The new ITA class

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Originally posted by Turfer:
Plus creating a situation where all the post 6/1/94 .095 wall cages would be illegal.

Rick
Click to expand...

So, 60lbs ain't gonna do much of anything, now is it?

Except, the weight listed for building a cage is NOT the same weight we race to. They are using an assumed 180 pounds for driver etc...

So.....the CRX weight, as raced, is currently 2140. Subtract 180 to get the actual vehcle weight: 1960. Adding 200 pounds would result in a weight of 2160, which is well below the .095 tubing wall thickness limit of 2200lbs.

So, while it aint gonna happen, it's not because of that....

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited May 04, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
One thing to consider is that when you add weight, the goal can't be to just slow the cars down "x" per lap. You have to look at the whole race. More weight equals more wear on tires, more use of brakes, etc. It would take it's toll over the course of the ENTIRE race as opposed to bringing the qualifying times perfectly in line.
Click to expand...

Good point, however, the tire equation would only really affect the heaviest cars. The CRX would still have an advantage there, as it would still be a lighter car. Also, with the new Hoosier and Kumho tires, it doesn't seem that they fall off as much during the race. The extra weight might not make a difference. Brakes are a possibility, but I don't think tire life is part of the argument.

Jeremy
 
CRX brakes are better than the competition as well, drop that factor.
 
The results for MARRS I are up. ITS and ITA are running together this year. Here's the finishing order by class. The first column is the number of cars in the class, then the class. The first 4 finishers were ITS, next 2 ITA, next 1 ITS, next 6 ITA and so on.

4 S
2 A
1 S
6 A
1 S
9 A
1 S
8 A
2 S
2 A

Anyone care to comment?

[This message has been edited by JoelG (edited May 11, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by JoelG:
The first 4 finishers were ITS, next 2 ITA, next 1 ITS, next 6 ITA and so on.
...

Anyone care to comment?
Click to expand...

It would be more useful if you'd list the cars as well...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
Originally posted by JoelG:
...Anyone care to comment?
Click to expand...

Sure.

If we went strictly by finishing positions (or lap times over some race distance) you could include all kinds of different cars in one class. Call it "Formula 2:15-2:20 at VIR" or "Spec 2 Minutes at Pacific Raceways," or whatever. I'm not going to go through finish data at work but I'll bet you could find formula, production, and GT cars that all fit into that same mix...

Cars should be classified based on their physical attributes and let the times fall where they will.

K
 
OK here's another idea... (ducking slightly)...

add weight ONLY to the top finishing cars in each race... similar to how the Speed Channel touring/GT series runs.

It's a cheap alternative to allowing the slower folks a chance to be competitive. This isn't my idea, just something I've seen done in other racing series(s)(es).

I can see this being both a benefit and a complete waste, however I do think this idea will have the added affect of keeping costs down. This IS in line with what IT is supposed to be about, yes?

Reward weight... Trophies made of lead that have to be bolted into the car.
wink.gif


blast away!
smile.gif


------------------
-dave
8)
http://www.nerdsracing.com

[This message has been edited by emwavey (edited May 11, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by emwavey:
OK here's another idea... (ducking slightly)...
Click to expand...

Dave,
Duck a little lower. If this ever happens, we will not race IT again. What's the point? This isn't horse racing. We spend a lot of time and effort on our IT car. Most of our $$ expended goes for consumables and entry fees. While our budget is probably larger than most teams, we spend a lot of time on the track.

We discussed this in the last year or so on this list. How do you make this work. Do you, for example, give Chris 20 lbs every time he wins a race? What happens when he goes out of division where the competition is different? Do you take off all of that weight and start over? It would be a mess.

As far as I am concerned, this is not an option.



------------------
Lesley Albin
Over The Limit Racing
Blazen Golden Retrievers
 
Originally posted by OTLimit:
As far as I am concerned, this is not an option.
Click to expand...

I'm with you Lesley...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
Originally posted by Banzai240:
It would be more useful if you'd list the cars as well...
Click to expand...

Not sure where Joel was going with the post, but if it helps -

Top 5 ITS cars were: BMW, 240Z, 240Z, 240Z, 280Z. Margin of victory 28 seconds. Worth noting that another BMW was leading when it went out on lap 8.

