411 replies to this topic

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Your adgenda stated you want more participation at the runnoffs!!!!!

 

Does this class really want that Danny?  We all want participation on a weekly basis but I personally dont care if 30 or 150 show up to the runnoffs. 

 

People participate now because their budget allows it no matter what car they have. If you want more participation your goal should be reducing racing costs!  many ways you can do that!

[Danny Steyn]

Very nice post Danny, I don't disagree with any. Unfortunately it really doesnt answer the question I asked?

You are a front runner with means to build whichever car you like.. When do you "personally" make the decision to build a 1.6? What would it take? We have ruled out choice 1.. "My" threshold would be at option 4. Do you build one at choice 3? I don't think so.

1)current rules
2)where you felt it the car was classed "fairly" and gave you no advantage or disadvantage over one of your other two current cars?
3) It provided a slight advantage at most tracks, especially if one was Daytona?
4) It provided a clear advantage at most tracks

 

1. No

2. Consider

3. Consider, but for me Daytona is not important as the results will be POT LUCK

4. Obviously

[Danny Steyn]

Your adgenda stated you want more participation at the runnoffs!!!!!

 

Does this class really want that Danny?  We all want participation on a weekly basis but I personally dont care if 30 or 150 show up to the runnoffs. 

 

People participate now because their budget allows it no matter what car they have. If you want more participation your goal should be reducing racing costs!  many ways you can do that!

 

Kyle - the increased runoffs attendance would be a net result of attracting more drivers to Spec Miata. Not asking regional driver to go, but the more that race, the more that will have those aspirations of attending. It's purely statistics Kyle 

[Tom Sager]

Jim, I would build a new car of any year if I felt that it would give me an advantage. I sold a couple of my multiple championship winning '99's in the belief that all our combined expertise would produce faster '99's, only to learn that it doesn't always work out that way :-). Some cars just like to race, others not so much!!!!

 

With regard to the 1.6, before I started racing in SM in 2007, I was told by several very knowledgeable and respected people in this class, not to waste my time with the 1.6, as the 99 car was the more competitive car. So I built my first 99. Later I observed the emergence of the VVT car and built one, only to spend more than 2 years on its development before it ever won a race. In the 8 years that I have spent racing this class, not a single driver has uttered the words,...... you better build a 1.6NA if you want to win......... Just saying!!!

 

With the current rule set I will NOT consider nor build any NA car, purely because they are NOT competitive. That means we are relegating an amazingly huge amount of Miatas to a "2nd" class, but they will never make it back to SM as a viable competitor. Jim possibly you could illuminate us on how many NA 1.6's were sold in the USA vs. the 1.8NA, 1.8NB and 1.8NBVVT cars.

 

None of this is socialistic. This for me is simple. The reason I was attracted to Spec Miata was the large fields and the competitive door-to-door racing. It looked like motocross with a cage. I was hooked immediately.

 

But since I started racing I always asked myself what can I give back to the sport? I am not inherently selfish. I like to share my enjoyment with others. I felt I could post exciting race videos to encourage drivers to consider this class, and help drivers learn new tracks. Hopefully get them to a point where they are challenging me and others for the win. I have taken a lot of heat from others for doing this, but I still feel it is helpful and I regularly get thanked at races from drivers who used the videos to prep for the event. To me that is giving something back, as small as it may be.

 

I did not ask to be on SMAC. When I was asked to serve I said that I felt that I might not be a good choice as I travel extensively and might not be able to participate in the conference calls. I also have no commercial interest in the class. But I have told many over the years, and now I will state it here, ....... I will feel as though I have made a contribution to SM when we have a RUNOFF's event where our class is oversubscribed and we have to have an A and B qualifying race to determine who gets to race in the main event. That is my personal agenda. Possibly this agenda is at odds with several driver's viewpoints here, but I do not see how this hurts our class.

 

So the question I ask is what Miata's are there that possibly can be equalized within a set of rules so that they can all compete "equally", each with their own characteristics? From my perspective, to just exclude the NA cars without trying to make them competitive is short sighted. Once again, just my opinion. If there is a way to get more participation, surely we should at least look at it. 

 

Flame suit on!!! :-) 

With that attitude, you'll make a fine addition to the SMAC.  

[Jim Drago]

And if you want to win the least cost is the car unless you write it off. But the beginner can start cheapest in the 1.6, and even if I agreed with your full-build cost estimates that just isn't the main issue here. Inflating it and repeating it helps to bury the car and deflect from what does matter. And I repeat, even if it were 25% more $, if it had a significant edge anywhere important today, at least some of the top teams would run them at those tracks. I'm not saying it is a woeful underdog everywhere, just calling BS on the frequent suggestions that it can "dominate" today in the right hands.

I think we have gone in 3 or 4 different tangents here..

The only thing I want to clear up.. I did not say or I feel that a 1.6 can dominate today. I did say it could and did dominate in early 2012 which is ancient history..

