ITGT and GTS classes -Is it time for a change

[CRXsi]

I agree that adding ITE or ITP is not the answer as it just creates the same issue...what is the answer though? I do like the possible idea of there being a certain time bracket where if an ITGT car goes under it then they get moved to GT or told to detune...

I guess one thing to consider is that when people build a car they usually find the class they want to run and then build a car to suit it...not the other way around. If a car has been built for a certain class and then the rules change that can also cause some frustration...

[gary]

Let me be the first to suggest that Mr. Brown's car get moved to GT2 to make some more room for ITGT cars in GT3

Anthony

[/quote]

Off Topic!? so someone finally brings out a proper GT3 car  and you want to move it up a class?  he fits the class properly.


Gary

[Super70Dave]

In regards to building a car to the class they want to run in.
I built my car as an IT2 car as one i loved the car and two because the class was full of talented drivers i wanted to race against.
Last year i ran IT2 it was boring for me as the people i usually raced against were no longer there ie GORD and JON. Or didn't come to all the races. The 2007 season i was consistently .5-1.0sec ahead of the next IT2 car.
I was mostly frustated at being in the middle of the CC race all the time and balancing racing for fun and not screwing up the CC race as much as possible.
I now hope to test my skill against another group of talented people in IT-GT or whatever it becomes.

[10cc]

There are 4 or 5 ITGT cars that are running times that are similar to GT3, and as fast as some GT2

There are also some ITGT cars that are not as fast as CC cars  ( I only mention this because..well you know! )

There was only one IT1 that ran all the Calgary weekends, and one other IT1 car that ran two weekends.

Seems to me that moving some of the ITGT cars back into IT1, somehow...., and possibly moving some of the faster ones to GT......giving sufficient time for reconfiguration, might be an easy solution.

Then, as I mentioned before, make ITGT the catch-all it was meant to be, and after a season of racing in ITGT, the car must be reclassified.

[CRXsi]

Fair enough reason for going to ITGT Dave. If some of the people who build ITGT cars instead built their cars for legit classes such as IT2 then there would be more competition in the IT classes. This year there was very good competition in IT2 with all the guys coming from Sask and out east...Still very good point Dave as to why we should rethink ITGT and where to put cars such as yours....The build a car to a class was not directed at you Dave...there are others who specifically build their cars for ITGT from the get go without having run the car in a regular class.

Brookes comment is exactly what my concern is...where is the limit of when and ITGT car should buck up and move on to GT with the proper safety equipment for the speeds that are occurring.

[streetywise guy]

I have a suggestion, based upon my different experiences at Calgary and Gimli.  (Lets not forget this discussion involves two race tracks)  My Neon can win at Calgary because of the long straight.  Chris Brown came to the last race there, and I had him covered by a fairly good margin-and Chris is no slouch.  I go to Gimli, and unless he has a nap, I can't touch him.

Heres my idea- I'll kick in 50 bucks, we get a million other people to match it, and build 3 racetracks of different configurations across the prairies.  Different cars work better on different tracks.  Who's in?

Seriously, I think there are probably some cars, Dave Gardiners being one of them, that could probably be justified in IT1 instead of ITGT.  If the engine swap is the only change, and its a known quantity- a typical stock Japanese market engine, for instance, I think running that car through the math would probably place it in IT1.  The science on the BMW's that populate ITGT right now might end up being the SCCA ITR class.  If its too weird, kick it to GT.

[CRXsi]

LOL! I like it Jim...

Now on a serious note. I am not opposed to the IT1 move...but how do we put it into rules so that other situations don't happen that are not IT type situations...Gary's idea of the everyone move down a class and then save IT1 for slight mods and ITGT for those tha should be GT but can't commit that weekend may be the best idea? What about the actual wording however?

[Domo]

what about if you made the rule that you can only bolt the engine swap in, no cutting or welding in new brackets allowed. Or if you swap the engine you must provide an original service manual even if its in another language.

[Sue]

I usually try to stay out of these communications as I am not a competitor but I need to say this - Gary Leadbetter was correct, the original ITGT and GTS and FL classes were all created for timing and lap scoring. 

Over the years WCMA has recognized certain classes and not others.  For example, WCMA does not recognize the Formula Atlantic class but WCMA created the FL class for legal Formula Atlantics to run under this umbrella.  WCMA stopped recognizing the Player's Limited / GM Motorsport class of cars but allowed them to run under the ITGT umbrella.  WCMA does not recognize the LeMans or NASCAR cars but they can run under the ITGT or GTS umbrella as they are a legal class somewhere in the world.

Originally these classes were created so cars that were LEGAL elsewhere could run with us.  All cars were supposed to meet the criteria of a specific class anywhere around the world, just WCMA did not recognize them as a class for trophy awards.  These classes were not created as a catch-all class for those who wanted to build what they wanted - the cars had to be LEGAL somewhere around the world.

