adding weight
- Thread starter zracre
- Start date
Some suggestions:
- Use this as an opportunity to make some mongo-bongo roll cage additions. Weight strategically placed (such as rear roll cage crosstubes and possibly a "rear end crush preventer structure" will go a long way to help making the weight and improve safety (~50#).
- Re-install the spare tire in the rear tire well. I suggest using a stronger bolt than factory and safety-wiring it in (~25#).
- Accusump and/or fire system, mounted in the right rear corner of the trunk area (~25#)
- Be creative (~infinity)...
GA
- Use this as an opportunity to make some mongo-bongo roll cage additions. Weight strategically placed (such as rear roll cage crosstubes and possibly a "rear end crush preventer structure" will go a long way to help making the weight and improve safety (~50#).
- Re-install the spare tire in the rear tire well. I suggest using a stronger bolt than factory and safety-wiring it in (~25#).
- Accusump and/or fire system, mounted in the right rear corner of the trunk area (~25#)
- Be creative (~infinity)...
GA
handfulz28
New member
Hey Evan, I feel your pain with that particular bimmer. I always thought he was running around in a "tweaked" ES, but I just realized this morning when I looked through the ITCS that everything is probably E-spec because they're on the same line. The problem is nobody else is running that car around the country, at least not to the "success" that he has, so the car was probably overlooked for adjustments. And he never leaves CFR because he's protected there.
Where I don't feel your pain: I've already been running 100lbs over, so I might actually have to start paying attention to my finishing weights
One of these days I'll finally get my Supermotard wheels on the DRZ; we'll have to get together.
Michael
Where I don't feel your pain: I've already been running 100lbs over, so I might actually have to start paying attention to my finishing weights
One of these days I'll finally get my Supermotard wheels on the DRZ; we'll have to get together.
Michael
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Originally posted by handfulz28@Jan 25 2006, 09:14 AM
Hey Evan, I feel your pain with that particular bimmer. I always thought he was running around in a "tweaked" ES, but I just realized this morning when I looked through the ITCS that everything is probably E-spec because they're on the same line. The problem is nobody else is running that car around the country, at least not to the "success" that he has, so the car was probably overlooked for adjustments. And he never leaves CFR because he's protected there.
Where I don't feel your pain: I've already been running 100lbs over, so I might actually have to start paying attention to my finishing weights
One of these days I'll finally get my Supermotard wheels on the DRZ; we'll have to get together.
Michael
[snapback]72059[/snapback]
The E and the ES are the same car, just 4 doors or two IIRC.
The 325e redlines at a very low 4800 RPM and only had 121 hp but 174 lb-ft of torque and an incredibly flat powerband to compensate. The "e" stood for "eta," which is the Greek letter for efficiency and was the theme for the 325e - only a 9.0 comression ratio.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
We aren't talking about the same car here. It's the ITA car that loses weight.
handfulz28
New member
Yeah Andy, that's the problem. There's a guy running an ITA 325e in Central Florida Region that typically finishes somewhere near the top 5 OVERALL. He regularly pulls most ITS cars down the straights.
NOW he gets to lose 200lbs? I didn't see that.
Not that I'm trying to call the guy out here on the forum (I've protested him before and will do so again when I get the chance), but according to the guy's own Tell-Tale tach, his motor will spin upwards of 7k RPM in "IT-trim". I imagine there's a lot more than revs being made in "IT-trim"...
NOW he gets to lose 200lbs? I didn't see that.
Not that I'm trying to call the guy out here on the forum (I've protested him before and will do so again when I get the chance), but according to the guy's own Tell-Tale tach, his motor will spin upwards of 7k RPM in "IT-trim". I imagine there's a lot more than revs being made in "IT-trim"...
RacerBowie
New member
Nah Andy, you guys are talking about the same car.
There is a REALLY fast 325e down in Florida. It is the only one I have heard of being that fast.
handfulz28
New member
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I don't want to accuse anyone of anything but:
- When a E30 325e pulls ITS cars, you have a MAJOR problem.
- When a car like that stays 'home' - so close to the ARRC, you have weird coincidence.
AB
- When a E30 325e pulls ITS cars, you have a MAJOR problem.
- When a car like that stays 'home' - so close to the ARRC, you have weird coincidence.
