411 replies to this topic

[Todd Lamb]

If drivers felt that they had an EQUAL chance of winning in ANY vintage, one would expect to see a representative cross section of vehicle versions appearing at the front of the class.

This logic is flawed. If we were starting with ZERO cars today, it becomes slightly less flawed. But a bunch of front running 99+ already exist. The results will always be skewed to the 99+.

Furthermore, as pointed out by so many others, the 1.6 is a finicky beast to tune consistently on the fine edge of performance. So the likelihood of someone being competitive who isn't spending the time/money to do it right is much lower.

Why not race a 1.6 if all else was equal? Because chasing the tune all day isn't fun.

The 1.6 could use a little help to improve the drivability. But the percentage of 1.6's on the podium isn't going to change in any meaningful way without it being the car of the year.

[LarryKing]

So... since 1.6s are so finicky why not allow a Megasquirt/MAF delete?

 

(I'd be OK with the expense)

[Tom Sager]

Production numbers posted on another site and they list their source.  These should be U.S. numbers.

 

'90-'93 = 138,000

'94-'97 = 77,000

'99'-'00 = 49,000

'01-'03 = 44,000 (does not include '04-'05)

 

http://www.miata.net...production.html

[Jim Drago]

I agree with Todd's post.
Danny you agree you wouldn't build a 1.6 less it having an advantage( neither would I or anyone else for that matter), as Todd said there are many front running NB cars now. Your "proof" will only be achieved when people with talent,money and time build new 1.6 cars or go back through existing ones. Our goal should be to prove that one of us with these characteristics can compete for wins in a 1.6( notice I didn't say win, I lost several races with the best car and won a few with the 4th or 5th best car) There is no way there will be an equality of winners moving forward now unless we skew the rules to favor the 1.6 drastically. There simply is not enough talented and funded drivers in 1.6 cars right now. IMO, your logic is flawed if this is the goal as there is only one way to get to the socialist view of parity Why don't we just do 25 lbs rewards weights? That will get to the goal sooner. We all start the season at base weight and add 25 lbs with each win. It is silly, but will accomplish your goal sooner and easier.

This has nothing to do with the car needing help or not.

[Mike Collins]

 

What do you say to this?

 

I say its cheaper to make a '99+ go fast and stay fast than it is to do that with a NA car...  I want to have fun on the weekends, not spend the entire weekend tweaking my car so I get it dialed in perfectly and thats what you have to do with a 1.6.  Give the 1.6 anything of sustenance and you will see me and others spend a bunch of money to build the overdog and then you will see everyone start complaining again...The "masses" are not going to "upgrade" the so called moth balled 1.6 cars...the only thing you will see with a significant rule change, particularly if it changes the outcome of he runoffs is a couple of VERY high dollar 1.6's get built...

[Sean - MiataCage]

Everything you guys are talking about is exactly what happened to the 1.6 in the first place.  The 99 was made the car to have by the rule changes the SMAC put into place.  Now the 1.6L is not the car to have because of the rule changes.  Shit.... The one guy who said the only race he won recently doesn't even race a 1.6L.  Why do you think that is?  Because it is not competitive enough (close) to win at most tracks. The day the 1.6L had to move to Hoosiers it could no longer compete at the pointy end of the grid with the 99-05 cars.  Parity was very, very good prior to the Hoosiers.  You can not deny the changes to the tire didn't hurt the 1.6L more than any other.  Dewhurst or someone smarter than me can calculate the impact it had based on circumference.  I can tell you it was 2 to 3hp on our dyno.

 

I think you guys are focusing on the wrong thing here.  Its not about how many 1.6's win at Majors or the runoffs for that matter.  Its about the grass roots guys on any given weekend who can not win against 99-05 cars that are equally prepped and equally driven.  If the guys entering the series don't think a 1.6L is capable of winning at a regional level (regardless of their talent) then we get into the situation we are in right now which is they choose to consider other classes because of the price of a 99-05 car to be built or bought is more in line with a Spec30, SRF and Spec46.

 

At a bare minimum we need to compensate for the effective change of the Hoosier tire from the RA1 which the rules parity was designed around at the time.

 

I hate to be the one to say it, but here goes........  We don't honestly have a real clue as to how far off the 1.6L is, because it was competing against cars that have found to be illegal.  Not just a few, and not for just the runoffs.

 

Part of fixing the 1.6L is also maintaining legality on the 99-05 cars.  Since I have been accused of not telling certain people the exact moment of which my team and I started thinking about a STR protest last year, here is my fair warning for 2015.

 

I am coming after VVT computers.  We have purchased 2 VVT cars that have had computers that were tampered with, so I know they are out there.  I am working with Mazda and AIM and believe we can catch an illegal VVT Computer through the OBDII port and a SOLO DL.  AIM has expressed some interest in helping solve this problem, so that will be my compliance focus for 2015.  

 

Thanks.... Sean

[MPR22]

This logic is flawed. If we were starting with ZERO cars today, it becomes slightly less flawed. But a bunch of front running 99+ already exist. The results will always be skewed to the 99+.

Furthermore, as pointed out by so many others, the 1.6 is a finicky beast to tune consistently on the fine edge of performance. So the likelihood of someone being competitive who isn't spending the time/money to do it right is much lower.

Why not race a 1.6 if all else was equal? Because chasing the tune all day isn't fun.

The 1.6 could use a little help to improve the drivability. But the percentage of 1.6's on the podium isn't going to change in any meaningful way without it being the car of the year.

+1000

[LarryKing]

Take away the '99+ timing wheel and FPR.

