October fastrack is out

[Greg Amy]

Brett, my SM-prepped '94 (C-package, no ABS, de-powered power steering) weighed exactly 2374 with me in it. I personally weigh about 190-200 in my driver's pretties. So, the car is *right there* with 13 pound Koseis and the spec suspension. You can see why I'm pissed I sold it...<grin>

Darin, most of the SM development has been on the 1.6s. Reliable wheel power on that car has been rumored to be from 95 on a crate engine to somewhere in the 105+ range on a Sunbelt engine. The 1.8s came with 10 more ponies stock and more torque, so your power-to-weight is close. However, I base my concerns on the fact that the Spec Miatas have historically run pretty decent times compared to the ITA boys, especially at the slower tracks like LRP. Given the (crappy) stock header, inlet restrictor, the (less than optimal) spec suspension, Toyo 15" tires, limited rear end ratios, and 13-pound wheels, there's KEE-RAPLOAD of development left in that car. Get one of the SM hot shoes in that car (like Prince de Pedro) and that car has a damn fine shot at ITA glory.

Doncha worry, though: if I ever get my stuff together, you boys will be crying to Topeka for weight additions on the NX...<grin>

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Aug 20 2005, 11:29 PM
Get one of the SM hot shoes in that car (like Prince de Pedro) and that car has a damn fine shot at ITA glory.

Doncha worry, though: if I ever get my stuff together, you boys will be crying to Topeka for weight additions on the NX...<grin>

[snapback]58718[/snapback]​

If this is the attitude, then I think the ITAC and CRB are on the right track!! Our goal is to get IT back to a place where any number of cars could be considered this way...

Only time will tell if we will be successful...

 

[RP Performance]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Aug 20 2005, 10:28 PM
Exactly...  With the ONLY difference in IT being the displacement...  I believe these cars will actually equate quite well... I think the 1.6 liter car is very close to idealy classified for this class...

Does anyone have any real data on what a 1.8 is capable of putting out in IT trim???

[snapback]58716[/snapback]​

My guess is that it is not going to be that much more then a 1.6. Just did not looking and maybe it will be better. The 94-95 had 128hp and 96-97 had 133 hp stock.

 

[R RACER]

Greg,

I think 1.8 should be real fast in A, I personally think its too light, almost 200 lbs
lighter than my new car, maybee you can help me write a letter to the comp board to knock the 100lbs of trophy on my floor! Its good to see some new cars in A.

 

[Knestis]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Aug 20 2005, 03:07 PM
... The problem with making it any heavier is that, because of the current SM cage rules, EVERY car out there built to the SM rules would have to replace the entire cage to come race ITA, because SM allows a lighter weight tubing than IT at the same weight...

Hmm. This sets a precedent that makes me a little concerned. I understand the logic but making IT spec decisions - irrespective of the restrictor option being available - to accommodate rules in other categories, seems like a very dangerous approach.

This step makes it evident that, in terms of policy, making it easier for 1.8 Miatas to migrate from SM to ITA is a bigger priority, than is consistency of application of policies and practices within the IT category. That smacks of reactive rather than strategic planning, which might seem appropriate given the rise in popularity of SM, but is likely to have unintended consequences.

Would the same response be applied if someone suggested (again) that they would run both IT and Prod, if the glass/headlight/lens rule in IT were eased?

Heck - if smaller tube is OK in an SM over 2500 pounds (or whatever it is), maybe the rollcage rules are the issue and should be addressed.

Kirk (for whom everything has potential policy implications)

 

[Daryl DeArman]

How about the comp adjustment that takes place prior to the runoffs? A certain FC car was given a 15% (+/-) weight adjustment. How'd you like 400# added to your 2500# car on a months' notice before the big one?

 

[Catch22]

And the thing that will always hold the Miata in check... Aero.
The 1.6 can't even hang with a good CRX down the back straight at Road Atlanta. I can't imagine that the 1.8 with the extra weight would do much better.

Pure speculation.

But I do think it was a good move. Weight looks good too.

