Toyota Corolla ITA or ITB?

[Jiveslug]

Ok, since Andy got skewered because of my comment, I feel the need to clarify. Im not talking about a "competition adjustment." I was just suggesting that several of the cars from one manufacturer seem to be classed either in the wrong class, or at such a high weight that they will never be raced by anyone other than a diehard fan who doesnt care about winning. How is that good for IT? Its not. The more cars that people feel they can run, the better. I would NEVER ask for an unfair advantage. I believe that would be akin to cheating and I have way too much self-esteem to stoop that low. What I WAS suggesting is that, when several cars have been reclassed from ITS into ITA that have the 130-140hp, 2400-2500lbs specs, why do the other cars that have been in ITA the whole time get to labor along at such a high weight? My best example is that the 86-88 Celica GTS is specced at 2680lbs at 135hp. The SOHC Neon is 132hp at 2450lbs and has better brakes to boot. The Sentra SE-R has 140hp at 2490lbs. Why is it unreasonable for someone to ask the question, "Hey, why isnt my Celica specced at 2450-2500lbs?" If you look at it from the perspective that NO ONE seems to have any idea how cars got classed at the weights they did, why dont we look at everything over again and make some changes that make sense? Not competition adjustments, just getting everything classed so that it makes sense. One car classed in ITA at 140hp and 2490lbs and another with the same basic layout at 135hp and 2680lbs? That does NOT make sense. I mean, I have definate likes and dislikes when it comes to marques of cars (dont like Honda, for example, so dont want to run one), so if Im going to spend the wad of cash required to procure a racecar, it had better damn well be something I at least like! My prefence for Toyota over Honda, for example, should not exclude me from being able to, with good driving and careful prep, run at the front of the group.....

Ok, so that probably came off a bit soapbox-ish. Sorry about that. I personally like the job that Andy and the other ITAC guys are doing and I got a bit annoyed when they were being given a hard time for making a helpful suggestion.

 

[Knestis]

The question makes perfect sense to me, 'slug. The problem becomes the precedent set and its longterm impact on the category. I'm not saying that I know the answer but it's a question that has to be asked if we have any chance of falling into the comp adjustment vortex.

Acutally, I think I *do* know the answer but when I proposed it, there was a lot of screaming and yelling about how "formulas won't work." In the last 2+ years, since I quit jousting at that windmill, I've only come to believe more firmly that the degree to which a formulaic weight-setting process "misses" some mythical form of true parity is far exceeded by other factors - budget, driver skill, and engineer ability.

A comprehensive review of ALL spec weights would be ideal but the ITAC's CURRENT APPLICATION of PCA's is at least an improvement over the paralysis of the past. Problem is, the PCA is a blunt instrument - it can only be applied to the "big misses" so a car like the Celica example is kind of stuck between policies.

K

Edit - "Skewered?" I hardly think, skewered. "Poked" perhaps, or "jabbed" but there was hardly any actual penetration of flesh.

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited June 25, 2005).]

 

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
People writing letters requesting that their car be made more competitive or another be made less...are not new. We have received them almost every month since I started this. They will never stop.

How did the ITS SE-R, Neon, 2.0 16V VW, etc go to ITA? We looked at the classes and saw what we perceived to be gross issues. That, coupled with some supporting letters promted a move.

I would like to continue to ferret out the 'issues', both proactively and with the help of membership. Some will get consideration if they make sense, some will get rejected based on a variety of reasons. *I* don't want to mess with small shifts here, and small shifts there...it just isn't the scope, nor is it practical or possible...but I'll be danged if I vote to let the MR2 in ITS flounder around there when it fits perfectly in ITA with the current crop. It's just plain mis-classed. It ain't a tweener, it can NEVER be competitive in ITS. I think that would be a good move for the car, the class, and IT.

What I won't do is vote to lighten a car by 50 lbs because someone writes in and thinks it could move them to the podium. 50lbs??? That ain't IT, thats PROD. But what I also won't do is discourage ANYONE from writing in and expressing their opinion...about their car or any other - on any topic. I may not agree, but it is ALWAYS good to be heard if you believe in what you are saying...THAT was my point.

