Bill Miller
New member
I would say it's absolutely a good interpretation, and I think it's good that they're looking at things to make sure that they're right.
July FasTrack is up
- Thread starter Bill Miller
- Start date
I would say it's absolutely a good interpretation, and I think it's good that they're looking at things to make sure that they're right.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
My bet is that you will see something soon effective 1-1-07.
YEAAAA BABY!!!! When I see it I will start my 10/10th's effort on the GSR! (if it is fair and it looks like the car has a chance...at least at some tracks!)
lateapex911
Super Moderator
LOL....Downsides might be more than that.....have you seen the ruleset? Not written yet...so, that's a big unknown.
And.....have you seen World Challenge cars?? Not shall we say, "easy on the wallet."
I wouldn't expect to have much left from your years salery after a Prep Category build. However, the cars are cool, and there is a decent supply of ex World Challenge cars out there, albeit in various states. Not sure how soon the class would ramp up the numbers enough to make it to the Runoffs.
At least with your current issues, you know where you stand. If the Runoffs are a goal, write a letter telling the board you love what they're doing, but think they could go further and make IT National. Who knows, it might just fly.
yes....except the "monitor FWD race cars" part. It's in the works, but it's not a reaction to race results per se', if you know what I mean. I think Andy's right, we'll see the system online by the new season.
Bill Miller
New member
While B & D Prepared will be cool (as will A & C Prepared), the whole World Challenge specification model is a significantly different paradigm. Discreet spec sheets for each car, rewards weight for drivers, factory involvement, etc. Not sure how that is going to fit into any kind of Club Racing Category model that exists today.
And as Jake said, don't plan on them being too easy on the wallet. Look at what it costs to build a top-level T3 car today, and figure you're going to probably double that to build the same car as a DP car. During a conversation that I had w/ a CRB member, we were talking about B & D Prepared. The general consensus was that a competitive DP car will be north of six figures.
And as Jake said, don't plan on them being too easy on the wallet. Look at what it costs to build a top-level T3 car today, and figure you're going to probably double that to build the same car as a DP car. During a conversation that I had w/ a CRB member, we were talking about B & D Prepared. The general consensus was that a competitive DP car will be north of six figures.
Z3_GoCar
New member
Jake,
I've seen one, it's in my garage
Still that's a good point as to why I'd still go with ITR. It's just I afraid I won't be able to find a harness with all the stock connectors on, you know how slavage yards treat wire harnesses, rip pull yank and when all else fails cut. I'd hate to replace my unrulely bundle of wire with second bundle that's no less unrulely and still not be legel. There's all the unneccessary computer functions to by pass such as traction control, anti-theft, ABS, power windows/locks and the list goes on. Then there's dealing with the non-stock standalone computer, or spend 2k for a plug adaptor module and another 3K for a new computer/stock sensors. Really though run offs are not realistic living on the West coast(well ok maybe more realistic than when they were in Antlanta)
James
planet6racing
New member
I know exactly what you mean. That FasTrack already has me designing my next car...
Banzai240
New member
I'm always curious as to WHY it is considered "unsafe" to carry around #115 of ballast in a location that's designed to hold a 200+ lbs passenger?
The rules allow for one to reinforce the area where the ballast is located... this is a non-issue that some are trying to make one...
zracre
New member
do you carry 200+ pound passengers in the passenger FOOTWELL area? Why would they give us an IMMEDIATE 115# pound penalty then give us the option of running it in the pass seat area A YEAR FROM NOW....its just mean. I have to re-engineer the car multiple times to get the weight right. PITA...just make it legal now. simple. its legal 1/1/07...do they have something against us? I cant see why they would wait like that.
I will stop because some people just dont see the point and like to argue.
I will stop
because some people just dont see the point and like to argue.Old Webmaster
New member
I know how you all hate subforums <_< but this sure looks like a good candidate to me.
You've got something published nationally thats going to get a LOT of attention from other classes and even other race organizations. Yet, to discuss the evolution of this class you are going to require people to wade through a bunch of unrelated and potentially hidden posts to find the info?
This very post is a perfect example.
Joe Blow hears his car may now be eligible to really race and heads over to IT.com and yet finds no post with the topic of ITR in which this discussion is being held as it's buried in something called FastTrack that he may have no idea what that means. << nice run on, but you get the point.
At the very least there should be a sticky topic with the CORRECT spreadsheet data and a moderated discussion inside. Bill M. you up for moderating again?
You've got something published nationally thats going to get a LOT of attention from other classes and even other race organizations. Yet, to discuss the evolution of this class you are going to require people to wade through a bunch of unrelated and potentially hidden posts to find the info?
