March fastrac

[CaptainWho]

My .02, for whatever it's worth, is that IT is just being used as a field filler so a new class can make numbers. After all the crap IT has taken over the years from the CRB (etc...), there's a lot of built-up distrust/resentment of ANYTHING the comp board does regarding IT???

I think I'd much rather see IT getting National status before I'd consider running with Prepared. What's to stop the board from saying IT is no longer welcome in Prepared after they make numbers?
[/b]

I haven't been in either racing or the SCCA or Improved Touring for very long, so in a lot of ways I really don't have a horse in this race. That said, I feel that the CRB is treating IT very shabbily, particularly with respect to the "run with Prepared to get their numbers up, but don't expect anything in return". Granted, that hasn't been stated outright, but based on prior experience, that's the way I expect things to progress. There are apparently a lot of people out there who are quite happy to enlist the water buffaloes of IT when their particular ox is about to be gored. But like compliant indentured servants we're supposed to respons "Yessuh, massa, right now!" when told to go away, we're just a regional class. The IT gang coughs up the "quid" and HQ witholds the "pro quo". Stick without carrot. [Please pardon the unwanton mixing of metaphors]

That grinds my gears.

So, what if no one in IT runs with the Prepared groups? Just let them sink or swim on their own, with no help from us. Then see what the BOD and CRB do when they don't even come close to making numbers for the Run Offs. Or they do. It's still no skin off our backsides.

 

[JeffYoung]

Doug, respectfully disagree -- how can we argue with another place to race? I see no downside for us.

I don't like the post 90 rule though, cuts a lot of us guys with IT dinosaurs out. What was the justification for that?

 

[dickita15]

I must admit I have been surprised at the negative reaction to allowing IT cars run in prepared. I get that the CRB is allowing this to jump start Prepared numbers but I just don't feel used.

Doug if your goal is for IT to be national than boycotting nationals in prepared may just send the message that IT drivers do not want to run nationals.

Jeff, I had a chat with a CRB member a few years ago and his worry was if IT went national it would be a enforcement nightmare because of all the old obscure cars that are classed in IT. He told me at the time that maybe if IT went national they should have a cut off on car age. I know that there are older cars in Prod but the specs are well documented for them. If we want older cars allowed we will need to give the CRB a method for documenting the specifications on these cars.

 

[Bill Miller]

I must admit I have been surprised at the negative reaction to allowing IT cars run in prepared. I get that the CRB is allowing this to jump start Prepared numbers but I just don't feel used.

Doug if your goal is for IT to be national than boycotting nationals in prepared may just send the message that IT drivers do not want to run nationals.

Jeff, I had a chat with a CRB member a few years ago and his worry was if IT went national it would be a enforcement nightmare because of all the old obscure cars that are classed in IT. He told me at the time that maybe if IT went national they should have a cut off on car age. I know that there are older cars in Prod but the specs are well documented for them. If we want older cars allowed we will need to give the CRB a method for documenting the specifications on these cars.
[/b]

Read between the lines on that one Dick. What does it matter where IT runs w.r.t. ability to document the specs? It's ok for IT to continue to run Regionals w/o being able to document specs? Or, that since IT onlyruns Regionals, nobody cares what the specs are? Ever wonder why you don't hear much about Regional issues among folks that run National-eligible cars? Sadly, in spite of what people are being told, there's still an attitude that Regionals don't really 'matter'. That gets carried through to IT, and comments from rules makers like the one above just reinforce that theory.

Jeff,

I think the 1990 cutoff has to do w/ one of the things that's at the core of Prepared, there are no cars older than 1990 listed.

 

[JLawton]

If so, then what would be interesting is if all the IT guys started showing up on national weekends to race in prepared. I can't imagine that there will be but one or two prepared cars running so most of the field would wind up being IT cars. You could then wind up with most of the prepared field at the runoffs being IT cars. The true prepared cars would run away (assuming good drivers), but the real racing would be between the IT cars. May show SCCA HQ what they're missing by not including IT in the big show. An interesting thought anyways.

I may enter the prepared race at Road Atlanta in June just for the hell of it. I'll be there anyways since the Regional is being combined with the National. If nothing else it's more track time. I'll have to wait and see how the schedule looks.

David
[/b]

Best idea I've heard so far!!

