June Fastrack

Greg, to clarify (even though I don't know that it's needed anymore):

[editor's note: I had NO CLUE that they are starting to allow alternate final drives and stuff like like in SM...here we go on the SM letters for comp adjustments "welcome to prod racing"... ANYWAY...]
[/b]
Click to expand...

The rear diff allowance is only to allow the 1.6 cars to use the Torsen LSD. The cars must retain the correct diff ratio - which means either a new ring and pinion in a 94-97 diff or the much easier task of getting a 99+ rear diff and dropping it in, as the 99+ 5-speed cars have the same rear end ratio as the 1.6 cars.

Advantages:
* It's a beefier setup

Disadvantages:
* Adds 40 lbs of weight to the car, including some rotating mass
* Torsens go open if you lift a tire, unlike the clutch pack.



Everyone else: I know a gentleman who owns both a 1.8L SM and a dyno. This past weekend he told me he loses around 4 HP for putting the restrictor plate in his 1996 1.8

Jarrod
 
for the 1.6
1) the weight is lower in ITA than SM
2) add 10hp or more via intake, ECU, head work, cams (yes cams as SM restrictions are tighter), crank pulley, header, .40 over, REM r/p, and i don't know what else.
3) better aero (a big problem in a miata which is why running in packs works so well) via a front air dam that's lower and will push air around the tires
4) better suspension in the form of lighter wheels, whatever shock you want over OTS OEM bilsteins, whatever spring you want, bushing upgrades, and whatever bars you want.
5) better brakes via ducting allowance
6) better gearing via FD change

for the 1.8 94-95
1) no restictor plate (45mm i think in SM, takes away about 2-3hp)
2) same improvements as the 1.6 gets in item 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

for the 96-97
1) no restrictor plate (43mm i think in SM)
2) same improvements as the 1.6 gets in item 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Combining these two posts I REALLY don't see how all of the IT allowable upgrades over SM prep are worth ONLY a 30lb weight penalty to an SM running in IT. Has anyone cought on to this. Want to run an ITA Miata.....I do. Bring on the Miata's, that's fine by me, but they NEED to SERIOUSLY have the weight looked at.

R

[/b]
Click to expand...

Rob,

Why are you equating the two? The weights of SM's are relative to EACH OTHER, nothing else. The weight of the IT Miata's was born from the same process as the other ITA cars.

(edit: Rob, we will chat this up over a beer this weekend)
 
Greg, to clarify (even though I don't know that it's needed anymore):
The rear diff allowance is only to allow the 1.6 cars to use the Torsen LSD. The cars must retain the correct diff ratio - which means either a new ring and pinion in a 94-97 diff or the much easier task of getting a 99+ rear diff and dropping it in, as the 99+ 5-speed cars have the same rear end ratio as the 1.6 cars.

Advantages:
* It's a beefier setup

Disadvantages:
* Adds 40 lbs of weight to the car, including some rotating mass
* Torsens go open if you lift a tire, unlike the clutch pack.
Everyone else: I know a gentleman who owns both a 1.8L SM and a dyno. This past weekend he told me he loses around 4 HP for putting the restrictor plate in his 1996 1.8

Jarrod
[/b]
Click to expand...
Jarrod, is this currently allowed in IT uunder update backdate? Answer is....NO that makes this rule outside the IT rules set...I would like to have a gleason in my 240sx....will I be allowed a 1.8 diff?
The same case could be made for a lot of other cars but we have not gone down this road and for good reasons.
 
TNord, I was talking about the ITA Miata. I'm sorry if my post was confusing.

AB what I'm stating is that if an SM is capable of running lap times consistent with front running ITA cars across the country in SM trim, then how is the list of all the available mods that IT rules provide worth only 30lbs??? I'm sure your answer will be something like an SM pack moves as a mass and doesn't hold each other up therefore.....

I'm just saying on paper it looks different from what [smooth talk] your going to sell me!! :D

R
 
TNord, I was talking about the ITA Miata. I'm sorry if my post was confusing.

AB what I'm stating is that if an SM is capable of running lap times consistent with front running ITA cars across the country in SM trim, then how is the list of all the available mods that IT rules provide worth only 30lbs??? I'm sure your answer will be something like an SM pack moves as a mass and doesn't hold each other up therefore.....

