Prep Differences Between SM and ITx

Greg, I agree 100% but allowing the de-powered rack makes the transition much easier and is probably the number 1 abused/overlooked rule for Miatas crossing over to IT.

So, we pass off this list and suddenly we are tossing cars at a wholesale rate!

What we can't afford, as a club, is to drive away more entries.:dead_horse:
 
ner88 said:
Greg, I agree 100% but allowing the de-powered rack makes the transition much easier and is probably the number 1 abused/overlooked rule for Miatas crossing over to IT.

So, we pass off this list and suddenly we are tossing cars at a wholesale rate!

What we can't afford, as a club, is to drive away more entries.:dead_horse:
Click to expand...

the answer is a very narrow view on what is allowed in IT that has served the class well over the decades, but still always seen as a stodgy and out of touch by many current participants. long term, it's best to leave the rules alone. short term, we need the entries, and Miatas are a lot of those. we have to make the decision individually about how much we care about rule infractions vs. numbers on track, and hope that works out well for the club.

the Miata is the best and worst thing to ever happen to the club in my lifetime.
 
where do you drawer the line???
Click to expand...

Very simple. For regional racing you draw a line at a point that offers the most entries. There is no performance difference between a factory manual, or human de-powered steering.

I plan on towing (6 hours) from New Jersey to NHMS for the entire season just, because I can run in multiple classes. One race is not enough. Therefore, at regional level, it is more important to allow people to run, even though they are not fully compliant, especially when the rule is silly. Dura Lex Sed Lex does not work in club racing.
 
^ Do you actually believe allowing STL Integra in SM would create more entries, or people would give up on SM all together?

I'm talking bigger picture here. Allow cars to run in multiple classes by removing rules that make them illegal if the rules itself are weak, and violating them does not change the performance of the car in question. In English: fix the rules and do not shoot yourself in the foot.
 
HERE WE GO! I agree 1000000000% Along these lines of thought.

My ITA 85 RX7 is eligable for STL and STU as it sits. But wait theres more, It can run EP and GT2 GT3 and GTL as it sits. Wanna keep going

Eligable GT2and3 cars are legal TA3 cars in Trans-am. Ergo I can run my IT car in Trans-Am this season. As it sits, cause some of those rules are "outdated, silly, insert adjective here."

GIVE ME A BREAK

The original question was correct, what are the differences between IT and SM as it pertains to STL. And now we are going into the whole" Im cheating, but the rules dont make sense so change them for me. That way Im not cheating anymore"

There is a process in place for this. Follow it and live with the effing results. We shouldnt just start allowing stuff cause "Its all about my car"

Ready....... GO
 
Greg Amy said:
"In English": the rules aren't broken, especially just because a bunch of Spec Miata drivers don't like them.

- GA
Click to expand...

Not thinking the SM drivers 'don't like them'...I honestly think they have no clue how their cars are or aren't legal for their IT classes. They just run.

What needs to happen is a reset of expectations of the SM guys if the ST guys are having some heartburn over SM cars or ITS 99's with depowered racks filling their fields. Like I said, it seems as if the IT guys would have the heartburn first because the SM's are much closer to their performance envelope than they are to STL.
 
Very simple. For regional racing you draw a line at a point that offers the most entries. There is no performance difference between a factory manual, or human de-powered steering.
Click to expand...

That's cool. As long as there are no points or trophies being awarded for ANYONE. An open-passing, no-classes, run-whatcha-brung track deal would be a hoot but it's not "racing," unless everyone on the track is competing for the same overall trophies.

K
 
awegrzyn said:
Very simple. For regional racing you draw a line at a point that offers the most entries. There is no performance difference between a factory manual, or human de-powered steering. (see #1 below)

I plan on towing (6 hours) from New Jersey to NHMS for the entire season just, because I can run in multiple classes. One race is not enough. (see #2 below) Therefore, at regional level, it is more important to allow people to run, even though they are not fully compliant, especially when the rule is silly. (#4) Dura Lex Sed Lex does not work in club racing.
Click to expand...

awegrzyn said:
^ Do you actually believe allowing STL Integra in SM would create more entries, or people would give up on SM all together?

I'm talking bigger picture here. Allow cars to run in multiple classes by removing rules that make them illegal (#3) if the rules itself are weak, and violating them does not change the performance of the car in question. In English: fix the rules and do not shoot yourself in the foot.
Click to expand...

1- If there is no performance advantage, then WHY are they modified??
2- If you want to run more races, why no run in ITE??? The car FITS -legally- in ITE. So whats wrong with that?
3- WHY should the ENTIRE CATEGORY of IT change the rules to suit guys with Miatas who: A want to double dip in IT (But COULD double dip elsewhere) when OTHER cars in teh ITCS (over three HUNDRED of them) will see performance changes...and not all of them will see EQUAL performance changes?
4- I understand that YOU, in YOUR car, think a rule in ANOTHER category is "silly", and that it affects YOUR choices and situation, but, I'm confused at how you can completely ignore that entire rest of the world and how it affects them.
 
lateapex911 said:
4- I understand that YOU, in YOUR car, think a rule in ANOTHER category is "silly", and that it affects YOUR choices and situation, but, I'm confused at how you can completely ignore that entire rest of the world and how it affects them.
Click to expand...

and this is why THIS is getting so much attention from a lot of people.

note that I don't disagree with Jake, but there's a lot of people who want to compete on very terms. seems that lately there are more of "them" than "us".
 
lateapex911 said:
1- If there is no performance advantage, then WHY are they modified??
Click to expand...

Because most cars come with them and it's super easy just to bypass instead of buying a manual rack and then doing a R&R.

