Street tires in IT??

[lateapex911]

I think the suggestions of 'changing the rules" or a "weight penalty/break' have all been done in the context of a regional gentlemans agreement or a race withing a race or that sort of thing. I might have failed to (re) mention that in my references, but I don't recall reading any serious suggestions to just change the National set of rules.

Now, it might have been discussed in blue sky terms like "Hmm, well IF you could figure out a standard deviation, and IF you could correlate that to weight then theoretically the ITAC COULD have a weight factor...." or the like.


The point is that expenses soared when the R tire that lasts maybe 10 cycles became the 'must have'.

It's too bad because it's such a waste of time and resources, not JUST money.

 

[Dano77]

In most IT class you may not be running in the top half, but you will be racing!!! (and being off by 3 seconds at WGI and 1 second at Lime Rock will not make you last in any IT class.) Don't use the excuse you can't afford Hoosiers so the rules should be changed. Run 200's and go have fun!!! Do NOT use tire expense as an excuse as to why you can't race.............

There is no getting around that but it can be done very inexpensively. I think my first season with my old GTi, running on Kumho's, i spent a total for the season (tires, motel, entry fees, repairs) about $5,500.

I would love to cut my tire bill by 75%. I'm all for giving Chump cars a place to play. I'm all for guys running 200's..

This was the main reason we all went to the Nitto NT-01 for the IT7 class. Making it affordable and fun. It may also be the reason we now have 10 cars in NER alone that all run on these tires.

Its not a 200tw tire but its cheap, available, and its fast and durable.

Pump gas, 1 set of tires, food and entrys for an entire season, tell us whats wrong with this.

 

[Xian]

I don't think anyone ever said that 200s are "almost as good as Hoosiers," in the sense that they would be competitive head-to-head.

Yeah... I know I said that they're "about as good as RA-1's/NT-01's" but that's a long way from "almost as good as Hoosiers".

 

[mossaidis]

"we're" addicts. That includes me...

 

[gran racing]

At Lime Rock, ITC and ITB cars are often flat from the left hander all the way thru the uphill, thru westbend and even down the downhill. They have cornering capability to spare.

I was pretty quick in my ITB Prelude adn can tell you that I most certainly braked for the uphill and westbend. Only sometimes I didn't in the downhill. Strangely I'm braking less in both of those areas with the ITA Miata. lol Although I don't have a lot more HP yet.

It's an opportunity for newbies to affordably race for the front against new friends and others to double dip on a budget.

IT fields are not that large. Keep them all together. Many of us including myself initially used inexpensive tires. I started off on SRF takeoffs.

 

[Knestis]

... Yes- SCCA should have a group built into at least some weekends that includes crossover cars and IT type cars ALL on street tires. It's an opportunity for newbies to affordably race for the front against new friends and others to double dip on a budget. ...

Now, see - this complicates and confounds things a bit.

If the point is to provide a place to double-dip existing IT cars, putting them on different tires makes no sense, as it will discourage doing so.

On the other hand, if an IT-flavored catchall class were to be created, that allowed cars not specifically prepped to GCR class rules (e.g., Chumpers) but equally did *not* prohibit IT cars as currently prepared - including R tires - then a region could get double bang for its buck. Existing IT guys/gals could double dip or put a second driver in for fun (on whatever tires they want) AND they could attract new cars.

If new Street Tire IT classes (think, otherwise GCR legal but with 200s) were to be introduced at the regional level, they might suck some cars out of "regular" IT ranks, and might bring some out of mothballs, but it seems unlikely to encourage multiple entries. Those new classes could run WITHIN the existing IT group(s).

A smart region might do BOTH an ITX catchall in a group separate from the existing IT classes, AND create "Street Tire" trophies within the IT classes. That's what I would do if I were king.

K

 

[1stgen]

There is a regional class for this...it's called ITE. I had no place to run my 1.8t swapped VW...but I didn't run around saying they should make a class so I could compete. Just run in IT-a,b,c,e or x on the street tires...I don't get this??!?!?! Why should SCCA go through the huge trouble to fuck up an already difficult to maintain set of IT rules? Just so people could try and level the playing field there so u could race on street tires? First off no one is addressing the fact that when a street tire let's go its abrupt and sudden. Having r comps on the cars makes for " safer" racing...with a more predictable car.

 

[autoxmike]

A smart region might do BOTH an ITX catchall in a group separate from the existing IT classes, AND create "Street Tire" trophies within the IT classes. That's what I would do if I were king.

K

Pretty much agree. If I were King I'd do this:

1) LeChump/Street Tire Catch all: Run this with the ITA,IT7 type run groups run group. I've run my LeChump MX-3 on street tires with these cars and there are cars that I can race with.


