291 replies to this topic

[Adam Molaver]

Let's remember that it wasn't just a little flak that NASA took for this last year, it was a metic f* ton of whining.

Also, as nice as it is to have the two groups synced up, these weights WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED without NASA taking the initiative to test the water and do the R&D while SCCA got to sit and watch NASA get screamed at by a bunch of butthurt 99 drivers.

So thank your local NASA region and its racers for being the guinea pigs and doing the work to get the weights closer.

Edit: Especially the NASA 99 guys that stuck it out despite the screams

+1 I'll be the first to admit i was mad as hell about how the rules were derived and announced, but as the season progressed it became obvious they were very close to right. glad to see how it has shaken out and that the orgs were able to put their heads together and put a package together that i think will a) encourage more crossover (both ways) and bring the p-word even closer.

ahm

[Caesar Vielmas]

Probably to late to bitch but why the increase in weigth on the 1.6?....not that I ever weight in below 2300 myself but it sure was nice to know I could go to 2275.

Should I start building a 99 now then?

[Bench Racer]

Probably to late to bitch but why the increase in weigth on the 1.6?....not that I ever weight in below 2300 myself but it sure was nice to know I could go to 2275.

Should I start building a 99 now then?

Caesar, were you lead down the garden path to post, why increase weight to the 1.6?

We ALL know that weight is the nemesis of a race car. I have a new build 1.6 at 2020 pounds without driver, OEM pumped ruel tank & no water in the cool suite. I have also lost 21 pounds over the last three months therefore the driver at this time is 204 pounds. By next racing season in the Midwest I expect to weigh 190ish. For my effort to build the car to about the minumin weight & for reducing my body weight is met with a reward, ADD ANOTHER 25 POUNDS TO YOU 1.6 SPEC LINE CAR WEIGHT.

[trimless]

hail hail the king, long live the king.

RIP 1.6.

Willie,

I won't be needing that 1.6 block after all...

[Zauskycop]

I'm willing to give this a shot. I raced pretty close to 2300 and kept up with the 99's pretty well (except for RA). The question is: How much, if any, will the smaller plate slow a 99 down with losing 50 lbs?

[Sacslider]

Any estimates on what this should do to the hp/tq numbers on the various years? If the decision were based in part on this I assume this info exists?

[FTodaro]

I'm willing to give this a shot. I raced pretty close to 2300 and kept up with the 99's pretty well (except for RA). The question is: How much, if any, will the smaller plate slow a 99 down with losing 50 lbs?

Allot is my answer. Running the 2390 and a 37 mm plate in NASA was like a 6 hp loss in my car from SCCA and when you did the HP to wt ratio it was below (worse) that the rest of the field. This should get the cars closer, In Nasa the light wt of the 1.6 would kill us coming out of the corners so this is a good step in getting us closer, but as always we will have our anecdotal story's race by race this coming season. Yes there was alot of screaming coming out of the 99 camp, but that is to be expected with such a major change.

[Steve D]

Thank you John, Jim, Mike, Sam, Dave, Louis, and Dan for the bold action to bring the cars AND clubs together.

I did a quick tally of the +/-14 comments so far that seemed to be casting a vote. Here's what I got:

1.6 - 4 positive, 3 negative
NA1.8 - 2 positive
NB - 4 positive, 1 negative (Kyle, tongue-in-cheek)

I believe based on the NASA evidence (bearing in mind that there will never be 100% irrefutable data that applies to all tracks and all prep levels) the 2012-2014 weights and plates should make for much better racing.

Yes, the 1.6 in SCCA trim adds 25 lbs (1.1%). The '99 in SCCA trim drops 2% weight but has a 14% smaller hole to breathe through if my math is right.

[dtfastbear]

Even though my signature says LS1 miata, I still occasionally race my wife's 1.6. I'm very positive about the new rules, but when I told her that she has to run 25lbs heavier, she was not happy. So, I guess that makes the Thomas family a wash from the 1.6 camp!

[Alex Bolanos]

Even though my signature says LS1 miata, I still occasionally race my wife's 1.6. I'm very positive about the new rules, but when I told her that she has to run 25lbs heavier, she was not happy. So, I guess that makes the Thomas family a wash from the 1.6 camp!

Oxymoron?

[JRHille]

How many 1.6'ers are losing a race over 15 lbs??? I doubt any..
Good job with the rule change...is it 2012 yet?

[Blake Thompson]

How many 1.6'ers are losing a race over 15 lbs??? I doubt any..
Good job with the rule change...is it 2012 yet?

I probably have.

[pat slattery]

it's 25lbs if your racing scca

[Bench Racer]

Thank you John, Jim, Mike, Sam, Dave, Louis, and Dan for the bold action to bring the cars AND clubs together.

I did a quick tally of the +/-14 comments so far that seemed to be casting a vote. Here's what I got:

1.6 - 4 positive, 3 negative
NA1.8 - 2 positive
NB - 4 positive, 1 negative (Kyle, tongue-in-cheek)

I believe based on the NASA evidence (bearing in mind that there will never be 100% irrefutable data that applies to all tracks and all prep levels) the 2012-2014 weights and plates should make for much better racing.

Yes, the 1.6 in SCCA trim adds 25 lbs (1.1%). The '99 in SCCA trim drops 2% weight but has a 14% smaller hole to breathe through if my math is right.

Steve, if you take my weight post as negative all you were doing is taking facts to the far side. My reward for building a 1.6 at 2020 & to date loosing 21 pounds of personal body weight is a reward to add 25 pounds to the spec line weight. Remember all the 99 cackling when nasa went smaller with the RP & less weight. If the RP was reduced another mm, the cackling would start all over again. I stated previous to these changes that the whole deal could be completed without saddling cars with the nemesis of race cars, weight. Do it with the restrictor.

