535 replies to this topic

[Michael Novak]

Trying to start a post with thoughts on rules---NO DEBATE(Make new thread if you want)---ONE ENTRY PER RACER---Please also tell what you race or will be racing next year and then reason if you want..

 

 

Tires---SM7

Suspension---Same

Engine-    1.6NA No change, 1.8 NA No change or 1 MM larger plate, 99 38MM plate and 15 lbs, 01+ NO change and 25 lbs

 

Race 2002 SM, Plan on building a 99 or a used 1.6 for Daytona type tracks.

 

Reason: I think the 1.6 and the 1.8 AT present PREP LEVELS could use some help and this might help people who have these cars spend money on engine and the like. It should help the values of the cars also. I think the 99 and now the 01+ have had further development in the last three years and this cuts them back some.

 

Whistler gate and Blendgate---have little effect as whistlergate will be fixed easily and blendgate effects all engines and will go one way or the other effecting everyone equally. These both really help the NA cars as it might slow the 99 and 01+ even more.

[FTodaro]

What have you been drinking in the water up there in pure Michigan?

 

I got my butt handed to me at Mid O on Saturday a few weeks ago by Murdick in a 1.6.

 

so what data are you relying on to slow the 99 and even slower the 01+ 2 mm and 25lbs is a big move.

 

The problem we have trying trying to sync up 3 different generations is that they are different and all you can hope to do is get them close. I do not think anything should change unless we have something on tape that shows an advantage.

 

NASA has been using Data randomly in cars, John what does the tape show?

 

Debate warning

[LarryKing]

You're debating Frank

 

Should we include the data point that your best laptime was 1/2 sec. better than Brian's, or that you finished ahead of him Sunday? (That's getting your butt handed to you?!)

 

(sorry, carry on)

[FTodaro]

You're debating Frank

 

Should we include the data point that your best laptime was 1/2 sec. better than Brian's, or that you finished ahead of him Sunday? (That's getting your butt handed to you?!)

 

(sorry, carry on)

He was in traffic i was not, but he was still under the lap record.

[LarryKing]

SM7s ?

[Dan Tiley]

My thoughts for 2015.  Let's get NA's cars back in the fray.....

 

 

All NA cars (1989-1997):  No Change

1999-00:  -2mm plate (to 36mm)

2001-05: -2mm plate (to 38mm).  Add 25 lbs.

 

I race, and will continue to race a 2001 car regardless.  

 

Frank... you didn't get your "butt handed to you" by a 1.6L.  You got it handed to you by arguably the best active SM driver at Mid Ohio, who has been racing there since the inception of SM.  

[Ron Alan]

Well, there are arguably 5 "Mazda Brand" cars to deal with now, 4 of which are in the same class and one that needs some help finding dance partners. Based on history...it doesnt make sense a car manufacturer is going to hang its hat on a 25 year old car! With that in mind...

 

90-93...regional and back to RA1's or something less aggressive and easier on parts.

94-97...tough one here. Either leave restricted to run with the same chassis and regional only or bump the 1.8 a little with intake or compression to get to the HP/LBS of the NB. ECU and subframe mod maybe also.

99-05...unrestricted with stand alone ECU all have to run. Sealed motors?

NC...restricted and run with the NB. Sealed motors as currently. Certified ECU.

All cars have to be given the ability to reach the same max speed before any rev limiter comes into effect.

 

Much has to be done to equal the cars in different aspects...but this is what we have been doing for years. Every track may "favor" one generation. But we have this now! No one who wanted to finish on top at Laguna this year was going to bring a 1.6 because of the hills...and some felt the 01 grunt advantage outweighed the 99 top end advantage...some would be right! 

[James York]

Well, there are arguably 5 "Mazda Brand" cars to deal with now, 4 of which are in the same class and one that needs some help finding dance partners. Based on history...it doesnt make sense a car manufacturer is going to hang its hat on a 25 year old car! With that in mind...

 

90-93...regional and back to RA1's or something less aggressive and easier on parts.

94-97...tough one here. Either leave restricted to run with the same chassis and regional only or bump the 1.8 a little with intake or compression to get to the HP/LBS of the NB. ECU and subframe mod maybe also.

99-05...unrestricted with stand alone ECU all have to run. Sealed motors?

NC...restricted and run with the NB. Sealed motors as currently. Certified ECU.

All cars have to be given the ability to reach the same max speed before any rev limiter comes into effect.

 

Much has to be done to equal the cars in different aspects...but this is what we have been doing for years. Every track may "favor" one generation. But we have this now! No one who wanted to finish on top at Laguna this year was going to bring a 1.6 because of the hills...and some felt the 01 grunt advantage outweighed the 99 top end advantage...some would be right! 

 

Not debating your ideas, but Novak said rules for 2015.  You are not going to get a sealed motor program, ecus, and totally rebalance cars in two months.