Sue Wilson
Chief Timing & Lap Scoring
Alberta Race Car Association

[irmechanic]

Allowing Japanese and European Specs in a North American series will be unfair to racers with vehicles produced only in the NA markets.  A 2200# Civic with 160 HP is not going to be challenged by a 1000# heavier (or more in my case) car with 200 - 225 HP.  Darrell's BMW in Euro spec surely has at least another 50 HP, maybe more.  Maybe the classes should be based on a power/weight ratio instead of potential lap times.  I don't want or can afford to put a bunch of money into my car to make it competitive in a GT class.  I've been running IT with both the Honda and Mustang as they were a relatively affordable and competitive class when run legally.  If IT-GT and GTS were created to allow these non-conforming cars to run then, that is maybe where they should be.  Make the classes as they were (no trophies or recognition) and promote either an upward or downward move to GT or IT if out playing regularly.  Jim mentioned how "running the numbers" would put Dave's Civic solidly into IT1.  Does this mean that Dominic's , Lance's and Gary C's cars all also fit in too?  Great for them as it increases the car counts and therefore the points potential.  Not so great for some others - and I know I'm one of them.  My options for competitiveness then is to cheat (not an option), buy a different car (again), or find somewhere else to play where my car fits in with no or minor mods and is competitive.  None of those are what I want to do.  Kelly and I enjoy our weekends racing with all of you and hope that we still can for the next 5 years.  It is not going to be much fun if I'm just going to spin my wheels and turn laps for the sake of turning laps.

  Just my thoughts on a tough discussion!


    Jon   #45 Mustang (and Honda)

[gary]

what about if you made the rule that you can only bolt the engine swap in, no cutting or welding in new brackets allowed. Or if you swap the engine you must provide an original service manual even if its in another language.

I like this, add it to my   list on the poll thread.  in addition add that the swapped motor must be stock ,  even if from somewhere else in the world.

Gary

[Super70Dave]

And around we go again.

We need IT-GT and GTS so we have a place for cars that don't race with us on a regular basis.

So is the issue safety ie too fast, not enough safety stuff. Or a timing and scoring issue.
Should it be recognized for points and championship

Really most of the IT guys don't want to run GT as the cost goes up ie slicks fuel cell can't compete against a tube frame.

So can we come to a concession as to some of the points on the table

We need a simple solution for the year to come i'm hoping for a baby step and not sweeping change for all the classes. Simple is better try it see how it works and see what happens.

I propose keep the classes the way they are and institue a prep points/weight penalty system for ITGT to address the speed safety issue. Keep it a recognized class but use the points/penalty system to encourage move up move down conforming. A comittee of the ITGT drivers can then be organized to address issues that arise within. The WCMA stewards can then address cars that come of concern on a case by case basis.
Added mine and Domo's idea to the poll and reset the voting.


Just to add to the argument, I always wondered why the GT guys didn't switch to DOT tires for the ARCA/NASCC races and run ITGT and go back to slicks for the WCMA races. With the # of ITGT cars and it being a recognized class you coulda won a ARCA/NASCC championship.
So perhaps we should add a rule to eliminate this possibilty.

[CRXsi]

I think both Sue and Anthonu K have hit the nail on the head...why has ITGT and GTS become a points/trophy class? Originally it was created as a catch all class but was not going to be recognized  for trophies or points...

Maybe this is what needs to happen again, allow the class but recommend competitors find a proper place to call their own class and not recognize the classes for trophies or points...this may alleviate most of the problems we are talking about...

Gary's/Domo's idea has merit except one problem...does this include aftermarket mounts or brackets that can be bought rather than fabricated?

[Super70Dave]

The rules really legitimize the ITGT
"This class is intended to allow a variety of inexpensive cars to be eligible;however those determined by WCMA to be outside these parameters will be classed as ITGT"
The rules are litered/full of reasons ITGT is a good idea. ITGT does have rules I counted 17 times specifically in the improved touring rules that make a car ITGT.
The ITCS-Improved Touring Category Specifications list specificly categories cars to run in the class.
So how can it or how was it ever an unrecognized class.
The original comittee made it so in writing the rules. Really it does allow a home for any car no matter how or why you built the car.

Devils Advocate

[10cc]

Hmmm...

We do seem to be going around in circles.

I know that ITGT and GTS WERE meant as catch-all classes, and they WERE NOT award classes. That much is fact

How and when they changed, I don't remember...I also forget the name of what it's called when you don't remember stuff.

Gord's recent post pretty much says what I have said twice at least here.

Go back to the original intent of the classes, which is to accomodate cars that show up and do not fit into our class structure.

Allow them suffcient time, ie: a season...to sort the car into an existing class.

Somehow have people STOP purpose building cars for ITGT and GTS.

That part is really rather simple, as the cars don't put themselves together, the builder does it, so if the builder of the car simply follows the existing rules, and builds a car that fits in an existing class....voila, we have no more problem.

And if you want to go faster....drive better.  If you are compelled to go faster by spending more money, move up a class in the existing structure.

Racing is a rules based deal, everywhere, and if you want to race, you follow the rules. I know how hard that is for some people, but that's how things are.


Thoughts from an old fart