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

[tnord]

The myth is that just because the FSM specs are not all encompasing, that you have the freedom to do whatever you like in those areas. I don't care what number is stamped on those cams, if they are not the same as a stock from the showroom floor car, they are not legal .period. There is no rule that states cams must match FSM specs (edit - well actually there is, does that shoot a hole in this whole argument? It hinges on definition of factory specifications, and whether that is manufacturing specs or FSM specs), there is more importantly no rule that allows use of a cam other than stock - you put one of those 'magic cams' in a cam doctor next to a cam purchased from the local dealership parts counter and they don't match - in any measurable way within the capability of the measuring equipment - then it ain't legal.

here's the problem you guys need to address. keep in mind i don't like it, and i wish it wasn't this way, but it is what it is......

Joe Bob wants to go ITB racing for a National Championship in a 1983 Italian Thingamajig. This wasn't exactly a mass produced car, they weren't particularly well taken care of cars, and being from Michigan, there really isn't one Joe Bob can find in very good shape. He does however find a car sitting in a barn in Texas that hasn't run in 10years, but has a decent chassis to start with, so he buys it.

Since Joe wants to contend for the National Championship, he needs to have a stout motor built. Problem is, they don't sell crate motors for 1983 Italian Thingamajigs like they do Miatas, and after taking the head off the motor in his car, he realizes that the timing chain broke, broke valves, and ran lots of little metal bits through the whole thing, so it's all trash. Joe now has two options, he can scour junkyards throughout the entire country, hoping somebody has a decent set of cams, but after having a couple sent to his house in Michigan from Florida at $400 each (gotta pay someone to go remove them for you), he sees evidence of bent rockers wearing on the lobes, and isn't confident putting them in his car.

so now what? well, Joe Bob's brother Billy Bob owns "Billy Bob's Dirt Track Motor Shop" out on country road FF. Billy can get a hold of some blanks and grind them to whatever specs Joe wants. Joe hands over the specs he has sourced from an OEM service manual, and since this is a race car, and Joe is trying to win the big show, Billy grinds them for max performance within the rules.

how do you plan to protest this guy? how do you expect tech to rule on this part if it meets every spec they are presented with? bring a stock cam of a 1983 Italian Thingamajig yourself to compare to on the cam doctor? go ahead, it says right in the GCR piece you quoted the club may establish an acceptable tolerance.

don't get caught up in the details of my poor example, just understand that not everyone shares the same views as you on the interpretation of the rules, and you can call those people names all you want, but unless there's a way to tech it, there's not much you can do. you can also expect more people showing up in the class who have the "tech shed legal" viewpoint as they influx from other national classes.

don't shoot the messenger, it is what it is.

 

[Knestis]

>> ...the point was that Greg Amy is not some 'magical' driver that could win in any car at any track any where. the point of the comment was only to de-emphasize what i felt was kirk's over-emphasis of the driver. it takes equal parts car and driver to win the RO, and i felt like kirk was communicating it was more like 75% driver 25% car.

I figured that pretty much everyone understands that it took a huge commitment of Greg's time and energy (and money) to make the Egg a winner, before it ever turned a wheel at the ARRC. My point - I guess not clearly made - was that he took a car that wasn't perceived to be a killer and made it one. And if you ask him, he did it with malice of forethought - he wanted to prove that it could be done, partially because he's that kind of guy and likes a challenge but partially to expose the myth of "pick the right car."

I guar-an-damn-tee you that there are people who now "know" that the NX is the Atlanta cherry, but only because of Greg's effort. If he'd built something everyone else was running, it would have been "Oh, yeah - but that's the car to have." Or maybe they "knew" that the NX was the big unit, until CRX's took it back this past fall. Now they "know" THAT'S the car to have.

It's about perceptions.

K

 

[Knestis]

here's the problem you guys need to address...

Your example is really quite well presented and does a great job of pointing out a huge issue that we need to address, even if the conversation about National status ends today.

...Billy grinds them for max performance within the rules.

This is the point at which you and the brothers have gone sideways. There's no such thing as "max performance within the rules." There's stock and not stock. If JB can't find one, he's got the option of sourcing one that's exactly the same dimensions as stock. If BB can't manage appropriate tolerances, JB should go elsewhere or he's SOL.

