3_GoCar said:
After much thought, here's what I see:

Kirk has a point that the rules for IT will change if this goes through, some of the most likely are removing the five year cutoff for classing cars and instituting a cutoff for aging out cars. Involvement of factory backed teams will change IT rules from the top down.

James
Click to expand...

Can you point me to where Kirk said that stuff?????
 
Z3_GoCar said:
After much thought, here's what I see:

There are many good reasons both for and aginst IT becomming a National elegible class. Kirk has a point that the rules for IT will change if this goes through, some of the most likely are removing the five year cutoff for classing cars and instituting a cutoff for aging out cars. Involvement of factory backed teams will change IT rules from the top down. I think that this is a great concern for everyone who currently runs in IT, because the factory team can do things like design a special hub and give it a factory part number (Neon ACR), but basically it's unavalible to eveyone else, or equip a car with four-way adjustable remote resovoir shocks and give them a factory part number, or sell the car with special delrin motor mounts to the factory team members only. Basically, the whole Solstice hardtop/ Miata MS-R/ Z4 hardtop debacles come to mind. Corporate manufactures can be huge 1600lb gorilla's when they're looking for advantages.
Click to expand...

Where the heck does this stuff come from? Keeping new cars out keeps manufacturer involvement out, and manufacturer involvement is bad, I agree. I was in SS/T and I felt the impact.

But I don't know why you think the 5-year rule would necessarily disappear as part of such an arrangement. You state it as though it's obvious, and it's far from obvious to me. And I don't think Kirk said it, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top