The normal in the SCCA is that a class red flag (car that romps the field or is the low life of the field) gets raised at the Runoffs track. I happen to be CenDiv Milwaukee region member & could race at Road America 5 to 10 times a year (nationals alone, June Sprints, Cat national, Runoffs through 2013). If others that blow my comments off lived in the CenDiv they would be saying the same thing. What's happening now for nationals is most 1.6's don't enter.

Now, if a unknown charter did the math the numbers would be totally different. Let's take the weight difference between the car build weight & the 2011 spec line weight.

1.6 2011 spec line weight = 2275 pounds - the 2020 pound build weight = 255 pounds

2012 additional weight = PLUS 25 pounds /255 pounds = PLUS 10%

99 2011 spec line weight = 2450 pounds - the 2100 pound build weight = 350 pounds

2012 additional weight = MINUS 50 pounds/350 pounds = MINUS 14% along with a smaller restrictor plate

Your numbers show a total differental of 3.1% of weight while the unknown charter's numbers show a total differental of 24% of weight.

Anyone care to use some of the statistical data, modeling or other factual evidence to show a comparison of the 1.6 & 99 cars at Road America from T14 to T1, from T3 to T5 & T5 to T12?

All said with

[pat slattery]

I guess, my big question would be what does the restrictor do to the torque values to the 99 in SCCA trim. vs the 1.6.

Pat

[Adam Molaver]

Steve, if you take my weight post as negative all you were doing is taking facts to the far side. My reward for building a 1.6 at 2020 & to date loosing 21 pounds of personal body weight is a reward to add 25 pounds to the spec line weight. Remember all the 99 cackling when nasa went smaller with the RP & less weight. If the RP was reduced another mm, the cackling would start all over again. I stated previous to these changes that the whole deal could be completed without saddling cars with the nemesis of race cars, weight. Do it with the restrictor.

The normal in the SCCA is that a class red flag (car that romps the field or is the low life of the field) gets raised at the Runoffs track. I happen to be CenDiv Milwaukee region member & could race at Road America 5 to 10 times a year (nationals alone, June Sprints, Cat national, Runoffs through 2013). If others that blow my comments off lived in the CenDiv they would be saying the same thing. What's happening now for nationals is most 1.6's don't enter.

Now, if a unknown charter did the math the numbers would be totally different. Let's take the weight difference between the car build weight & the 2011 spec line weight.

1.6 2011 spec line weight = 2275 pounds - the 2020 pound build weight = 255 pounds

2012 additional weight = PLUS 25 pounds /255 pounds = PLUS 10%

99 2011 spec line weight = 2450 pounds - the 2100 pound build weight = 350 pounds

2012 additional weight = MINUS 50 pounds/350 pounds = MINUS 14% along with a smaller restrictor plate

Your numbers show a total differental of 3.1% of weight while the unknown charter's numbers show a total differental of 24% of weight.

Anyone care to use some of the statistical data, modeling or other factual evidence to show a comparison of the 1.6 & 99 cars at Road America from T14 to T1, from T3 to T5 & T5 to T12?

All said with

i don't understand your focus on 'spec line weight'. we have a minimum weight for each car type including driver. period. your machinations to produce 'MINUS 14%' and 'PLUS 10%' don't seem to create any argument so far as i can tell - you still end up with 1.6's adding .6% percent weight and 99's adding .4%

while i certainly understand anyone's frustration whose 'home track' has a definitive best car that doesn't match whats in their trailer, i think you essentially have to either switch cars or race at other tracks. i don't think it makes sense to change the rules that work at most tracks so it works better at one particular, even if the runoffs are there (or NASA championships for that matter).

accidentally posted earlier than i wanted too

[Jim Boemler]

I too am having trouble following your math, David. You seem to be dealing with a number representing "maximum driver weight", and I think that's a valid and valuable number, but you're talking about it in percentages of change -- which doesn't carry any clear meaning.

For any change, the question should be "How does the new number compare to the ideal?", rather than "How much did my number change versus someone else's?" It's assumed that the percentages of change must in fact be different -- otherwise, there's no real change at all.

As for your statistical data question, comparing cars at only one track is bad enough. By time we're trying to compare cars through specific turns on a single track, there's a clue that you're just asking the wrong questions.

PS: kudos on your car's diet, and especially on your own weight loss. I've battled the 1.6 minimums every year, and have never yet run a race near minimums. I envy your determination.

[john mueller]

while i certainly understand anyone's frustration whose 'home track' has a definitive best car that doesn't match whats in their trailer, i think you essentially have to either switch cars or race at other tracks. i don't think it makes sense to change the rules that work at most tracks so it works better at one particular, even if the runoffs are there (or NASA championships for that matter).

I think this is a really good point.... This is a national class, balancing across all the tracks in the county is cray hard.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

HAHAHAHAHAHA !!! You always get me laughing Kyle.

You can stick all these changes in your pipe and smoke it LOLOLOLOLOL I just want my deep fried turkey and fried OKRA back you f++king GRINCH!

You better just keep your protrait as part of your signature for life! Mueller you are to cool for school! And You Steve D, you should know better than to chock that up in the negative column! If I had a Neg to say you know I would say it! You need to do some quick editing, you know it will f++k up all of Dewhursts equations unless you have it all in the correct column! ROG LMAO

[Muda]

Wow, I'm only 20 lbs over weight now!

1.8's torque won't change, what will the weight v. hp loss mean?
Can I catch them 20 feet sooner in the draft? Hope so.
Need HP to pull rolling resistance. Could make things better.
John, I won't be needing that '99 of yours, after all. ( ;
Maybe some head work this winter.