43 replies to this topic

[WilsonSteele]

All,

    Just asking an in depth technical question here, please don't take this the wrong way.

 

    What makes a car a certain year?  Is it just the VIN on the drivers door?  On the Firewall?  Those are "easy" enough to change or "fade"

 

    I drive a '94, which I am considering making into a '97.  I have been told from many sources that of the 1.8 NA's, the '97 is the far better car to have.  And I would love to have the OBDII for trouble-shooting and data logging.

 

    In many parts of the rule sets, especially in the listed engine parts, '94-'97 components are all lumped together, such as piston weights, at least in the NASA rule set.

 

    And I don't mean a cheater, best parts from any which year.  I mean a full on, complete build of a '97, with engine, gauge cluster, wiring harness, ignition coils, etc all matching the part numbers for that year.  All 100 percent legal to the '97 spec.  Just a little off if one runs the VIN to check build date.

 

    Part of this is because I just got a '97 complete block and wiring harness off craigslist, and that motor rebuild is my winter project.  So build to '94 or '97 is one of my current questions.

 

    A question to engine builders out there, do you ask a customer which year of car they have when they want a "pro" NA 1.8?  For instance, I just got a Drago head, and there was no year specification other than NA 1.8.  I don't know if the heads are different, but certain other engine parts certainly are, such as the pistons starting in '96.

 

    Again, this post isn't about cheating, it's about specifying how the rules are written so I don't have to buy a different car after putting 1000s of man hours into the one I already have, that I now know wasn't the greatest starting point.  I'm not trying to turn an NA into an NB.

 

    Have I missed anything that people know are different between the '94 to '97 tubs?  Stripped Chassis weights, brake boosters, rear brake balance valve, drive shaft length/weight, emissions canister, marker lights, blinker fluid, etc?  As far as I know, it's mainly the wiring and engine controls, as they got ready for OBD-II.

[Mike Collins]

The VIN on the firewall is stamped. It is the only VIN listed in the FSM. The parts on your car need to be consistent with the VIN/year. You just can't decide to update or back date..the rules don't allow for it.

Its the same reason you can't turn a 1.6 into a 1.8...

[Ron Alan]

Time to find that 97 tub!

[Tom Sager]

All,

    Just asking an in depth technical question here, please don't take this the wrong way.

 

    What makes a car a certain year?  Is it just the VIN on the drivers door?  On the Firewall?  Those are "easy" enough to change or "fade"

 

    I drive a '94, which I am considering making into a '97.  I have been told from many sources that of the 1.8 NA's, the '97 is the far better car to have.  And I would love to have the OBDII for trouble-shooting and data logging.

 

    In many parts of the rule sets, especially in the listed engine parts, '94-'97 components are all lumped together, such as piston weights, at least in the NASA rule set.

 

    And I don't mean a cheater, best parts from any which year.  I mean a full on, complete build of a '97, with engine, gauge cluster, wiring harness, ignition coils, etc all matching the part numbers for that year.  All 100 percent legal to the '97 spec.  Just a little off if one runs the VIN to check build date.

 

    Part of this is because I just got a '97 complete block and wiring harness off craigslist, and that motor rebuild is my winter project.  So build to '94 or '97 is one of my current questions.

 

    A question to engine builders out there, do you ask a customer which year of car they have when they want a "pro" NA 1.8?  For instance, I just got a Drago head, and there was no year specification other than NA 1.8.  I don't know if the heads are different, but certain other engine parts certainly are, such as the pistons starting in '96.

 

    Again, this post isn't about cheating, it's about specifying how the rules are written so I don't have to buy a different car after putting 1000s of man hours into the one I already have, that I now know wasn't the greatest starting point.  I'm not trying to turn an NA into an NB.

 

    Have I missed anything that people know are different between the '94 to '97 tubs?  Stripped Chassis weights, brake boosters, rear brake balance valve, drive shaft length/weight, emissions canister, marker lights, blinker fluid, etc?  As far as I know, it's mainly the wiring and engine controls, as they got ready for OBD-II.

