chuck baader
New member
With John Norris's comments I still don't see where the e36 is such an overdog. Give CAs to cars that are dominating---CRX in ITA? and let people develop new cars then make adjustments. CB
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Chuck,
It's interesting that you would use the CRX as an example of a dominat car. The CRX is just ONE of a 4-car mix currently in ITA. It, along with the Integra, the 240SX and now the Miata have proven all to be in the same 'zone'.
The issue with the BMW is simple. It's potential power output was seemingly underestimated by a significant margin when intially classified. In order for it to be where it should be, some think changes shouldbe made to it's spec weight. The cars above in ITA do not show this sort of disparity.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
It's interesting that you would use the CRX as an example of a dominat car. The CRX is just ONE of a 4-car mix currently in ITA. It, along with the Integra, the 240SX and now the Miata have proven all to be in the same 'zone'.
The issue with the BMW is simple. It's potential power output was seemingly underestimated by a significant margin when intially classified. In order for it to be where it should be, some think changes shouldbe made to it's spec weight. The cars above in ITA do not show this sort of disparity.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
robits325is
New member
Is everyone supposed to drive cars from the 70's and 80's forever?? Times change and so do the cars. The BMW isn't an overdog at all.
We already had our ABS removed - while almost every car sold in the USA today has it standard. It's time for everyone else to catch up - don't hold back technology.
We already had our ABS removed - while almost every car sold in the USA today has it standard. It's time for everyone else to catch up - don't hold back technology.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
By "holding back" that part of technology, the ITAC has avoided obselescing (sp?) about 75% of the current fields. (Asuming that ABS is an advantage, which most agree it is) And by requiring it to be removed, it also removes the possiblity of further electronic "tinkering".
One of the great things about IT is the diversity of cars, both in manufacturer and model diverstity, and in relative age. Old vs. new is cool!
There are other categories that are more appropriate places for "technology", in my view.
Does WC allow ABS?
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
One of the great things about IT is the diversity of cars, both in manufacturer and model diverstity, and in relative age. Old vs. new is cool!
There are other categories that are more appropriate places for "technology", in my view.
Does WC allow ABS?
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
mlytle
New member
old vs. new is cool until the new has to be dumbed down too far to play with the old. let the capability of a class of cars increase incrementally over time as technology moves on.
how about decrease the age limit on it cars. over 20yrs and you have to go play in vintage.
or (even though there is no guaranttee of competitiveness in it) only attempt to keep the most recent 15yrs of cars at a competitive level. beyond that, well, it is fun to race anyway.
or just shuffle more slower cars further and further down the class structure (s,a,b,c...)over time.
just some thoughts.
how about decrease the age limit on it cars. over 20yrs and you have to go play in vintage.
or (even though there is no guaranttee of competitiveness in it) only attempt to keep the most recent 15yrs of cars at a competitive level. beyond that, well, it is fun to race anyway.
or just shuffle more slower cars further and further down the class structure (s,a,b,c...)over time.
just some thoughts.
x-ring
New member
Ah, this is the main problem as I see it with IT today. I think of it as 'Speed Creep'.
Some people here, including at least one ITAC member, seem to think that currently classified cars need to be obsoleted and the bar moved up on a continuous basis in each class. Why? Can't we set a performance standard for each class and hold to it? If faster cars want in, maybe we need to add a faster class above S. When that class (ITD? ITF?) has reached it’s potential, and all the 330’s, Z32’s, last gen Rx7’s, etc. are ‘too slow’ add another class above it. If the slowest, or the in-between, classes thin out so be it. A regional class doesn’t have to ‘make the numbers’ to keep its official standing.
As things are now, a racer that wants to be competitive is forced to change cars every few years, effectively flushing his past effort and dollars. Maybe the rest of you can toss your car for new a $30K ($40K, $50K?) race car every couple of years, but I can’t. The $10K or so I spend per year on tires, travel, fees, bank money for rebuilds, etc., etc., is about my limit.
I'm always hearing 'them' moan about member loss to other clubs, the ‘graying’ of the SCCA, and so forth. Am I too far off base to think that chasing out all but the most well off isn’t the way to make the club grow? Follow that to its absurd conclusion, and you’ll eventually see two billionaires racing each other. After a while they’ll get bored and go home.
