I have the solution. And no it is not original. We need a new class between ITA and ITB.
IMHO….
ITS is looking much better with the 2.0L cars dropping to A.
ITA CRX’s have a bunch of cars to battle in full fields. (even without the slower 75%)
ITB and ITC seem to be working fairly well.
One way to do it is the method Solo2 has used to deal with faster cars: move ALL ITC to ITD, ALL ITB to ITC, and the slow 75% of ITA to ITB (and now let ITB can use 7” rims). If you look at Solo2, it has been wildly successful with a zillion different classes. IT is very popular, and there is no downfall to having more classes. In fact, it makes race days even easier to schedule because multiple classes can run together.
Anyone care to comment (besides Bill)?
IMHO….
ITS is looking much better with the 2.0L cars dropping to A.
ITA CRX’s have a bunch of cars to battle in full fields. (even without the slower 75%)
ITB and ITC seem to be working fairly well.
One way to do it is the method Solo2 has used to deal with faster cars: move ALL ITC to ITD, ALL ITB to ITC, and the slow 75% of ITA to ITB (and now let ITB can use 7” rims). If you look at Solo2, it has been wildly successful with a zillion different classes. IT is very popular, and there is no downfall to having more classes. In fact, it makes race days even easier to schedule because multiple classes can run together.
Anyone care to comment (besides Bill)?
Banzai240
New member
Guys... Humour me...
I need a list of ITC cars that people consider to be hopeless in that class...
Basically, anything that's slower than a 510, CRX, or VW...
For that matter, you might as well give me the same thing for ITB...
If you can't come up with a SUBSTANTIAL list from ITC, then any talk about inserting another class is really pointless, because we have 4 classes, two of which are currently undersubscribed in most parts of the country... I don't think there is a need for another class within the existing top and bottom limits of the current structure... If anything, we need another class on the top to fit in some of the newer V6, etc. cars that are out there (350Z, RX-8, S2000, etc...) There CERTAINLY is little need for anything below C...
Give me your lists and lets see what the real scope of the problem is and what we might be able to do to correct it...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
I need a list of ITC cars that people consider to be hopeless in that class...
Basically, anything that's slower than a 510, CRX, or VW...
For that matter, you might as well give me the same thing for ITB...
If you can't come up with a SUBSTANTIAL list from ITC, then any talk about inserting another class is really pointless, because we have 4 classes, two of which are currently undersubscribed in most parts of the country... I don't think there is a need for another class within the existing top and bottom limits of the current structure... If anything, we need another class on the top to fit in some of the newer V6, etc. cars that are out there (350Z, RX-8, S2000, etc...) There CERTAINLY is little need for anything below C...
Give me your lists and lets see what the real scope of the problem is and what we might be able to do to correct it...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
Darin - read my post again. I am not proposing a class for cars slower than ITC. All I'm saying is that we split ITA into 2. I also agree that a class above ITS in the future would be good as well. ITX? ITSS?
FWIW, ITC is the only class in NER that you might consider "undersubscribed", but it routinely attracts more cars than any production, touring, or ss class in our regionals. And furthermore it has excellent and close racing every race (even if there are only 9 or so of them), and makes a great place for people to start racing.
At Limerock, ITA is routinely oversubscribed, and it is getting to the point where our region is actually turning away drivers. With the new cars coming down from ITS, I see this situation getting even worse. Taking NER as an example, splitting ITA into 2 classes could make a pair of 20 car races instead of 40 car field that would require some cars being sent away. Ideal, and it pisses of NOBODY. (except probably Bill for a reason that I haven't thought of yet)
FWIW, ITC is the only class in NER that you might consider "undersubscribed", but it routinely attracts more cars than any production, touring, or ss class in our regionals. And furthermore it has excellent and close racing every race (even if there are only 9 or so of them), and makes a great place for people to start racing.
At Limerock, ITA is routinely oversubscribed, and it is getting to the point where our region is actually turning away drivers. With the new cars coming down from ITS, I see this situation getting even worse. Taking NER as an example, splitting ITA into 2 classes could make a pair of 20 car races instead of 40 car field that would require some cars being sent away. Ideal, and it pisses of NOBODY. (except probably Bill for a reason that I haven't thought of yet)
Also, in NER ITA is almost always the largest group of cars. SM sometimes will beat it, but ITA is usually a much larger group that ITS, ITB, or ITC. With the ITS->ITA changes, I would guess that the 2005 season may see ITA fields that are approx twice as large as any other IT field. Splitting ITA into 2 would be perfect.