It's a real PITA to build a whole new car or even to convert a '94 to '97 electronics.  The whole thing could be solved with a small plate or weight adjustment.  Years ago '94-'95 had a different spec line in the rules compared to '96 - '97.  That got killed and in large part because of ECU monkey business in the '94 - '95 cars.  It's time to separate these cars again in recognition of the difference or make ECU reflash legal.   

[Mike Collins]

It's a real PITA to build a whole new car or even to convert a '94 to '97 electronics.  The whole thing could be solved with a small plate or weight adjustment.  Years ago '94-'95 had a different spec line in the rules compared to '96 - '97.  That got killed and in large part because of ECU monkey business in the '94 - '95 cars.  It's time to separate these cars again in recognition of the difference or make ECU reflash legal.   

 

If you want to make a REAL '94 legal you need a 49 plate...

 

The available data suggest otherwise, but what do I know....

[Tom Sager]

If you want to make a REAL '94 legal you need a 49 plate...

 

The available data suggest otherwise, but what do I know....

There's quite a bit of data right in front of our noses.  Car choice by racers, entry lists, results and podiums.  '94 -'95's almost extinct.    Heck, some dude is selling a pretty good '94 on this site for $9900 and I'll bet it can be bought for less than that.  

[WilsonSteele]

To those in the higher levels of SM rules and building, help me understand this Drago quote:

"There are many cars that needed to be re-tubbed etc that have the "wrong" year tub. If you meet the requirements on VIN number to your spec line, you meet the requirements. "

I cut the VIN off my dash because one of my cage bars went right there. I carry it around in the folder of my log book.

But really, what is the difference between the tubs? If there was any tub performance advantage, i wouldn't consider it. Not trying to cheat here. But if the only difference between my car, thats paid for, and a better one is manhours and some stamped numerals, why wouldn't i do it?

[Bench Racer]

To those in the higher levels of SM rules and building, help me understand this Drago quote:

"There are many cars that needed to be re-tubbed etc that have the "wrong" year tub. If you meet the requirements on VIN number to your spec line, you meet the requirements. "

 

 

The VIN on the firewall is stamped. It is the only VIN listed in the FSM.

The SCCA written rule for the VIN is very poor because as Collins stated, the only VIN you will find written in the Mazda FSM is the VIN stamped in the front firewall.

[Jim Drago]

Difference of interpretation.
I will stand by what I wrote...
"There are many cars that needed to be re-tubbed etc that have the "wrong" year tub. If you meet the requirements on VIN number to your spec line, you meet the requirements. "

VIN = vehicle identification number
There are several VIN plates on the car.. dash, engine, transmission drivers door jamb. If you have enough of these plates on your car to meet the rule and they differ from the ONE stamped in your firewall and all else meets the spec line, you are compliant.
Mike can disagree, you can disagree but "I" feel this is a non issue. If you want 100% clarification on the matter you can look in I believe 8.1.4 in GCR and send in the $300 for clarification. Since this will likely end up back in my lap after doing so, what do you think the outcome will be?

If I owned a 94 car and wanted to convert it to a 97, or a 90 for that matter.. "I" would buy a 97 parts car and strip my 90-95 race car and put every part from my 97 car on my stripped old race car. I feel that is still within 100% of the rules now. I would use the pan, dash and transmission from the 97 donor. If you or anyone else wanted to protest it on the basis of the number in the firewall, I would welcome that protest as I feel I would win 100% of the time.

If you are not happy with that, you can always submit a letter to do away with the vin rule completely or allow update/ back date within the spec line.

[Bench Racer]

Difference of interpretation.
I will stand by what I wrote...
"There are many cars that needed to be re-tubbed etc that have the "wrong" year tub. If you meet the requirements on VIN number to your spec line, you meet the requirements. "

 

SCCA GCR

 

1.2.3.A

 

Interpreting and Applying the GCR

 

Strained or toutured and applying the GCR SHALL be logical. < Short version of actual written rule words. 

