Burns, James B. wrote:
> One advantage that an IT car has is that it can use any final drive ratio,
> but this still isn't likely to offset all the other disadvantages.
Taken individually, IT has several allowances that would appear at first
glance to offer an advantage. It's the overall rules package that places
an IT car at a disadvantage.
> The
> gutted interior weight savings is usually offset by the weight of the cage,
> although the cage can add considerable chassis stiffness, so I'd say that
> the gutting and cage installation is another advantage.
Well, there's the minimum weight, anyway. You can legally get most cars
in SP trim to a figure that's significantly below the same car's IT
minimum weight.
> I had an ITS RX7 that I always wanted to try in CSP just to see how it would
> do, but I sold it before I had the chance to autox it. It weighed about
> 2500 lbs.
I believe 1st-gen RX7s can be brought down to 2250-2300 lbs. in SP-legal
trim. Maybe lower. Wendell Karr-Ake told me two years ago how much his
car weighed at the time. I don't remember his figure, but it was
definitely less than 2500 lbs.
> and had about 200hp (dynoed at 175 at
> the wheels).
Which I'd wager is well short of what can be gotten from an SP-legal 13B
motor.
> Fully adjustable suspension,
One plus for IT. But more than offset by the IT limits on rim width and
the rules specifying a minimum ride height. Adjustability is fine, but
you're not allowed to exploit it fully in IT.
> all delrin bushings, etc.
Legal in SP anyway.
> My top
> choices for a dual-purpose IT and SP car would be an ITS 2nd gen. RX7, an
> ITA CRX Si, or an ITA RX3.
The dual-purpose concept is why the Solo II rules allow IT (and A Sedan)
cars to run in SP. Such accommodations don't threaten anyone with a real
SP car. If they did, you'd see everybody who's serious about SP building
IT cars. It's an open question as to why the road racing side doesn't
make similar concessions to cars prepped to Solo II rules.
Jay
|