One man’s opinion, take it for what it’s worth.
On edit, I think it was Chris Camadella who posted (somewhere in the 'New Beetle in ITC thread') to the effect that it is inevitable that speed creep (aka class creep) will have newly classified cars push currently classified cars out of the running. I want to know why it must be this way. If I’m wrong about who said that, someone please correct me.
------------------
Ty Till
#16 ITS
Rocky Mountain Division
[This message has been edited by x-ring (edited November 02, 2004).]
Some people here, including at least one ITAC member, seem to think that currently classified cars need to be obsoleted and the bar moved up on a continuous basis in each class. Why? Can't we set a performance standard for each class and hold to it? If faster cars want in, maybe we need to add a faster class above S. When that class (ITD? ITF?) has reached it’s potential, and all the 330’s, Z32’s, last gen Rx7’s, etc. are ‘too slow’ add another class above it. If the slowest, or the in-between, classes thin out so be it. A regional class doesn’t have to ‘make the numbers’ to keep its official standing.
As things are now, a racer that wants to be competitive is forced to change cars every few years, effectively flushing his past effort and dollars. Maybe the rest of you can toss your car for new a $30K ($40K, $50K?) race car every couple of years, but I can’t. The $10K or so I spend per year on tires, travel, fees, bank money for rebuilds, etc., etc., is about my limit.
I'm always hearing 'them' moan about member loss to other clubs, the ‘graying’ of the SCCA, and so forth. Am I too far off base to think that chasing out all but the most well off isn’t the way to make the club grow? Follow that to its absurd conclusion, and you’ll eventually see two billionaires racing each other. After a while they’ll get bored and go home.
One man’s opinion, take it for what it’s worth.
On edit, I think it was Chris Camadella who posted (somewhere in the 'New Beetle in ITC thread') to the effect that it is inevitable that speed creep (aka class creep) will have newly classified cars push currently classified cars out of the running. I want to know why it must be this way. If I’m wrong about who said that, someone please correct me.
------------------
Ty Till
#16 ITS
Rocky Mountain Division
[This message has been edited by x-ring (edited November 02, 2004).]
chuck baader
New member
Andy...POTENTIAL????? A lot of cars have potential BUT, until proven, it is pure conjecture. My point...CRX over the last few years has --per this forum-- won just about everything. No one has clamored for added weight. The BMW may or may not win everything...my point is we need to wait and see, not penaltize based on POTENTIAL!!!
------------------
Chuck Baader
#36 ITA E30 BMW
Alabama Region Divisional Registrar
------------------
Chuck Baader
#36 ITA E30 BMW
Alabama Region Divisional Registrar
lateapex911
Super Moderator
The CRX does very well, but like the RX-7 of old, isn't the DOMINANT car that many seem to think it is. It does well due to it's popularity, but I guarantee you that if Bob Stretch shows in his 240, or Anthony Serra (to name one) in his Integra, any CRX will have their hands more than full. They may win, but they won't dominate and run away.
The RX-7 did very well, but an RX-3Sp could always handle a 7 in the right hands.
I think the ARRCs might be interesting. Nick Leverone and his RX-7 will be there. He's pretty equal to Kip VanSteenburg, so we should consider him representative of what a top flight RX-7 can do. How will he fare against the BMWs????
We'll know in 4 days!
Predictions??
I'll go out on a limb and predict he will be 1.6 off the pole, which will be an E36.
What do you all think?
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
The RX-7 did very well, but an RX-3Sp could always handle a 7 in the right hands.
I think the ARRCs might be interesting. Nick Leverone and his RX-7 will be there. He's pretty equal to Kip VanSteenburg, so we should consider him representative of what a top flight RX-7 can do. How will he fare against the BMWs????
We'll know in 4 days!
Predictions??
I'll go out on a limb and predict he will be 1.6 off the pole, which will be an E36.
What do you all think?
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
chuck baader
New member
I'll predict the pole will also be a BMW at a new track record of under 1:40!!