As far as this.. you have lost me..

In ANY equivalent prep level, it is my belief that you can build a 99 car as inexpensively as a 90 car. The only place that does not hold true is buying a used car. The problem is the lack of 1.6 cars running at the front has hurt the resale value of 1.6 cars.

So the cheapest way to get on the track and race is to buy a used 1.6 car. But I didn't think that is what we were talking about?

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Kyle - the increased runoffs attendance would be a net result of attracting more drivers to Spec Miata. Not asking regional driver to go, but the more that race, the more that will have those aspirations of attending. It's purely statistics Kyle 

 

Ok then give the 1.6 a real kick then...  I think if you can find a way to make racing more affordable in our class for all model years  you might just achieve your goal, but if your counting on a big boost in 1.6 attendance especially at big events your misguided.  

[MPR22]

And if you want to win the least cost is the car unless you write it off. But the beginner can start cheapest in the 1.6, and even if I agreed with your full-build cost estimates that just isn't the main issue here. Inflating it and repeating it helps to bury the car and deflect from what does matter. And I repeat, even if it were 25% more $, if it had a significant edge anywhere important today, at least some of the top teams would run them at those tracks. I'm not saying it is a woeful underdog everywhere, just calling BS on the frequent suggestions that it can "dominate" today in the right hands.

Why would I race a car that has to have a perfectly tuned engine to win today.  On the other hand if you gave it enough handouts that it didn't have to be perfect to win and when it is perfect it would dominate, I would race that car.  

 

Unless we take the screwy AFM out of the loop this car will always be hard to tune properly.  Giving additional performance upgades to mitigate for its tuning issues again does not benefit the average midpack or starting driver as much as it benefits the top prep guys.  Guys willing to do 100% prep will always beat the guys wanting to just go out and drive.  You can't change that no matter what car you make the COTY.  

 

I have not seen one post from anyone claiming the 1.6 is perfect as is.  I have seen many posts saying lets start improving its racing ability by lowering weight and trying to give it a method of eliminating the heat soaking.  Those two things will go a long way in letting the car be more competitive at the end of races where races are won.  

 

Why have we spent 4 pages arguing that the car needs help.  The answer has been yes, now lets send letters to make it happen.

 

I will gladly support Dave Wheeler's suggested revisions.  I will even race my 1.6 with those revisions to help with the data collection.  

 

I will vehemently oppose any suggested upgrades that make the car an overdog that needs to be restricted.  

 

 

 

 

I 

[Jim Drago]

1. No
2. Consider
3. Consider, but for me Daytona is not important as the results will be POT LUCK
4. Obviously

Pretty much my opinion and the point I was trying to make. We need to get the 1.6 to position three at best. I am fine racing any of my cars at a "fair" level of parity even if I don't have what I perceive as the best version ( as I believe most are or should be as we are racing basically five different version cars). Intentionally getting to position 4 is wrong regardless of the reasoning and forces our collective hand.

[Steve Scheifler]

Steve NO CAR CAN DOMINATE today... You will point to the 99 of course, but that is because more of them show up to the big races then any other model and are well prepped and well funded, the 01+ is equally capable as witnessed last season and so far this season. If you could get a top prep car for 25% less why wouldn't anyone in their right mind do so???? if it take 25% less headache or less money that is where any reasonable person would go.

I believe this is already where most of us have gone! If the 1.6 is given much of anything it will then justify that extra 25% and the car will make a comeback on the results sheet but only because the best will build them, the people who are budget racing them today will be no better off because of that change.

You are screaming against something I NEVER said. What I said was that it is often stated that the 1.6 is alresdy the best choice at certain tracks. It has also been stated repeatedly that a1.6 dominated in 2012 (with a top engine but otherwise less than top build). MY point is that if there were much to those claims, at least a few of the people up front who go to ridiculous and often shady/risky extremes for the SLIGHTEST edge, would be showing up at those tracks with a 1.6 at least to test, despite any minor cost difference or tuning hassle. When they have, they almost always still end up in something else. That is well documented.

[James York]

Danny,

 

What is the SMAC charter exactly?  As a volunteer representing SM community, what has the SCCA asked you to exactly do?  (I thought I knew what the SMAC did, but now I am not so sure)

 

And second,

 

Would you say your position is such that under any "equitable" rule set, you would not build a NA model car?

[pat slattery]

More Runoff participation, equals more participation at the Majors and the Regional level IMHO, Which is good for the class a a whole.

[MPR22]

More Runoff participation, equals more participation at the Majors and the Regional level IMHO, Which is good for the class a a whole.

Runoffs participation is more travel and track dependent than car dependent.  

 

If the track is cool and the travel costs are reasonable there will be larger car counts.  Go see the 50th run-offs as my evidence.  Car counts had nothing to do with car year.  

It was last year at Road America and it was the 50th anniversary.  

 

I didn't go to last years run-offs because of the travel costs and time.  