 

[dickita15]

Kirk
i actually think that looking at the effect of our rules and and how they interact with other catagories is not all bad. we do need to mave to more consistant and progessive cage rules as you move up thru the catagories.

that said I am very concerned about the idea of not being able to set the weight of a car where it should be due to the arbtrary cage requirement for a given weight. because many of the cars we race are right near a cage rule break point this is keeping PCAs from being implemented, ie we can not move that car and add weight because many of the cars would not have a legal cage if we added 100 pounds (or 5 pounds) to the spec weight.

I wish the ITAC could do what they fell is right and maybe grandfather existing cars on cage tube diameter.

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by dickita15@Aug 22 2005, 11:24 AM
I wish the ITAC could do what they fell is right and maybe grandfather existing cars on cage tube diameter.

[snapback]58769[/snapback]​

Guys... there are MAJOR LIABILITY issues that the ITAC has NO control over... We can NOT make decisions concerning true "safety" items such as this... It's NOT part of our charter... we have no place "grandfathering" in items such as this...

Also, the cage rules are controlled by the GCR, which is out of the scope of the ITAC... that's CRB teritory.

AND... we were told that the cage rules were getting revised across the catagory, and that they were likely going to be MORE IT-like in their tubing requirements, meaning that the IT tubing requirements (typically heavier tubing), would be more the norm...

As for the 1.8L needing to be 200lbs heavier than it is... Please, be real... the car is classified withing 25lbs or so of what the "process" says it should be... That's the same process that has been used to classify every car over the past year or so... the ITAC DID do what it felt was right. Classify the car in a manner that makes it competitive without being an overdog... make existing SM cars able to make the transition.... and KNOW that we can add a restrictor if this proves to be necessary....

Looking at the numbers, someones going to have to get a pretty big hp gain over stock to make this car the "overdog" that some think it will be...

 

[Greg Amy]

Darin, I don't think Anthony is specifically saying the car is 200 pounds light, I think he's simply pointing out that the 1.8L Miata will be 200 pounds lighter than his 1.8L (FWD) Honda... GA

 

[planet6racing]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Aug 22 2005, 07:28 AM
Darin, I don't think Anthony is specifically saying the car is 200 pounds light, I think he's simply pointing out that the 1.8L Miata will be 200 pounds lighter than his 1.8L (FWD) Honda... GA

[snapback]58774[/snapback]​

And the 1.8L Miata is classified ~40# heavier than the Saturn SC with the 1.9L engine...

So? Don't tell me you all want to add 200# to the Saturn now...

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by GregAmy+Aug 22 2005, 12:28 PM-->

Darin, I don't think Anthony is specifically saying the car is 200 pounds light, I think he's simply pointing out that the 1.8L Miata will be 200 pounds lighter than his 1.8L (FWD) Honda... GA

[snapback]58774[/snapback]​

[/b]

Guys... once again you are NOT listening to what I'm typing... Classifications are done based on performance potential... That means wt/pwr ratios, plus other factors such as handling, etc...

The Miata handles great, but I don't believe for a moment that any of you really think that the 1.8L Miata motor in IT trim has the same performance potential as the 1.8L Honda V-Tech motor...

<!--QuoteBegin-Knestis
This step makes it evident that, in terms of policy, making it easier for 1.8 Miatas to migrate from SM to ITA is a bigger priority, than is consistency of application of policies and practices within the IT category. That smacks of reactive rather than strategic planning, which might seem appropriate given the rise in popularity of SM, but is likely to have unintended consequences.

Once again... the classification of the 1.8L Miata is within 25lbs... TWENTY-FIVE measly pounds.. of where the "process" says it should be... and THAT is assuming that the car is capable of achieving the type of HP gains that we calculated that it might... which we don't think it can...

WHY isn't anyone complaining about the 1.6L Miata, which handles EXACTLY the same, but is nearly 200lbs lighter? Is there that great a performance difference between these two cars??? The only difference is the HP/torque potential, and there isn't that great a difference between them in stock trim...

The ITAC has NOTHING to do with making cage rules... This is the job of the CRB and BoD... We have to work within the confines of the rules as they are written...

NOW, would you have us make these existing race cars RIP out their existing cages to come race IT over TWENTY-FIVE pounds?? I don't think so... Especially when, if developement proves that the potential is there, we can simply require that this car run a restrictor to get it back in line with the parameters of the class???