------------------
Chuck Baader
#36 ITA E30 BMW
Alabama Region Divisional Registrar
------------------
Chuck Baader
#36 ITA E30 BMW
Alabama Region Divisional Registrar
Very true. Instead, a bunch of us were clamoring LOUDLY to get other cars added to ITA that (a) would be competitive with the CRX, and (
should in many cases have been in the same class with it in the first place.That option isn't practical for the e36 325 at this point. There isn't a class above it, full of cars with similar power/weight ratios and other qualities.
K
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
In case you haven't read every thread on this forum, this is EXACTLY what is happening now, including the consideration of an additional class.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Well, I disagree to some extent. All cars are classed initially based on potential. An educated guess is made based on a ton of factors. We feel now that the process is MORE educated, MORE consistant and extreamly defencible.
The extreme examples of the BMW have shown that their performance envelope is far beyong what was originally intended.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
chuck baader
New member
Andy...you are correct that all cars are classified by SWAG "poetntial". Until this year we had no mechamism to adjust mistakes. However, my original premis is that the e36 is not an overdog in general..that may be in part because there are small numbers running at this time. I think one should consider the the car's performance nationwide, not just in a region. As we all know, dominating in a region may or may not indicate an overdog...adjustments, unless we give rewards weight to specific cars, must be fair and equal.
------------------
Chuck Baader
#36 ITA E30 BMW
Alabama Region Divisional Registrar
------------------
Chuck Baader
#36 ITA E30 BMW
Alabama Region Divisional Registrar
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Chuck,
Again, good points. However, I disagree to some extent. While the E36 is not dominating Nationwide, it may be becasue, as you say, there are not that many out there. Of those few, even fewer are built to the extent of the rules. 'Full-bore' cars if you will. Those are the cars (Vansteenburg, Clay, Thomas, Whittle, York, etc) that you have seen and are seeing dominate. My point is that when you compare these full-bore examples to each other with top drivers in them, the Bimmers are in a class by themselves on all but momentum tracks, which are equalizers.
ITS has a target performance envelope that the ITAC has developed for the current class and any new cars considered. The E36's power potential (documnented) far exceeds this envelope and the 'FB' examples are proof. They may not be the majority but you have to class based on these cars (and the Speedsource RX-7's, Rebello powered Z-cars, etc) because they CAN GET THERE.
Classing and weight must be done based on ultra-prepped examples, not the average guy in a Regional. If you did it the latter, then the ultra-prepped cars would be unbeatable.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
x-ring
New member
I do read pretty much every post on this forum; I visit at least once each weekday. Yes, you and some others seem to think that speed creep isn't inevitable, yet there are others that insist it is. Wasn’t it Chris that essentially said to get a newer, faster, car or get comfortable at the back of the pack? Or Mlytle’s suggestion that 21 year old cars be banned from IT? This attitude infuriates me.
I suppose that if you live in the rust belt all you see are new cars, but here in the sunny southwest there are still plenty of 12A Rx7’s and S30 Z’s still on the road.
Don’t take this as a shot against you. I really appreciate all that you have done for the IT community, I just hope that the old guard doesn’t eventually notice what’s going on and undo all of your work.
------------------
Ty Till
#16 ITS
Rocky Mountain Division
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Actually, I had hoped my last post demonstrated otherwise. I DO think speed creep is inevitable. Cars get older, parts get scarce and new stuff must be allowed in.
The two ways to do this are simple:
Slowly eliminate the competitiveness of the older stuff by pushing cars down the food chain to make room for the newer, more powerful and better designed stuff in SS right now
OR
Develope a new class above ITSto have aplace for these cars to run while still maintaing the current competitive babalce as best as possible.
Interestingly, we have had some feedback that keeping the same amount of classes is fine and that the only thing we are doing by 'protecting' ITB and ITC is creating a vinatge class within IT...has SOME merit but I think we can do more.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
mlytle
New member
i agree with both your proposed simple solutions andy. either one of them is better than trying to dumb down modern technology so that 30yr old cars can still be competitive.
can't wait for the future discussions over how to dumb down an impluse or warp drive so that an internal combustion engine can be competitive! ;-)
marshall
can't wait for the future discussions over how to dumb down an impluse or warp drive so that an internal combustion engine can be competitive! ;-)
marshall