RE clutch legal for ITA 1.6 miata?

G

gpeluso

New member
B) Is the now illegal RE clutch for spec miata legal for ITA? Just curious. Andy, if you are out there, what chance does a 1.6 have in ITA? I understand a great driver towards summit had great success, but from what I understand he can win in anything. Very interested in your opinion or anyone elses.

Greg
 
B) Is the now illegal RE clutch for spec miata legal for ITA? Just curious. Andy, if you are out there, what chance does a 1.6 have in ITA? I understand a great driver towards summit had great success, but from what I understand he can win in anything. Very interested in your opinion or anyone elses.

Greg [/b]
Click to expand...

Yes. The clutch and PP are open in IT so you are all set. I think the 1.6 car is a very viable choice. Most people (including me) thought the 1.8 would be better but I am betting they are about equal. The 125 lb difference is real. I have found that the 1.8 does not make the power we all expected while the 1.6 does a nice job. In full IT specs, they seem to be within about 5whp. The big difference is in torque. About a 15wtq difference.

If you have handling tracks and momentum tracks, you will be fine. HP and drag races you will lose. If you have CRX's doing well in your area, go for it. If you have NX/SE-R's, Teg's and 240SX's doing well, it will be an uphill battle, but one that can be won occasionally if you get it all right. The car will be the strongest on track the last 1/4 of your races. Feel free to contact me offline. All IMHO. I would like to hear Greg A's opinion as he has seen the other side.
 
I don't see why a 1.6 would not be a really good choice. They still are (overall) the car to have in SM. Andy is probably real close on the 5 HP difference. The weight deal is better then that 5HP as you are trying to win on turning better then anybody else anyway. Every time we all think the later miata (1.8) is going to be better, the old ones (1.6) rares it's head. There should be some deals on the RE clutches out there, same as there were on shocks ..... before and after the Runoffs. (That's where I found mine.)
 
damnit mac. the last thing i wanted to hear was that you acquired an RE clutch and some runoffs shocks. i already know you scored some lightweight wheels. where's my tax refund? and where's karl's phone number? :P

but yes, pretty much all the stuff that became illegal over last year is perfectly fine for IT.

i'm one of those people that still think the 1.8 is the car to have. i personally think the whp potential in the 1.8 is more like 10 than 5. my somewhat educated (though probably not as educated as andy's) guess is that the 1.6 can get to 130-135 in pretty balls out trim, while the 1.8 can get to 140-145; with an even bigger advantage in torque. i do think that the 1.8 has less of an advantage in IT than it does in SM though.

as has been alluded to, it's all going to depend on the tracks you run at. momentum tracks without big speed variances betwen corners i think the car can do well. lots of hard braking and 2nd gear corners is where you'll really want the torque you don't have.

you really can't make a single mistake if you want these cars to go fast, and if you want to finish well. you gotta qualify up front and stay clear of traffic if you want to finish well. watch your mirrors at the start too, because everything else out there will blow by you from rows back.
 
I would like to hear Greg A's opinion...[/b]
Click to expand...
Of the 1.6 v 1.8? Yours is a nice summary. The ligher 1.6 will further exacerbate the advantages - and disadvantages - you've demonstrated with the 1.8L. I suggest that a well-built and -driven 1.6 can be faster at momentum tracks like LRP, but will have a harder time as faster tracks, like the Glen and Road Atlanta.

The 1.6 may also have a more difficult time in traffic, given its less ability to regain lost momentum. But it's most certainly a viable choice.
 
i'm one of those people that still think the 1.8 is the car to have. i personally think the whp potential in the 1.8 is more like 10 than 5. my somewhat educated (though probably not as educated as andy's) guess is that the 1.6 can get to 130-135 in pretty balls out trim, while the 1.8 can get to 140-145; with an even bigger advantage in torque. [/b]
Click to expand...

Ain't no 94-97 1.8 Miata going to hit 145whp. There are full Sunbelt builds and RE builds out there now and they aren't even close. Trust me, I feel the pain on every straight. :)

I look for 1.6/130 and 1.8/135 when all tricked out. Torque I would pin at 1.6/105 and 1.8/125. Take these with a grain of salt - as Greg says to me all the time, "Are those Dynojets or something real?" : )
 
Ain't no 94-97 1.8 Miata going to hit 145whp. There are full Sunbelt builds and RE builds out there now and they aren't even close. Trust me, I feel the pain on every straight. :)

I look for 1.6/130 and 1.8/135 when all tricked out. Torque I would pin at 1.6/105 and 1.8/125. Take these with a grain of salt - as Greg says to me all the time, "Are those Dynojets or something real?" : )
[/b]
Click to expand...

i know....comparing dyno #'s from separate dyno's on different days is a fairly pointless exercise. i still stand by my belief that the 1.8 will make more than 5whp more than the 1.6 in equivilant prep levels.

you've still got that fancy ECU to tack onto yours right?
 
you've still got that fancy ECU to tack onto yours right? [/b]
Click to expand...