2) ITX Catch all. All IT-like cars can run there. Run separate from IT run groups which will allow double dipping multiple drivers for an IT car. Street tired cars can double dip here. This will allow an entire 3 or 4 driver LeChump crew to race during a club race weekend.

3) Class within a class for IT cars on street tires: Would give more reason for those that want to race in IT classes but want to cut cost of consumables...

Quantity discounts per car to encourage more race entries per car, sharing a car between drivers which will reduce per-driver event costs.

 

[autoxmike]

First off no one is addressing the fact that when a street tire let's go its abrupt and sudden. Having r comps on the cars makes for " safer" racing...with a more predictable car.

Not true at all with the current crop of High Performance street tires. Not even close. They are ESIER to drive on than race tires. They do not break away suddenly and are very easy to bring back if you push them over the limit.

Have you driven the Dunlop Direzza's, BFG Rival, or Hankook R-S3? I have over 3000 race miles on these tires and they aren't like that at all.

 

[Chip42]

There is a regional class for this...it's called ITE.

ITE is not nationally recognized, so not all regions HAVE such a class. the SEDIV, for example, recognizes SPO and SPU as catchall classes, and the safety requirements of these are prod based, not IT. true, in many cases it's 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other, but in addition to that, the SPU class in particular is pretty popular, with motorcycle-engine powered baby grands, thunder roadsters, and the like running 2-5 entries per event. not the right place to drop IT-speed cars with lesser cornering.

If I were king:

I'd have a nationally or at LEAST Division (conference?) recognized IT safety prep catchall class run WITH the/a IT run group and with regionally sanctioned enduros and long-format races (in SEDIV: CCPS, proIT, TCPS, ECR, TES, FES)

I'd have a street tire based regional championship "race within" existing IT classes. see how many people come out to play without diluting fields.

I'd consider adding another catchall class outside of IT run groups IF there was enough support for it AND if the above ideas played well. I certainly wouldn't have this in from the git go.

 

[Robbie]

There is a regional class for this...it's called ITE. I had no place to run my 1.8t swapped VW...but I didn't run around saying they should make a class so I could compete. Just run in IT-a,b,c,e or x on the street tires...I don't get this??!?!?! Why should SCCA go through the huge trouble to fuck up an already difficult to maintain set of IT rules? Just so people could try and level the playing field there so u could race on street tires? First off no one is addressing the fact that when a street tire let's go its abrupt and sudden. Having r comps on the cars makes for " safer" racing...with a more predictable car.

They don't let go all of the sudden. They are very progressive. I've driven Star Specs, RS3's and RE01R's on the track.

 

[Ron Earp]

Whatever happened to that guy that used to post about Chump all the time? I can't remember his name, does VWs and has a long advertising signature.

 

[1stgen]

Whatever happened to that guy that used to post about Chump all the time? I can't remember his name, does VWs and has a long advertising signature.

He's from Florida, FWD handbook I think?
IT is NOT a nationally recognized class, so.....not sure what you guys are talking àbout.
And if they work so well...run em, do car set up. Compete but doñt expect to win in a big fiełd....that's what I did in ITE. And almost every region has some sort of catch all class.

 

[lateapex911]

There is a regional class for this...it's called ITE. I had no place to run my 1.8t swapped VW...but I didn't run around saying they should make a class so I could compete. Just run in IT-a,b,c,e or x on the street tires...I don't get this??!?!?! Why should SCCA go through the huge trouble to fuck up an already difficult to maintain set of IT rules? Just so people could try and level the playing field there so u could race on street tires? First off no one is addressing the fact that when a street tire let's go its abrupt and sudden. Having r comps on the cars makes for " safer" racing...with a more predictable car.

Ahhh, the 'safety card" I love when it gets played.

First, have you driven on said tires??
Second, if a "predictable car' were so important that we didn't want people driving , "unpredictable cars", then half the field would be banned...

"

Why should SCCA go through the huge trouble"

? you ask...

Well, lets focus your argument on something thats actually being discussed. I think those of us actually suggesting the concept haven't said that the ITAC (SCCA) must create a whole new hierarchy and class structure...maybe it's been suggested that it would have been nice to do way back in the day, but thats quite different.

What IS being discussed is that theres a whole goup of racers out there and SCCA has largely not tapped them, and the crossover to SCCA isn't that severe.

And what could we do to make the jump more attractive???
yes yes, it's great to say, "When I was a young racer I didn't demand my own class, and I walked tow miles to school each way, uphill, in the snow!"

Yes yes yes, I too have spent way too much prepping my car to the max, I've worked my way from the bottom, but you know what?? WHO CARES?? The "pay your dues kid" rhetoric from old geezers like me aint gonna get new converts.

