Next spring, i plan on buying a car that eventually be built into a road car. Probably autocrossed and HPDE'd in the mean time.

For budgets reasons, i'm looking at these three cars.

CRX Si for ITA
GTI (DOHC) for ITA
GTI (SOHC) for ITB

Maybe even a scirocco.

I had a CRX Si i had autocrossed years ago, and i loved the car, but locally VW's are way more common, and have a larger local scene support. It would also be nice to try something different with the vw. The chances of also finding a CRX locally are pretty slim, while there are always numerous VWs.

I've been cruising through IT.com results page (from 2000? what is with that?) and it seems like the GTI does well in ITB, but there are occasionally GTI's placing in ITA. The CRX always seems present in ITA.

As far as price parts, i'm not too sure about the DOHC GTI's, i always thought the 16v was kind of rare, and the 8v is pretty popular. Of course, D16A6's seems easy to get a hold of. I'm not sure about other performance components though.
Any input is much appreciated.

Thanks.
Penfold.

 

You could also add a 92-93 integra to your list for ITA.

Then again, if you're worried about budget, an ITC/ITB car is the way to go - you can buy one ready to race for $5-$6k.

 

All of those choices are good ones. You cant really go wrong.

The 1.6 and 1.7 Sciroccos are great ITC cars. I run against 3 of them and they are all horses.
The 1st gen CRX is also a cheap and easy choice for ITC if you dont mind fooling with carbs.
The 1st gen CRX Si is now in ITB, where it should run well.

If there is ITB and ITC competition in your area, those are really nice budget classes. The money required to compete in ITA is a fairly significant step up from ITB in most cases. ITC is just dirt cheap (in racing terms).
But things vary by division. Some have lots of ITC cars and some have zero. Check your local results to see where the competition is.

Scott, who has never seen the point of racing against nobody.

 

I've done both the Golf and the CRX in ITA trim. The 16v Golf will never be truly competitive in ITA compared to the CRX, Civic, Integra, etc.

The Golf has a handling deficit that will not be overcome without relocating suspension pickup points. And if you rely on the large Florida based VW race shop for advice you'll go slower yet.

Rick

 

http://nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=6423

 

I don't know which division the Plante Erf is in but you will want to see what's up locally before you decide. At the end of the day though, it might make sense to choose based on which make you have the most knowledge base available for. Lots of good choices have been tossed out here.

To complicate things a little, the Comp Board just approved moving the GTI 2.0 16v from ITS to ITA. It's heavy but might be an interesting option. Parts are a little scarce. Had I not done the MkIII Golf in B, I think my next choice would have been the 2nd-generation Integra in A or - since they finally moved it - the same thing only one generation newer.

C is pretty much always going to be cheaper than B, which is cheaper than A - all other things being equal. Slower cars just aren't as hard on parts, tires, fuel, pads, etc.

You have some good options.

K

 

Thanks for the responses.

Erf is small borough in a city in Southern Maine, and i read on IT.com about ITB having 20+ cars at NHIS. Is this on par with other regions?

The more reading i do, the more it seems it would be just most effective to let opportunity decide, and purchase an already built car when the time comes. I also noticed that the b13 SE-R is classed as ITA. That seems to be a pretty quick car compared to CRX Si's.

I do have another concern. Is there any sort of difference in driver development that may be effect by if they are introduced into racing in a front-wheel drive car, instead of a rear-wheel one? Or vice versa?

Thanks again.
Penfold.

 

There's good advice given already. I would suggest picking a class, or classes, where you are able to give yourself a competitive car to race in, in both model and preparation. Sooner or later, you will want to make yourself be the major factor in determining your success, and not so much your equipment. If you reach a point where you can't afford to bring at least a good (competitive) car to the track, it may become frustrating continuing to spend the money and effort you have up to that point.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Penfold &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I also noticed that the b13 SE-R is classed as ITA. That seems to be a pretty quick car compared to CRX Si's. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Also check out the NX2000 with bigger brakes and only 25 lbs heavier. There are also the two Neons (sohc and dohc) you can consider and '92-98 Civic Si/EXs as other fwd choices. As far as rwd ITA cars, you can pick from the 240SX, 1.6L Miata, and real soon the 1.8L Miata, which imo will be the hot ticket for this class. These are just cars off the top of my head, and you can check them all out from all classes at http://www.scca.com/_Filelibra...y.pdf

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Penfold &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I do have another concern. Is there any sort of difference in driver development that may be effect by if they are introduced into racing in a front-wheel drive car, instead of a rear-wheel one? Or vice versa?</TD></TR></TABLE>
I wouldn't worry about it at first. A great deal of the things that make you fast in one type also make you fast in the other. If you do it well, even driving identically both types of cars, you will be fast. The differences between the two come in only when getting the last drops of speed, imo.