I certainly don't understand all the strong emotions on this decision. Christ, if this was my biggest worry this season (or this hour!!) I would be a happy man. If you don't like the decision, don't race. If you do, go have fun!!

 

[dickita15]

Sorry Bill but I think I do get it. If IT was at the runoffs it would be the CRB's job to deal with the specs. Right now it is not their problem, it is ours. The runoffs is the only place where the club takes responsibility for determining the legality of cars. I think it is quite understandable for the CRB to worry about this and I take it as no insult. How would you like to be the guy to decide the cam specs on a Jensen Healy of the suspension pick up points on a Opel Gt.

 

[erlrich]

I must admit I have been surprised at the negative reaction to allowing IT cars run in prepared. I get that the CRB is allowing this to jump start Prepared numbers but I just don't feel used. [/b]

I can't say I'm really surprised at the overall reaction, given the abundance of cynicism we have here, but I have been surprised by some of the individuals who have joined the black helicopter watch group. Even if it is true that the CRB is allowing IT to run in Prepared to get the numbers up, who cares? If you don't like it, don't race your IT car in Prepared. I don't buy for one second that allowing IT cars to run in a national class, where they have zero chance of being competitive, is going to steal cars from the IT fields.

I do get it that some of you feel like we're being used; but it's not like this is something we're being forced to do. If you don't like it, just don't support it. I can't imagine there are going to be that many IT guys who want to race with cars 5 - 10 seconds faster than they are anyway.

 

[Brian Holtz]

Peter,

The president of the SCCA stated exactly the opposite.
[/b]

Bill

Do you know this for a fact or is it just hearsay based on what someone else said? Jim Julow was not privy to the email conversations that were going on among the BOD. The reason that it was changed to put it off a year was because the original effective date for counting the current year was in the middle of the season. It was felt that this wasn't fair to anyone, be it T3 or GTL.

Brian

 

[CaptainWho]

Personally, it doesn't matter to me whether IT classes are National classes or not. Even if I ran National races, to get invited to the Run Offs I'd have to run in an extremely undersubscribed class. The day the car or prep level or track conditions are the limiting factors on my racing is long in the future.

But I don't like hidden agendas and such, especially in a club like this. In just over three years, I've become very cynical about the way the club so often seems to run. I run everything through the "Who's Ox" filter. Not that I think the grass is greener elsewhere. It seems to be part and parcel of volunteer or mostly volunteer non-profit (or not for profit) organizations. And quite a few non-volunteer, for-profit ones, too.

 

[Gary L]

Sorry Bill but I think I do get it. If IT was at the runoffs it would be the CRB's job to deal with the specs. Right now it is not their problem, it is ours. The runoffs is the only place where the club takes responsibility for determining the legality of cars. I think it is quite understandable for the CRB to worry about this and I take it as no insult. How would you like to be the guy to decide the cam specs on a Jensen Healy of the suspension pick up points on a Opel Gt. [/b]

Errrr.... Wuttabout the IT cars that are already running in national classes? Do the terms "production" and "limited prep" ring a bell?

 

[Greg Amy]

IT cars that are already running in national classes?[/b]

Gary, IT-legal cars cannot run in Production. Requirements such as headlights and lamps removal, plus the requirement for a fuel cell (only recommended in IT) prevent them from competing.

I haven't reviewed the Prod rules in a couple of years, but if the requirement to remove headlamps and other lenses was rescinded, then IT-legal cars (except convertibles) can run as-is, with the recommended windshield clips installed, door glass stuff all removed, and fuel cell installed. - GA

 

[JoshS]

I haven't reviewed the Prod rules in a couple of years, but if the requirement to remove headlamps and other lenses was rescinded, then IT-legal cars (except convertibles) can run as-is, with the recommended windshield clips installed, door glass stuff all removed, and fuel cell installed. - GA
[/b]

Except for the faster, newer ones. ITS and ITR cars are too fast for the fastest Production class.

 

[Gary L]

Greg - My comment was directed towards Dick's assertion that if IT cars were allowed to participate at the runoffs, it would be impossible to keep track of the specifications. But IT-based limited prep cars, are already at the runoffs. And the specifications, like Dick's suspension pickup point example, are already being dealt with. Or not.

My point would be... that cat is already out of the bag. Right? Or is there significant additonal paperwork (to include suspension pickup points, etc) that has to happen before an IT car like my Volvo is classified in F production as a limited prep, ex-ITB car? (This is an honest question... not an argument.)

