390 replies to this topic

[Johnny D]

Let hear from the 1.6 guys.

 

For / against.

 

Would you like to see it a certain way, thoughts, comments, etc.

[ECOBRAP]

Pros

 

I can win a race.

I can save money by not upgrading to a 1.8 (whoever says a 1.8 upgrade is cheaper than making a fast 1.6 is wrong, period)

I can improve my driving skills by sticking with the more spirited car.

 

Cons

Additional tech at races for 1.6 class

Less contingency for each class

Battling with people in the other class (I personally enjoy this, but I know some people would get frustrated with this)

Easy way out.

 

 

Overall, I'm not a fan of this idea. I do enjoy racing with 1.8's, and am comfortable with the idea that different cars are fast in different places. The main problem I have right now is that the 1.6 does not have a racing advantage at ANY track in the US. I would be happy if I was given overdog status at just one track in my region. Not only will this make me enjoy that track, it will bring me closer at the other tracks. Only positives can come from that. My current plan for next year involves rebuilding my 1.6 to run for the season, and renting a car for the championships at Laguna. With this, I still come out $6k under upgrading to a 1.8.

 

Because our only adjustments now are weight/plate, I would like to see a noticeable drop in weight for the 1.6. Preferably 2260, but I can live with 2275.

[Ron Alan]

Because I commented on another thread I see this as a possibility...and would have no issue with it, It is worth noting to all those NB owners...this bumps up the cost of your class!!!! The same issue that has been repeated many times over with regards to "best flowing parts" in an unrestricted motor comes into play(more so!)! Dont want to become a dyno class but in these cases a max HP and Torque somewhere around a very good stock motor? Achievable by all? 

 

Any of those at the Big Pow Wow get a hint looking into the future of our class...or classes??

[pat slattery]

I want to race with all cars but, with a fair rule set for all. 

[Johnny D]

So you need a certain number before running Runoffs right ?

Would be funny for you guys, not us, if the following happened.

 

Once upon a time

SM 1.6 is started.

The current Sm class is diluted maybe even cut in half.

The 1.6 class doesn't look that bad anymore and even looks like fun.

More 1.6's come out that had been parked, group get bigger than the NB's.

NB guys start coming over because the racing is bigger/better.

1.6's goes to the Runoffs and the NB stay at home.

 

Just saying.

J~

[RacerX]

The 1.6 is alive and well in WDCR.  Typical SSM fields are 30 plus 1.6's per race and last year had close to 50 cars on labor day weekend. 

[Danny Steyn]

The 1.6 is alive and well in WDCR.  Typical SSM fields are 30 plus 1.6's per race and last year had close to 50 cars on labor day weekend. 

 

And I suspect that the reason it works so well there, as with all things in life, is that at one time there was a leader who championed the class, campaigned for it, made it work and got it to a critical mass. Most things in life take generous, selfless leadership to establish a foothold.

 

I suspect that the problem with the 1.6 class, is that many of the typical selfless and generous alpha males that would have naturally moved into leadership roles, have for a variety of reasons, moved on to the NB car or elsewhere, and no longer have any vested interest in championing the 1.6 class

 

if this 1.6 class is to gain traction, it will take the concerted effort of a dedicated few who champion its relevance. In the absence of that selfless leadership, IMHO it has not chance. So for those of you that want it, man up and offer your services to make it happen.

[Bruce Wilson]

God bless us everyone.

 

Merry Christmas to all!

[steveracer]

Against.

 

SSM floundered here.

 

I'd rather drive my balls off for 10th than cruise to an easy win in one of the Parade classes.

[38bfast]

One of my biggest issues with the 1.6 is the flapper door AFM. Lets face it, its a PITA. Working to a goal to eliminate that dastardly  part would go a long way to improve the appeal of the car and help with consistency issues. Just MY thoughts. 

 

Other than that one big issue I love the car. But for me that is one big issue. 

 

If you are not running data on your AFR on a 1.6 you have no clue how bad it is. 

[Steve Scheifler]

Not ready yet because I don't think we have exhausted the possibilities yet and the last three years were pretty much wasted. But if what we learn this year is that it can't be "fixed" then I think it's time to consider a separes class. Not overly restrictive or "purist" like some I've heard about, just the same basic rules we have now but a separate class. If participation is high enough nationally then it should be majors/runoffs eligible. But let's give this one more try.

[38bfast]

Just for info. Adding another national class is going to be a very tough sell. SCCA is very focused on reduction of classes. Several classes have already been consolidated and a study is under way to dig deeper for more consolidation.

[Steve Scheifler]

Yea, they've been trying for many years, yet the add new ones constantly while force-fit combining others. But IF the decision is still based on participation levels then even worst--case the 1.6 would beat out at least half of all other classes. That would piss off somebody, but it seems overall most fair

[38bfast]

Yea Steve that would rustle some feathers. The non Miata drivers out there aren't exactly in our corner fighting for us. Head gate has rustled the feathers in a lot of the other classes.

[SaulSpeedwell]

One of my biggest issues with the 1.6 is the flapper door AFM. Lets face it, its a PITA. Working to a goal to eliminate that dastardly  part would go a long way to improve the appeal of the car and help with consistency issues. Just MY thoughts. 