I'm just saying on paper it looks different from what [smooth talk] your going to sell me!! :D

R [/b]
Click to expand...

We already told you buddy, the prep level and driver talent in those SM's people are quoting is as high as it gets. IF the same prep and attention to detail was put into an IT car, you get versions like Greg's NX, the Moser's CRX, Chet's BMW, etc. You know them...the cars that hold the track records. Because the SM's are theoretically equal, guys spend thousands on reduction of rotating friction, 1-2 hp here and there, etc. The level of prep of the top 5 IT cars at the ARRC can be found at any National in any Division on any weekend in SM. $7000 motors are COMMONPLACE in SM. Yup - a class where you can't do ANYTHING. These things are running upwards of 120whp. IIRC, a certain Southeastern track record holding ITS Mercedes was shared with a top-National SM guy last year or a year or two. He jumped in and smashed the record by something like 2 seconds. What does that tell us? Nothing. It's just one of many reasons you can't use on-track as a measurement between classes - or even between drivers. You have to be able to quantify levels of prep (tires, shocks, hp, etc) AND driver ability all at single events - how do you do that? You can't.
 
First off, I'm one of those 99' Miata drivers.
I had nothing to do with this, I have never been accused of blocking or running into any IT cars and have never run over anyones trailer door. :dead_horse:
So, looking at the April event at NHIS, ITA and ITS times are very close.
In SM trim I don't think I could get anywhere near those times but remove restrictor, take out some weight and put on some Hoosiers and I might have a shot at ITS.
But, I'm having way too much fun in SM, why would I want to change??? :unsure:
I just heard that FP is being renamed Miata Limited Prep............. :P
 
We already told you buddy, the prep level and driver talent in those SM's people are quoting is as high as it gets. IF the same prep and attention to detail was put into an IT car, you get versions like Greg's NX, the Moser's CRX, Chet's BMW, etc. You know them...the cars that hold the track records. Because the SM's are theoretically equal, guys spend thousands on reduction of rotating friction, 1-2 hp here and there, etc. The level of prep of the top 5 IT cars at the ARRC can be found at any National in any Division on any weekend in SM. $7000 motors are COMMONPLACE in SM. Yup - a class where you can't do ANYTHING. These things are running upwards of 120whp. IIRC, a certain Southeastern track record holding ITS Mercedes was shared with a top-National SM guy last year or a year or two. He jumped in and smashed the record by something like 2 seconds. What does that tell us? Nothing. It's just one of many reasons you can't use on-track as a measurement between classes - or even between drivers. You have to be able to quantify levels of prep (tires, shocks, hp, etc) AND driver ability all at single events - how do you do that? You can't.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Andy, that seems like really good rational for not mixing the two.

I really don't see much room for discussion. This move is wrong for IT. competitive, not competitive, whatever, it doesn't matter, this not an acceptable move.

Cars racing in IT should all be cars prepped for and by IT rules, that's all there is to it.
 
Andy, that seems like really good rational for not mixing the two.

I really don't see much room for discussion. This move is wrong for IT. competitive, not competitive, whatever, it doesn't matter, this not an acceptable move.

Cars racing in IT should all be cars prepped for and by IT rules, that's all there is to it.
[/b]
Click to expand...

it already happens all the time though cameron, me being one of them. protest me for my looped power steering if you like and see what that gets you.

the mistake is not in having the 90-97 race in ITA with these technically illegal yet non-performance enhancing items, the mistake is in explicitly adding verbage to make them legal.
 
Andy, that seems like really good rational for not mixing the two.

I really don't see much room for discussion. This move is wrong for IT. competitive, not competitive, whatever, it doesn't matter, this not an acceptable move.

Cars racing in IT should all be cars prepped for and by IT rules, that's all there is to it.

[/b]
Click to expand...