 

[charrbq]

[/quote]

IT-legal cars cannot run in Production. Requirements such as headlights and lamps removal, plus the requirement for a fuel cell (only recommended in IT) prevent them from competing.


[/b]

There may have been a rules change that I'm not aware of in production and limited prep, but, to my knowledge, IT cars, meeting the safety specs of Production, can run in their appropriate class. Chris Albin used to run his ITB Golf in both ITB and GP. Same car for both, as many of his events were back to back. He had a welded cage, window straps, fuel cell, and fire system...all legal for Production and recommended for IT. He did do some playing with slicks for a while, but I believe he took the IT car to both the Runoffs and the ARRC one year. He later built a Production car only as it was wearing out his IT car to run so much.

 

[cherokee]

I did not mean for that little comment to twist the thread down the national path.

I am quite happy with going to the new Mid O Festival then down to the ARRC later in the year.

I suppose a lot of this depends upon the goals of the club and how IT fits into that.
Jake, what are real IT cars?
[/b]

This is a big part of the problem, you are happy with the Mid O Fest, Prod guys are wanting to go to Prod Fest, The AARC is the champs for the IT cars.....

Does anyone but me think that the club is splintering? This is a big problem, and I think will destroy the club.
Get all the classes together, and on a level field. Let car counts determine what goes to the big dance.

The world is changing, SCCA is not. I for one want to see my car on T.V. I do this for fun what would could be more cool then that? The AARC is ignored by the club, so will the IT and Prod Fest. There is only one "big dance" and that is the way it should be, and the largest classes should be part of it, if you don't like where it is do what it takes to change it.

As far as not being able to police our old IT cars...sorry don't hold water...I guess if a cam is impossible to check or a pickup point, perhaps we should let those be open....just like ECU's oking that buzzing nest again: Or if I show up with the Opel sounding like a top fuel drag car, I have no worries as the specs are impossible to police.....ya I bet.

I think that the reason they cut off the IT cars at 1990 is how would it look if an old Jenson, Triumph, or heaven forbid an Opel do well in the new chosen class, If they even show up it is going to be bad. This class is getting a runoff spot, no question about it. Can't have that old POS in there now can we, and if the T.V. cameras are running what do you think they would show, just for the human intrest part of it, I for one can say that the odd ball cars are some of the best looking ones of the lot, do you honstly think that speed would not come up and say: So tell me Jeff, Why an Old Triumph TR8?.......Well that is one good looking car, hope you do well.

 

[OTLimit]

Chris Albin used to run his ITB Golf in both ITB and GP. Same car for both, as many of his events were back to back. He had a welded cage, window straps, fuel cell, and fire system...all legal for Production and recommended for IT. He did do some playing with slicks for a while, but I believe he took the IT car to both the Runoffs and the ARRC one year. [/b]

Kind of. We campaigned the same car in IT and GP for 2 years. The first year (2001) Chris won the regional GP and ITB championships, and he spent the summer of 2002 building a GP car--which made it's debut at the Labor Day races in Topeka, went to the regional races at Mid-Ohio right before the Runoffs, and then was 6th at the Runoffs. The IT car never raced at the Runoffs (although it was there as a backup).

It required us to do some quick changes of tires, doors, and grills/headlights/marker lights between races. Most regions seemed to help our situation by not having us run in back-to-back groups--and when it happened, he opted for one or the other.

The problem was that it just got OLD after awhile--a real pain. And if not for a really good bunch of friends, it never would have been possible. But I think he made his point--it can be done.

 

[dickita15]

Greg - My comment was directed towards Dick's assertion that if IT cars were allowed to participate at the runoffs, it would be impossible to keep track of the specifications. But IT-based limited prep cars, are already at the runoffs. And the specifications, like Dick's suspension pickup point example, are already being dealt with. Or not.

My point would be... that cat is already out of the bag. Right? Or is there significant additonal paperwork (to include suspension pickup points, etc) that has to happen before an IT car like my Volvo is classified in F production as a limited prep, ex-ITB car? (This is an honest question... not an argument.)
[/b]

I think it is easier to add some cars to prod and deal with figuring out the specs for the few former IT cars that they let in than it would be to have effective enforcement on the hundreds of cars listed in IT.
I am not saying it cannot be done. All I am saying is if you are going to lobby to make T national you will need a plan to deal with the enforcement issue. It does not even matter if the concern is well founded; the perception is there so you will have to have a plan to overcome it.

