I apologize for the weight gain and loss statement. I don't have the ready info to back that up, only what I've heard from other drivers in other classes. Sorry to sound a little like Mattberg on that one.
[/b]
Cool, the adds and subtractions have been very systematic, and have NOT been the result of "My car is too heavy" or "He is too fast, give him weight". Without getting too deep in history, the clasification process was, at one time, done without the aid of a process, and it was done by what is currently called the CRB...and they had WAY too much to do...so things were a bit out of sync. Initially, the ITAC tested the waters by actually moving cars down a class where it felt it was appropriate, by utilizing a not really recognized option in the rulebook. Next, the PCA process went before the membership, was supported, and approved, and then began the realignment process. Of course cars were given weight breaks they (it turns out, in hindsight) just couldn't quite make, and others gained weight that brought protests from those who felt that their superior car crafting and racecraft were being punished. But it's been very systematic, and I'd wager most who have some institutional memory feel it's a better world today than it was as little as 2 -3 years ago.
I agree that not wanting other cars in my class is not a smart thing when the class is getting weaker. But the Mini Cooper example is an excellent one. Perhaps the thinking in B and C is we just want to be left alone. I can't answer that, it's only a conjecture. Perhaps, like our cars, we are old and slow. I've heard that excuse used and implied before.
[/b]
Things haven't been NOT been put in B or C because of objections from the drivers....but rather because the cars that have been brought before the ITAC to be classified haven't FIT the C or B classes often.
In regard to the example of the A Civic getting put into B...I stand by what I said. True, the process has changed, and I have no idea how many requests are sent by the general racing public to get a car's class changed. The only thing, other than personal history, I have to go by is what I read in Fastrack. Those requests are all too often responded by, "Thanks for your input, but the car is competitive where it is classed". There may not be room for a complete explanation, but that one seems pretty cold.
[/b]
yes, I can see that it does, and I agree. But it's often thebest answer, as another explanation would run way too long, and wind up in the same place. There are times that we table something for more research, and I think you've seen at least 4 ITAC guys on here soliciting opinions and reading the minds of the IT community.
When I tried to get my car into B from A where it would have a chance, I was told that there was a process through the ITAC board...by the board members. I was not alone in my request as there were at least seven other drivers of similar cars that were simultaneously going through the process in some manner. I personally contacted each of the members of the ITAC by phone and in person with my plea, race statistics, and performance numbers. I wrote letters to the various boards and to other competitors that I thought would be concerned. At one time, Fastrack informed us that the car would be moved to B the following year. It didn't happen, and I received a letter to inform me, "Thanks for your input, but the car is competitive where it is classed."
[/b]
Keep in mind that the structure needs to break things into 4 boxes, from a wide range of capabilities, and make them race well together. Some cars are just "tweeners". My car is one that many consider such. Some say it's a fine B car on thinner wheels and a bit of weight, others think thats "Crazy"! But the A to B move is problematic.....the ITAC needs to see a CLEAR need to as it can create a situation where racers across the country need to junk 3 sets of wheels and buy 3 more sets. Or worse, certain cars can wind up needing a complete recage.
It, like so many in ITC are old and gone now. There are a bunch of good cars listed to play in ITC, but they've been absorbed into the junk yards of lore. Detroit, Japan, Europe, and anywhere else that makes cars doesn't make anything so crude and slow as is required to be in ITC. Asking the membership what they would like to see put in the class is a cross between admitting defeat and self serving.
Past time to go, I've got way to much to do. [/b]
Your last comment confuses me. Many say that the ITAC should be proactive and class cars without requests being made. But when the topic was brought up...by a non ITAC member, by the way,.... you call it "self serving" and an "Admission of failure"?
Hardly! The simple fact of the matter is that the majority of new or wanna be racers are, guess what...younger.....and they just don't remember the 80s when the GTI was the fasted and coolest car and 1200 Civics where everywhere. No, they remember an Eclipse as being OK, but slow in the non turbo form. I just don't think there's that much
desire from many to race in ITC. Sure we can argue rationally that it's ONLY 2 or 3 seconds a lap slower than B, and that it's a lot of great racing for very little money, but lets face it...we're racers...and racing isn't rational!
cars like the mx3 1600 could go to C the beetle is there so should the same other cars with the same drivetrain...nissan sentra (it may already be there but it will still be too slow((sohc)) an assortment of 3 cylinder geo/daiatsu (sp?) type econoboxes etc.
as for stupid rules i'm sure it has been listed...if your car came standard with a radio it can be removed...but not the speakers! [/b]
If we ditched the 5 year rule, the Honda Fit would be a great fit..
And on the speakers thing, that should hit Fastrack soon, it's been cleared up.
