This board is hilarious… well I wasn’t actually asking for anything Jake, just pointing out that if you reprocess based off a fast car other cars will get lighter and getting lighter is difficult/expensive/impossible in IT. So where does that get you? I’m quite content with my POS and yes losing weight is too expensive for me. I mean where do you draw the line? I know I could call up Minilite or whoever and get some custom magnesium wheels but come on, this is improved touring not pro touring. I’d be embarrassed to even use them. Admittedly my cut off is a bit lower than some with a $3300 total investment in the car but I actually like to race with people, not time trials with a $15,000 IT car. Hee hee. I’d be much more in favor of sheding non-essential crap than adding weight to anyone(don’t want to start that one here). But if your not adding weight and at the same time don’t have many ways to shed weight(imo) then fiddling with weight dosen’t get you too far.
Well, that's not accurate, entirely. For
you, it might not, but that's because of the choices
you've made. And you just said you
chose not to avail yourself of some of the options you have. Others might take a crappy cheap to get car, then make it top drawer, because they see it as a way to get to the top, and competition is what racing is about. Some decide they want to compete up front, others are happier in the middle. And that's fine.
But, you can't say to a governing board,
"Look, I don't want to spend a lot of money here, but i want my car to be competitive, and it's not. It weighs too much compared to others. So, make them all add weight, or allow me to remove things" Which will, in turn cause everyone else to need to do the same, if they wish to be as competitive as they were pre allowance. And that is the dangerous Rules creep scenario.
If you were on the governing board, you'd have a tough time justifying that to everyone slapping in the weight, or needing to remove heater cores, or make lexan windows, or carbon fenders, and on and on. Really, you would.
You're coming at this from the point of view that things haven't been reprocessed. They have. This discussion is about fine tuning, or a second swipe to get things closer. Cars in the front HAVE been slapped with weight. Some weren't classified when the GR took place, but their weights should reflect the framework laid out.
Don't forget that there are FIVE classes. Each class has a performance target/window. The architecture of the framework was to, in each class, come to a target that added weight to the front runners, and removed a reasonable amount from the backmarkers. With 300 cars, it is very very difficult to strike a balance, and have every car happy. Trust me, I was involved, and my car came up short...and that's the way it needed to be. The class/category needs outweighed my personal desires. In your case, you have the
opportunity to improve your lot, and it's up to you to chose whether it's worth it to you to take the advantages.
I'm not trying to pick on you, really, but your post focused a light onto some of the issues surrounding the structure, and the limitation of the classifications, and I think some reading this aren[t aware of things that have occurred over the years, or why things are the way they are.
This has nothing to do with "hating" anything, it does have to do with fairly applying the rules to all cars classed. Remember "We know what we know"... and what we know is that the Miata's make more than 25% in gains. I'd argue it's closer to 35% than 30% but, regardless, the real figures are more than it was classed at.
