563 replies to this topic

[Bench Racer]

No semantics, what year did you start on the SMAC?

[pat slattery]

I never ever said equal...  similar is how i term it.  Your being off the pace at ATL has nothing to do with the model year IMO, it is track time, and dollars spent on your car.  I realize I spend less than most of the top guys are spending.  for me mostly its tires, not saying I am good enough even with the tires but I have fewer sets of tires at the race then most of the top guys, advantage them... Nothing to bitch about I just need to do more with less. Pat your son can drive, thats pretty obvious, but after seeing your car a couple times, that car is your weak link, not because its a 1.6, agrue all you want about parity, but money spent in the right places in racing gives you advantages over the rest.  when you come to mid ohio to have a trans failure that sends you home and then show up at ATL and leave for a lack of power, that speaks to car prep, nothing less and nothing more.   Why fight the inevitable? you can spend a boat load on your 1.6 to get the prep level to the top or you can sell it and then add that to the money you would spend on it and damn near build a top 99, seems a no brainer to me.  but then again i have been accused of being too logical more than a few times...

 

I am convinced that Partiy is in the eye of the beholder LOL

Kyle we didn't leave for lack of power, our fresh rebuilt motor with new head built by a national motor builder developed a knock in the motor and we had to retire.  The motor did start running slower as the day went on and by qualifying it was toast.  Yes our Tranny also went out at Mid Oh. We were close enough to Mid Oh to repair and get back for the race, but the clutch was damaged and didn't have the parts to fix.  If it was only a tranny we would have been there on sunday.  Stuff happens just don't have as many hands to repair things as a big race group.  Have to do what your budget allows, but we do go out with the best that we can get. 

[pat slattery]

By definition the cars will never be equal, I have never heard anyone say that? Certainly not me. 

 

Serious question.. 

When the cars were absolutely equal.. You guys raced Bennett in his 1.6 like what 25-30 times? How many times did you guys beat him in the same version car? Once? 

Why, if the cars were the same were the results so lopsided? better driver? better car? better preparation? all of the above? 

Why would you expect different results now? Bennett was only one guy, no there are 15+ guys performmg at that level or higher. .

Jim I have lots of respect for Bennett.  He and Shawn I would consider to be equal in driving ability, with Mark being light years ahead in prep, and we had just started car racing.  At Mid Oh Bennett was pretty much unbeatable, but we did manage to beat him at Indy, Gingerman, and Road America, and we beat his 99 car at Road America.  Why are you trying to beat Shawn up?

[pat slattery]

I never ever said equal...  similar is how i term it.  Your being off the pace at ATL has nothing to do with the model year IMO, it is track time, and dollars spent on your car.  I realize I spend less than most of the top guys are spending.  for me mostly its tires, not saying I am good enough even with the tires but I have fewer sets of tires at the race then most of the top guys, advantage them... Nothing to bitch about I just need to do more with less. Pat your son can drive, thats pretty obvious, but after seeing your car a couple times, that car is your weak link, not because its a 1.6, agrue all you want about parity, but money spent in the right places in racing gives you advantages over the rest.  when you come to mid ohio to have a trans failure that sends you home and then show up at ATL and leave for a lack of power, that speaks to car prep, nothing less and nothing more.   Why fight the inevitable? you can spend a boat load on your 1.6 to get the prep level to the top or you can sell it and then add that to the money you would spend on it and damn near build a top 99, seems a no brainer to me.  but then again i have been accused of being too logical more than a few times...

 

I am convinced that Partiy is in the eye of the beholder LOL

Kyle your telling me there is parity, but your telling me I need to get a 99.   If there is such parity, why do I need to spend 25000 on a 99?

[pat slattery]

IMHO

Running a fully prepped 1.6 is a dominate car.

 

The car races, which has nothing to do with me, awesome. I know a few teams are starting to redo the development on a 1.6, how cool is
that…

The 1.6 chassis is stiffer, the diff is better, the car is lighter and the Air / Fuel is better than the 99. Must be the reason for the 99’s
fuel pressure regulator being allowed. Without it, the 99 could not keep up with the 1.6.
 

The last weight adjustment for the 1.6 was the CRB adding 15Lbs to the car, which I did not understand until the first race.
 

Good Job, CRB….

Last year the 1.6 holds 5 new track records.
 

Todd your a heck of a driver, I believe your 1.6 is legal, but, no one other than you is getting that kind of performance out of a 1.6  Is it just you as a driver or what?

[Jim Drago]

Jim I have lots of respect for Bennett.  He and Shawn I would consider to be equal in driving ability, with Mark being light years ahead in prep, and we had just started car racing.  At Mid Oh Bennett was pretty much unbeatable, but we did manage to beat him at Indy, Gingerman, and Road America, and we beat his 99 car at Road America.  Why are you trying to beat Shawn up?

