390 replies to this topic

[Jim Drago]

I quickly scanned what is above. Differences I see, and Mike can correct me if I am wrong.

 

Fat cats/99 hats not allowed

Spec plugs and wires

Spec exhaust that is not available for purchase new

Stock air box

94-97 cars grandfathered? at 2400

Spec fuel, or at least highly restricted fuel

Master switched recomended, not required.

 

I may have missed it but don't you have a dyno limit with seals?

 

dave

 plugs are optional if you are the shop sealing the cars

[Johnny D]

Bracket racing ? don't go over, but you'll need a dyno.
J~

[Bench Racer]

Several people use the word, "heat soak", help me out because it seems different people describe heat soak different from each other.

[Todd Green]

I'm not so sure a split class simultaneous race would be the answer.  I can only imagine the howling when if the NB guys get hung up behind an NA battle and someone loses a podium spot.  Or, more likely, the howling from the NA guys as some mid-pack NB folks come through a tight podium fight towards the end of the race.

 

I suppose it's not much different from running T4 occasionally with SM here in Sowdiv, or other situations with multiple cars on the track. .

^^^ This.  As SM director for our Region I constantly hear gripes about out of class cars "jacking up" the SM race.  Usually some Pcar that qualified slower, but of course rockets down the straight on the start and then parks it in turn one often splitting the field.  Generally a split start is requested.   Unfortunately we are not large enough to have SM have its own run group.  I don't even want to think about what it would be like with NA/NB cars messing with each other's races.  We'd have to have security in the pits after the races to stop the fights (this is the Wild West after all). 1/2

[Danny Steyn]

ENGINE heat soak as i understand it -underhood temps rise, making the intake air temp rise, and horsepower falls, due to changes in air density, AF ratio, ECU's pulling timing and other factors. Feel free to add here

[Johnny D]

Already has. SSM came in 12th ? About every event is like this in SFR (SCCA)
http://racehero.io/e...ults/1073744785
J~

SM, SMT, and SSM at Laguna
Fastest Mark Drennan 1:47
Slowest 1:53
27 of 36 on the same lap.
J~

[Danny Steyn]

^^^ This.  As SM director for our Region I constantly hear gripes about out of class cars "jacking up" the SM race.  Usually some Pcar that qualified slower, but of course rockets down the straight on the start and then parks it in turn one often splitting the field.  Generally a split start is requested.   Unfortunately we are not large enough to have SM have its own run group.  I don't even want to think about what it would be like with NA/NB cars messing with each other's races.  We'd have to have security in the pits after the races to stop the fights (this is the Wild West after all). 1/2

 

Todd I know that you wrote this tongue in cheek, but for those that miss the joke, the lap/time speed differentials between SM and SM2/SSM are tiny,and do not the cause of scenarios Todd alludes to above

[davew]

Back when I was on the SMAC, we did not touch any other class. SSM, SMT, SM2 whatever, where not within our juristiction. That may have changed but I doubt it.

 

Currently we have "Majors" classes (SM, GT1, FP etc) that are eligable for the Runoffs. We then have nationally recognised, regional only class. These include IT, GTA and SM5). We then have local regional classes that include the various forms of SSM/SMT/SM2.

 

What if we made a nationally recognised, regional only, version of SSM for 1.6 cars only. It will take some polishing. We can not have a spec exhaust that is no longer available. We could not expect a west coaster to take his car to a Dyno in WDC region. But it could be easily done. This would give the 1.6 cars a home all to themselves, where they can compete competitively at a regional level with a more limited budget. I would then modify the SM Majors rules to allow the updates that I proposed a few pages back (that Drago agreed with).

 

With this package you are not making any car an overdog or underdog. You will have closer parity at the Majors. You will have the entry level, low budget class for those not wanting to travel to Majors. You would not be eliminating the 1.6 cars from Majors, just giving them options if they want to be more competitive in their current chassis, but still can run Majors with 1.6 power. It may pull some of the "parked" cars out to the track. It may even make Dewey happy.

 

I think I know some former SMAC members who would gladly work on a rules package that could be established nationwide. 

 

IMHO this would need to be a package deal with both a new regional class and the allowed engine/suspension swap for Majors.

 

As they say in FastTrack, WDYT

 

dave

[LarryKing]

 

What if we made a nationally recognised, regional only, version of SSM for 1.6 cars only.

 

That sounds like a GREAT idea.

 

I wish I would have thought of it.