Point taken. The majority on ths BB has spoken. Let's make sure we follow up in an offical capacity when the request hits. (and encourage those who don't read it to understand the issue and weigh in)
 
If the regions have to raise entry fees because they loose out on double dipping Miata's (or DD IT cars, or DD SPO cars, etc), then I respectfully submit that a 'no' to this idea caused it. You have actually predicted something tangible to a rejection of the idea. And that thing is raised costs to the racers if regions loose this current or future increased revenue. No? Maybe I am over-reading it.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Andy, I respectfully submit that you are assigning a level of importance to the increased entry point that it doesn't deserve. There are enough currently-IT-legal SM cars that are crossing over that it makes the balance of potential additional cross-over cars a very small percentage. Certainly not enough in number to have a significant monetary infusion for the regions. And now we are making/adding a different ruleset outside of the current IT rules in an attempt to persuade that very small percentage to come and run IT, and to save struggling regions in the process. Ain't gonna fly.

You'll have my letter at the time of the request, if not sooner.

I welcome all SM racers who's cars meet the IT rule book without special exceptions. Let's be clear on that. I've raced SM with them before; they're a good group.
 
Chris, all I can tell you is that this isn't to really increase what could come in, it is to legalize what is already there. Nobody wants it, that is fine and the majority shall rule but to think that all the SM's in ITA are legal is a misunderstanding of the way they are prepped.

All 1.8's technically illegal (with RP in place)

Any power steering car plugged is illegal

The 1st gen 'Daniels' exhaust is illegal

Any 1.6 using the Torsen (small %) is illegal

I think you would be surprised to know how many SM's fall into at least one of these categories. I would hate the anti-Miata sentiment to get to a level that paper started flying on these items, but if it did, it is the right of the participant to protest technically illegal vehicles. I guess I am more worried about the LOSS of revenue if someone gets a hair across their ass on this and protests them all.
 
Chris, all I can tell you is that this isn't to really increase what could come in, it is to legalize what is already there. Nobody wants it, that is fine and the majority shall rule but to think that all the SM's in ITA are legal is a misunderstanding of the way they are prepped.

All 1.8's technically illegal (with RP in place)

Any power steering car plugged is illegal

The 1st gen 'Daniels' exhaust is illegal
Any 1.6 using the Torsen (small %) is illegal

I think you would be surprised to know how many SM's fall into at least one of these categories. I would hate the anti-Miata sentiment to get to a level that paper started flying on these items, but if it did, it is the right of the participant to protest technically illegal vehicles. I guess I am more worried about the LOSS of revenue if someone gets a hair across their ass on this and protests them all.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I am not sure I have seen the daniels exhaust. The 1.6's I have seen dump the exhaust at about the rear swaybar and that meets the current rule.


g. Any exhaust header and exhaust system may be used. Exhaust shall exit behind the driver, and shall be directed away from the car body. Original exhaust system heat shields may be removed. A suitable muffler may be necessary to meet sound control requirements.
 
I think you would be surprised to know how many SM's fall into at least one of these categories. I would hate the anti-Miata sentiment to get to a level that paper started flying on these items, but if it did, it is the right of the participant to protest technically illegal vehicles. I guess I am more worried about the LOSS of revenue if someone gets a hair across their ass on this and protests them all.[/b]
Click to expand...

Seems to me that the obvious solution is not allowing SM-legal cars to compete in IT, but is, instead, to change the SM rules so that they are IT compliant. No backdating, same prep rules. Require all Miatas of a particular year and model to be IT compliant and if one wants to equalize the performance across Miata year/model, then ADD a restrictor for ALL Miatas of that particular year/model.

As for filing paper, I'm not sympathetic. The cars aren't IT legal and it is no different than me putting the fuel-injected engine in my car and running ITB. I might do it to get track time, but you bet I wouldn't be running for series points if I did it.
 
Seems to me that the obvious solution is not allowing SM-legal cars to compete in IT, but is, instead, to change the SM rules so that they are IT compliant. No backdating, same prep rules. Require all Miatas of a particular year and model to be IT compliant and if one wants to equalize the performance across Miata year/model, then ADD a restrictor for ALL Miatas of that particular year/model.

As for filing paper, I'm not sympathetic. The cars aren't IT legal and it is no different than me putting the fuel-injected engine in my car and running ITB. I might do it to get track time, but you bet I wouldn't be running for series points if I did it.
[/b]
Click to expand...

look, i think this was a mistake just like everyone else, but the logic behind some of this stuff is nothing but bullfeathers.