Pat

When I try to bring in facts, I am beating up on Shawn?  I have always been Shawns biggest proponent behind the wheel. Shawn is very good, but Mark is one of the best that has raced in Sm, not quite sure I would rate them the same,  just my opinion and not a shot at Shawn. My only point is and was that your program was not on "par"with the same car in one small region. I don't think it is fair to think that Nationally you should be more competitive against all types of cars and drivers then you were regionally against one of the same versions. While unfortunate, regardless of what car you guys race, it will be a challenge, because of time and budget.  That has been my opinion all along. The problem is not the year of the car or the driver.  I don't think there is anything wrong with that, just harsh reality. Even with the best car in the field, with best tires etc, racing a few times a year it is hard to win. Guys like Danny and many others race often and rarely miss a big race and that keeps them very sharp.  Popping in and out is not easy and makes it very hard to be successful, even with top equipment. 

BTW, You said you beat Bennett about as many times or more proportionally in his 99 That would suggest the 99 must need some help

[Jim Drago]

No semantics, what year did you start on the SMAC?

You spent all that time looking up the changes trying to prove me wrong, you can spend a few more figuring out when I came on. You are retired, isn't that what you old folks do down at the home between naps and Bingo?

 

 I believe it was late 07 as I was on when we lowered the weight on the 1.6 25 lbs and raised the 99 up 25 lbs. It should be easy to find, I really don't remember exact date. 

[LarryKing]

Keep making the class more expensive - I mean, who the hale likes big fields anyway?

[steveracer]

I still wish they had allowed  the 1.6's to update to the 99+ front suspension.

 

I feel like that would've put us all on the same basic platform and under the current rules I would agree that the cars would be VERY, VERY, any model can win, close.

 

Considering there were 2 hot shoes(Andy Rushing a National Championship winner) in 1.6 cars that couldn't even crack the top 5 at COTA, and a couple of competitors who I could always beat when they drove NA cars, and I can't hang with them since they moved to 99's. Seems the 1.6 cars have fallen behind. Just how much is left to develop the 1.6?

[Mike Asselta]

I think its fair to consider the long course at COTA a power track.  Not as much the dyno that Road America is, but power plays a big role there.  Taylor, in his 1.8NA was able to make decent laps there because of the deep braking zones and relatively decent torque/power ratio on this car.

 

Let's face it...if horsepower is the question, then the 99 wins hands down.  Mix in a little braking and torque, then the 1.8 NA has a good chance.  But at a handling track, a top shelf 1.6 is still a potent weapon in the right hands.  

 

As we approach Hallett in two weekends (by the champ's own admission, the consummate technical track where handling is critical), I am reminded that our 1.8NA's run nose to tail with some of the best 99's in the country and a 1.6 has held the track record for years. The extra grip of the Hoosier has helped the 1.8NA a little and hurt the 1.6 a little at this track. Don't know about its effect on the 99.

 

If anyone is still wondering, here's the bottom line on HP and torque on a matched dyno with current restrictors:

 

Top shelf (not best ever seen) 1.6 = 123/109

Top shelf (not best ever seen 1.8NA = 123/114

Top shelf (not best ever seen) 99 = 128/121

 

These are all consistently attainable engine/driveline combinations.  If your rear hubs are junk, or your pads drag, or your driveshaft is wobbly...forget it.  You won't get there. Folks with dyno data, feel free to argue any of the above relationships.

 

Hallett is so balanced, that the Super Tour winner will be decided by the following:  Driver preparedness, car preparation, tire budget, minimal contact (there will be some) and a little luck.

[Jamz14]

Mike,

 

Those power numbers don't look quite right if advertised HP numbers by pro builders is to be believed. For instance, just saw Flying Tigers car up for sale touting numbers above 130 if I remember right. And there is a 1.6 here in socal that makes north of 130 too

[Tom Sager]

I think its fair to consider the long course at COTA a power track.  Not as much the dyno that Road America is, but power plays a big role there.  Taylor, in his 1.8NA was able to make decent laps there because of the deep braking zones and relatively decent torque/power ratio on this car.

 

Let's face it...if horsepower is the question, then the 99 wins hands down.  Mix in a little braking and torque, then the 1.8 NA has a good chance.  But at a handling track, a top shelf 1.6 is still a potent weapon in the right hands.  

 

As we approach Hallett in two weekends (by the champ's own admission, the consummate technical track where handling is critical), I am reminded that our 1.8NA's run nose to tail with some of the best 99's in the country and a 1.6 has held the track record for years. The extra grip of the Hoosier has helped the 1.8NA a little and hurt the 1.6 a little at this track. Don't know about its effect on the 99.

 

If anyone is still wondering, here's the bottom line on HP and torque on a matched dyno with current restrictors:

 

Top shelf (not best ever seen) 1.6 = 123/109

Top shelf (not best ever seen 1.8NA = 123/114

Top shelf (not best ever seen) 99 = 128/121

 

These are all consistently attainable engine/driveline combinations.  If your rear hubs are junk, or your pads drag, or your driveshaft is wobbly...forget it.  You won't get there. Folks with dyno data, feel free to argue any of the above relationships.