 

[Stan]

Does anyone but me think that the club is splintering? This is a big problem, and I think will destroy the club.[/b]

While I agree somewhat with your observation, I disagree strongly with your conclusion. I happen to think that the "frank and open discussions" one sees here and elsewhere are a key to the Club's health. How can the Club's elected and appointed leadership know what's really on folks minds if we aren't talking? The old days of waiting for hand-crafted letters to arrive in Denver are behind us, guys, and IMHO our present squabbling Tower of Babel is a vast improvement on that old model. Good riddance!

Get all the classes together, and on a level field. Let car counts determine what goes to the big dance.[/b]

I agree 100%. Back in the day when IT was approved, the classes really were treated as the red-headed step children of SCCA. I think we're getting to the point where we are beyond that, and I foresee a day when IT is no longer expected to "step to the back of the bus".

The world is changing, SCCA is not.[/b]

Bollocks! What do you call the fundamental change to how classes are classed from the outset? What do you call multiple members of the CRB publicly calling for IT to be accorded the same rights and privileges of any other class?

As far as not being able to police our old IT cars...sorry don't hold water...I guess if a cam is impossible to check or a pickup point, perhaps we should let those be open....just like ECU's oking that buzzing nest again: Or if I show up with the Opel sounding like a top fuel drag car, I have no worries as the specs are impossible to police.....ya I bet.[/b]

That is one member's opinion at some time in the past. I happen to think that between the factory shop manual and the some additional work from the members and the ITAC that all those issues cab be resolved to most folks' satisfaction.

I think that the reason they cut off the IT cars at 1990 is how would it look if an old Jenson, Triumph, or heaven forbid an Opel do well in the new chosen class, If they even show up it is going to be bad. This class is getting a runoff spot, no question about it. Can't have that old POS in there now can we, and if the T.V. cameras are running what do you think they would show, just for the human intrest part of it, I for one can say that the odd ball cars are some of the best looking ones of the lot, do you honstly think that speed would not come up and say: So tell me Jeff, Why an Old Triumph TR8?.......Well that is one good looking car, hope you do well.[/b]

The second part of your paragraph proves that the first part cannot possibly be correct.

Now...for the record. (EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION!!! ) We chose 1990 as the cutoff year for B & DP for one simple reason. When we sat down last year to draft the Prep rules to bring WC cars into club racing, we asked the Pro guys for input on which model years they wanted covered. They said that as far as they could tell from the old records the first model years classified were the 1990 year cars. (They could be 5 years old at the time.) A year ago we had no thought to adding IT cars to the mix, so said "1990 is it!" There is no magic to it. There are no black helicopters circling out there ready to swoop down and thwart the dreams of IT guys who want to run their (insert favorite pre-90 car here) in DP.

And frankly, knowing that IT cars below the ITR ranks would be nearly totally uncompetitive in DP, and that there are few if any pre-90 ITR cars, we did not change the model years. It isn't because we don't want to see your ugly-a$$ Opel or 510 out there ( ) ... it's because we honest did not think that many pre-90 car owners would be interested. Ya can't have it both ways, guys. The CRB can't be trying to stuff the DP ballot box on the one hand and legitimately cutting off ballot stuffers on the other...

Are we havin' fun yet?

Stan

 

[JamesB]

Are we havin' fun yet?

Stan
[/b]

Not till Friday, and no racing fun till the end of April for me.

 

[erlrich]

Now...for the record. (EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION!!! ) We chose 1990 as the cutoff year for B & DP for one simple reason. When we sat down last year to draft the Prep rules to bring WC cars into club racing, we asked the Pro guys for input on which model years they wanted covered. They said that as far as they could tell from the old records the first model years classified were the 1990 year cars. (They could be 5 years old at the time.) A year ago we had no thought to adding IT cars to the mix, so said "1990 is it!" There is no magic to it. There are no black helicopters circling out there ready to swoop down and thwart the dreams of IT guys who want to run their (insert favorite pre-90 car here) in DP.

Are we havin' fun yet?
Stan [/b]

Geez Stan, you sure know how to ruin a perfectly good conspiracy theory

I hope you're happy now.