AB

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

 

[racerb]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:

I am currently building an '86 Celica GTS, and have recently contacted SCCA comp board
for correct specs. The current listings are
not consistent with factory specs. The ITCS
lists the 86-88 on one line, with 89 listed
seperately. From all info I've gathered, the
line listing 89 specs are the correct ones, with proper weight, brake diameters, and gear ratios. If you go by the 89 listing, then the GTS would only need to weigh 2615, or 2435 minus driver. As I stated earlier, I'm building this car, but am not extremely
concerned with it's competetiveness, as I'm sure it will hold it's own in our area.

racerb

 

[Jiveslug]

Im very seriously considering doing an 86 Celica GTS as well. I really love those cars. Durable as hell. I noticed the same thing about the 86-88 models being on a different spec line than the 89. I was doing some research on it as well and found the same thing you did. Actaully, I was about to post on the Rules and Regs forum on how to properly put together a comp board petition. Heh. I was also going to include a request to drop the weight by 100-150# to get it more in line with the SE-R, NX2000, and Neons that were moved into ITA. Perhaps I should send that as separate request?

 

[racerb]

Originally posted by Jiveslug:
Im very seriously considering doing an 86 Celica GTS as well. I really love those cars. Durable as hell. I noticed the same thing about the 86-88 models being on a different spec line than the 89. I was doing some research on it as well and found the same thing you did. Actaully, I was about to post on the Rules and Regs forum on how to properly put together a comp board petition. Heh. I was also going to include a request to drop the weight by 100-150# to get it more in line with the SE-R, NX2000, and Neons that were moved into ITA. Perhaps I should send that as separate request?

Hey I was going to give my GTS the World-Challenge touch, by putting my name on the windsheild with a plus 175lbs above, referring to the next lightest car in ITA. If you are serious about a letter and or petition, I'm interested, but mostly to get the specs corrected. I have been in contact with a West Coast driver currently running a GTS, and he has been very helpful with set-up ideas. I will warn you, there isn't a lot of performance parts availible for this car, so I'm soarcing custom peices as we speak, items like headers, coil-over kits, bushings, and wheel studs come to mind as some of the tuffer items to find.

racerb

 

[Jiveslug]

Yeah, I know of that west coast drive. Im in that region. Dont know him personally, however. Parts are a little hard to come by, thats for sure. The fact that you can get a real limited-slip is good tho. I know that coilovers are hard to come by because of a funky design on the rear shocks. There is a tech article on this website that talks about how to make external coils fit:
http://www.4gcelica.net/v5/diyindex.html
There is also some info about suspension mods for these cars in general. One thing that I had thought about doing was contacting the guys at the Danny McKeever racing school. They use former Long Beach Grand Prix celebrity race cars that have been Toyota Celicas for 20 years. This is the school that the celebs to go before the race. They are Toyota people and may have some good info.
http://www.raceschool.com/
The only real problem Im having with the Celica right now is that my partner in crime, the dude who has all the mechanical skills, HATES FWD cars. Dagnabit. Anyway, let me know if you are gonna do the petition. My email is [email protected]

Ryan

 

[racerb]

Originally posted by Jiveslug:

Yeah I've actually already been apart of the 4th gen Celica page, in fact I'm a moderator on there. As for coil-overs, it looks like Ground-Control makes them for the 90-94s which will fit our cars also. In reguards to struts, I've already gotten a set of struts with Koni sports adjustible inserts installed, just have to cut off spring perches and install coil-overs. The LSD I purchased from Phantom-Grip, with their optional heavier spring kit. I am presently having the cage installed in my 86 chassis, while I'm stripping all my engine, tranny, and suspension system peices from my 88. I also have an 87 which is being converted into my daily driver/auto-x car. The West Coast driver I mentioned, has been in contact with ARP about producing longer wheel studs, and I'm looking into having delron or nylatron bushing made by a local fabricator. I hope to have this same fabricator make camber plates for my cars, as Ground-Control would have to have templates sent before they could produce anything, meaning higher cost than their normal off the shelf peices.