And WHY should people have to jump through stupid hoops?? Seriously, lets figure out a way...thats smart and effective, to get new guys racing with us. MAYbe we can't reinvent the club enough to attract them, MAYbe it would cost us existing stakeholders, but MAYbe we can fine a neat solution that works for everyone.
Thats why were noodling regional solutions.

I vote Kirk King.

 

[lawtonglenn]

...The point is that expenses soared when the R tire that lasts maybe 10 cycles became the 'must have'..

We only get 6 cycles before they become "mid pack" tires... This is by far our
biggest expense item in the entire budget

I could run the tires from cycle 7-12, but the psychological problem becomes
"why bother going if I'm not going to try my hardest to win"

So after cycle 6 they become "qualifying rubber" as I'm less interested in burning money
to get to be on the first or second row at the start... fourth or fifth row is fine, If I'm good
enough I will be able to make it up in the race, when I'm on "race rubber"

If everyone was running on NT01s, or even 200TWs, I'd be happy

.

 

[autoxmike]

IMHO the SCCA would benefit from a competitive class where people can race on a lower budget. Much lime I hear IT used to be. One obvious part of that equation is the new generation of street tires. If the SCCA doesn't figure it out then someone else will. For all of us SCCA folk that would be a bad thing. I was hoping that the IT crowd would be a bit more open to figuring out how to let ST cars be just a ltitle less uncompetitive. Wouldn't you all like to see more new blood And bigger field?

Maybe in the end the answer will be a catch all ST class evolving into something more like the IT of old with more limited prep?? Or just stay the course and hope NASA or Chump figure out the recipe...

 

[Chip42]

Maybe in the end the answer will be a catch all ST class evolving into something more like the IT of old with more limited prep?? Or just stay the course and hope NASA or Chump figure out the recipe...

The problem, mike, is that whatever changes happen have to happen alongside the stuff that doesn't change. adding run groups is NOT easy.

and I 100% disagree with rules changes. if people want to come and play in IT, but don't want to spend the purple cash, GREAT! they are welcome. to prove it, see the ideas for ITST/STC/IT200. you know where I'm going with this. equating things that aren't linearly different is very hard. creating a new objective to encourage people to use 200s and supporting that with a series and championship within the existing framework is not only easy to implement, but can be controlled by the local / regional racers and is not dependent upon the ITAC, CRB, BoD, local BoG, etc... those of us who want to participate in region need to agree on a few things and get someone to manage and administer this thing and it's go.

use THAT to attract new blood. use THAT to show the strengths of 200s. Use THAT data for any future adventure into rulesmaking.

1stGen:
Mike Ogren is the CFR guy you are asking about. I too have noted the thunderous silence of his absence on this topic.

also - IT is a nationally recognized category, consisting of ITC, B, A, S, and R. that's why it's in the GCR. IT is a Regional only class, not National (big N), but anymore that just means you can't run majors or the runoffs. classes with rules and identities maintained by a region are regionally recognized classes, and Regional only (big R).

 

[pfcs]

jest sayin"

IT was born when Cal-Club (SCCA) started a new regional class based on 1963 production car rules.
It quickly became the most popular regional sedan class, and in 1984, was adopted on the east coast, running under special "suggested" ruleset under the umbrella of Showroom Stock.
When national adopted it and published rules (85?), I believe the first paragraph read: (sic) "Improved Touring is INTENDED (my emphasis) to be a true dual purpose class where members may race vehicles that can be driven on the street"
There was actual angina over the possibiity that the rules should require un-leaded fuel lest SCCA run afoul of EPA regulations!
Hard to imagine today grasshopper?? Certainly is for recent converts.
National was very concerned about "junk car racing". (Doug Reed, dir of club racing, queried me at length about this with good reason!) but the class survived the gestation period pretty much intact, and hundreds (thousands?) of new cars were being prepared and bolstering the ranks of a not-so-healthy club.

So be in possibility please!
Be in the possibility that somehow a re-birth of reason and reasonableness might imagine a new way forward that rhymes with Improved Touring as it was and always should have been!
OK, all you inside the box revisionists can pile on and tell me how everything that morphed IT into a mess was well, good, and oh so necessary!
Bullshit!

 

[autoxmike]

Chip,

I agee that adding new classes, run groups etc is next to impossible. My last post was more a reflection of what would be nice to somehow happen, and some musings on what could happen if another group "invents" s successful race class similar to IT but focusing on keepingvthr cost of racing down.

And I certainly appreciate you support of a "class within a class" for street tires. If be interested in working with you to make that happen in SEDiv

 

[JeffYoung]

Be in the possibility that somehow a re-birth of reason and reasonableness might imagine a new way forward that rhymes with Improved Touring as it was and always should have been!
OK, all you inside the box revisionists can pile on and tell me how everything that morphed IT into a mess was well, good, and oh so necessary!
Bullshit!

Your first point, we're working on it and agree.

Your second, lame and unnecessary.