1) expecting SM to change their ruleset so it is convienent for IT to gain a few more entries is just dumb. same is true of the reverse, which many here are arguing. it's dumb of IT to change their ruleset to allow a few more SMs to legally enter an IT race.
2) PS - there is no updating/backdating in SM.
3) PS again - many SMs are currently IT legal as they sit today without turning a single wrench.
4) the restrictor already is added across an entire year, there are no 'models' of miata. 94/95 1.8L OBDI get the same restrictor, 96/97 1.8L OBDII get the same restrictor. 99+ 1.8L get the same restrictor
5) many of the cars are IT legal, and 90% of the ones that aren't, all they have to do is pull the restrictor plate and maybe add some gas. i have a hard time seeing how this is the same as you swapping an entire engine. if you want to squak about the cars being legal, all they're going to do is go faster than before. :bash_1_:
 
If the purpose of the change is to add revenue for the regions and to give more seat time for SM drivers, it seems that there's a much simpler solution that could aready be implemented at the local level - add SM to the ITA run group. Write the supps so that it's a separate entry from the "other" SM run group. Is it legal to schedule multiple run groups for a single class?
 
If the purpose of the change is to add revenue for the regions and to give more seat time for SM drivers, it seems that there's a much simpler solution that could aready be implemented at the local level - add SM to the ITA run group. Write the supps so that it's a separate entry from the "other" SM run group. Is it legal to schedule multiple run groups for a single class?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Marty that would defeat the making IT one of the classes that becomes a top 20 runoffs spot which has been a behind the scenes motive for a few of the ITAC guys from day one....:)
 
I am not sure I have seen the daniels exhaust. The 1.6's I have seen dump the exhaust at about the rear swaybar and that meets the current rule.


g. Any exhaust header and exhaust system may be used. Exhaust shall exit behind the driver, and shall be directed away from the car body. Original exhaust system heat shields may be removed. A suitable muffler may be necessary to meet sound control requirements.
[/b]
Click to expand...

It was the 'first gen' SM exhaust of choice and they still pop up on cars every now and again until they get flattened by an off. It went parallel with the tub. All the versions since have a nice 'dump' that sends exhaust toward the ground.



If the purpose of the change is to add revenue for the regions and to give more seat time for SM drivers, it seems that there's a much simpler solution that could aready be implemented at the local level - add SM to the ITA run group. Write the supps so that it's a separate entry from the "other" SM run group. Is it legal to schedule multiple run groups for a single class? [/b]
Click to expand...

Oh, now every one else will LOVE that!
 
Whew,

After reading ALL the posts, I can say that this is totally amazing.

I think the CRB missed on this one along with a few other changes they made this month.

(Have any of you ever heard my wife use NASTY words? Have any of you ever seen her get mad? Well, she did get mad at the CRB this month, and her words were not very nice....)

So, in the class of unintended consequences, exactly how is a competitor to know which rule set a Miata is preped to if they are running in ITA? (being a some time tech inspector makes me think about this.) What if they want to protest that car? How could they ever protest the car for being illegal in some respect if they cannot find out what the exact rules for that car are? Is there going to be a public sign up sheet

When I last had a chat with a CRB member, he said that it was probably a mistake that there wasn't a non-driver or two on the CRB (e.g. folks who know the nuts and bolts of what it takes to make a race happen from a workers perspective, and what some of the silly consequences of a rule change might just be. The same is probably true for the ACs as well.)

The real question is exactly how many of the drivers with Miatas are there who need this rule change to "double dip"? In the Northeast, there is SSM and SM, so they can already double dip and still be competitive in BOTH groups. And there is ITA and SM in other parts of the country where they can be competitive in at least one of the groups, show why do we need a SM rules cam in ITA as yet another option?

Exactly how many extra entries are we going to see because of this? How many drivers will want to "triple dip" on a race weekend?

This weekend is a "triple" for my region. I can't imagine any driver running their car in 9 different races over the course of one weekend.

And the logistics of assuring the SM, SSM and ITA are never in consecutive groups would be hell as well.

Unintended consequences. The CRB needs to learn about that concept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top