535 replies to this topic

[Jim Drago]

I also suspect that several VVT cars will slow down quite a bit when their compression is brought in line.

We will see this weekend.

[Alex Bolanos]

Legal cars appear pretty balanced performance wise to me from 99-2005.

 

1.6 cars are too expensive to build and maintain, there would have to be a REAL clear advantage for those of us that make weight to build that car.  I think our flow bench would wear out flowing 100 exhaust manifolds, intake manifolds, throttle bodies, etc.  Not being able to re weld the stock header when (not if) it cracks is a huge problem as well.  

 

No sense in even mentioning the 94-97 other than to say... all four years are not the same.

[Tom Sager]

Here ya go, how about this...

IT rules for 1.6
Basically .040 over, add .5 compression, port matching 1 in in on intake and head. ( probably do away with port matching portion)

94/97 cars get 47 mm plate/ no other changes

99/00 no change

01/05 +35 lbs


This will speed up the 1.6, give it some more grunt and no effect the rest of the cars. Nor will it slow anyone else down. If it becomes a problem, we can add weight to it or reduce weight on all the rest.

I would think that the 1.6 would be granted some additional weight with that package.  Those engine changes would probably result in 4-5HP and 3-4Ft/Lbs torque increase?  At 2300 pounds and with those improvements, I'd look for a 1.6.

[Steve Scheifler]

Port matching will likely produce a big gap again between "pro built" and not, probably worse than having left the plunge cuts stock. Why give all the control, or at very least the perception of it, back to the pro builder again?

[38bfast]

IMHO I don't like the idea of splitting up SM. The NA cars are what the class started with and I still see a place for them in the current program. Excluding them to me would be the wrong direction. To me taking an option away from a car owner is a very bad thing. As well forcing the NA cars to undergo expensive change would as well to me be in the wrong direction and against class philosophy and cause a bigger have and have nots. The 1.6 is already the most expensive car to prep right now. 

 

Also the power on the NB cars is more now than when they had a smaller plate again separating the gap to the NA cars. 

 

I like:

1.6 No change

1.8 2 mm larger plate (back to the original size plate) and allow modifications to stock lower air box (drill holes). This car has been ignored for years. 

99 -2 mm plate

VVT -2 mm and +50 Lbs (we don't need this car to be the over dog car to have forcing everyone to feel they need a VVT car to compete.)

 

Low cost impact to all cars involved and keeps all cars in one group. Lets give the NA cars a fighting chance. I think we owe that to them. They are after all the backbone of the class and what has got the class to what it is today. Lets not put them out to pasture to die. 

 

Ralph

[jguthrie]

Jaime

Bullseye .Spot on

[pat slattery]

I have no hesitation on spending money on my 1.6 if I can see something that I know will give results.  Modifying the suspension didn't seem like the cost would out weigh the benefits, but .040 over does, etc.

[john mueller]

A common mistake has been underestimating the speed of 'newer' car development.  IMO the 1.6 - 2000 has been pretty much maximized (within our rule set)...  I feel 01 needs to be a bit of an underdog to compensate for the advantage that will surely be there in a few months time.  Falling behind and then trying to catch-up just before the 2015 Western NASA Champs (July) is not an option for me.

[Alberto]

Port matching will likely produce a big gap again between "pro built" and not, probably worse than having left the plunge cuts stock. Why give all the control, or at very least the perception of it, back to the pro builder again?

 

+1

I want to be able to do this myself or at least have the local machine shop be able to do it.

[Jaime Florence]

The 1.6 is probably not a good candidate (or shouldn't be) for a NEW build, but I don't see why they couldn't or shouldn't be afforded the consideration to be a competative car.

 

I'm not clear why the maintanance is considered to be more expensive??  I understand the exhaust manifold thing, although I don't break them that often so it doesn't seem to be a real issue.  And balance that with the wheel hubs lasting longer than the NB (just speculation but what I think i see), it seems a wash.  Is it the dyno time for re-tuning that you are referring to?

 

Steve, I get your point about the pro builders.  But why not have room for them? It seems like leaving some room for "development" helps the motor builders that support our class stay in business as well as the home builder who wants to do it himself.  I know a couple of guys that make their living building motors for our little class, and I sure would hate for them to go find some other form of racing to be involved with instead.  It sure seems like rules that evolve a little every once in a while keeps things healthy.

[Jaime Florence]

As Mr. Drago said, I'm bettiing the porting ain't gonna make it through but I personally think it would be cool.  I'll shut up now.

[Mike Babcock]

I like all of Jim's suggestions, except of course, for the 1.6.  Not a huge fan of invasive engine work to bring it up.  I'll let Jim quote the sticker price on that option, but I'm guessing it has 4 digits.

 

Personally, I'd rather have the flywheel... and if the feeling is that's not sufficient, let us duct some fresh air to the intake.

 

I do think the pairity is close... not quite there, but close.  I'd rather make small adjustments and get it closer, than overshoot and have to add weight later.

[Alberto]

i'm curious...

 

Why not a 1.8 NA swap instead of 1.6 engine boreing and associated parts?

[Jim Drago]

Sticker price is zero.. Unless when you refresh your engine you plan on using the old pistons ? If so about 200 bucks

Why not 1.8 swap.. 5-10x the cost and work. However you can basically do that now.. Use all from a 1.8 donor and put in your caged 1.6 chasis as long as you meet vin requirement.

[davew]

Here is a couple options not yet stomped on. Not sure I am in favor, just throwing out fodder.

 

Allow all cars to upgrade to any newer suspension components, control arms, spindle, uprights and subframes. No back dating to keep someone from concocting a 99 lower, 92 upright, 97 upper with a 02 subframe mcbastard combination. Please note ALLOW, not require or even recommend, just allow.