 

Hallett is so balanced, that the Super Tour winner will be decided by the following:  Driver preparedness, car preparation, tire budget, minimal contact (there will be some) and a little luck.

I promised myself yesterday I would not post in this thread.  No willpower I guess.

 

2 thoughts Mike.

 

1.  Based on your submitted data, the choice of car is obvious.

2.  Sounds like you're running for VP on Drago's ticket and a certain lobby has made a sizeable donation to your campaign.

[Danny Steyn]

And to throw another wrench in the works, I do consider my #39 car to be a top shelf 99 car, yet I have NEVER EVER had as much as 128HP, so it shows just how unuseable dyno numbers are unless they are the same dyno, same day

[Mike Asselta]

2.  Sounds like you're running for VP on Drago's ticket and a certain lobby has made a sizeable donation to your campaign.

 

That put a huge smile on my face Tom...very funny! 

 

If anyone cares, here's where I stand:

 

1. Jim and I are friends and have been friends throughout all of our parity arguments, of which we have had plenty and some teeth nashing.  We tend to use our smartphones rather than the forum for this purpose.  Jim can confirm, but I am still an advocate for a 1mm larger plate on the 1.8NA on the basis of the current run-offs track, which I believe is a power track (most Run Offs tracks will be). I would also remove the weight from the 1.6 cars. We don't agree on this, but we're still friends (Jim can confirm or deny). 

 

2.  I wrote letters in the off-season to get a larger plate, but was denied.  The issue is closed for racing season...may ride that horse again in the off-season, but it's time to race.

 

3.  At handling tracks, I do believe there is reasonable parity where all else is equal:  skill, preparation and tire budget.  The disadvantage at COTA for instance, was that it is very difficult to find a dance partner for a 1.6 or a 1.8.  So many 99's are slow where the other cars are fast, and fast where the other cars are slow.  I intended to have a completely re-done 1.8NA there to tag up with other 1.8's, but the wiring harness on the new build would not cooperate.  Taylor was hung out to dry in a parade of early-braking, top end ripping 99's.  He did well, nonetheless.

 

4.  I lament the higher costs of top shelf cars in Spec Miata, but also accept that it was inevitable.  There's no inherent morality in high or low costs, only that higher costs threaten to keep some participants on the sidelines.  I believe strongly in classes that bring people into club racing.

 

5.  If I've worked my way on to Jim's political ticket, I should fall of if my plans to beat him at Hallett work out.     If DNF's count, I beat him last year (again).    Truthfully, I have been less prepared, spent less on tires, and have lesser racecraft than Jim and many of the 99's that we compete against.  

[Mike Asselta]

And to throw another wrench in the works, I do consider my #39 car to be a top shelf 99 car, yet I have NEVER EVER had as much as 128HP, so it shows just how unuseable dyno numbers are unless they are the same dyno, same day

 

 

On a single dyno, we see consistent numbers across different days, if properly adjusted for temp, humidity, etc.  There are differences from dyno to dyno, but not as much as some claim if the brand/rig is the same and SAE adjusted. A real dyno guy/engineering type could settle this question easily enough (not me).

[Mike Asselta]

Mike,

 

Those power numbers don't look quite right if advertised HP numbers by pro builders is to be believed. For instance, just saw Flying Tigers car up for sale touting numbers above 130 if I remember right. And there is a 1.6 here in socal that makes north of 130 too

Dyno inflation, me thinks

[Jim Drago]

Seriously, Can someone point out a scenario where a NA driver was not competitive, switched to a 99 up and started winning races and became a "Front Runner"? I am sure there are several, but I can't think of any that were not winning in NA cars that switched to NB cars and just started winning?  Just curious

[Tom Sager]

Seriously, Can someone point out a scenario where a NA driver was not competitive, switched to a 99 up and started winning races and became a "Front Runner"? I am sure there are several, but I can't think of any that were not winning in NA cars that switched to NB cars and just started winning? Just curious

There's a guy up our way named Voytek Burdzy. Some of you may have heard of him. He drove a well prepped '94 or '95 SM for about 3 years. He did pretty well in that car. He switched to a '99 just prior to the 2010 Runoffs and then podiumed at the 2011 Runoffs. I have asked him and he has told me that he prefers the '99 and feels it is the faster race car. His former crew Adam has told me the same thing.

[Jim Drago]

I think Voytek won Nationals in the in the 94 car as well didn't he?  Really don't know the answer. 

[Tom Sager]

I think Voytek won Nationals in the in the 94 car as well didn't he?  Really don't know the answer. 

He did but his results are even more impressive since changing cars.  He's a good example of someone who did very well and improved even further once he changed cars.  Certainly a car change alone won't make a winner out of a mid-pack driver.  Car choice of the front drivers really tells the whole story.  Everything else is just opinion.  Mine, yours and everyone else's.