411 replies to this topic

[pfrichardson]

...are up:

http://www.scca.com/...t.cfm?cid=44472

[Derrick Ambrose]

Not SM but happy dance for the Mazda 2s out there in B-Spec.  We get to go back 100 lbs after we got saddled with 130 just before the runoffs.

 

-Derrick

[mhiggins10]

Weight addition for the 01-05. Some folks won't be happy. Looks like some NA 1.8 guys will be.

[MPR22]

Are these competition adjustments based on the testing they performed over the winter?

[FTodaro]

Spec Miata
1. #14724 (Tom Sager) Request for competition adjustment
In SM, Mazda MX-5/Miata (94-97), change the restrictor as follows:
45mm 47mm
In SM, Mazda MX-5/Miata (01-05), change the weight as follows:
2400 2425
2415 2440 with alternate bore

[38bfast]

Frank you still have to add 50 lbs

[Dave McAnaney]

SM

1. #15838 (Bob Kucera) 1.6 Parity in SM

The CRB and the SMAC request input from members on potential changes that could be made to the 90-93 Spec Miata rules to increase the performance, specifically the torque, of the 1.6L. Please provide your feedback through the CRB letter system at crbscca.com. Some potential changes that are being considered include:

• Increasing maximum compression ratio for the 1.6L from 9.4 to 9.9 and adjusting minimum head thickness accordingly
• Permitting 0.020 oversized pistons
• Specifying an optional aftermarket exhaust header

[Dave McAnaney]

Are these competition adjustments based on the testing they performed over the winter?

No.  The "super committee" testing has not been completed at this point.

[Marc Cefalo]

No.  The "super committee" testing has not been completed at this point.

then what a joke, the lap times from homestead and sebring in january between the 99-00 cars and the 01-05 cars were as close as ever.

[FTodaro]

Frank you still have to add 50 lbs

does it count if i do it around by belly?

[Jim Drago]

No.  The "super committee" testing has not been completed at this point.

There is only one super committee and it isnt the one most think it is The SMAC forgot more about SM than the "super comittee' will ever know. keep up the good works guys..

[Jim Drago]

SM
1. #15838 (Bob Kucera) 1.6 Parity in SM
The CRB and the SMAC request input from members on potential changes that could be made to the 90-93 Spec Miata rules to increase the performance, specifically the torque, of the 1.6L. Please provide your feedback through the CRB letter system at crbscca.com. Some potential changes that are being considered include:

• Increasing maximum compression ratio for the 1.6L from 9.4 to 9.9 and adjusting minimum head thickness accordingly
• Permitting 0.020 oversized pistons
• Specifying an optional aftermarket exhaust header

The .020 wont be much, but if you add any two of these items. I will be building a 1.6, as will others. That IMO is a bad thing for the class and the start of the COTY again. No one in their right mind would build a 1.6 if cars are close( slight disadvantage or advantage) but at a clear advantage which these changes will represent, many will build them. Even with these rules, the 1.6 will still have issues with TQ where DD will point out, but unbeatable.. So we shall see
Jim

[38bfast]

If all or a combination of the 1.6 changes are implemented and prove to make the 1.6 car an over dog in top prep the SMAC has the option to make adjustment with weights or plates to bring it back in line.

Just a note. If you use the SCCA equation for parity HP+torque / weight the 1.6 has the best advantage over all the years. I can't say that I agree with the equation as it does no take in account the area under the power curve just peek number. But for most other clasees that is the equation they use.

[38bfast]

Jim your doctor wants you to race a 1.6. Get back to being a Slim Jim.

[Jim Drago]

Jim your doctor wants you to race a 1.6. Get back to being a Slim Jim.

been on it AGAIN since 12/1

[Rob Burgoon]

The .020 wont be much, but if you add any two of these items. I will be building a 1.6, as will others. That IMO is a bad thing for the class and the start of the COTY again. No one in their right mind would build a 1.6 if cars are close( slight disadvantage or advantage) but at a clear advantage which these changes will represent, many will build them. Even with these rules, the 1.6 will still have issues with TQ where DD will point out, but unbeatable.. So we shall see
Jim

 

That's why you add weight too.

[38bfast]

been on it AGAIN since 12/1

Form DSR to P1 they keep on adding weight. All the ballast seem to finding its way to the driver, Me. Having a low min weight in a class for me is the best motivation for keeping my body weight in check. So Jim its looks like you should be part of the 1.6'croud for 2015. Go for it.

[Jim Drago]

Form DSR to P1 they keep on adding weight. All the ballast seem to finding its way to the driver, Me. Having a low min weight in a class for me is the best motivation for keeping my body weight in check. So Jim its looks like you should be part of the 1.6'croud for 2015. Go for it.

Unfortunatley I agree, I know making min weight has always been motivation.. we need to lower all the weights 50 lbs

[38bfast]

Hear yea hear yea. Drago says he is going to win the runoffs at Daytona in a 1.6.

Ok Jim there is your motivation.

[Bench Racer]

I have a new pc and the "quote" tab does not function, new pc ???, site issue?

 

I also can not copy and past???

 

Ralph, is the result of the SCCA equation for parity, HP+torque/weight the magic "power number"?

 

For my non-engine builder 2 cents, MegaSquirt, intake and exhaust will raise the torque under 5,500 rpm where the 1.6 falls short. If with these items the 1.6 becomes an overdog, back it up one way or another. I understand MegaSquirt may be considered outside the box. So have some of the other made legal items been outside the box.

 

If 2 out of 3 of the suggested options within post #7 make the 1.6 an overdog, please provide what at which rpm. and the rpm range.