[Johnny D]

I don't think not debating is going to work.

 

2015

I'll leave that to the very top drivers, I've been beaten by all this year.

 

 

Ron's idea is interesting... how about 1.8 open, 99 some RP 50mm?, 01 2mm smaller? NC RP, get to handle better?

 

And if you did the regional / Majors thing, (dropping the 1.6 down) how would NASA be ??

J~

[Jamz14]

I don't understand all this talk of having to retire 1.6s and NA 1.8s. Maybe this is the wrong thread but there are 4-5 threads all dealing with roughly the same thing so I apologize if I have picked the wrong one. People talking about there being 5-6 versions of the MX5. So? Maybe naive but doesn't Tudor, Pirelli WC, WTC, and others run many many different types of cars with an active parity adjustment program? I think the differences between a LMP1 car and a daytona prototype are far greater than the differences between our cars. And the differences make for great racing! A LMP1 car doesn't warm the tires as fast as the DP car. The LMP car is magic in the tight stuff and gets run down a bit on the straights. One does well at one track and the other at a different track. That is cool!, not a drag.When the donors dry up and parts can't be found, a particular year will naturally die out. Until then, the governing bodies should and do actively change parity adjusters such as weight and plates. There are good ideas being put forth by Daniels and such for a different kind of restrictor plate that look promising to my amateur eye.

 

The one thing I don't agree with is any type of mandatory rules freeze for any time frame. The boards should always be open to the possibility of needed adjustments and should not be constrained by a self imposed limitations like a rules freeze. Not saying that they should have to address every whim request by guys looking to have an adjustment made to their year, but to close down the possibility of a change by an absolute statement of a rules freeze only leads to the possibility of having to break your word if a real need is demonstrated.

[pat slattery]

He was in traffic i was not, but he was still under the lap record.

Plus that is about the only track Brian races at

[Keith Novak]

I race, and will still race my '95 next year in SM.  Why?  Because it's a manly man's car.

 

It doesn't have the tweaking potential of a 1.6 with intake and AFM, and it doesn't have the power potential of a 99+ so you have to drive it like you stole it.  It's heavier than the 1.6 so cornering with them, you literally have to hold onto the back end by clenching the seat with your butt cheeks.  It also gets eaten alive at the top end by...well by anything else so it improves the defensive game and you get lots of chances to ask, "Are we really going to do this two wide?"

 

The heavier car with the earlier suspension also allows you to use up your tires faster than anyone else. While others are raving about the longevity of the SM7, I have the self satisfaction of knowing I finished the race with cords showing.

 

With the lower rev limiter than any other year, it greatly improves your shifting skills too.  When others describe how they're just hitting the rev limiter before a certain corner, I know I was up a gear 3 corners back and working the stick shift like a Tijuana hooker in every brake zone.  That also allows you to master your transmission replacement skills.  I have a whole farm of dead transmissions out back.  I can set them all up in formation and pretend I'm ruling over them like my personal army of minions. 

 

None of the parts are interchangeable with any other car so you have to learn self-reliance like a homesteader in the Yukon.  You can't just borrow a spare anything from everyone else in the paddock.  You either have to bring one, find one within a 200 mile radius, or whittle one out of the nearest tree.

 

I'll knock some dents out for next year, make it look a little prettier (or at least have body panels of the same color), and turn a bolt or two to make it faster.  Aside from that, you girls can drive your nimble 1.6's or your overdog 99+ cars.  I'll have the satisfaction of knowing that the only thing that makes the #88 fast is the driver. 

 

P.S.  What the heck does it take to get my checkered flag?  Do the admins even monitor their mail box.  I earned that dammit.

[Bench Racer]

2015 Rule Proposals

Hey, the post is long, it's one shot per poster per Michael the post initiator and then no discussion.

This 2015 rule proposal begins with a typical post from within many threads. Parity sucks for the 1.6, the friken 1.8 red line sucks and the car weighs to much, in process of building a new VVT car and is beat before it's finished by XXXX, the leaders of the pack out spend, get rid of the 1.6 car, get rid of the NA 1.8 car and on and on. Maintaining parity when adding new spec lines will be a challenge. Get rid of YOUR spec line car will be next. The 1.6 torque parity sucks for the 1.6 anytime it's forced to race below a certain RPM. It takes X amount of lap time to catch back up. Hey, if the 1.6 is never slowed below a certain RPM it can race with other spec line cars. I have a top end quality 1.6 car. Totally new under the tub including subframes, pro motor, different dyno, similar numbers to the Burras 1.6 car. I'm sure newer spec line cars have their faults as compared to other spec line cars.

Proposal 1. Inclusion class vision for year 2015 based on spec line.