 

 

 

IMHO this would need to be a package deal with both a new regional class and the allowed engine/suspension swap for Majors.

 

Not sure what one has to do with the other.

[davew]

 

 

 

Not sure what one has to do with the other.

 

If you want to make a Majors competitive car out of a 1.6 (since the majority of the people on this website feel you can not under current rules) this allows you to do so. And removes the 1.6 from any future parity discussions.

 

dave

[LarryKing]

But why is creating a nationally recognized SSM class dependent on also making the 1.6 competitive at Majors? (since the majority of 1.6 owners don't give a rat's ass about Majors)

 

In other words, why does it need to be a "package deal"?

[Bench Racer]

Danny, thanks for the heat soak input.

 

Bruce through out some time back that piston/bore clearance after head skim was an issue they cured out that way.

 

Dave Wheeler, Dewy grumbles and kind of says, overall the class is what it is.

 

With that ^ aside, if Kuch was playing at all on the level yesterday with thoughts of a couple SM classes (simply lets say a 1.6 class and a 99 class) within the same run group, and I'll say as many folks do on this site, "the majority (SM racers)" are in favor, is Topeka going to tell their best class/competition it's not going to happen. Win Win, no changes required other than in this simple case the 1.6er's change class decals to SM2. Oh, if your a 1.6er and you desire to compete with all the other Spec lines leave your decals SM, the "P" grumbling ends and everyone has fun and maybe more 1.6er's will show up. What would it hurt other than some feelings at Topeka? Simply put the deal exists currently on a wider, wildly different basis in the production class and all 3 sub classes race the same group with minimal bitching. The pro racers race wildly different cars within one race group.    

[Tom Hampton]

 

I love this debate - so many viewpoints as Sager points out. So let me comment on a couple of posts

 

1. My Personal Nirvana would be giving the 1.6 and 1.8 NA's something that makes them competitive in the current SM class, but it is proving very difficult to identify what the right thing is. Last night however the SMAC received some incredibly well documented data analysis from a 1.6 showing the net results of removing the left turn signal to allow cold air into the engine bay to try and prevent the heat soak that is common with these cars. The data contained before and after, showed the calibration of the instruments and was very thorough. It is this sort of help that the SMAC needs to make informed suggestions to the CRB. Please keep them coming.
2. SM2 - running the NA's in the same SM class but scoring them independently. Personally I think this is a decent solution, maybe not the best solution, but we have tried it at the ARRC and we did not get any more NA's signing up than before. However there were some interesting take aways. Those that podiumed in the SM2 class were THRILLED to get the attention and the podium, flags, trophies, champagne, just as they should. However several NA cars that have never been teched before were suddenly under the spotlight in tech, and not all of them made it through, so lets call this an unintended consequence that needs to be understood.
3. SSM - MARRS region does a wonderful job with SSM and I have run with them and it is a very competitive class and a fraction of the cost of running competitively in SM. As Todd says, it will take critical mass, but before it even can begin to take hold it will need individuals to CHAMPION the SSM class, in the same way as committed individuals within the MARRS region put their time and effort into building this amazing class. It will NOT happen without strong charismatic leadership championing the formation of this as an alternative. So the question for you all is, if this is the way forward, who is going to step up and champion this as a class? Do you have the time and energy and leadership to pull this all together and make it work?

 

 

I'm more in line with #1 above than either #2, or #3.  I don't really want to be relegated to a second class citizen. 

 

As has been mentioned above, several times and not really responded to....I'd rather see the 1.6 be given a performance upgrade to improve power across the board, and then a restrictor plate to dampen peak-HP.

 

Then the turn signal thing to correct the heat-soak issue. 

[Bench Racer]

Guys, you can currently legally keep your 1.6 filter air below 100*.  If I was smart enough I'd post pictures. Hey, I do it, Drago does it with his 1.6. I believe back in the day Collins did it. I'm sure there's more that do it, except they keep tight lips. Wow, all the it's and lips leaves a bunch of room for site antics. Johnny???

[Blake Thompson]

Who woke the old man from his nap

[LarryKing]

 

Guys, you can currently legally keep your 1.6 filter air below 100*. If I was smart enough I'd post pictures. Hey, I do it, Drago does it with his 1.6. I believe back in the day Collins did it. I'm sure there's more that do it, except they keep tight lips.

 

Is that because it's still non-compliant to "loosen" the weather stripping at the left firewall, and, umm, "fix" the gap of the left headlight door?