I have a custom ECU now that is effectively a 'chipped' unit that really delivers some sweet A/F ratios. The programmable unit should yeild a couple more peak ponies and a little more area under the curve. I am at 133/121 dynojets now.

I have talked and shared info with some top builders this year. What I have found is that the 1.6 gains are strong, the 1994-1997 1.8 gains are much less, and the 1999+ gains are even less than that. Unfortunatley, Mazda used a lot of the same parts and designs when 'developing' these motors as they went from 116hp to 128hp to 133hp to 140hp.
 
IIRC the first 3 finishers at the 2006 Runoffs were 1.6 L Rebello motors. Did these three drivers gain these finishes because of their driving consistency, their race setup or THE Rebello motors or a combination of the three items?

Hmmmmmmm ;)
David
 
IIRC the first 3 finishers at the 2006 Runoffs were 1.6 L Rebello motors. Did these three drivers gain these finishes because of their driving consistency, their race setup or THE Rebello motors or a combination of the three items?

Hmmmmmmm ;)
David
[/b]
Click to expand...

none of the above really. if you were there (and i was, and i've watched in-car, and have it DVR'd at home) you'd have seen about the top 7 1.8 cars largely RE powered all get taken out at T1. there were only 3 cars that really got through the mess well; Caddell, Rivera, and Coello. The weather conditions SUCKED. dry line forming, but still wet and muddy off line at the start. I know Coello was in a 1.8 and Rivera was in a 99 iirc. They were right there with Caddell at the start of the race, but they were both on wet tires while Caddell was on dries. both of them eventually went off the track and Caddell had the front all to himself.

absolutely nothing regarding car performance should be assumed based on the runoffs race this year.

i still have some questions regarding the legality of the rebello motors despite them being torn WAY down. look in the latest redline adds and keep in mind these cars have hydraulic lifters for a clue. ;)
 
***their driving consistency, their race setup or THE Rebello motors or a combination of the three items?***

***none of the above.***

Ok, they did nothing to finish 1, 2 & 3 & everyone else did everthing wrong. I bet several motor builders that had motors in cars would like to have had the same whatever you call it to finish 1, 2 & 3.

Yes Travis I was there for 13 days & viewed the screw up by the fast qualifer comming off T2 & collecting a bunch of cars. Coello's 1st off occured comming off T5........... Didn't view what got TR. No DVD just my eyes at the track. :D

***look in the latest redline adds and keep in mind these cars have hydraulic lifters for a clue.***

Wouldn't that be called race setup................... :P Maybe Andy will enlighten us on the Spec Miata motor temp related hp losses.


Have Fun ;)
David
 
***their driving consistency, their race setup or THE Rebello motors or a combination of the three items?***

***none of the above.***

Ok, they did nothing to finish 1, 2 & 3 & everyone else did everthing wrong. I bet several motor builders that had motors in cars would like to have had the same whatever you call it to finish 1, 2 & 3.

Yes Travis I was there for 13 days & viewed the screw up by the fast qualifer comming off T2 & collecting a bunch of cars. Coello's 1st off occured comming off T5........... Didn't view what got TR. No DVD just my eyes at the track. :D

***look in the latest redline adds and keep in mind these cars have hydraulic lifters for a clue.***

Wouldn't that be called race setup................... :P Maybe Andy will enlighten us on the Spec Miata motor temp related hp losses.
Have Fun ;)
David
[/b]
Click to expand...

i didn't mean to be insulting, sorry if it came off that way.

i didn't say everyone else did everything wrong, and i'm sure all the rest of the builders would love to have first, second, and third finishing positions. would you agree that HP played a relatively small role in that race? it's not like the reason caddell, rampleberg, and cross finished where they did because of the motors. all those guys drove well and deserved their finishing positions, but luck was a factor on that day. Caddell was probably the most deserving (as the winner should be). he qualified well, drove mistake free, worked hard, and chose the right setup for the day.

as for the motor legality issue, it's only a race setup if all parts inside the motor are mazda parts, and all parts are present and accounted for. i absolutely will not accuse any of these guys of cheating, but i do have some questions.
 
AG's right boys.

Blake got whacked.... he only screwed up by not raising hell about it! Actually he should be praised to no end for being quite about an incident that kept the race from even being better. Blake most likely would have been a nice match for the fast young Mr. Caddell.

As far as the clutch, I don't have one yet, but I will be looking!

Travis, I have found (and AG can testify) that I need very legal speed secret just to be average!

Mac
 
*** No DVD just my eyes at the track.***

Sorry guys.......... :OLA: Instant replay from car or DVD is just like football instant replay. :023:

Have Fun ;)
David
 
I look for 1.6/130 and 1.8/135 when all tricked out. Torque I would pin at 1.6/105 and 1.8/125. Take these with a grain of salt - as Greg says to me all the time, "Are those Dynojets or something real?" : ) [/b]
Click to expand...

Andy, I read somewhere, and looked at into it myself, but I believe the reasoning behind the 1.6L being more acceptable to power gains is that given it's dispacement, the camshaft is more "radical" than the 1.8L. I'm sure you've already figured that out though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top