Darin,
I have an ITB one for ya'
Why is an '83-'88 Scirocco II 8V (2270#) listed 90 pounds heavier than the '83-'84 Rabbit GTI (2180#) when all of their specs are the same?
By the way, the '83-'84 Rabbit GTI could use a little weight off as well.
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by theenico (edited April 10, 2004).]
I have an ITB one for ya'
Why is an '83-'88 Scirocco II 8V (2270#) listed 90 pounds heavier than the '83-'84 Rabbit GTI (2180#) when all of their specs are the same?
By the way, the '83-'84 Rabbit GTI could use a little weight off as well.
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by theenico (edited April 10, 2004).]
Originally posted by Jake:
Darin - read my post again. I am not proposing a class for cars slower than ITC. All I'm saying is that we split ITA into 2. I also agree that a class above ITS in the future would be good as well. ITX? ITSS?
FWIW, ITC is the only class in NER that you might consider "undersubscribed", but it routinely attracts more cars than any production, touring, or ss class in our regionals. And furthermore it has excellent and close racing every race (even if there are only 9 or so of them), and makes a great place for people to start racing.
At Limerock, ITA is routinely oversubscribed, and it is getting to the point where our region is actually turning away drivers. With the new cars coming down from ITS, I see this situation getting even worse. Taking NER as an example, splitting ITA into 2 classes could make a pair of 20 car races instead of 40 car field that would require some cars being sent away. Ideal, and it pisses of NOBODY. (except probably Bill for a reason that I haven't thought of yet)
Actually, what you should do is split ITS in two AND ITA in two and merge the top and bottom of each. Then you allow the faster stuff into ITS - more on par with the 325/944S.
NER's actual average per event (NERRC):
ITS: 17.0
ITA: 19.3
ITB: 11.6
ITC: 4.7
SM: 26.4
In NER, where ITA and ITC run together, it's a great pair. Average run group size in 2003:
ITS/ITB: 28.6
ITA/ITC: 24.0
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Is it possible that there is an aero difference to compensate for?
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Bill Miller
New member
Andy, This is pretty much what I've been saying for the past 18 - 24 months, since the whole IT2 concepted was first broached. Adding another class to catch the cars above ITS would be a proactive move. You just can't fit all the new cars into two classes (as evidenced by the underdogs in ITS that are getting moved out). If the cars were different enough to be in SSB and SSC, how can anyone in their right mind think they'll be similar in ITS?
And George, where was a formal, official explanation given?
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Fastrack. I think it was a couple of months ago. The last few months have been a bit of a blur for me, so I don't remember exactly, but I know it was there.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
lateapex911
Super Moderator
May 04 describes the procedure, which is not exactly earth shattering so I won't waste my time typing it here. Page F74.
Suffice it to say that you, Bill, will not be happy nor satisfied.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited April 11, 2004).]
Not really what i was saying. You take the bottom of ITS, and the top of ITA and make it one class. That leaves a new 'ITR' using Kirk's term and then the new class is ITS, then ITB becomes ITA, etc. Then you have one more class (performance envelope) to get more cars into that gereral area.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Thanks for clarifying, in that case I don't agree with you. You can’t just take the lower 50 or 75% (cars that can’t compete with the 325) and lump them in with the ITA CRX/240/Miata/Acura. That will screw up those “fast” ITA cars. What you can do is move some ITS cars, case-by-case, (after requests have been made) into “fast” ITA, with additional weight in some cases (as has been done to the praises and appreciation of many) as to not screw up the “fast” ITA balance. You can also split off the slower 75% of ITA cars (RX7 and slower?) into their own class. You can do this, because it doesn’t screw up anybody.
The ITR idea is great and needs to happen since cars just keep getting faster and faster. However, I feel the ITA split addresses an immediate need due to two tiers of ITA cars as well as the potential of oversubscribed ITA races in the future. Those 350Z cars you mention can run today in T2, and won’t be IT eligible for a couple of years. For those who are against even more IT classes, I would predict that ITR would just begin to flourish just as ITC officially dies.
Bill Miller
New member
Jake Gulick,
Do you mean where it says "The SCCA will specify the minimum weight for each car classified, as qualified or raced, with driver." If that's what you were talking aaabout, I'd hardly call that a statement or explanation of 'the process'.
Jake (the other one),
Why would ITC need to 'officially die'? Why would you want to lose theose drivers? Bottom line is that an increased level of granularity in the IT classes is needed to properly serve {b]all[/b] the cars out there. I just don't see PCAs aaddressing this issue adeequately.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Do you mean where it says "The SCCA will specify the minimum weight for each car classified, as qualified or raced, with driver." If that's what you were talking aaabout, I'd hardly call that a statement or explanation of 'the process'.