Top 5 in ITA were: CRX, CRX, 240SX, CRX, 240SX. Margin of victory .2 seconds. Top 3 cars' best laps were within .5 seconds.

Only 9 ITS cars. And of those, only 1 RX7. Interesting.

------------------
Earl R
Aspiring 240SX pilot
 
Originally posted by JoelG:
The results for MARRS I are up. ITS and ITA are running together this year. Here's the finishing order by class. The first column is the number of cars in the class, then the class. The first 4 finishers were ITS, next 2 ITA, next 1 ITS, next 6 ITA and so on.

4 S
2 A
1 S
6 A
1 S
9 A
1 S
8 A
2 S
2 A

Anyone care to comment?

[This message has been edited by JoelG (edited May 11, 2004).]
Click to expand...

Looks like a wide range of cars and prep levels.
smile.gif



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Dave - actually it is a GREAT idea, but not quite right for IT. I could see it used as an additional class in a particular region if it was started that way.
 
Reward weight has a LOT of arguments against it in this situation, including...

** Presumes that the same core of people race each other all the time

** Compromises overachievment for the sake of the show

** Doesn't accommodate switching series (regions, divisions, whatever)

Etc. I can't see it being viable but it works great for high-visibility pro series.

K
 
Hey guys...

Thanks for not taking my head off... should have ducked a little lower.

I'm really green to all this stuff, but I've read a lot, and have heard quite a bit from different people in the SCCA about road racing in general. I'm interested in seeing IT and other forms of racing continue to exist and be attractive to not only folks in it now, but also see newbies continue to keep this sport alive.

After reading everything here it just seemed like the only thing not mentioned... weight is cheap to add, but difficult to subtract.

So from what I can gather adding and having the weight change a car is, or can be extremely costly? Am I getting that right?... meaning it can throw corner weights off, set up off, brakes and tires and gas all get consumed more quickly...

-dave, the newbie-dude
 
Originally posted by erlrich:
Not sure where Joel was going with the post, but if it helps -

Top 5 ITS cars were: BMW, 240Z, 240Z, 240Z, 280Z. Margin of victory 28 seconds. Worth noting that another BMW was leading when it went out on lap 8.

Top 5 in ITA were: CRX, CRX, 240SX, CRX, 240SX. Margin of victory .2 seconds. Top 3 cars' best laps were within .5 seconds.

Only 9 ITS cars. And of those, only 1 RX7. Interesting.
Click to expand...

So, combining all this info, we get:

1. ITS - BMW
2. ITS - 240Z
3. ITS - 240Z
4. ITS - 240Z
5. ITA - CRX
6. ITA - CRX
7. ITS - 280Z
8. ITA - 240SX
9. ITA - CRX
10. ITA - 240SX

If I were to infer anything from this, it's that the 240Z is still a great ITS car... The BMW is still an overdog in the class... and that basing our reclassification efforts on the specifications of the CRX, the 240SX and the Acura is the right thing to do...

....that's IF I were to infer anything from this...
wink.gif



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
FWIW, we just ran a regional at LRP. Just take a look at the subcribed numbers:

ITS:20
ITA:29
ITB:18
ITC:4

Plus, there was an ITA car that could have won ITS, and an ITC car that would have taken the pole in ITB.

We really need to continue dropping cars down the ranks!
 
I don't think that a couple of guys in a couple cars should have anything to do with what class the car should be in. One good driver that spent lots of time with the car can win overall in an ITB car...I see it all the time (darn fast yellow car), that does not mean that car should be in ITS it just means that guy is very good, and knows his car.
 
Originally posted by emwavey:
Hey guys...

Thanks for not taking my head off... should have ducked a little lower.

I'm really green to all this stuff...

-dave, the newbie-dude
Click to expand...

Dave,

You are in the middle of a classic racing debate: Should the winner be determined by the resources (effort, talent, time, $) a competitor is willing to put forth to win, or should "adjustments" be made so everyone has a (theoretically) equal shot at victory?

Different strokes for different folks.

------------------
Gregg Baker, P.E.
Isaac, LLC
http://www.isaacdirect.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top