racerb

 

[dazzlesa]

i would love my 85 corolla gts be moved to ITB. just some past times to chew on. in the past 5 years my car has run 1:043 at lime rock,1:30 at summit,2:24 at watkinsglen. i know the car can be made faster with todays tires and some computer and tunning. the brakes have never been an issue and i doubt the weight would hurt it. at least not anymore then occurs in my ITA integra, the integra creates crazy heat. the car runs 205 tires. Rick

 

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by dazzlesa@Oct 17 2005, 12:20 PM
i would love my 85 corolla gts be moved to ITB. just some past times to chew on. in the past 5 years my car has run 1:043 at lime rock,1:30 at summit,2:24 at watkinsglen. i know the car can be made faster with todays tires and some computer and tunning.  the brakes have never been an issue and i doubt the weight would hurt it. at least not anymore then occurs in my ITA integra, the integra creates crazy heat. the car runs 205 tires. Rick

[snapback]62812[/snapback]​

It is not very easy to get an ITB car to run a 1:04.3 at Lime Rock. The track needs to be perfect, as well as the car and driver. Not many people are getting into the 1:04's at all in ITB and we are all very close in times... seems to me like the car is a bit to fast especially since you mention that the car can still be made faster!!!

Raymond I would love to see more cars, but we need to get you slowed down a bit first " Blethen

 

[gran racing]

Those are very, very quick times and would get you pole on many, many days. At Summit, 1:31 is a very quick time but 1:30... LRP, if I get a mid/high 1:04 I'm pushing it pretty darn hard. I've raced against a prepped Corrola at the Glen and the power he had really impressed me.

 

[dazzlesa]

i have to admit that the 1:043 was not my time. the best i ran was a 1:05 flat at lrp. all the other times were mine. added weight and 6" rims should slow here down. i had a mr2 and the corolla is 10 times easier to drive. rick

 

[Spinnetti]

Originally posted by ITANorm@Jun 8 2005, 02:56 AM
All had ~112HP, stock. 1587cc DOHC, 16-valve, Bosch L-jetronic.

All except the AE86 Corolla (front engine, rear drive) were all-strut. AE86 had a coil spring rear w/IRS.

Close, The AE86 is Front strut, SOLID AXLE rear end.. Nice stone age stuff

 

[Jiveslug]

Originally posted by Spinnetti@Nov 15 2005, 02:59 AM
Close, The AE86 is Front strut, SOLID AXLE rear end.. Nice stone age stuff

[snapback]65393[/snapback]​

Hey, I LIKE that stone-age stuff. Its helping me keep my racing costs down! Hehe. However, if you want to sell some of the suspension parts and/or diff off that AE86, let me know because they are a direct bolt-on for my TE72.

 

[AE86ITA]

Well going back to the subject of the 4AG powered cars. Apparently there are some people afraid of this engine due to it's potential(i.e. Formula Atlantic).

It is good to point out that this engine in order to produce power needs to be reved past 10,000rpm and in IT this cars will never see those rpms.

The 4AG engine is old technology and it would be fear to move it to ITB.

Thanks,

 

[AE86ITA]

Well:
Apparently I am the lone rider as the people who previously wrote this subject moved on towards other car.

Is there anyone else racing any 4AG powered car in IT?

Better yet, Is there any Corolla GTS (84-87) racing in IT?

Suposed everyone went to drifting...


Thanks,


Efrain

 

[Spinnetti]

Well:
Apparently I am the lone rider as the people who previously wrote this subject moved on towards other car.

Is there anyone else racing any 4AG powered car in IT?

Better yet, Is there any Corolla GTS (84-87) racing in IT?

Suposed everyone went to drifting...
Thanks,
Efrain
[/b]

I'm still here..
Got it, totally prepped it, love it.
Still get whupped in A, but I ran at least in the lead pack for a decade.
Anything you want to know about the Corolla I can probably tell you, but I can tell you for sure that there is no real power to be had.. they don't respond to ecu tuning like Hondas..