I have to disagree Bill, although I have no data to back up my assumptions, only lots of seat time in both. Yes, I'm sure on the longer tracks the aero might have a big impact, I think the GTi is light enough to run at the front of the pack most places.
Hmmmm, I smell a GRM test...............
Also, the big difference is you can buy a built GTi for a lot less than a built A3.
[/b]
Look around the country Jeff, just how many Rabbit GTI's are running 'at the front'? They will probably do ok at places like LRP or Beaver Run, but they're just not going to get it done on the longer, more wide-open tracks. I agree with Joe, they are nimble little cars that have pretty decent brakes (losing 100# helped that). But that is not going to make up for the 25-30 whp that they are down to a full-tilt A3, even if the A3 is 270# heavier. Take another 100# out of the Rabbit, and
maybe it will run near the front.
And there's a reason that you can
buy a built GTI for a lot less than a built A3. It's because the GTI can't run at the front. You know as well as I do, that cars that are at the pointy end of the grid bring more than mid-pack cars. What you can't do is
build a built GTI for a lot less than you can an A3. Some of the stuff will cost you the same, for either car. Cage, suspension, motor, and trans will be pretty much the same. Wheels for sure will be the same. The only area where you'll really be able to spend more money on the A3, is on the engine mgmt system (and maybe some uber-pimp headlights

). And the whole reason behind the new ECU rule is to bring the cost of the engine mgmt. system down.
Put 150-175 lbs on the GTIs and move them to ITC. Dump the VIN# rule, and all of the current ITC Rabbits could upgrade to 1.8 motors w/ close-ratio boxes and vented rotors (along w/ some lead), if they wanted to. There's a whole lot more 1.8 8v blocks out there than 1.6 blocks.