AB
zracre
New member
It is quite frustrating...I have spent a ton of money on my car since the ARRC hoping for a better showing next year there...I have had some great battles with him but still cant pull him on the straights. he holds the track record at Daytona and Sebring Club Course and his dad holds the track record at Sebring Long. I was hoping that the now faster car would be able to run with it but now with weight being added...I doubt it 
wasted money. this is why people are turning to SM and other spec classes (self included)stack on weight, add a tweener and listen to the complaints until something gives...or people leave. I will try with the Teg, but I will probably try to run more SM this year than ITA as it seems to be getting silly. I dont know what to protest on the guys car and wouldnt without knowledge. I'm not against the changes, but adding weight to cars that have been there so long and taking silly amounts off of others seems like penalty time for people doing their homework. i'm no rich man and it took me years to build the teg to where it is now to just have lead thrown at me. I'm happy to see the MR2 lose some as well as the others, parity is good, but c'mon people...many people have been running the teg for years (not to mention the CRX...) and NOW a penalty???? please...what happens when you make too many changes at once.......you go backwards.
leave the class leaders weight the same
adjust the cars that obviously need it (MR2 Celica 1st gen Teg RX7 Protege etc)
add new cars and monitor...
I hear all this blah blah talk about performance potential...how is that calculated?? you have raw numbers of stock rated flywheel bhp...where in gods name do you come up with 2380# 140 CHP miata and a 2595# 140CHP Integra??????
If Kip Vansteenburgs 99 Miata is any indication of what a 1.8 is capable of...good luck with IT.
wasted money. this is why people are turning to SM and other spec classes (self included)stack on weight, add a tweener and listen to the complaints until something gives...or people leave. I will try with the Teg, but I will probably try to run more SM this year than ITA as it seems to be getting silly. I dont know what to protest on the guys car and wouldnt without knowledge. I'm not against the changes, but adding weight to cars that have been there so long and taking silly amounts off of others seems like penalty time for people doing their homework. i'm no rich man and it took me years to build the teg to where it is now to just have lead thrown at me. I'm happy to see the MR2 lose some as well as the others, parity is good, but c'mon people...many people have been running the teg for years (not to mention the CRX...) and NOW a penalty???? please...what happens when you make too many changes at once.......you go backwards.leave the class leaders weight the same
adjust the cars that obviously need it (MR2 Celica 1st gen Teg RX7 Protege etc)
add new cars and monitor...
I hear all this blah blah talk about performance potential...how is that calculated?? you have raw numbers of stock rated flywheel bhp...where in gods name do you come up with 2380# 140 CHP miata and a 2595# 140CHP Integra??????
If Kip Vansteenburgs 99 Miata is any indication of what a 1.8 is capable of...good luck with IT.
Tristan Smith
New member
Does anyone know what a cool suit system (loaded with water and ice) weights? Since I need to add a few pounds I might as well get something out of it.
gran racing
Super Moderator
Evan,
You're talking about a few different topics here. How to compete against other legal ITA cars and how to deal with possible illegal cars.
Let's assume all cars in ITA are legal. Before these changes begining last year, ITA was essentially spec Integra / CRX. Yawn.
What about the people who were there before the CRX / Integra misclassifications? How many RX7 and other cars were impacted? Weight being added to these two cars is a good thing! You can't honestly say that these two cars did not have a classification advantage. And it still one of the cars to have. From what I've talked with some of the very fast Integra drivers (with very well prepped cars), it won't hurt them much. Some were not even able to achieve the previous minimum weight.
Illegal cars. This is where I can understand your frustration assuming it is in fact true.
You're talking about a few different topics here. How to compete against other legal ITA cars and how to deal with possible illegal cars.
Let's assume all cars in ITA are legal. Before these changes begining last year, ITA was essentially spec Integra / CRX. Yawn.
What about the people who were there before the CRX / Integra misclassifications? How many RX7 and other cars were impacted? Weight being added to these two cars is a good thing! You can't honestly say that these two cars did not have a classification advantage. And it still one of the cars to have. From what I've talked with some of the very fast Integra drivers (with very well prepped cars), it won't hurt them much. Some were not even able to achieve the previous minimum weight.
