Up to 15" wheels, 2.0 liter cars in ITA, gel cell batteries, competition adjustments!!!

Oh my oh my, should be really interesting over the next couple of years as this stuff gets all sorted out.

 

Hey, now - don't say "competition adjustments." They are "performance compensation adjustments" (PCAs).

If the CRB can resist temptation and stick with the vision of the ITAC on this, they should actually be different things, operationally.

Regardless, the next couple years will indeed be VERY interesting, particularly in ITA.

K

 

15" wheels - whoo! Does that apply to ITB and ITC, or just ITA?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Crack Monkey &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">15" wheels - whoo! Does that apply to ITB and ITC, or just ITA?</TD></TR></TABLE>

applies to the whole shootin' match.

Because you need to be out there now, MaddMatt, the driver's school dates for the SE next year are:

Double at CMP Jan 15-16

Double at RR Feb 10-13

I expect to see you at one of those with your ITA SE-r, biatch.

 

Ok let’s dissect this further, what constitutes "performance compensation adjustments" (and "competition adjustments") ? I've also never heard of gel cell batteries, what are those? Sorry for the newB questions!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RacerBowie &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I expect to see you at one of those with your ITA SE-r, biatch.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Pat Griffith's car is still f/s

RJ - sitting on his hands till next year

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hracer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ok let’s dissect this further, what constitutes "performance compensation adjustments" (and "competition adjustments") ? I've also never heard of gel cell batteries, what are those? Sorry for the newB questions!</TD></TR></TABLE>

I *think* the IT comp adjustments (PCAs) are meant to be one-time, or very rare and would be restricted to weight adjustments. Like making the Neon heavier in ITA, rather than lighter (and uncompetitive) in ITS.

Whereas standard comp. adjustment would be like some of the pro series - where drivers and marques get penalized based on performance from week to week. And these adjustments range from weight to gear ratios to boost to inlet retrictors.

 

Batteries that use a semi-liquid cell medium instead of sulfuric acid, like Optimas. I wonder if lighter ones are allowed, or if this is just a safety allowance. Either way it be a good thang.

CM: That's how I interpret the difference too. Kindof like reclassing a car in SoloII, it would be handled on a yearly basis and would require member comment and approval from the BOD and all that good stuff.

 

More specifically, "Competition Adjustments" in club racing have been applied to make/model rather than specific entrants but they have generally been made based on on-track performance, and only annually. I call it the "Doug Peterson Rule" from a time in the '80s when he dominated the small GT classes and you could pretty much be assured that if you were a regular guy spending regular dough on the same kind of box Peterson was driving at the RubOffs, you were going to get fatter over the winter...

There is still room for this to go sideways but only if someone re-purposes the policy. Institutional memory is going to play a huge role in this down the line: If leadership shifts (when it does), it could be very easy to slip into the old paradigm of "make my car faster so I can compete." That is explicitly NOT the stated intent of the people who drafted the rule.

The wheel diameter rule is going to get tweaked so that it is "up to" 15" rather than JUST 15" wheels. There was a push to get B and C cars up to the A/S 7" wide standard too but it fell short. I would love to go to a 15 on the Golf, strictly for availability reasons, if nothing else but there aren't any options in a 6" width.

K

 

Thanks K.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The wheel diameter rule is going to get tweaked so that it is "up to" 15" rather than JUST 15" wheels. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I am sure it will be up to 15", because allowing just 15" would be absolutely ridiculous.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RacerBowie &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">2.0 liter cars in ITA</TD></TR></TABLE>

what's this pertain to? There's 2+ Liter cars in ITA already.

s

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by stevel &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

what's this pertain to? There's 2+ Liter cars in ITA already.

s</TD></TR></TABLE>

This refers to the line of 2.0 liter "orphan" cars that were poorly classed in ITS, that now seem to be "movin' on down" to ITA:

Sentra SE-R/NX2000, Neons, others to follow I would assume.

 

2-liter, 16v VW MkII GTI. Yummy.

K

 

94-95 Civic EX coupe to ITA at #2305.

Let the rebuild begin

 

The 2nd gen Prelude si is off to B - Yipee! I'm certainly looking foward to next year...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by downingracing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">94-95 Civic EX coupe to ITA at #2305.

Let the rebuild begin </TD></TR></TABLE>

Thats not a bad car on paper. Hmm...

 

VW 2.0 16v MKII would be very interesting. The car has good torque and handles increadably well. ...I know, I used to own one.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by downingracing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">94-95 Civic EX coupe to ITA at #2305.

Let the rebuild begin </TD></TR></TABLE>

is the si hatch going with it?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MichaelJComputer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

is the si hatch going with it?</TD></TR></TABLE>

i believe so. i forget the weight though, i think it's a tad different.

s

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by downingracing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">94-95 Civic EX coupe to ITA at #2305.

Let the rebuild begin </TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Thats not a bad car on paper. Hmm... </TD></TR></TABLE>

I've been thinkin' the same thing all year. I'm excited about these changes, as they line up with the car I bought/am building, and the wheels I bought, too.

Oh, and I was the one that requested the Si move, as well. I know the request has been reviewed, but I haven't heard whether it officially passed yet, or not. I'm still trying to work with Kirk to get some of the Honda ITA disorganization in the ITCS cleared up, but the CRB is painfully slow.

 

what exactly makes the 94-95 civic Ex look good on paper? (and why haven't the 92-93 cars been reclassed/classed/combined?)

nate - waiting to see if anyone mentions the "special" tranny...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by solo-x &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
nate - waiting to see if anyone mentions the "special" tranny...</TD></TR></TABLE>

nate, spill the beans. what are you talking about?

the thing i love about the obd1 cars finally being classed is being able to use hondata. It's about damn time!!

s

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by solo-x &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> (and why haven't the 92-93 cars been reclassed/classed/combined?) </TD></TR></TABLE>


Because the CRB tends to work on things in steps. We had to request that the cars be moved into the right class, then we will begin requesting that different year cars that are on different lines, that are the same car, be combined. We've found out that if you make too many requests in the same submission, if there is any part of the request that the CRB denies, then they deny the entire submission. So, it's going to take a little bit of time.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Because you need to be out there now, MaddMatt,</TD></TR></TABLE>

But I suck....

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by FormulaIntegra &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">


Because the CRB tends to work on things in steps. We had to request that the cars be moved into the right class, then we will begin requesting that different year cars that are on different lines, that are the same car, be combined. We've found out that if you make too many requests in the same submission, if there is any part of the request that the CRB denies, then they deny the entire submission. So, it's going to take a little bit of time.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Is this also what caused the debate about the 91-94 SE-R's being reclassed? I heard only 91-93's not 94 Which seems odd because 94's are the low ports which make less power then the 91-93 high ports. Hmmmm....