 

Says nothing about the many different peoples interpretation. The word interpretation is very much the same as when people use the word intent with reference to rules.

 

With logic, I'll follow the SCCA rules and the Mazda Miata FSM mentions only the VIN stamped into the front firewall. Were in the SCCA rules or the Mazda Miata FSM do you see any mention of location for other VIN number locations? 

 

This woud be version 2 of this discussion. Why don't you spend $300.00 to prove your not correct? I would expect a fair and honest guy like yourself to recluse yourself from decision making on this issue becauase without CRB discussion your mind is fixed and your a Spec Miata competitor. 

 

Writting letters is almost a joke. After the SCCA published the new rule to include "cowls" as "trim" pieces within 3-4 days of an national event at the Farm I wrote a letter that suggested the new SCCA rule is not correct because "trim" pieces per the GCR glossary are "coverings or attachments whose function is solely cosmetic". On 2 of the 3 cars that were teched the cowl was functional and cosmetic and on 1 car the cowl was solely cosmetic. The letter flownders in the production committiee almost 2 months latter.

[Jim Drago]

Dave
Thank you for your input

For the rest,
I think my opinion is pretty clear.

Jim

[Caveman-kwebb99]

. 

 

 I would expect a fair and honest guy like yourself to recluse yourself from decision making on this issue becauase without CRB discussion your mind is fixed and your a Spec Miata competitor. 

 

 

 

Caveman 3.16

 

Dave dewhurts should make any and all descisions for SCCA in every class since he is "NOT" a competitor

[Bench Racer]

Debb, please use your personal capabilities when discussing rules, not what someone tells you. Skip the   .

 

In your words, tell us where in the Miata FSM there are any words written about the VIN number other than the VIN stamped in the front firewall.

[Johnny D]

Yes, the rules are rules. Some rules have been changed/deleted because they are a non issue.

 

It's ok to bring a 94 and race it, and bring a 97 to the next track. As long as it what it says it is. "If it looks like a duck....

 

So this is really an issue and should be fully inforced for what gain?

J~

[Caveman-kwebb99]

deherts I dont care about vins unless they are being turned into a bottle of wine!!!!!

 

I doint read the rules either, mayeb thats why you are so much fun??? , you read the rules alot and keeps you sense of humor and personality keen!  Keep up the good work!

[Bench Racer]

Dave
Thank you for your input

For the rest,
I think my opinion is pretty clear.

Jim

Jim, (my grand daughter just said, Jim Drago, is that the big guy. Yes Hannah. ) don't hurt yourself falling on your opinion crutch, TYFYI. 

[Bench Racer]

Yes, the rules are rules. Some rules have been changed/deleted because they are a non issue.

 

J~

And some rules have been changed because folks were cheating and rather than tech and DQ people it was easier to change the rule.

 

Johnny, are you familar with the production car rules from the 60's and what those same rules skidded into 90's and what they are today? The SCCA thought they had the production cars rules fixed with the release of the limited prep/level 2 rules in th emid 90's. They did eliminate some of the costly stuff, but according to production car owners, not nearly enough.

[Mike Collins]

With all due respect Jim Drago is wrong. I've been down this road before, both with protest and appeal. One of the 2 required VIN needs to be located per the FSM. The second is a debatable. To be compliant I wrote it in magic marker on the door sill, but I could have written it anywhere.

You can't turn a 94-97 into a 90... the tubs are different Jim..you of all people should know that.

[Johnny D]

So people aren't cheating because of the VN on the firewall?

People can't run legal because of a VN?

People have to spend more time and $ for a VN?

 

No I'm not familar.

If it's an issue, it's an issue.

J~

[Jim Drago]

Jim, (my grand daughter just said, Jim Drago, is that the big guy. Yes Hannah. ) don't hurt yourself falling on your opinion crutch, TYFYI.

I'm too busy arguing with Collins off line right now to take you seriously. BTW, the opposite of what Collins said