 

Allow 1.6 cars to install either 1.8 NA engine. This may be done with the kit from Flyin' Miata for about $300 and works off the 1.6 ecu. You have 2 options, use the 1.6 ecu with the complete electronics package from a 1.6. Or, do a complete transfer of the 1.8 ecu, harness, injectors etc. Would also have to upgrade brakes to 1.8 size.

 

Here is the hard pill to swallow (and I know something about swallowing pills). Tell the 1.6 cars "this is all you are getting". Just as any class progresses, we have to say "stop the madness" If your car is not competitive, either get a competitive car or be happy with what you have. But you are still welcome to come out and have fun.

 

Again, I am not saying that I am in favor of any of these ideas, just giving you all something to argue about.

 

Dave

[MPR22]

I'm with Fowler on this. I personally have not been able to get my '02 car to the level of my '99 car.

 

Under 5,500 RPM my VVT car is slightly stronger, but in the usable RPM range from 5,500 to 6,900 which is used at most of our tracks, the 99 is the stronger car. 

 

Other VVT builders might see different numbers, but I also suspect that several VVT cars will slow down quite a bit when their compression is brought in line.

Chris just finished rebuilding my 01 engine ( i overreved it at the NASA eastern champs and dented the pistons with some valves).  Dynoed it yesterday, falls flat on its face from 6000-6500.  Some tracks it will be stronger than the 99 but anything with a decent straight away it will be the dog.  

[Tom Sager]

 

IMHO I don't like the idea of splitting up SM. The NA cars are what the class started with and I still see a place for them in the current program. Excluding them to me would be the wrong direction. To me taking an option away from a car owner is a very bad thing. As well forcing the NA cars to undergo expensive change would as well to me be in the wrong direction and against class philosophy and cause a bigger have and have nots. The 1.6 is already the most expensive car to prep right now. 

 

Also the power on the NB cars is more now than when they had a smaller plate again separating the gap to the NA cars. 

 

I like:

1.6 No change

1.8 2 mm larger plate (back to the original size plate) and allow modifications to stock lower air box (drill holes). This car has been ignored for years. 

99 -2 mm plate

VVT -2 mm and +50 Lbs (we don't need this car to be the over dog car to have forcing everyone to feel they need a VVT car to compete.)

 

Low cost impact to all cars involved and keeps all cars in one group. Lets give the NA cars a fighting chance. I think we owe that to them. They are after all the backbone of the class and what has got the class to what it is today. Lets not put them out to pasture to die. 

 

Ralph

 

I like the large font.  Don't need my readers to see it.  

[pat slattery]

Here is a couple options not yet stomped on. Not sure I am in favor, just throwing out fodder.

 

Allow all cars to upgrade to any newer suspension components, control arms, spindle, uprights and subframes. No back dating to keep someone from concocting a 99 lower, 92 upright, 97 upper with a 02 subframe mcbastard combination. Please note ALLOW, not require or even recommend, just allow.

 

Allow 1.6 cars to install either 1.8 NA engine. This may be done with the kit from Flyin' Miata for about $300 and works off the 1.6 ecu. You have 2 options, use the 1.6 ecu with the complete electronics package from a 1.6. Or, do a complete transfer of the 1.8 ecu, harness, injectors etc. Would also have to upgrade brakes to 1.8 size.

 

Here is the hard pill to swallow (and I know something about swallowing pills). Tell the 1.6 cars "this is all you are getting". Just as any class progresses, we have to say "stop the madness" If your car is not competitive, either get a competitive car or be happy with what you have. But you are still welcome to come out and have fun.

 

Again, I am not saying that I am in favor of any of these ideas, just giving you all something to argue about.

 

Dave

Why is this all you get, why not say the new cars can be slowed down also Dave.  This was the originating cars of SM,  Why such a hard ass approach, we (1.6) owners  didn't allow the overdogs in the class

[steveracer]

Here is a couple options not yet stomped on. Not sure I am in favor, just throwing out fodder.

 

Allow all cars to upgrade to any newer suspension components, control arms, spindle, uprights and subframes. No back dating to keep someone from concocting a 99 lower, 92 upright, 97 upper with a 02 subframe mcbastard combination. Please note ALLOW, not require or even recommend, just allow.

 

Allow 1.6 cars to install either 1.8 NA engine. This may be done with the kit from Flyin' Miata for about $300 and works off the 1.6 ecu. You have 2 options, use the 1.6 ecu with the complete electronics package from a 1.6. Or, do a complete transfer of the 1.8 ecu, harness, injectors etc. Would also have to upgrade brakes to 1.8 size.

 

Here is the hard pill to swallow (and I know something about swallowing pills). Tell the 1.6 cars "this is all you are getting". Just as any class progresses, we have to say "stop the madness" If your car is not competitive, either get a competitive car or be happy with what you have. But you are still welcome to come out and have fun.

 

Again, I am not saying that I am in favor of any of these ideas, just giving you all something to argue about.

 

Dave

 

This is what several of us were proposing the 1st time the suspension upgrade was being debated, with the idea that we end up with basically the same car except for sheet metal.

I supported it then, and would support it now.

[pat slattery]

This is what several of us were proposing the 1st time the suspension upgrade was being debated, with the idea that we end up with basically the same car except for sheet metal.

I supported it then, and would support it now.

Steve, I am sure there a some benefits to suspension upgrades, but of all the good and bad things about a 1.6, most don't complain that much about how it handles, it is the bottom end torque that it is missing.  And the ability to keep it in tune would be my 2nd complaint.