Joe Harlan
New member
If it is the base model that's classified then they should have the brake either then should they?
Wheel diameter rule change Poll
- Thread starter Jake
- Start date
If it is the base model that's classified then they should have the brake either then should they?
Actually absolutely believe that this WAS the case, given the competititiveness of each example when each question came up.
Problem is that we will never know because (a) there is no establshed procedure for making this kind of decision, and (
there is no requirement that records documenting decisions be kept.K
Banzai240
New member
There ARE established RULES for making this type of decision, and the "procedure" is to follow the rules...
ITCS 17.1.4.A. PURPOSE-
...cars will be models, as offered for sale in the United States. They will be prepared to the manufacture's specifications except for modifications permitted by these rules."
ITCS 17.1.4.C. SPECIFICATIONS- ...it is not permitted to "create" a model or type of car by updating or backdating assemblies... (i.e.: GTU calipers/wheels/etc. on an NON-GTU car...)
ITCS 17.1.4.D.7. WHEELS/TIRES
All other cars shall retain the wheel diameter fitted as original equipment for their make, model, and type.
Was the "model", as specified, orinally equiped with 16" wheels? Don't know about the specifics of the 2nd Gen RX-7, but I do know about the 240SX and the Porsche, and the answer is YES, it was...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 17, 2003).]
Bill Miller
New member
Ok Darin, what about the ITB Mustangs that came stock w/ 7" wide wheels? How come they can't run them?
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Banzai240
New member
ITCS 17.1.4.D.7.a.1 WHEELS/TIRES
All other cars shall retain the wheel diameter fitted as original equipment for their make, model, and type. ...
ITCS 17.1.4.D.7.a.6 WHEELS/TIRES
Maximum allowable rim widths: classes ITS and ITA - seven (7) inches; classes ITB and ITC - six (6) inches.
Because the rules say they can't...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
That's what I say.
I want to use the 15x8 Fuchs that came on my 944.
But, I won't argue for it. Not in the best interest of IT.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
lateapex911
Super Moderator
If this was showroom stock, I could see the width staying the same as stock. But in an effort to create parity within a structure, and as wheel width is one of the greatest factors affecting handling and cornering power, the organizers have limited ALL cars in a class to one wheel width, which removes a huge variable, and makes it easier to achieve parity. If the 944 were to have wider rims, it would, all other things being equal, be able to corner better than the RX-7, for example. Now, to equilize the performance, do you add more weight? How much? I can see the desire to just eliminate that question altogether.
And I don't see the smaller diameter (than the model came with, if that is indeed the case) as a defacto competition adjustment per se', as Kirk says, as it was done in the classification procedure. If it were to be changed after classification then sure, I'd cry foul. (Just as the relaxed ECU rule was, without doubt, a competiton adjustment, whether intentional or not).
I think it's important to understand that all cars classified are 'competiton adjusted' before they ever set tire to the track. But technically it's not a "competition adjustment" as it isn't made as a result of competition inequities. Maybe it would be a good idea to call it a "Performance potential equilization" to describe the spec setting procedure done during classification, and a PCA if done after classification, as a result of perceived mistakes made during that classification period. If all the attributes aren't accounted for properly at the start, we are all stuck with the result.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
And I don't see the smaller diameter (than the model came with, if that is indeed the case) as a defacto competition adjustment per se', as Kirk says, as it was done in the classification procedure. If it were to be changed after classification then sure, I'd cry foul. (Just as the relaxed ECU rule was, without doubt, a competiton adjustment, whether intentional or not).
I think it's important to understand that all cars classified are 'competiton adjusted' before they ever set tire to the track. But technically it's not a "competition adjustment" as it isn't made as a result of competition inequities. Maybe it would be a good idea to call it a "Performance potential equilization" to describe the spec setting procedure done during classification, and a PCA if done after classification, as a result of perceived mistakes made during that classification period. If all the attributes aren't accounted for properly at the start, we are all stuck with the result.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Bill Miller
New member
Darin,
I know that's what the rule says. Doesn't mean it's a good rule. Why shouldn't a classified car be allowed to run stock parts that came on it?
Jake,
I'd buy that, except that there are several places in the ITCS where it says "unless fitted as original equipment".
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
I know that's what the rule says. Doesn't mean it's a good rule. Why shouldn't a classified car be allowed to run stock parts that came on it?
Jake,
I'd buy that, except that there are several places in the ITCS where it says "unless fitted as original equipment".
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Joe Harlan
New member
Bill, it is because SCCA has alway had this long standing thought that wheel diameter and rim width will equalize competition.....(wrong as it may be) the rules are designed to keep cars running on similar tires..
The Sleeper
New member
Greetings Gentlemen, I think it was proposed earlier in this thread to allow you to change to the largest rim size allowed on any vehicle in your class if you so desired. I think this would be the way to go, not an across the board rule change but class spacific. I do not know the spec`s for the other IT classes but I know in ITS there are cars allowed to run 16`s so the whole class should be allowed to run 16`s if so desired. For all the other classes the max. rim size should be set to the vehicle with the largest rim size allowed in that class,if so desired. Alot of good pro`s and con`s have been stated in this thread, but I for one know that a race of this type is won or lost in the cornering speed attained by a vehicle, not so much as the straight line speed. Alot of the tire/wheel decision is also dependent on the driver style hence trailing brake or american driving style can corner just as fast with an 1" shorter sidewall as with an 1" taller sidewall because the tire load is linear though the entire corner aspect, whereas the european style or dirt track style as we call it here demands a firmer sidewall to control the added load applied on the tires. This is not an agrument that one style of driving is better then the other it is just my observations and what works best for me.
I already requested the change based onj the fact that the CB had approved 15" wheels for the CRX in Production-that one got shot down. Would I join a large vote in favor-absolutely. It is not a competitive advantage when they can weigh more and a limitation on width and tire size can be imposed. I think the idea is sound considering the cost of competition today. If anything we should be looking to stabilize it for IT. The way to get there is to have more wheel and tire company choices.
------------------
Grandpa's toys-modded suspensions and a few other tweaks
'89 CRX Si-SCCA ITA #99
'99 Prelude=a sweet song
'03 Dodge Dakota Club Cab V8-Patriot Blue gonna tow
------------------
Grandpa's toys-modded suspensions and a few other tweaks
'89 CRX Si-SCCA ITA #99
'99 Prelude=a sweet song
'03 Dodge Dakota Club Cab V8-Patriot Blue gonna tow
We need people to keep writing the CB about this if there is any chance for it to fly.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
FYI: On of my four Revolution RFX 14x7 wheels got busted up in a crash at a race a few weeks ago. Since that wheel is no longer produced, I called about ordering Panasports. Apparently, the Ultralight’s spokes hit the brakes of the 87-89 Toyota MR2, so that’s out too. Is this a reason to allow alternative sizes? My only other choice is to get 14x6 wheels or have wheels custom made at a cost of at least $1000/set. I’m trying to get my broke wheel repaired – not only is that more expensive than buying a new 15x7 wheel, but it’s probably not as safe to race on.
Bill Miller
New member
Jake,
I had 14x7 Panasports on my old ITA MR2. I think it was an '86 though.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
I had 14x7 Panasports on my old ITA MR2. I think it was an '86 though.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Bill Miller
New member
Jake,
Is that because all the later cars had the SC brakes? I seem to remember something along that line.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Is that because all the later cars had the SC brakes? I seem to remember something along that line.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608