 

 

I don't really want to be relegated to a second class citizen.

 

But the 1.6 drivers already are.

 

PS: Isn't everything what it is?

[Blake Thompson]

Is that because it's still non-compliant to "loosen" the weather stripping at the left firewall, and, umm, "fix" the gap of the left headlight door?

 

 

But the 1.6 drivers already are.

 

PS: Isn't everything what it is?

 

All of SM is second class citizens.  That makes the 1.6 folks something else.  ... Formula Vee drivers?

[Bench Racer]

Non of the above Walter. Think in terms of throwing away the MazdaSpeed filler plastic in front of the radiator if you have one, now attach stuff to the radiator (by rule any radiator) to stop air from following around the radiator keeping an open area drivers side above the radiator and to the headlight cover. The ambient air that flows through the open area says HI to the air filter back by the master cylinder.

 

 

Back out to finish the car prep.

[Johnny D]

Back when I was on the SMAC, we did not touch any other class. SSM, SMT, SM2 whatever, where not within our juristiction. That may have changed but I doubt it.
 
Currently we have "Majors" classes (SM, GT1, FP etc) that are eligable for the Runoffs. We then have nationally recognised, regional only class. These include IT, GTA and SM5). We then have local regional classes that include the various forms of SSM/SMT/SM2.
 
What if we made a nationally recognised, regional only, version of SSM for 1.6 cars only. It will take some polishing. We can not have a spec exhaust that is no longer available. We could not expect a west coaster to take his car to a Dyno in WDC region. But it could be easily done. This would give the 1.6 cars a home all to themselves, where they can compete competitively at a regional level with a more limited budget. I would then modify the SM Majors rules to allow the updates that I proposed a few pages back (that Drago agreed with).
 
With this package you are not making any car an overdog or underdog. You will have closer parity at the Majors. You will have the entry level, low budget class for those not wanting to travel to Majors. You would not be eliminating the 1.6 cars from Majors, just giving them options if they want to be more competitive in their current chassis, but still can run Majors with 1.6 power. It may pull some of the "parked" cars out to the track. It may even make Dewey happy.
 
I think I know some former SMAC members who would gladly work on a rules package that could be established nationwide. 
 
IMHO this would need to be a package deal with both a new regional class and the allowed engine/suspension swap for Majors.
 
As they say in FastTrack, WDYT
 
dave

https://www.youtube....h?v=HMcQKz3H0yY  <--for Dave

I think people have to be true to them selves.
What are you racing for ?
Are all 1.6's fairly low budget or do you want to be ? Run what you brung ?

Champ ?
Racecraft = Car count/does it matter what class/tight/close racing ?
People/beers
Time on track.
Budget
Parity
others.

If we all went out and raced and came back with smiles, does some or any or all this matter ?
Your call, car count is up there in my book.

Does Dave's suggestion ^^^ fit or help, need tuning, forget Majors?
J~


 

[Tom Hampton]

Is that because it's still non-compliant to "loosen" the weather stripping at the left firewall, and, umm, "fix" the gap of the left headlight door?

 

 

But the 1.6 drivers already are.

 

PS: Isn't everything what it is?

 

I'm not convinced of that, but if there is a movement to change something I'd rather it be something that still attempts to keep the 1.6 on "P" with the NA8, and NB.  I would not like to see a formalized exhorcism of the 1.6 from SM into either SM2, SMT, SSM or whatever.  I don't mind the creation of those sub-classes...but, I don't want that to be at the expense of continuiny to maintain "P" for the 1.6 in SM. 

 

I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Wheeler, half of my car came from him...and I love his cage.  But, I don't agree with the sentiment to stop considering the 1.6 in SM "P" discussions.

 

Again, I'm not convinced that the 1.6 needs help, today. We have a 1.6 in our region who competes in the top5 against some very competetive NBs, and gets his shots at the top step.  But, I'm certainly not good enough myself to see the difference.  So, if NB drivers like Danny think the 1.6 needs a little some'n-some'n, who am I to look a gift horse in the mouth?  I'm personally a long way from wishing I had 3 more ft-lbs---and I'm fully aware that I'm unlikely to notice any change made.    But, someday I hope to be, and I want the rules makers to keep adjusting all the cars to improve "P" until I get there. 

 

Maybe by then I will want to switch to an NB...but, if the 1.6 is still competetive and capable of winning, and my car is still in one piece...I don't know why I would do that.