EVEN HAVING THIS CONVERSATION is sending the message to some of our loyal readers that maybe that kind of tomfoolery is OK. That you are describing it as "it is what it is" is implicit social/cultural approval for the practice. If NO IT entrant did that, or tolerated others doing it, the problem would go away. That we aren't collectively willing to take that step is an influence that sends us down the path.

Yeah - it's wouldn't be easy to police legality of IT cars in a National arena. Just like it isn't easy NOW, and isn't easy to police other categories at high-stakes events. To ask it to be easy, or to hold programmatic changes ransom to a demand that it be easy (or else!), doesn't strike me as very fair.

BTW, the "Thingamajig" is an ITC Fiat 124 Coupe. It would be killer - if one had relatives in the old country and lots of shipping containers to move spares across the Atlantic.



K

 

[tnord]

This is the point at which you and the brothers have gone sideways. There's no such thing as "max performance within the rules." There's stock and not stock. If JB can't find one, he's got the option of sourcing one that's exactly the same dimensions as stock. If BB can't manage appropriate tolerances, JB should go elsewhere or he's SOL.

what, are you saying that every stock part is manufactured exactly the same? i know you know they're not.

EVEN HAVING THIS CONVERSATION is sending the message to some of our loyal readers that maybe that kind of tomfoolery is OK. That you are describing it as "it is what it is" is implicit social/cultural approval for the practice. If NO IT entrant did that, or tolerated others doing it, the problem would go away. That we aren't collectively willing to take that step is an influence that sends us down the path.

i'm not saying it's OK, i'm saying we don't really have a way to stop it outside of walking the paddock with our jack-handles threatening people.

Yeah - it's wouldn't be easy to police legality of IT cars in a National arena. Just like it isn't easy NOW, and isn't easy to police other categories at high-stakes events. To ask it to be easy, or to hold programmatic changes ransom to a demand that it be easy (or else!), doesn't strike me as very fair.

rules enforcement doesn't get near the pressure now it would if IT were to go National and participate at the RO. it is my somewhat educated opinion that there are engine builders out there taking advantage of these shortcomings in the rules right now. it is also my opinion that there would be a great many more engines taking advantage of this at the runoffs, at which point the rules, and the process, will fail at enforcing what you want it to enforce. enter stage left.....tech shed legal mentality.

BTW, the "Thingamajig" is an ITC Fiat 124 Coupe. It would be killer - if one had relatives in the old country and lots of shipping containers to move spares across the Atlantic.



K

i was thinking more ITB Alfa Spyder....but that'll work too.

 

[Knestis]

My choice in B would be the Fiat 131 Brava. Still one of my favorite cars ever, thanks to the Alitalia rally cars.

K

 

[Eagle7]

... There are plenty of cars that have NEVER won a Regional, that The Greg Amy could win an ARRC IT race, given sufficient development budget....

my point didn't come across very clear, my fault.

the point was that Greg Amy is not some 'magical' driver that could win in any car at any track any where. the point of the comment was only to de-emphasize what i felt was kirk's over-emphasis of the driver. it takes equal parts car and driver to win the RO, and i felt like kirk was communicating it was more like 75% driver 25% car.

I took it the other way around - that "The Greg Amy" could develop most any car to be a front-runner.

 

[lateapex911]

Look at the ARRC ITA races over the past few years.

-Stretch wins in a 240SX with a truck motor. It is now THE car to have for Atlanta
-Serra shows up, and beats Stretch in a real back and forth battle. The Integra is now THE car for Atlanta.
-Amy shows up (he'd been there before, but Puff the Magic Dragon-ed the motor), and HE beats the now impressive array of Honda products, including, I think, Serra. (or was it one of Serras' cars?) The Egg is the car for Atlanta! Go find an Egg!!!
- The Mosers show up, and the egg is whipped. The CRX is the car for Atlanta! Wait! it thought it was the car for Mid Ohio!

Side comments/observations/quotes:
- Stretch says after the race with Serra, "I thought the SM race was going to be the tough one. i should have tuned my Nissan, and put in good brakes"
- Integra prices skyrocket. Amy builds another engine.
- Amy brings all his horse to bear over the next season, Serra spends some of his energy putting together his Grand Am plan. After qualifying, he states "Man, I am just off...just not in the grove"
- CRXen cry foul on the Eggs unfair weight advantage, or, actually, about their own "unfair penalty". They vow to show the world.
- The final chapter has the CRX team loaded for bear to prove something, and reportedly "A" compound tires are used on the light cars in cool weather to good effect. After race comments were made to the effect that the Egg was still the car to beat, and the CRX was unfairly penalized.

