PA Hillclimb

Well we might as well start talking now about this. I've read a few things from a few regions and they are all over the place. Here are a few points

I've seen

1. ITE1 and ITE2
2. ITO and ITU (like spo and spu)
3. Just ITE with many different rules

And does anyone have any more insight on the BP and DP proposed class revisions. There is talk about SPO and SPU for them. Altho according to this there maybe be issues with fuel cells required. I'll try and do some research tonight to find out what i can. Here is a discussion from the Atlanta region on this.

http://www.roadraceautox.com/showthread.php?t=20721

These discussions from other groups may be helpful in our process.

SEDIV rules
http://www.sedivracing.org/2009SEDivReg ... sRules.pdf

I guess we should start from the beginning. Do we want a ITE class? Do we want it to be a open to anything that dosn't fit other IT classes or a more traditional ITE? Do we want SP classes instead? Should we just send them to special?

I don't really have a set idea of what i'd like at the moment. Lets hear what others think!

Jeremy, you are the unofficial point man on this issue. Gather what you can. Post your findings. Dive into it and give everybody your opinion.

Damn, I love it when other people get involved!

Dave Y.

Jer,

The original intent of ITE, was to give World Challenge, Firestone Firehawk cars a place to play in regional road racing. I know NARRC's rules differ from MARRS rules, but they are generally the accepted.

Super Production was in the GCR, under various class listings in the front half of the book, sort of a Formula S for Production and GT cars. Speaking of Super Production, there is an acticle in Vintage Motorsports magazine about a Porsche 962 that is running as a SPO car.

Rich

The difficulty with with Super Production is, different regions have different specs about what is O (over) and U (under) determined by cc's. Is it Over, Under 1.8, 2.0, 2.5, etc.?

That is why I said Specials has a better break down, three levels not two.

Dave Y

dspgti wrote:Jeremy, you are the unofficial point man on this issue. Gather what you can. Post your findings. Dive into it and give everybody your opinion.

Damn, I love it when other people get involved!

Dave Y.

Dave, I'll see what i can come up with.

Rich, Are the Marrs rules the ones were thinking of adopting? Do we even want to consider something different?

I'll be honest, i will most likely be on the side of opening up the rules of ITE to allow alot of different stuff. If this is not even in the realm of something the PHA would consider then please let me kno so i don't waste my time searching for alternatives.

So just from the SCCA GCR this is what i have so far.

1. No AWD except SS/Touring/Super touring. ( SO no awd cars in IT classes period unless we come up with our own classification in ITE) And i don't see if they are actually allowed in SP.
2.No turbo's or supercharger in IT.(another no no unless we say its allowed)

Now here is class i didn't kno anything about. Super touring! This class seems to be a ITE like class already. Do we run this class or classes actually?

As for SPO and U. Send them to special! They have to exceed a GT car spec. That is pretty hard to do IMO.



Please forgive me if i this is very basic. i'm just learning alot of this stuff.

Okay i read the MARRS ITE rules. LOL. http://www.wdcr-scca.org/LinkClick.aspx ... 73&mid=535

So all the solo SP cars could race ITE according to this. But no SM cars unless they fit into another race series. . And you need to prove that the car is eligible for that race series, with a logbook.

Now i like the rules i posted earlier alittle better. They are including many of the NASA classifications that many more cars would fall into. These rules pretty much restrict it too SCCA rule cars.

Now i'm sure we will hear "well this is the SCCA". They have begun to accept NASA road race licenses in SCCA and visa versa, so should we open it up to more of their classes bye allowing more into the existing SCCA classes? (Specifically Performance touring)

I actually think we should have ITE as a catch all for non-tube chassis cars beyond the rules of SM. Such as NASA's American Iron and AIX classes, as well as Jer's car. The way the rules are now if you show up in a mustang with an aftermarket k-member you are in S3.

I think i agree with Mark. What that does is give you a place for cars that don't fit anywhere else. To race in a class that dosn't require fuel cells and fire suppression systems! What are the safety requirements for special?

I have limited knowledge about World Challenge Series cars. There have been many series over the years and ITE has been used to acommodate most of them. Of course Audi ran and therefore you see Bill Miller"s AWD Twin Turbo S4 properly classed in that group. Gordan Wise also has a Twin Turbo Rotary RX7 which had a series back in the 90's. They fit. In the futrue, there can be a ton of all types of cars. Look at the Koni Challenge, Mustang Challenge, etc. You will see RX8's, Mazda Cup, etc as well as many other up and coming series spec car classes. My favorite is the TDI Cup (who says diesels are slow). ITE is a good catch all class, but be carefull about what to include. You might consider each series has to go thru some kind of approval process to be accepted.