There would be four, maybe five, maybe six classes in the future within Spec Miata with all cars racing within the same race group as they do now. Each class has a finisher from 1st to last. If a 1990/1993 has a desire to race within a newer year spec line class he/she requests to do so before their first annual race, logbook is noted and the car stays within the chosen newer year spec line class for all races within that annual. No reversing a spec line class car to a lesser year spec line class. So a couple more trophies. Add a trophy fee to the entry fee as was done with the tech fee. Before the chuckles start, let's not forget which goose laid the Golden Egg.

Four or more spec line classes within Spec Miata:

1990/1993 SMA

1995/1997 SMB

1999/2000 SMC

2001/2005 SMD

Newer spec line SME

SMA through SME classes is very doable and inclusionary for all Spec Miata race car owners. Or break up the spec lines for the best inclusionary classes. When the SMA cars fade away, so be it. It's a natural progression without the big kids saying, you 1.6, cheap a$$ under prepared, always bitching about parity need to go away. Any issues can be straightened out before the get-go.

Proposal 2. Measure torque on track

There is much talk about on track torque/horsepower testing has been tried with minimal usable results. There is constant talk about Dynos at big races/Majors races, not cost effective and not enough Dynos. There is a thread titled, "Measure Torque on Race Track", the thought being, monitor all spec line on track capabilities (red flag for tear down) and cheats during races. Up front, let's not get bogged down with negative thoughts, let's find a torque measuring system that will do the job required. Because you don't like the messanger is no reason not to get your thoughts out within the "Measure Torque on Race Track" thread.

Proposal 3. Transparency within the SCCA

The Runoffs cheats and the general lack of knowledge being handed out is minimal. I'm not real political therefore to me it's more secrets, smoke and rose colored glasses by the SCCA and Mazda. I've heard the cheats were more than massaging the plunge cut and screwing with the short turn radius. Who has position of the heads??? Gag order??? Would like to support massaging the head plunge cut and de-shroud (Runoffs head issues) rules (have finished relative to plunge cut and de-shroud with limited info) except with zero factual knowledge of the cheats it's real hard to add clarity to said rules.

David Dewhurst

 

[Brocodile]

Keith, not only are you a manly man, you are a man of letters and acerbic wit. I salute you.

[pat slattery]

He was in traffic i was not, but he was still under the lap record.

So I guess you were also under the track record Frank?

[MPR22]

This may not be popular with the 1.6 crowd but I think we should up the compression ratio and allow an 11 lb flywheel. That will make them much more raceable. Slowing the top speed of the NBs will only help them on high speed long straight tracks.

NA 1.8 take out 15 lbs and add 300 rpm, not sure how we do thie latter.

99 leave the same, it is the standard all others should be adjusted to.

01'up jury is out. How many of those wins this year were with cheated up compression ratio heads? I suspect too many to make a judgement at this point. Give them another year of racing, there are plenty about there in hands of capable drivers.

NCs have their own class stay out of SM!

[FTodaro]

This may not be popular with the 1.6 crowd but I think we should up the compression ratio and allow an 11 lb flywheel. That will make them much more raceable. Slowing the top speed of the NBs will only help them on high speed long straight tracks.

NA 1.8 take out 15 lbs and add 300 rpm, not sure how we do thie latter.

99 leave the same, it is the standard all others should be adjusted to.

01'up jury is out. How many of those wins this year were with cheated up compression ratio heads? I suspect too many to make a judgement at this point. Give them another year of racing, there are plenty about there in hands of capable drivers.

NCs have their own class stay out of SM!

I like the idea on the added compression on the 1.6 but wait till after the runoffs at Daytona as its already the tool to have for next year.

And I like the rest of your post.

[James York]

This may not be popular with the 1.6 crowd but I think we should up the compression ratio and allow an 11 lb flywheel. That will make them much more raceable. Slowing the top speed of the NBs will only help them on high speed long straight tracks.

NA 1.8 take out 15 lbs and add 300 rpm, not sure how we do thie latter.

99 leave the same, it is the standard all others should be adjusted to.

01'up jury is out. How many of those wins this year were with cheated up compression ratio heads? I suspect too many to make a judgement at this point. Give them another year of racing, there are plenty about there in hands of capable drivers.

NCs have their own class stay out of SM!

 

This is sensible.  Agree with all.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Why do we need to assume all the 2001 cars were cheated up? Seemed to me none of those drivers where ever caught with anything... So I have to assume they were legal all season. Unless those that investigates Armstrong are on the case.

[Steve Scheifler]

Flywheel weight always comes up in these discussions but I wonder whether the people in favor of lighter ones for the 1.6 understand how and to what degree a few pounds will impact performance under various confitions. So rather than simply debating it in broad terms let's examine exactly what problem it would address and how. I would like to ask those in favor of such a rule change to give specific examples of circumstances where they think it would make a meaningful difference. Please describe the track and corner, approximate speeds and RPM if possible.