So, read above, and tell me what you believe, and what the car for the track is....


-

 

[Knestis]

What is the Mazda Miata, Alex?

K

 

[tnord]

and in your examples Jake people are still developing cars, and everyone isn't bringing 100% efforts. come about the 2nd or 3rd year of the RO's, if the category is popular (which i feel pretty confident it will be), you'll have 15+ 100% builds showing up, and you'll start to get some reliable data and be able to identify trends on what's working the best and what isn't.

i know it's hard to see, and it's hard for me to explain without being insulting to anyone, but be prepared for the ante to be upped if the National gates are opened. To further my point, Stretch qualified 18th at the 2006 ROs and DNF'd. in 2007 he was 15th on Day 1 Qual, 15th Day 2 Qual, 17th Day 3 Qual, and finished the race in 14th.

 

[JeffYoung]

We are quite a bit far afield from where we started....or are we?

We are starting to sound like the Prod guys arguing about car specs based on on track performance-- with the underlying subtext that they shoudl be adjusted for competition purposes -- despite all of the variables relative to such performance that Jake and others identified above.

Bottom line for me? IT works. Many different chassis are competitive in S, A and B (I don't know much about C). I know how to protest folks. The protest process/car to have cult really has no bearing for me on whether IT should or should not go National. That to me should rest soley with the IT COMMUNITY only, and not the Club as a whole.

That is what I think is controversial isn't it? Should the CLUB decide whether we go National or should it be IT drivers only?

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Bottom line for me? IT works. Many different chassis are competitive in S, A and B (I don't know much about C). I know how to protest folks. The protest process/car to have cult really has no bearing for me on whether IT should or should not go National.

So I guess I have to ask - what would change in your above thought if IT went National?

Discuss.

 

[JeffYoung]

About 9000 posts above I stated my two concerns; after all of this they still remain (for me anyway):

1. Rules pressure on the IT ruleset from folks coming into the class that are used to comp adjustments, etc.

2. Dilution of and weakening of traditional regional race events.

If you do away with the national/regional distinction you probably take care of (2) for me. (1) will be, as Kirk points out, always an issue whether we are national or not. I just see at as MUCH riskier if we are national.

 

[jjjanos]

So I guess I have to ask - what would change in your above thought if IT went National?

Discuss.

1. Smaller Regional fields as cars depart to Nationals
2. More mechanical protests as a) the category attracts people looking for those creative interpretations b) old, illegal, national cars filter down to regional racers who think they have a legal car, but won't know until it comes time to tear it down in either the tech shed or rebuild time. Yep, I know its our responsibility to police the rules, but all this does is make the weekend less enjoyable for the winner of the protest, the stewards and the tech shed guys.
3. More Technical Bulletins that alter what many/most think is the rule and doing it w/o member input.

 

[IPRESS]

Maybe it is over simplification, but in it's most basic form isn't the question.

Do IT racers want to change IT so that some IT racers can go to the Runoffs?

It's simple yet hard to get a straight answer.

Andy seems to say YES. (Personally only, not wearing his ITAC hat I think)
I am a definite No.
Tnord is a sorta No at least I think, but might be talked into it.
Kirk seems to be OK with it, but he uses way too many big words for me to be sure.
I ain't making a call on Jake he is holding his cards close to the vest (although I suspect his say National on them when exposed. (i'll get called on the carpet for that bit of opinion!)
JJJ is a Hell No.
Jeff is a qualified NO.... I think but maybe a yes under conditions.
Dickita not sure, but probably Yes I think, but another hard read.
Jerry didn't say, but he has enough problems fixing SWDIV.
shwah a big YES
Probably several other NOs that I forgot and some more Yes votes too.
I am sorry if I left some out, and this is not offical, It is mainly just therapy!

New IT tag line:
"Let's Go National....Let's Just Not Go to The RunOffs!"

 

[Knestis]

>> ...Should the CLUB decide whether we go National or should it be IT drivers only?

