Originally posted by Scooter:
....... But then everyone wants their car adjusted, too. And the original intent of the rules was that you take a stock car's weight and subtract a little for taking out the interior and whatever, (plus a little magic that I don't understand) and that's the race weight of the car. The weight was supposed to be based on the stock car, not on whether or not it would run within .5 seconds of every other car in it's class.
So then in order to change the rules to make people happy, you have to change the philosophy of weight. Now it's supposed to make every (!) car competitive. But that ITC Rabbit is like 25 years old. We have to make that competitive with the CRXs? What about the guy who wants to run his Chrysler TC by Maserati? Should it's weight be 1500lbs?
Point is, yes, they try very hard to make the rules fair. It's hard.
(My solution, btw, is another class between ITS and ITA, and adjustable weights, but only within a certain limit of the original factory weight of the car.)
Scooter, you make an excellent case, and really, your commentary is one I agree with wholeheartedly.
The SCCA has a much tougher battle than NASA, as they are servicing an audience that wants to run cars that represent a much broader technological base.
The GTS challenge is trying to work with a very limited sample, and then divideds them into greater divisions, but they will still run into the overdog/underdog situation, and the wallet will surely be a major factor. I wonder, this whole power to weight ratio thing...how will they police inventive racers who have switchable power curves? The old secret switch that cuts out 30 hp? And don't tell me it can't be done, or it won't be done! It can and will.
Anyway, I do disagree slightly with your thoughts on the philosophy of the initial weight set. You said "plus a little majic that I don't understand", and I think that hits the nail on the head. I think the CRB has tried to create an equal playing field, but they are hampered by a lack of a crystal ball, as there are just too many intangibles to accurately predict actual performance on a multitude of tracks. In the begining, IT was created, along with other reasons, to give retiring SS cars a place to race. The classification of those cars was easier, as their on track perforance was a known. That case is the exception today, as the class has become very popular and the bulk of cars never saw SS duty.
I don't think the basic philosophy has changed, but that time has changed the situation, and a safety net is being installed to give the CRB an opportunity to remedy obvious issues.
I do not think that anyone invlved in the PCA concept has any desire or intention of creating a scenario where all models will have an equal chance, or even one where all models will be treated fairly. That's just impossible considering the scope involved here. But I do think that there is a desire to right some obvious wrongs, and while there will never be a completely equal playing field, the scales will end up being more balanced.
And given the scope and complexity of the situation, thats all we can ask for.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]