I may not go to this years because of the same issues.  It has nothing with my ability to win or what car I have.  

[Caveman-kwebb99]

You are screaming against something I NEVER said. What I said was that it is often stated that the 1.6 is alresdy the best choice at certain tracks. It has also been stated repeatedly that a1.6 dominated in 2012 (with a top engine but otherwise less than top build). MY point is that if there were much to those claims, at least a few of the people up front who go to ridiculous and often shady/risky extremes for the SLIGHTEST edge, would be showing up at those tracks with a 1.6 at least to test, despite any minor cost difference or tuning hassle. When they have, they almost always still end up in something else. That is well documented.

who is screaming???  maybe some grunting...

 

fact is 1.6 can win any given day at Mid ohio and has done so over the last few years, as for 2012 claims I wasnt at any races where it did so I have no idea but videos and hearsay.  if we felt the 1.6 had the slightest edge I do not agree that people would go there as the car is still a PITA for a slight gain and even then the gain may not even be there for race time after it was there in qual.  If you give the car a clear advantage you will not see the budget guys showing up at the runnoffs or any other big race or winning because of it, you will however see sir daniel building one immediatily if not sooner.  

[Steve Scheifler]

And I think the club has long put too much emphasis on the Runoffs. The masses who make the club financially viable will never participate or will go once just to have done it but knowing they are field fillers having fun at the big show. It pisses me off every time that one race influences the rules in any way.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

And I think the club has long put too much emphasis on the Runoffs. The masses who make the club financially viable will never participate or will go once just to have done it but knowing they are field fillers having fun at the big show. It pissed me off every time that one race influences the rules in any way.

  

 

Duhhh!!!!!  and was my main point to Danny.  reduce racing costs in this class and you will bring car counts up!

[Steve Scheifler]

who is screaming??? maybe some grunting...

fact is 1.6 can win any given day at Mid ohio and has done so over the last few years, as for 2012 claims I wasnt at any races where it did so I have no idea but videos and hearsay. if we felt the 1.6 had the slightest edge I do not agree that people would go there as the car is still a PITA for a slight gain and even then the gain may not even be there for race time after it was there in qual. If you give the car a clear advantage you will not see the budget guys showing up at the runnoffs or any other big race or winning because of it, you will however see sir daniel building one immediatily if not sooner.

Online, "Steve NO CAR CAN DOMINATE today... " constitutes screaming, and implies that I said something I did not.

I think you are mistaken about what some will do for a tiny edge, if it existed at even a few tracks they visit.

[Ron Alan]

 I can't state enough the cost of the donor is all but irrelevant in building a new race car. the worst money spent on a new build is cheaping out on the donor.

I just picked up a 38k donor 99...anyone interested...LOL 

 

 

In ANY equivalent prep level, it is my belief that you can build a 99 car as inexpensively as a 90 car. The only place that does not hold true is buying a used car. The problem is the lack of 1.6 cars running at the front has hurt the resale value of 1.6 cars.

So the cheapest way to get on the track and race is to buy a used 1.6 car. But I didn't think that is what we were talking about?

And to this point...there are a lot of "survivors" that are really cheap. BUT...if one does their homework, so many have substandard equipment and cage design. Its not that they cant win or be competitive(1.6)...so often its a safety issue and almost starting over. At that point the new guy, who cares about his nugget, and is on the upper side of 175lbs, the desision is a no-brainer! Picking the only car that can win(in many eyes)is just a side benefit for many.

 

The fact of life is the 1.6 car is just older...even with help, new builds will be scarce. Old builds will continue to circulate and change hands as newbies come in, get a taste, build a NEWER car and the cycle continues.  Trying to keep the old new is not progress. -25lbs and cooler air will keep more survivers around! But they still wont be built...IMO

 

COST,COST,COST will drive new participation. The car is the first part of the equation, after that the region and National SCCA have to do their best to keep costs down. This is a club...non-profit club correct?? And after that we all just deal with the cycle of life and the market as it fluctuates.  

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Online, "Steve NO CAR CAN DOMINATE today... " constitutes screaming, and implies that I said something I did not.

I think you are mistaken about what some will do for a tiny edge, if it existed at even a few tracks they visit.

 

oh sorry let me use my quite typing voice  NO CAR CAN DOMINATE today, I was not saying that you stated one car could dominate, I was just emphasizing that currently no car can.  Which means the rules are pretty dam right on.  so IMO major changes are unwarented.  if you want to lighter a 1.6 15lb or something that might be justafiable just like adding the 25lb tot he 01+.  if you want to find  a better way to cool the 1.6 motor that seems reasonable to me.  but cams etc seem way over the top when we have the great racing we currently have.

[Steve Scheifler]

Wrong. That no one model doninates looks "pretty damn right on" only if you are in one that can compete. "Parity" is when any model can win a proportional share (equally prepped and driven).

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Which I believe they can currently.