 

Previously owning a 2.0 16v Jetta, I would have to say it would be competative. I remember driving it at Sebring and it handled great and the brakes seem to hold up. A buddy of mine had built one for ITS and if you compared his lap times, it would make him a front running ITA. Now would I race one? Those 2.0l are kinda hard to come by so I don't know.

Now a 1.8 Miata in ITA, that's where I would put my money on. Look at the lap times of SM and ITA at Sebring and you'll now why. It's too bad I don't fit in a Miata.

 

Here you go.... https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1392095&page=1

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by GBRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Previously owning a 2.0 16v Jetta ... A buddy of mine had built one for ITS and if you compared his lap times, it would make him a front running ITA. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Ooh - be careful about this comparison. In ITS, this Golf was listed at a featherweight 2220# but in A it needs to be at 2475#. That's enough that it will slow down, particularly at the tracks where it has had a relative competitive advantage in S.

I'm picturing a 200# rear antiroll bar and mounts.

Still a good option, probably but there's a TON of advantage for someone new to the game to run something that a lot of others have out on the track. ITA is going to be awesome in the coming years but there's a lot of new ground to be broken out there for some of these chassis. Greg Amy has gotten his NX into the hunt but it's required some serious development work, expenses, and the occasional expensive error.

K

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hracer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">There's good advice given already. I would suggest picking a class, or classes, where you are able to give yourself a competitive car to race in, in both model and preparation. Sooner or later, you will want to make yourself be the major factor in determining your success, and not so much your equipment. If you reach a point where you can't afford to bring at least a good (competitive) car to the track, it may become frustrating continuing to spend the money and effort you have up to that point.</TD></TR></TABLE>

As always, this is the best advice for starting out.

All the cars Alex mentioned may also prove to be extremely competitive in the near future. Some, such as the 240SX is already proven. In the NW, we have yet to see a decent expample of a Neon but on paper it looks as if they should be able run well. The Miatas look as if they will be real strong once they start making the jump from Demolition Derby to Road Racing.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by GBRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Previously owning a 2.0 16v Jetta, I would have to say it would be competative. I remember driving it at Sebring and it handled great and the brakes seem to hold up. </TD></TR></TABLE>


One can get a Golf to go pretty damn fast but I don't think that it has the ability to consisently win. From my own experience and those of others who run Golfs, the brakes can be a big sore point. The car also has an odd handling/balance characteristic that is very difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. Because of this, the front tires get hot and greasy before the end of a 30 minute race.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">ITA is going to be awesome in the coming years but there's a lot of new ground to be broken out there for some of these chassis. K</TD></TR></TABLE>

I couldn't agree more. We should see deep, multi make/model fields that are fast and relatively affordable. I predict here in the NW that our 12-15 car fields will be 25-30 deep in 2-3 years time. This is the exact reason that I don't understand running HC H4 exclusively.

Rick

 

Regarding the extra weight added to the 2.0GTI, I don't think anyone got and ITS version anywhere near the min weight. The extra added is really closer to 100lbs. The brakes are virtually the same as the 1.8 16v and 8v versions. The Jetta 16V does use bigger front brakes so that could be a reason to choose one if the weights are the same and achievable. ITB in my region has been taken over by the Volvos. No aero but good hp and excellent torque and they seem to handle well. An ITC VW would be dirt cheap to run and they hold up well. If you can find an already built Honda I expect it would hold up well too.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mohudsolo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">... The Jetta 16V does use bigger front brakes so that could be a reason to choose one if the weights are the same and achievable. ...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Veddy interrresting point. That weight should be very doable for a Golf but I don't know about the Jetta.

K

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by GBRacing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Now a 1.8 Miata in ITA, that's where I would put my money on. Look at the lap times of SM and ITA at Sebring and you'll now why. It's too bad I don't fit in a Miata.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Isn't the 1.8 an ITS car? Or did that change?

 

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

Isn't the 1.8 an ITS car? Or did that change?</TD></TR></TABLE>

1.8 becomes an ITA car on 1/1/06. 2380lbs.

We had a big discussion on it here, some think it will be too fast, some think it will be just right, some think the 1.6 is still the better car. (Ok, that last "some" is just me!)

 

The 91-94 Nissan Sentra SE-R and NX2000 are both bumped down to ITA as of this year. In IT, the NX is probably the more desirable one due to slightly bigger front brakes. But they were mostly sold with T-tops, and good luck finding a hardtop NX nowadays. The SE-R is slightly lighter, easier to come by in hardtop form, and more plentiful in general. They both are cheap and fun to drive.

Andrew