 

Other than that one big issue I love the car. But for me that is one big issue. 

 

If you are not running data on your AFR on a 1.6 you have no clue how bad it is. 

 

I've sold a lot of tuned/adjusted AFMs, and I *mostly* agree with you!  My take on it is that the AFM absolutely IS a PITA, but not fatally so .... and no fairly easy/fairly cheap solution seems to exist. 

 

I've looked into viable replacements (MAFs, MAPs), and the big issue is the 1.6 AFM and ECU are odd in being "4.5-to-0.5 volts for idle to redline", whereas the rest of the universe is 0.5-to-4.5 volts.  You would think a simple signal inverter/remapper would be out there off the shelf from the various turbo hotrodder people, but it isn't - at least not that I found.  In addition to the AFM flow signal, it also hosts the fuel pump relay and the IAT sensor.  A workaround is going to take some engineering, or we're talking MegaSquirt.

 

I only ran AFR on my 1.6 briefly.  As long as I had >45 degrees of connector-down tilt angle, the AFR was PRETTY stable.  It was still different 1g left versus 1g right, no doubt, and it would bounce over the Grattan "jump" - but it wasn't really hurting me.    Truly perfect AFR versus "just OK" AFR is only 2-ish HP?

 

I see a lot of 1.6s with crazy unrepeatable fuel pressure - bad pumps, bad FPRs, goofy AFPRs, goofy AFPR installs.

 

I also see cars run leaner on-board AFR than dyno AFR, or vise versa, or leaner on one day and richer another day.  3% oxygenated fuel is 3% leaner AFR  Bad 02 installs, bad 02 maintenance, wildly different environmental conditions.

 

The 1.6 EFI handles environmental changes within reason.  I'll avoid beating my CAI dead horse here, but the Miata AFR moves straight up and down as a function of the IAT SIGNAL.  So long as that signal matches reality and the fuel system isn't wonky, the EFI will compensate. 

[cam]

I would much rather see the 1.6 allowed to be competitive and then let the market and race track figure out which is better.  Right now, the 99's have a clear advantage on the track so the market has gone that direction.  Only way to bring more 1.6's back out is to allow them the chance to be competitive at the front. In a perfect world, I would remove all the restrictor plates and allow the 1.6 and 1.8 power upgrades to compete against the 99's.  IMHO, a 1.6 only class is not a good idea.

[Ron Alan]

I would much rather see the 1.6 allowed to be competitive and then let the market and race track figure out which is better.  Right now, the 99's have a clear advantage on the track so the market has gone that direction.  Only way to bring more 1.6's back out is to allow them the chance to be competitive at the front. In a perfect world, I would remove all the restrictor plates and allow the 1.6 and 1.8 power upgrades to compete against the 99's.  IMHO, a 1.6 only class is not a good idea.

It's statements like your first 3 sentences that do more harm to the 1.6 than anything else! Parity amongst the best drivers and best prepped cars is very close! When people write that the 1.6 is not competitive...especially in a generic no data form as you have, some actually believe this and jump on the bandwagon. Newbies(some mid packers)become convinced it is not there driving or lack of car prep why they get beat by 1.8 cars. Instead of working on the things they should, they blame the rules for their lack of speed or good finishes!

[cam]

Thanks for sharing your input Ron, there are several other threads discussing 1.6 Vs 99 already. Since this thread is discussing the merits of having a 1.6 only class, then it is a fair assumption that the 1.6 is not competitive with the other years.  Do not see the need the rehash all the background that is already in other current threads.  My point was that making the 1.6 a unique class will just about guarantee it will never be competitive in SM and will effectively kill off the 1.6.  A more constructive way to help the 1.6 is to help it be more competitive with the other years and keep SM a multi year class. 

 

The 1.6 can already run in multiple SCCA and NASA classes depending on the level of prep. Off the top of my head:  In SCCA, the 1.6 can run STL, ITA, GTL, and FP. (there might be other but think these are all the main ones)  And NASA has PTE and sure there are others as well.

[Ron Alan]

  A more constructive way to help the 1.6 is to help it be more competitive. 

 

 

Again, my comment was aimed at your statements(nothing else). I believe your premise is false...or at the least overstated. Whether its a 1.6 class only or parity discussion, it doesnt matter.

 

For this discussion...1,6 only class...IMO its more about time marching on than anything else. Do we want to continue to slow down every generation that has followed(what is now) the 25 year old car? 

 

The reason SM has thrived and will continued to do(even if split classes) so is for one simple reason. Mazda built a platform(production car) that has no equal in terms of design(rear wheel drive), handling, cost, support, easy maintenance, availability. and PURE enjoyment to drive at the edge for just about anyone!!  

[LarryKing]

 

... more about time marching on than anything else. Do we want to continue to slow down every generation ...

 

Let's just let that one reverberate a little while I point out that 1999 was 16 years ago. Whether it's two years from now or ten years, eventually the NB owners will be in the same boat when the NC cars (already ten years old) take over.

 

Will you have the same pragmatism?