Illegal cars. This is where I can understand your frustration assuming it is in fact true.
zracre
New member
thats why you take weight off MR2's RX7's Protege's etc and add new cars...my point is that the rx7 was a tweener when it was introduced...the crx same...the teg same (but pretty much equal to crx)...let the older cars that cant reach the performance standard lose the weight and add newer cars. Dont penalize a car (and driver) that has been running for a dozen or so years. To me it is too many changes at once. My point is also that they do not use on track performance (race results) as a guage. If they did the 325e would not lose 200#!! If they did they would see that a large percentage of the SE tracks have a 325e as record holders there. They penalized the Accord a few years back and stuck it in ITA where it was a back marker even well developed and that was simply one change...which they had to undo after all the people went and built them and spent hard earned money and got POed. now they went and made lots of changes. Im all for change. Just not so many at once.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Originally posted by zracre@Jan 25 2006, 03:04 PM
I hear all this blah blah talk about performance potential...how is that calculated?? you have raw numbers of stock rated flywheel bhp...where in gods name do you come up with 2380# 140 CHP miata and a 2595# 140CHP Integra??????
If Kip Vansteenburgs 99 Miata is any indication of what a 1.8 is capable of...good luck with IT.
[snapback]72128[/snapback]
Evan,
The way it is calculated has been put on this site multiple times. You are getting all worked up over nothing. The 2380 Miata is in ITA and is 128hp stock. Kip's car is a 99+ and is 140hp but it's in ITS.
Does that help your blood pressure?
This is not a penalty. It's a correction of all cars using the methods we use now to class and re-class. Instead of a crap shoot, all cars are starting from a level field. Some cars have been getting a 'free' ride for a while and some cars have been taking one for the team for a while - well, that is all gone now.
The 325e is a seperate issue. The same specs that added weight to your car, decreased weight on that one...121hp stock. I understand your frestration, but you can't complain about it unless you are going to do something about it.
AB
spnkzss
New member
My 16 quart cool suit system weighs about 5 lbs empty. 16 quarts = 4 gallons. 4 gallons of water = 33.36 lbs (1 gallon water equals 8.34 lbs). 33.36lbs water + 5 lbs system = 38.36 lbs. Give or take a little bit because you are not going to have a full 4 gallons of water in there and ice takes up more volume then water so it will melt and won't equal the same amount. Logically I would expect a good 25 lbs to be added if not close to 30 if you add a couple cold ones in the cooler for after the race
Not a bad idea. I may have to consider that as well. I've got a fuel cell, so can't add a spare tire. I already have a fire system, but I'd say it only weighs a whopping 15 lbs max anyways. I'll have to read the cage rules to see what can be done on it. The car is almost perfectly corner weighted with the spring perches at the same height and me in the drivers seat so bolting weight to the passenger floor is going to blow. That's probably what I'll have to do in the short term though. I'll have to say that this does suck for people who spent the time and effort to get their cars down to min weight (or bought a car at min weight like me).
As to fast cars that aren't currently at min weight, I guess they won't be any slower. If the car's at the front, but not at min weight, then making its min weight higher won't do anything to slow it down. I don't if any cars fit that description, just making an observation.
David
Evan, I've been fairly mum on this subject since last week, mostly because it would seem to be self-serving. However, this weight adjustment is not a penalty in any sense of the word; it's an adjustment to bring these cars back to parity with the rest of the class. You guys should be on your knees thanking the SCCA gods that you've had the advantage for as long as you have...!
For example, did you know that my NX2000's weight was adjusted when it was moved into ITA from ITS? That's right: I went through the same formulaic process last year, and the ITAC/CRB added weight to my car. I didn't hear any Honda drivers complaining about that...
Before you go off to the garden and eat worms, let's do some direct comparisons between our cars:
- Horsepower: Your Integra 140 stock, My NX2000 140hp stock (no advantage). However, I make a demonstrable 147hp to the wheels, and I've got it on very good authority that "well over 150 horsepower" (possibly greater than 155) is possible on the DC2 Acura. We might be able to get more from the SR20DE, but there just ain't anyone else doing development on this engine, and I think we're pretty good...
- Camshafts: 'Teg: VTEC. NX: Fixed (advantage, Acura)
- RPM: Advantage Acura. (The 'Teg engine has nice light rods; the rods on my SR20DE are actually heavier than a small-block Chevy's...)