There is a slight ratio difference but I know just as many who like the manual as like the de-powered..
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
Because most cars come with them and it's super easy just to bypass instead of buying a manual rack and then doing a R&R.

There is a slight ratio difference but I know just as many who like the manual as like the de-powered..
Click to expand...
So most cars come with power steering?
And most people disable it.
Why?
I understand it's easier than converting to the slower ratio manual, but that doesn't get to the core question:
WHY do it at all?
 
Chip42 said:
and this is why THIS is getting so much attention from a lot of people.

note that I don't disagree with Jake, but there's a lot of people who want to compete on very terms. seems that lately there are more of "them" than "us".
Click to expand...

I'm not following?
"There's a lot of people who want to compete on very terms"?
Does very =even??
Is Chump really 'even terms"?????



Going back to the steering thing, it has been turned down by the ITAC because some cars have it in IT some don't. They have all classed based on the assumption that they have it. Having it takes power to run it.
If the rule were changed, the concern was that it wouldn't affect all cars equally across the board.
As a ruling body, it's not the ITACs concern to worry about what Spec Miatas want when they decide to double and triple dip. Most regions have an IT'X" class specifically so that SMs can double dip. There's also ITE. So I think the ITAC sees that, and sees that there would be a "cost" to IT, and there are other viable solutions for the SM'ers, and decided to hold station on that rule.
 
lateapex911 said:
I'm not following?
"There's a lot of people who want to compete on very terms"?
Does very =even??
Is Chump really 'even terms"?????



Going back to the steering thing, it has been turned down by the ITAC because some cars have it in IT some don't. They have all classed based on the assumption that they have it. Having it takes power to run it.
If the rule were changed, the concern was that it wouldn't affect all cars equally across the board.
As a ruling body, it's not the ITACs concern to worry about what Spec Miatas want when they decide to double and triple dip. Most regions have an IT'X" class specifically so that SMs can double dip. There's also ITE. So I think the ITAC sees that, and sees that there would be a "cost" to IT, and there are other viable solutions for the SM'ers, and decided to hold station on that rule.
Click to expand...

oops - yes even terms. as in "rules" - they are seen as a hindrance and annoyance by many. long term they are wrong. short term, they are having fun and we are suffering.

agreed 100% with Jake on the reasons for IT power steering depower rules, but in the case of an oddball like the Miata, I personally have no issue with a PS rack being depowered as the no PS rack is already allowed on the same specline, but it IS illegal and for the good of the category as a whole, will remain that way.
 
lateapex911 said:
So most cars come with power steering?
And most people disable it.
Why?
I understand it's easier than converting to the slower ratio manual, but that doesn't get to the core question:
WHY do it at all?
Click to expand...

Because the de-powered rack provides enough feel and doesn't require too much effort to operate...and you get to eliminate the belt/lines/fluids that can cause pain. Like Chip said, because a non-powered option is there, this is just easier. Not advocating, just saying.

I like the rule as is.
 
I gave up on the topic, but then I read this:

Going back to the steering thing, it has been turned down by the ITAC because some cars have it in IT some don't. They have all classed based on the assumption that they have it. Having it takes power to run it.
If the rule were changed, the concern was that it wouldn't affect all cars equally across the board.
Click to expand...

So let's follow the logic here. ITAC assumes every car has power steering, but they know some don't. ITAC classifies all cars based on the assumption they have it.

Most Miatas have power steering, but some don't. ITAC classifies both types of Miatas on the same assumption that they have it, and they did not penalize the Miatas with the manual steering rack. Neither did they penalize other type of cars with manual steering.

You say above, it takes power to run power steering. I agree. Mazda Miata with power steering is going to be slower than one with a manual. ITAC is already OK with such a big difference, therefore, there is no reason to complain about de-powered racks.
 
Man's actually got a point there... ^^^^

But then again, I've lobbied for de-powering the racks in IT for years. I consider it insignificant for performance difference.

But...the rulez is da rulez. :shrug:

- GA
 
awegrzyn said:
I gave up on the topic, but then I read this:



So let's follow the logic here. ITAC assumes every car has power steering, but they know some don't. ITAC classifies all cars based on the assumption they have it.

Most Miatas have power steering, but some don't. ITAC classifies both types of Miatas on the same assumption that they have it, and they did not penalize the Miatas with the manual steering rack. Neither did they penalize other type of cars with manual steering.

You say above, it takes power to run power steering. I agree. Mazda Miata with power steering is going to be slower than one with a manual. ITAC is already OK with such a big difference, therefore, there is no reason to complain about de-powered racks.
Click to expand...

Actually, I mis wrote that. The ITAC parses each car and decides if it's better as one line or as two, for a variety of reasons. Certain cars come with power steering only, some as an option, some not at all.
It's likely (I wasn't there for all the cars classed!) that the cars get classed based on the hp levels that the ITAC can gleen, which are dependent on installed equipment. So, if they were to allow de powering of all cars, some would wind up in an advantageous positions. It's a rule change that doesn't treat all cars equally. Yes, it's certainly insignificant in some cases but not all.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
Because the de-powered rack provides enough feel and doesn't require too much effort to operate...and you get to eliminate the belt/lines/fluids that can cause pain. Like Chip said, because a non-powered option is there, this is just easier. Not advocating, just saying.

I like the rule as is.
Click to expand...

OK, but it seems to me that stating that there is no performance benefit isn't true then.
Otherwise people wouldn't do it.
(Based on the base assumption that Kirk can explain better than I, that more reliability, better feel, etc etc are all performance benefits)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top