Compromise on the weight by 25lbs to allow HUNDREDS of existing cars to transition to IT, then require a restrictor if it is proven that we've underestimated the performance potential of this car... I'd think that sounds like we have a VERY good plan...

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by planet6racing@Aug 22 2005, 12:35 PM
And the 1.8L Miata is classified ~40# heavier than the Saturn SC with the 1.9L engine...

So?  Don't tell me you all want to add 200# to the Saturn now... 

[snapback]58775[/snapback]​

Based on the numbers I just looked at, the process shows that the Saturns are classified almost perfectly for ITA... The 1991-1996 Coupe and SC2 may have about a 30lbs advantage over the other Saturns... Not sure why, since they all make the same stock HP... but they are all WELL within the parameters for the class and should prove to be VERY competitive... at least they look that way on paper...

 

[ITANorm]

Wow - yet another car in ITA with about the same HP, stock, that you can get out of a legally prepped MR2 engine. Oh, wait - it's a whole 10# heavier - well . . . that'll make a big difference.

Everybody seems to be horribly worried about "rules creep", but it seems that for some strange reason there has been a total disregard for "performance envelope creep". SOHC Neons - and now 1.8 Miatas . . . ..

In case you guys hadn't noticed - a 1.8 Miata in SM trim is VERY competitive against ITA cars - never mind what it could do with a full IT package.

What does your "magic formula" tell you about the poor old MR2? We just keep sliding farther down the ladder.

 

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ITANorm@Aug 22 2005, 11:44 AM


What does your "magic formula" tell you about the poor old MR2?  We just keep sliding farther down the ladder.   

[snapback]58795[/snapback]​

Guys, Rome wasn't built in a day.

I think this Miata move was a big success, judging by the pro/con reaction here.

It could have been left in ITS until the CRB and the BoD examined the cage rules and made some possible ammendments, but while the ITAC was informed that such a process was ongoing, it wasn't informed as to the scope, the direction, nor the timetable. So waiting made little sense. Time moves quickly, racing seasons go by in a heartbeat, and NOT making a move is sometimes equivilant to deciding against something.

In terms of the actual final weight, I think the target number was even closer than the 25 pounds already mentioned, and honestly, that kind of granularity is about as good as we are likely to reasonable expect. It is the hope that the car, when raced against other top prep/top driver cars will score wins on certain tracks, be in the game on other tracks and be off the pace on other types of tracks.

I think that's all you can ask.

Also remember that a 1.8L engine from Honda is different than one from Mazda, or Saturn, or Nissan, or Chevy! Even the two Mazda engines discussed here, the 1.6 and the 1.8, won't likely show the same IT potential due to unique components.

A case in point is the E36. The CRB requested that it be slowed with a restrictor, but experts say that the restrictor will do little as there are further built in restrictions that are the real bottleneck, so the change is likely to do little. Each package has it's unique variables, so applying the same standards across the board isn't always the way to go.

Also, remenber that this is a work in progress. The ITAC is very aware that anytime decisions are made before the development is done that the actual numbers might not be in line with the predicted numbers. But we have to start someplace, and in the Miatas case, it seemd like a win win to get it

A- Out of ITS...it flat didn't belong there
B- Into a class that would require as little drama in the transition (Changes to the car) as possible
C- In a position where it has a solid chance.
D- In a position where it can be looked at and adjusted further in the future should it become necessary.

Having the restrictor option that has proven to be effective on Miatas was the key.

Also, remember, the ITAC is lucky to have a member of the SMAC on it's roster, so the change was discussed with some thoroughness.

Finally, back to the original point.

Rome wasn't built in a day...I doubt that this is an isolated move. I bet we'll be chatting about more than this down the road, LOL.

 

[tderonne]

All right. I'll say it.

Why would somebody take a Nationally legal SM and turn it into an Regional only IT car? What am I missing here? (Not that I'm against an overall flow to the rules vs. prep level, I just don't see where SM fits in.)

If you're trying to encourage multiple entries of the same car at a regional, they can already do that, SM cars are legal in ITA and ITS now.

As for cages, weights, and safety, who said it's ok to build any spec miata to the 2095 weight requirement ? It would seem that bridge has already been crossed.