Jake (the other one),
Why would ITC need to 'officially die'? Why would you want to lose theose drivers? Bottom line is that an increased level of granularity in the IT classes is needed to properly serve {b]all[/b] the cars out there. I just don't see PCAs aaddressing this issue adeequately.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
AB,
There isn't a straightaway in the country that is long enough to take advantage of the Scirocco's marginally better aero with an IT engine (The cars accelerate indentically up to 105 mph). In GP trim it may be a different story.
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by theenico (edited April 11, 2004).]
There isn't a straightaway in the country that is long enough to take advantage of the Scirocco's marginally better aero with an IT engine (The cars accelerate indentically up to 105 mph). In GP trim it may be a different story.
------------------
Nico
KCRaceware (816) 257-7305
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by theenico (edited April 11, 2004).]
dominojd
New member
I don't think he means move 50 to 75% of cars that can't compete with the 325. My feelings are that the cars that are getting moved to ITA are cars that should have never been in ITS in the first place. Look at it this way the Sentra or NX 2000 was classified in ITS around the same time as the RX 7. What were they thinking back then? As far as messing up the Fast ITA cars we'll use Greg A NX as an example probably one of if not the best prepped ITS bottom feeder around the area he is still more than 1 sec of of the track record at LRP with his best lap ever. How does this screw up fast ITA cars. This pretty much a good fit. Along with the neons,prelude and so forth.
As far as adding a class above ITS it is inevitable. If I can run 108's-109's at LRP with a stock 2002 Nissan SE-R Spec V w/ street tires (FAlken Azenis) and a good set of brake pads (Carbotech Panther +). The 350Z must be pretty damn close to ITS times in stock trim. I think this car would make the BMW's look slow in IT trim.
Just my opinions no flaming please.
------------------
Crazy Joe
#7 ITS pilot
[This message has been edited by dominojd (edited April 11, 2004).]
Joe - please read Andy and my posts again. I won't bother everyone with all the quotes this time. I agree with you. The 2.0L type cars that are starting to drop from S to A are the moves that should be made. (Neon, 2000SX, Prelude) etc. Others can follow with requests. (I can think of the 90-95 NA MR2 as an example)
Andy said, this is not what HE meant, and he seems to think that the top half of ITS could serve as the "ITR". I don't buy this because, as you point out, the new cars coming will leave the 325 in the dust.
Bill, I am not proposing to "shut down" ITC. I'm just saying that each year it gets smaller and smaller and may die of natural causes. This is one of the reasons that we need more classes (more granulatrity like you say). In NER (a big freakin region) ITC averaged 4 cars last year. Why should we be scared of adding a new class or two?
So here is one way to impliment:
ITR <--- new spot for for IT cars faster than 325 (a place for T2 cars to go)
ITS <--- maybe add a lb or two to the 325 and loose slower cars to ITA
ITA <--- Fast half of ITA (CRX, Miata, 240, Integra) + silly slow ITS cars (2000NX, Neon, Prelude, and others)
ITB <---- about 75% of the current classified ITA cars (RX7 and slower)
ITC <---- Move ALL ITB cars here
ITD <---- Move ALL ITC cars here
So there you have it, 6 classes where there were only 4. In reality, ITR will be tiny for a while, and ITD will be tiny as ITC is now, and only get smaller.
Andy said, this is not what HE meant, and he seems to think that the top half of ITS could serve as the "ITR". I don't buy this because, as you point out, the new cars coming will leave the 325 in the dust.
Bill, I am not proposing to "shut down" ITC. I'm just saying that each year it gets smaller and smaller and may die of natural causes. This is one of the reasons that we need more classes (more granulatrity like you say). In NER (a big freakin region) ITC averaged 4 cars last year. Why should we be scared of adding a new class or two?
So here is one way to impliment:
ITR <--- new spot for for IT cars faster than 325 (a place for T2 cars to go)
ITS <--- maybe add a lb or two to the 325 and loose slower cars to ITA
ITA <--- Fast half of ITA (CRX, Miata, 240, Integra) + silly slow ITS cars (2000NX, Neon, Prelude, and others)
ITB <---- about 75% of the current classified ITA cars (RX7 and slower)
ITC <---- Move ALL ITB cars here
ITD <---- Move ALL ITC cars here
So there you have it, 6 classes where there were only 4. In reality, ITR will be tiny for a while, and ITD will be tiny as ITC is now, and only get smaller.