- Engine Management: Lots of choices for 'Teg, NX gets to choose one vendor (JWT) makes one computer that I've shown makes no difference (unless I want to pay thousands to have a MoTec developed for the car). I tried doing my own ECU tuning last year and blew up two engines...
- IT Weight: Teg: 2595, NX: 2515 (Advantage: Nissan by 80 pounds)
- Suspension: 'Teg: multi-link control arm suspension, NX: Mcpherson struts all around. The Acura can lower the car as low as desired (maybe to the IT limit?); if I lower the NX much more than stock ride height the geometry goes all to holy hell. SIGNIFICANT Advantage: Acura.
- Brakes: 262/239, NX: 257/234 (Advantage: Acura)
- Trans: both 5-speeds with similar ratios. (No advantage)
- Final Drives: a plethora of choices of ratios for the 'Teg; I get to choose between stock or 4.437 (and I have to go to Japan to get that one, unless I want to pay to fabricate my own. Advantage: Acura)
- Limited slips: Acura gets to choose from anything. Nissan gets to buy Nismo's clutch-type LSD and nothing else (Quaife no longer makes one for the NX)
- Aftermarket support: SCADS for the Acura, everything from full-up suspension packages to bolt-on camber plates, to any kind of suspension bushings/bearings you want, to any kind of pads you want. NX2000? EVERYTHING on this car is fabricated (I even had to fabricate my own rear swaybar), and NOTHING available on the aftermarket is race-quality (it's all street crap). Hell, Hawk doesn't even make BRAKE PADS for this thing any more; I have tomodify very-close Mitsubishi pads to fit!
So, let's sum this up to the bottom right-hand corner: If I told you you could choose between a car that has more power, a better bottom-end, better cam design, a better suspension, better brakes, better final drive ratio, more choices in LSDs, and drastically more aftermarket support -- or -- an 80-pound weight break, which would you choose? And I why am I such an idiot?
Sorry, man, it's time for you guys to just suck it up and go racing; I really can't feel any empathy for you... - Greg
Catch22
New member
Small correction Greg.
The ITA Integras are not VTEC. Just a plain old DOHC.
They are 1.8, you are 2.0, so you do get a Tq advantage. But I'd imagine both cars are about dead even in HP.
The one that folks think they can get over 150whp out of is the 3rd gen which now has to weight 2620. So even if they do get that kind of power, there is no p/w advantage.
Just clarifying things. You are transposing Hondas
I agree with you though.
lets take the above mentioned Integra and NX as a prime example.
Both cars have about the same HP
Both cars have about the same gearing
Both cars have about the same brakes
The NX has a slight torque advantage.
The Integra has a serious suspension advantage
It makes sense for the Integra to weigh a little more.
The only car that frightens me after this whole adjustment shakeout is the 1.8 Miata. No one has really done a killer car yet, but if someone gets the relative gains out of an ITA model that the top SM guys have seen in the 1.6 cars, there will be trouble in ITA land.
But, the Miata is aero hampered, so we'll see. I have full confidence that the Miata, IF dominant, will be "fixed" by our friendly neighborhood ITAC.
Scott, still looking for a CRX donut spare and lead plates, and being perfectly OK with it.
The ITA Integras are not VTEC. Just a plain old DOHC.
They are 1.8, you are 2.0, so you do get a Tq advantage. But I'd imagine both cars are about dead even in HP.
The one that folks think they can get over 150whp out of is the 3rd gen which now has to weight 2620. So even if they do get that kind of power, there is no p/w advantage.
Just clarifying things. You are transposing Hondas
I agree with you though.
lets take the above mentioned Integra and NX as a prime example.
Both cars have about the same HP
Both cars have about the same gearing
Both cars have about the same brakes
The NX has a slight torque advantage.
The Integra has a serious suspension advantage
It makes sense for the Integra to weigh a little more.
The only car that frightens me after this whole adjustment shakeout is the 1.8 Miata. No one has really done a killer car yet, but if someone gets the relative gains out of an ITA model that the top SM guys have seen in the 1.6 cars, there will be trouble in ITA land.
But, the Miata is aero hampered, so we'll see. I have full confidence that the Miata, IF dominant, will be "fixed" by our friendly neighborhood ITAC.
Scott, still looking for a CRX donut spare and lead plates, and being perfectly OK with it.