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by ITANorm@Aug 22 2005, 03:44 PM
What does your "magic formula" tell you about the poor old MR2?  We just keep sliding farther down the ladder.   

[snapback]58795[/snapback]​

The "process" says that you need to be patient... you are not the only one who sees the descrepancies in the classifications and is trying to do something about it...

Should be noted, however, that the MR-2 and the RX-7 are both bound by the same cage rules as the Miata... Can't move them to ITB because you can't add ANY weight to them without making their current cages illegal... (we have to assume that the cars out there were built to the current rules and are using the minimum tubing sizes allowed)...

The "process" would also say that the MR-2 would need to have some "adders" for handling and brakes, so you can't look at just HP figures alone... It "should" be able to outhandle and outbrake a Miata given equal prep...

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by tderonne@Aug 22 2005, 04:48 PM
As for cages, weights, and safety, who said it's ok to build any spec miata to the 2095 weight requirement ? It would seem that bridge has already been crossed.

[snapback]58798[/snapback]​

First, I can't recall anyone worrying about Multiple Entries... The ITAC is concerned with IT, not helping SM race in IT, 944 Cup race in IT, Sentra-Cup race in IT, etc...

That being said, there is a big up-side to classifying cars that exist in large numbers in a competitive configuration...

As for the SM weights... Surely you guys can reason this one out, right??? The SM rules have been in place for how long??? Hint: NOT LONG... The SS/IT cage rules have stood for some time... When NASA, or whoever, came up with the SM rules, and then the SCCA adopted them, or however it happened, THEY are the ones that choose to ignore the current rules...

As I've said several times now... WE don't have the ability to do that... If the CRB/BoD decides to make an allowance, that is up to them, but we were told in pretty certain terms that the CRB would likely NOT make a special allowance for this car... They, like the ITAC, are trying to work from a point of consistancy... at least within the class, so we are trying VERY hard to avoid "special considerations" for individual cars...

Guys, this is NOT really a big issue... The Miata is competitively classed, but it's NOT an overdog...

Oh, and as for the MR-2 vs. the Miata... I think the MR-2 makes a LITTLE more than 128hp in IT Trim... I have it on pretty good authority that it's capable of a little more... but I've made a promise to keep the exact numbers classified....

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by ITANorm@Aug 22 2005, 10:44 AM

Everybody seems to be horribly worried about "rules creep", but it seems that for some strange reason there has been a total disregard for "performance envelope  creep".  SOHC Neons - and now 1.8 Miatas .  .  .  ..

In case you guys hadn't noticed - a 1.8 Miata in SM trim is VERY competitive against ITA cars - never mind what it could do with a full IT package.

[snapback]58795[/snapback]​

I want to address this comment specifically. The performance envelope creep happened way before we made any moves in the last year or two. The 'creep' you speek of is defined by the CRX and 240SX - and most recently bu the Integra. New classifications have been based, conservativly, on the envelope that these cars have created. Not to be dominant, but to fit well.

The 1.8 Miata's are equal to the 1.6's in Spec Miata. That is the nature of the class as you know. Where there are top IT cars, the SM's are not close. Use your backyard as an example Jake:

LRP: ITA runs LOW 1:02's and SM runs LOW 1:04's.
NHIS: ITA runs LOW 1:16's and SM runs LOW 1:18's

Then look at the ARRC:

ITA running Mid 1:43's and SM running Mid 1:46's.
Always remember to compare apples to apples.

AB

 

[planet6racing]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Aug 22 2005, 10:23 AM
Based on the numbers I just looked at, the process shows that the Saturns are classified almost perfectly for ITA...  The 1991-1996 Coupe and SC2 may have about a 30lbs advantage over the other Saturns...  Not sure why, since they all make the same stock HP...  but they are all WELL within the parameters for the class and should prove to be VERY competitive...  at least they look that way on paper...

[snapback]58793[/snapback]​

Sorry, should have been more clear. By "...you guys..." I meant that the non-members of the ITAC that were saying that the 1.8L miata should be heavier because it has a 1.8...

The Saturns are classed perfectly. The only thing holding my car back is me!