The car was fast enough at Road America that other competitors called me and asked about it on Saturday morning. They also talked to the driver. He described a very thorough build process that included flow testing of multiple intakes and heads along the way, and an intention to run at the ARRC. That passes my snif test, and I expect we may get to find out next month.
The very point that this car is out there and appropriately competitive, yet you chose to act regardless definitely sent me a message about desire to get it right vs. desire to "fix" the MR2. It hurts perception regardless of any legitimate motivations.
here's what went down WRT that MR2. no punches pulled - so if anyone reading this is involved in that effort, I appologise if I offent in my assumptions.
I met a guy at CMP in 2008 driving a VERY slow ITB MR2. being involved with the cars myself, I made a point to chat with him. I like the guy, he's smart and entertaining. But I disagree on legality of some of the things he finds no issue with. file it away. fast forward a few years, and we have the discussions on this board about the MR2, I have some hands on knowledge about the cars as prepped now, and some others are doing VERY serious efforts to crack 15% gains, and failing. you've all followed allong well enough to know this and the ensuing facts.
a few months back, I hear of some killer fast ITB MR2 at Rd. America. I can't find anything on it. then a little while later I catch wind that he's in the ITNT, I check, I learn who it is, I find race results, lap times, history on the driver, whatever the internet is giving up. I find Race footage from the IT SPectacular where he was running. I see a car that has motor. I bring it to the attention of the MR2 crowd. no one knows who it is. then that guy from CMP pops up. we've talked a few times since then and every time he's talking about some new "loophole" he's found, which I almost always find to be very illegal, so that saga continues. turns out he was intimately invovled with the car in its early stages. from what I know of this guy's take on the rules, and what I have SEEN that car do in videos - like miss a shift exiting the keyhole on L1 at MidO and then motor by what is granted not the fatsest car out there but still the straight line recovery is noteworthy. I believe the car to have some illegal modifications. yes, from all accounts it is a stellar build with a lot of effort in it, good parts, and a lot of time dialing it in, but you don't get huge leaps from polishing a turd. you get incimental improvement. I know well what others have in their MR2s and what they are getting out of them, in numbers and how it appears on track. this car was in another league all together. AND IT STILL didn't touch pablo, a civic, or the "fastest rabbit in the world" and was roughly 2s off the lap record at rd am.
yes. we moved ahead with this knowledge. FWIW, he probobly wont make the ARRC due to breaking the crankshaft spinnning the thing over 9k consistently @ rd. america.
Another data point, just to get it out there. Steve U (quadzjr here) set the ITB pole at the SARRC invitational at Roebling in his MR2. by 1 or 2 tenths only, but he did it. thats a track/car combo that works well. His is the best prepared and legal MR2 that I know of, outside of possibly Nick E's (the Texan), and he makes between 108 and 109 whp (corrected) depending on the dyno. This occured after our recommendation went to the CRB, but it wouldn't have changed my vote either. He faught for the lead with the RSR
A2 VW for ~7 laps but finished 3rd, behind what used to be the Underwood Civic, now driven by Steve S. class balance looks OK to me, were I to consider such things as on track evidence.
I will be honest in saying that I personally believe the 120HP number to be inaccurate but accurate... I have friends at VW, and throughout the factory Audi rally teams from the 80's that I think personally know way more than any of us including Irish mike, Chris, and Peter. I am 99% sure they sited the HP number WITH the quattro downpipe and header which DOES produce that extra STOCK HP. The mistake is that it was never offered on any of the ITB varients and only the quattro. In the end it is what it is and I can't argue with what has been shown as evidence that is beleived to be accurate. I accepted this answer a year or so ago since that was different then the original reason which was that we were getting a Comp adjustment for the 5cyl tourque that it produced. We did get asked to take our cars to Dyno's but didn't. No denying that. I honestly didn't think skipping a race at the time was worth it to pay for it and after someone offered to pay I felt guilty about it knowing that I wasn't going to race the car much longer (And didn't think anyone else was going to build one). I knew I was going to build a new car in a new class that had a new begining that I trusted was as good as they could make it (ITR). I still have the same car with the same engine making the same good power in it. Maybe I will ask Andy how much to take it down to his shop for a visit. It is only a little over an hr away and I trust him that he would get an accurate reading for everyone. In fact I will send him a PM. 
