October fastrack is out

in a section on ss/t cages there is a request from lipperini for a 9th cage attachment point that was tabled. I wonder that that is about.
 
Won't publish performance parameters, but can say a car is in one envelope, but would exceed another. :rolleyes:

But we all knew that already. :happy204:
 
October Fast track is out.

Excellent. Now the whole IT world can read why I am called "dangerous" dave parker. :happy204:

cheers
"dangerous" dave parker
wdcr ITC#97
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller@Aug 19 2005, 07:54 PM
Won't publish performance parameters, but can say a car is in one envelope, but would exceed another.  :rolleyes:

But we all knew that already. :happy204:
[snapback]58663[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


Sounded like a good enough explanation to me...

As we explained in Fastrack (more explanation than one would normally expect, I'd have to say...), these parameters are being refined and, therefore, it would accomplish NOTHING to publish them at this time...

You seem to forget that we've only been in this mode for one season, and there needs to be some time to see how things are working out... That would be the Prudent thing to do, anyhow...

Surely you don't have a problem with people being prudent, do you???

As for the ITB Rabbit, we have Chris Albin on our committee, as well as numerous other intelligent individuals, so we think we know what we are doing with respect to this, and many other cars... we have a plan... It's only about 25% implemented at this point, so perhaps you should wait to see if we are successful in implementing it before you sell us down the river...

You seem to think that you are the only person who wants things done RIGHT around here... :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Banzai240@Aug 19 2005, 10:14 PM
Sounded like a good enough explanation to me...

As we explained in Fastrack (more explanation than one would normally expect, I'd have to say...), these parameters are being refined and, therefore, it would accomplish NOTHING to publish them at this time...

You seem to forget that we've only been in this mode for one season, and there needs to be some time to see how things are working out...  That would be the Prudent thing to do, anyhow...

Surely you don't have a problem with people being prudent, do you???

As for the ITB Rabbit, we have Chris Albin on our committee, as well as numerous other intelligent individuals, so we think we know what we are doing with respect to this, and many other cars...  we have a plan...  It's only about 25% implemented at this point, so perhaps you should wait to see if we are successful in implementing it before you sell us down the river... 

You seem to think that you are the only person who wants things done RIGHT around here...  :rolleyes:
[snapback]58672[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


Darin,

Didn't realize I was selling you down the river. Also, all I asked for were the performance parameters for the given classes to be published. I didn't say anything else about the Rabbit GTI.
 
Originally posted by Jake@Aug 19 2005, 09:05 PM
Good move on the 94-95 Miata going to ITA.
Click to expand...

Yup, I agree. But, as I've said to others privately, I think it's too light. That car has a lot of potential to be a class-killer, but I hope I'm wrong.

And I'm peeved that I sold my '94 SM literally days before I got word about this change. Had I known this, especially given the weight, I would have dumped the NX in a heartbeat...sold it for a killer price, too...sigh...
 
Originally posted by GregAmy@Aug 20 2005, 12:13 PM
And I'm peeved that I sold my '94 SM literally days before I got word about this change. Had I known this, especially given the weight, I would have dumped the NX in a heartbeat...sold it for a killer price, too...sigh...
[snapback]58693[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Arrgh... that's tragic! I've got this thought in the back of my mind that if I sell the MR2 and get a SM or Spec Serra Integra, the MR2 will move to B instantly after.
 
Maybe time to convert some 1.8 SM cars to ITA. I have one but after converting my 1.6 last winter that might be too much work. Does anyone know if the 4.8 rear will work in the 1.8 housing? We need to keep my 1.8 in SM trim to try and win the 12 hour again in "06"
 
Originally posted by GregAmy@Aug 20 2005, 12:13 PM
Yup, I agree. But, as I've said to others privately, I think it's too light. That car has a lot of potential to be a class-killer, but I hope I'm wrong.
[snapback]58693[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


This one took a LOT of discussion by the ITAC... Based on the classification process for IT, this as classified is within 25lbs of where it should be... The problem with making it any heavier is that, because of the current SM cage rules, EVERY car out there built to the SM rules would have to replace the entire cage to come race ITA, because SM allows a lighter weight tubing than IT at the same weight...

So, this one WAS a bit of a compromise, which was made in an effort to help protect the investments of the competitors...

Keep in mind, however, that we have an Ace in the hole on this one... Because the 1.8 in SM is required to run a restrictor (43mm I believe), and we now have PCAs, which allow us to make adjustments... If it is proven that we've underestimated the performance potential of this car, we have the option of requiring that a restrictor be added back to the specs...

In doing the classification this way, we were able to get the car in at a legal weight for the cage, yet still protect the other competitors from a potential "class killer"...

Hopefully somewhat of a win-win for the class...

Also... I don't know if I'd go bailing on my car before the December BoD meetings... Some interesting things could happen at the end of the year...
 
Well, it certainly had no business being in ITS with only 128hp stock. Seems like the best decision that could have been made considering the restraints.
 
I really felt that the performance potential of this car would never see it in ITA, but I was wrong. Not the first time. We'll see...but I don't see a bunch of them showing up immediately. However, it won't be long. They've got what it takes to win in ITA...a big motor...same as the Integra. <_<
 
Originally posted by Banzai240@Aug 20 2005, 11:07 AM
...we have an Ace in the hole...a restrictor...
[snapback]58701[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Yeah, Darin (and you-know-who else), I'd forgotten about that ace. I really hate restrictors, but I see it as an acceptable compromise. Though, I'd have preferred that the car come into ITA *with* its associated SM restrictor, with consideration to remove it later, rather than vice versa. It's always easier to remove restrictions (weight or otherwise) than to add them.

Regardless, as I noted, this car belongs in ITA. I'm sure it will add to the exitement in a class that has been completely transformed over the last 5 years, one that in my opinion is the best IT class we've got... GA
 
Originally posted by GregAmy@Aug 20 2005, 06:33 PM
Though, I'd have preferred that the car come into ITA *with* its associated SM restrictor, with consideration to remove it later, rather than vice versa. It's always easier to remove restrictions (weight or otherwise) than to add them.
[snapback]58710[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


Using the IT classification process, and also knowing some real output numbers for IT prepped 1.8L Mazda motors, the car is VERY close at the classified weight... The wt/pwr ratio is just about right for the class...

We are trying to NOT use restrictors, but in these special cases, they may be necessary... It might be in the best interests of IT for us to investigate the idea of using single-inlet-restrictors rather than flat plate restrictors, because, as the GT guys have discovered, the SIRs are an excellent way to absolutely limit the output...

After all the discussion, it is my believe that this Miata WILL be a competitive car in ITA, but not because of it's wt/pwr ratios... More likely because there are a TON of them out there, sharing development and ideas, and competiting in sheer numbers... Because, on paper, this car has about the same potential as the 1.6L already classified in ITA...

We'll see... I know it's a stretch for many of you, but I would hope you can see by now that there ARE people watching this kind of thing and ready to make adjustments if they are needed...
 
Don't forget that is still 175 lbs more then a 1.6. Not sure if you can get that much more out of it. I still think that the 1.6 might be a better car.
 
Originally posted by RP Performance@Aug 20 2005, 10:00 PM
Don't forget that is still 175 lbs more then a 1.6. Not sure if you can get that much more out of it. I still think that the 1.6 might be a better car.
[snapback]58714[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Exactly... With the ONLY difference in IT being the displacement... I believe these cars will actually equate quite well... I think the 1.6 liter car is very close to idealy classified for this class...

Does anyone have any real data on what a 1.8 is capable of putting out in IT trim???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top