That's a great question. IT racers don't "own" the category but culturally, the Club tends to presume that those who run in a category get to steer it around. That's arguably gotten more than a few categories in hot water.

I personally think that the boards, committees, and the Club Racing office DO have the obligation to act as stewards for the categories. Those groups and the individuals that make constitute them have to serve to damp out the thousands of individual interests and make decisions that are good for the category, even if some individuals or groups don't think the decisions are good for THEM.

I don't think we really want to be as responsive to particular interests (as operationalized in member requests) as each of us thinks when we're writing those requests. My idea is the best ever - of course! - but all of those other members' ideas are stupid. (If you get my drift.)

>> Rules pressure on the IT ruleset from folks coming into the class that are used to comp adjustments, etc.; More Technical Bulletins that alter what many/most think is the rule and doing it w/o member input

These move from the presumption that the ITAC won't be able to resist that pressure. You say "if we go National" but I think you mean "if IT gets REALLY popular and competitive, for whatever reason." Do you think that we can stem the tide of craziness absent National status, with no growth? How about Regional-only but with some huge influx of new racers (like if the other categories were to collapse because Club Racing abolishes "National racing" as we know it)?

>> Dilution of and weakening of traditional regional race events; Smaller Regional fields as cars depart to Nationals

This would be a non-issue if the National/Regional distinction went away, wouldn't it? I'm increasingly of the opinion that this should be the first step, regardless of whether IT gets considered for a boost(?) in status. Does this make "restructure qualifying/eliminate distinction" as a possible precondition for consideration of National status for IT? Were that to happen, would it address this concern?

>> More mechanical protests

I guess I don't see that as a problem. I personally think we'd benefit NOW from some additional scrutiny. I think this contention moves from an inaccurate assessment of the current legality of IT cars. If anything, someone going to the RubOffs is arguably MORE likely to be legal than the typical Regional entrant: Ask those that headed to this past ARRC figuring (or hoping!) that they'd be torn down...

Kirk (who continues to learn things from this conversation, even though it has dragged on...)

 

[JeffYoung]

I'm a no. I would change my mind if:

a. There was a definite proposal as to how this was to be done.

b. That proposal eliminated the national/regional distinction entirely.

c. The proposal was voted on an agreed to by a majority of IT drivers, and not imposed by the Club.

If those three things happened, I would support this and just deal with my concerns over pressure on the ruleset.

 

[Knestis]

"Let's Go National....Let's Just Not Go to The RunOffs!"

I saw this distinction made somewhere earlier and I have to confess that I just don't get it. The primary difference between "National" and "Regional" classes is the RubOffs (and Divisional titles?) Is it just about 30 minute races...?

Completely puzzled,

K

 

[DavidM]

This is the point at which you and the brothers have gone sideways. There's no such thing as "max performance within the rules." There's stock and not stock. If JB can't find one, he's got the option of sourcing one that's exactly the same dimensions as stock. If BB can't manage appropriate tolerances, JB should go elsewhere or he's SOL.
K

Well, aren't most stock specs listed as a range? That's the whole idea behind balancing & blueprinting, right. Find the parts that are within the spec range, but offer the best performance. You just need a crapton of spare parts to find the best ones and match them up. If you have somebody machine your own, but it's still within stock specs is that legal? I didn't think it was, but how do you prove it? Should it be legal?

Back to the topic, I can see how the gray areas will be pushed more if there's a national "championship". We all know how fun some of the rules discussions have been already.

David

 

[HOOSER 99]

...And from the unsubstantiated rumor department..

http://prodracing.com/prodcar/viewtopic.php?t=9156&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

 

[IPRESS]

I saw this distinction made somewhere earlier and I have to confess that I just don't get it. The primary difference between "National" and "Regional" classes is the RubOffs (and Divisional titles?) Is it just about 30 minute races...?

Completely puzzled,

K

Kirk, I puzzle myself all the time.

By not going to The RunOffs I don't see the problems that come with them seeping in to IT.
By being a National class for a good part of the country you solve some Reg. / Nat. issues on track time and race scheduling. You could even have qualifier races for National races and or DBL (Div or NARRC type races). Like you guys say the distinction between the two may not be a need. But somewhere somehow SCCA needs a class that has the atributes of Improved Touring today. RunOffs warts will make IT ....something else. (IMHO)