This very post is a perfect example.
Joe Blow hears his car may now be eligible to really race and heads over to IT.com and yet finds no post with the topic of ITR in which this discussion is being held as it's buried in something called FastTrack that he may have no idea what that means. << nice run on, but you get the point.
At the very least there should be a sticky topic with the CORRECT spreadsheet data and a moderated discussion inside. Bill M. you up for moderating again?
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Mr Webmaster:
(I love calling you that, LOL)
By all means, throw up a category called "The new IT class, ITR" and subhead it "Discuss cars, rules, and your thoughts here"
Put it right under "Rules and Regs, and over "General "
Andy has the proper spreadsheet, he can send it to you, and you can sticky it on top as post one.
Great idea. Seems simple too, no?
(I love calling you that, LOL)
By all means, throw up a category called "The new IT class, ITR" and subhead it "Discuss cars, rules, and your thoughts here"
Put it right under "Rules and Regs, and over "General "
Andy has the proper spreadsheet, he can send it to you, and you can sticky it on top as post one.
Great idea. Seems simple too, no?
lateapex911
Super Moderator
do you carry 200+ pound passengers in the passenger FOOTWELL area? Why would they give us an IMMEDIATE 115# pound penalty then give us the option of running it in the pass seat area A YEAR FROM NOW....its just mean. I have to re-engineer the car multiple times to get the weight right. PITA...just make it legal now. simple. its legal 1/1/07...do they have something against us? I cant see why they would wait like that.
I will stop
[/b]
Evan, Evan, Evan....relax, grab a beer, whatever. You're aiming your venom at the wrong target. We, (the ITAC) recommended a more liberal policy for ballast placement a loooonng time ago. (And this has been explained here numerous times). Somehow, it was lost in the sauce. Never saw the light of day.
So, we asked around: "Hey, anyone know what happened to that ballast rule? I never saw it in Fastrack?"
Crickets chirped.
OK, so we did it again, and thought that the rule would be added quickly, because it could be handled as an "Errors and Omissions" type of thing. Didn't happen...the big brass either didn't see it as such, or it didn't get presented as such when it went for publication.
Friends, what we have here is simply one of them deals, Yea it sucks, and yea it should be better, but there's a lot of fish to fry, and this one IS getting done, just not as we'd like. The worlds an imperfect place- "Screws fall out, in the infamous "Breakfast Club" words.
The flipside is that it just isn't that hard to attach some weight to a car. Honestly, it's not a NASA grade engineering thing...it's agricultural technology level stuff. Most anyone can do it, and race shops like Bildon and such do it in their sleep.
Inconvenient? Yes. Sorry. But minorly so.
Mean?? Now...c'mon...get real.
zracre
New member
I was referring to Banzai240's reaction to my request. sorry if I offended. I did not mean to imply that SCCA ITAC BOD was "mean", I was just alittle upset with his tone on the subject...lots of great things are happening. I was just expressing my opinion on a simple subject. the purpose of this forum. Yes i had almost 200# of ballast attached to the small area of the footwell...I have since added some stock parts to try and make weight but still have well over 100# there now. I am engineering more weight legally in the chassis but my point was we had weeks to comply with the weight issue. Once the weight is allowed in the seat area, do I have to take off the welded 1/8" bracing ahead of the seat area that I put in for the temp weights? sorry if it was taken wrong.
planet6racing
New member
Well, I just sent my first e-mail to the CRB/BOD in support of what I read in this month's FasTrack. I encourage everyone to do the same!
Banzai240
New member
For the record... The recommendation to change the ballast placement rules was submitted a considerable time before the class realignment was proposed. The idea was to have it in place to cover just the situation you are talking about. It fell through the process somehow, and was only recently "caught" by us... We had moved forward with our recommendations thinking this rule change had been put into motion.
Contrary to popular belief, we are NOT incompetent or otherwise incapable of making logical decisions... we actually DO consider the impacts of these changes and try to compensate for them before we move forward... This one just slipped through... something that wasnt' noticed in time to get it in the books this year. "Rule changes" like this have to go before the BoD... Things like Spec Line (Weight adjustments, etc...) typically don't... under most circumstances...
Hopefully you can work it out until the rule comes into play...
Ron Earp
Administrator
Yes, we put the BMW 325, 328, 330 in the class. It races at a lighter weight than in S too if I recall the weights on the sheet. From the feedback I've received on working with various folks on ITR it appears that everyone is in agreement to try and class R correctly and avoid SIRs. Nice thing about R and starting from scratch is that you can be sure all the cars are classed using the same procedure. I'm sure it won't be perfect, but I bet 325 like mistakes can be avoided.
Ron