Paul's rationale is very well presented. I'd agree with him that we shouldn't just dump IP-4. As he says, it's not costing CACC a lot of money if no one enters. A couple of lines in the rulebook is about it.

Mike

Jordy,
I can see you are not going to be convinced but at least get some facts straight.

I do own an IP4 car which I built specifically because of the class , I ran it in class this year and will continue to campaign it in IP4 while it has a class to run it in. I will not run it in IP3 and have not before in the past. So you are wrong and I want that clarified.

I do own an IP3 car and it gets entered into IP3 and GTU when we (Scott Rattray and I) bring it to the track.

I cannot comment on why Keith runs his car in IP3, I know one car he runs in that run group is not IP4 eligible and maybe at this time he does not have a car that is IP4 legal.

"dave" has an IP4 car, Wayne McKinnon has a car that with the removal of dual carbs and hot cam would be more welcome in IP4 than he needs to be in GTL.
There were a couple of more out there so we do know exist.

The other reason for this class was to encourage the much cheaper than $500 difference non Si models to be developed into race cars. There is already starting to be a lack of suitable Si's and eventually the non Si models can  be an alternative as long as they don't have to race against the faster models. SCCA and ICSCC have recognized this with the specific classes why do you want to push them to those events and away from CACC's ?

Here's my bottom line, eliminate the class and lose me as a competitor. Big deal you might say, he's just one guy, but I will assure you, I will not enter that car in IP3 but possibly wait until a ICSCC weekend and spend my racing dollars with them and not CACC, How does that not hurt CACC ? Are there others out there like me ? I can't say for sure if there are and how many, but you will definitely not find out if you eliminate the class.

I'm not going to suggest to anyone starting out that they shouldn't try to find a car that might be competitive in IP3 but there are a few IP4 cars out there that we do know of and they will be the ones immediately and directly affected by your decision. Hopefully for your sake and CACC's as well they will capitulate and run their grossly uncompetitive cars in IP3 and keep your class numbers healthy but maybe they will retire from that class and search out an organization that wasn't so insensitive to their needs and desires to have a class that was suited for them.

Again, let the rebuttals be heard,

Paul

Nope. Won't stop IP3 racing but seeing as I mostly share the IP3 car on specific weekends, those weekends that I do not need to share it I would just as likely run the IP4 car. Seeing as I am a die hard CACC supporter I would more than likely try to sell the IP4 car if you nix the class. Just makes it hard to sell a car that only has a dedicated class for it 2 or 3 weekends a year at Mission.

How about :

1. Dump IPA

2. PUT IP4 on a one year probation where there must be at least 3 different cars show up throughout the 2012 year at any time.

If we cant get 3 different cars to any of the 5 or 6 races then those cars will be classed in IP3, and IP4 will be gone for 2013.

If there is only one car running in IP4 and that guy is running in that class  because he can not be competitive in IP3, well then clearly he is not being competitive running against himself either?

Chris, it's been 4 years since we've had more than 1 car on the track at a time in IP4 (last time was October 2007).  Do we really need another year to know the numbers aren't there?

Looks like the Conference guys have simplified everything.
I notice this concept is now used in motorcycle racing and even boat racing.

http://www.race-st.com/

Well seeing as my name has been mentioned on a couple of occasions (and not in a derogatory manner!) I feel obliged to add my opinion.
I am pleased to see Jason's comments because it was his (or people in his situation) involvement in lapping days and a couple of other cars that I knew of which could easily be made into racecars that prompted me to suggest the IP4 class. His migration from lapping to IP4 to IP3 is a classic example of what I had imagined. Dave/Doodson's old car (which I sold to Dood!) was another example and if Wayne had asked me I would have told him to run IP4 (legally) instead of spending a lot of money (for fuel cell and carbs and cam etc.) to run GTL where he is totally uncompetitive. I wonder if we might not have seen more of him this year if he had made the IP4 choice?
I think Paul/Dave/Jason have all shown that there is still a place for the class. Incidentally it was never my intention to run in IP4 I just thought it would be good as an entry level class.
I currently have a stock1986 CRX (almost rust free) and an almost complete 'bolt in' roll cage. If someone would like to start racing next year I'll sell them the car, the cage and a set of wheels (with better tires than Doodson started with) for $1200. Such a car would not be embarrassed in IP4 and it is a little cheaper than any IP3 car that I have seen  .

IP4 is currently restricted to OEM throttle body fuel injection, so you are never going to see any cars newer than what's already out there under the current rules.  Also under the current rules there's no provision for carbed cars, so you may want to consider holding off with the '86 CRX or getting the rules changed to make it legal, Keith .

I'll just point out again that there hasn't been any actual racing in IP4 since 2007, which was the last time that there was actually more than one car on the track in class.