I'd like to suggest having one criteria that needs to be included. All ITE cars, whether an actual or replicated model of an allowed series, must have a Full Roll Cage equivalent to the series requirements or comply with with current SCCA IT specifications. I'd rather say GT specs but lets be reasonable. To answer other general question: in IT, fuel cells and Fire "Systems" are not required. That doesn't mean if they were required in the series that is being included, would that carry thru?

Dave Y

Mark Aubele wrote:I actually think we should have ITE as a catch all for non-tube chassis cars beyond the rules of SM. Such as NASA's American Iron and AIX classes, as well as Jer's car. The way the rules are now if you show up in a mustang with an aftermarket k-member you are in S3.

Yeah, and the K-member is a very common mod on the street. It should be allowed in SM. Actually, it should be allowed in the Street Prepared classes because it's that common.

I completely agree that ITE should follow all the IT safety requirements. I'm not sure how much we really need to worry about what we let run there, as there are some pretty serious race classes that could run. (Ferrari).

I think we should just let it open to anything non-tube frame and on DOT tires. This will cover just about anything coming into race with out the need for the fuel cells, fire syestem, and firewall breaching roll cage. That gives us pretty much 3 levels of unlimited classes. Unlimited street=SM, Unlimited race=anything with more then SM but not up too tube frame specials., Unlimited anything=specials.

Here are the San Francisco regions ITE rules. So im not completely crazy!
http://www.sfrscca.org/images/2008/Road ... trules.pdf

Jer,
Keep the research going. The information that you are gathering is invaluable. PHA could be the clearing house for all ITE information.

Dave Y.

Hmm, so super touring is a new class? This sounds interesting! http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/336897.aspx

I'm sorry if anyone read my last post before I deleted it. At least give me credit that I was doing good for a while. And then I fell off the wagon. How stupid of me to not be more constructive and supportive when others are trying to help out.

So I'll start over again.

Dave Y.

Wait a minute, ITE is a Roadracing class. As was stated before it is a catch all for roadracing. Why try to butcher it just so street cars fit? There is already "catch all" classes for hillclimbs. We don't want to match up roadrace cars with "weak" records in the same class as autocross cars now do we? I thought we were already through that?

Steve Tumolo wrote:Wait a minute, ITE is a Roadracing class. As was stated before it is a catch all for roadracing. Why try to butcher it just so street cars fit? There is already "catch all" classes for hillclimbs. We don't want to match up roadrace cars with "weak" records in the same class as autocross cars now do we? I thought we were already through that?

I don't think we are trying to fit street cars into a roadrace class. There are no classes for some cars that can roadrace other places.

Dave, I'll assume your comments are about Super touring. . I think ITE should be a open too just about anything, or we need to run this Super touring class. So that means make 1 class to fit all, or 3 classes. ITE, STO, and STU! I'm ducking.

On the other note about that, The GCR dosn't have anything about ITE, but it does list this new Super touring. So that begs the question mabye no ITE and just ST.

I just took a few minutes to scan the new STU/O. Super Production SPU/O has been removed as I see it. First of all PHA must accomodate STU/O because it is now a National Class. Super Touring is a pretty hopped up class. They are talking relocating lower suspension pickup points 1 inch and upper 3 inches from stock, custom tube A arms with hyme joints are allowed, Lexan windows, unlimited brake up grades with water spray cooling. That is some serious race cars there. Way too wild for ITE type cars but if that is were some people want to run until a "Real Race Car" shows up, no problem. Note turbo upgrade restrictions and restrictor plates!

I'd keep looking at ITE if I were you.

Dave Y.

Actually Dave, if you look at the car classifications, there are some notes that do allow turbo upgrades for a few vehicles from what i can tell. (Mitsubishi being one of them). . And you are right that this is a serious race class! Sounds kinda fun to me, i'd love to go against some of these cars. Just for sh*ts and giggles.

And since you like AUDI"s how about this one.
http://www.neuspeed.com/supertouring/A4forsale.html

If I only had the money?
Thanks Jer.

Dave Y