[MPR22]

Everything you guys are talking about is exactly what happened to the 1.6 in the first place.  The 99 was made the car to have by the rule changes the SMAC put into place.  Now the 1.6L is not the car to have because of the rule changes.  Shit.... The one guy who said the only race he won recently doesn't even race a 1.6L.  Why do you think that is?  Because it is not competitive enough (close) to win at most tracks. The day the 1.6L had to move to Hoosiers it could no longer compete at the pointy end of the grid with the 99-05 cars.  Parity was very, very good prior to the Hoosiers.  You can not deny the changes to the tire didn't hurt the 1.6L more than any other.  Dewhurst or someone smarter than me can calculate the impact it had based on circumference.  I can tell you it was 2 to 3hp on our dyno.

 

Then change the freaking tire to something that is more economical for the masses.  Why change the car because we put too much grip on the car.  I agree that the tire is the most likely cause of the lack of perceived difference in the cars.  Will the SCCA/NASA change tires this year?  NO.    It gets back to: if you run too hard you should have the tires go off.  Reducing the weight should have a similar effect and is FREE! 

 

 

I think you guys are focusing on the wrong thing here.  Its not about how many 1.6's win at Majors or the runoffs for that matter.  Its about the grass roots guys on any given weekend who can not win against 99-05 cars that are equally prepped and equally driven.  

 

I dont' know about in your area but the same guys that run Majors run Regionals, the grassroots guys isn't winning a race or even making the podium without a top prep car in Texas.  

 

 

At a bare minimum we need to compensate for the effective change of the Hoosier tire from the RA1 which the rules parity was designed around at the time.  

 

Weight reduction is the easiest way to achieve this, oh and did I mention it is free and could be implemented by the next Major if we all act today!  

 

I hate to be the one to say it, but here goes........  We don't honestly have a real clue as to how far off the 1.6L is, because it was competing against cars that have found to be illegal.  Not just a few, and not for just the runoffs.

 

 

I am coming after VVT computers.  We have purchased 2 VVT cars that have had computers that were tampered with, so I know they are out there.  I am working with Mazda and AIM and believe we can catch an illegal VVT Computer through the OBDII port and a SOLO DL.  AIM has expressed some interest in helping solve this problem, so that will be my compliance focus for 2015.  Mark... I will send you a certified letter to make sure you get it.

 

Were they SM builds or street cars?  Maybe a problem that none of us VVT owners know we have.  Definitely interested in teching this on my car and other VVTs.  I doubt mine has this problem as I have plenty of video of 99s running by me at the top end.  

[pat slattery]

No one wants the 1.6 to be the cars of the year, because they have the car of the last 5 years, the 99. 

[MPR22]

No one wants the 1.6 to be the cars of the year, because they have the car of the last 5 years, the 99. 

Answer one question honestly.

 

Would making the 1.6 the COTY be better for the class?  

[Ron Alan]

Everything you guys are talking about is exactly what happened to the 1.6 in the first place.  The 99 was made the car to have by the rule changes the SMAC put into place.  Now the 1.6L is not the car to have because of the rule changes.  Shit.... The one guy who said the only race he won recently doesn't even race a 1.6L.  Why do you think that is?  Because it is not competitive enough (close) to win at most tracks. The day the 1.6L had to move to Hoosiers it could no longer compete at the pointy end of the grid with the 99-05 cars.  Parity was very, very good prior to the Hoosiers.  You can not deny the changes to the tire didn't hurt the 1.6L more than any other.  Dewhurst or someone smarter than me can calculate the impact it had based on circumference.  I can tell you it was 2 to 3hp on our dyno.

 

I think you guys are focusing on the wrong thing here.  Its not about how many 1.6's win at Majors or the runoffs for that matter.  Its about the grass roots guys on any given weekend who can not win against 99-05 cars that are equally prepped and equally driven.  If the guys entering the series don't think a 1.6L is capable of winning at a regional level (regardless of their talent) then we get into the situation we are in right now which is they choose to consider other classes because of the price of a 99-05 car to be built or bought is more in line with a Spec30, SRF and Spec46.

 

At a bare minimum we need to compensate for the effective change of the Hoosier tire from the RA1 which the rules parity was designed around at the time.

 

I hate to be the one to say it, but here goes........  We don't honestly have a real clue as to how far off the 1.6L is, because it was competing against cars that have found to be illegal.  Not just a few, and not for just the runoffs.

 

Part of fixing the 1.6L is also maintaining legality on the 99-05 cars.  Since I have been accused of not telling certain people the exact moment of which my team and I started thinking about a STR protest last year, here is my fair warning for 2015.

 

I am coming after VVT computers.  We have purchased 2 VVT cars that have had computers that were tampered with, so I know they are out there.  I am working with Mazda and AIM and believe we can catch an illegal VVT Computer through the OBDII port and a SOLO DL.  AIM has expressed some interest in helping solve this problem, so that will be my compliance focus for 2015.  Mark... I will send you a certified letter to make sure you get it.

 

Thanks.... Sean

And to be fair to all drivers/groups Sean...finding advantages legally, tech shed legal, or flat out illegal does not know a car year! No doubt OBDII computers are easier to manipulate than the OBDI years. I would hope SCCA/NASA are ahead of you on this! Is REM parts(in SM) also on that hit list of yours? 

[FTodaro]

All this talk about the 1.6 I am going to start a letter writing campaign I may even get Tom Sager to start a petition to help the VVT car. They run out of TQ at 5900 RPM and they need help. I think they should at least take back the 25lbs and then another 25lbs so that they 99 does not steam roll the car at the end of the straights.

 

Who is with me?  

[MPR22]

All this talk about the 1.6 I am going to start a letter writing campaign I may even get Tom Sager to start a petition to help the VVT car. They run out of TQ at 5900 RPM and they need help. I think they should at least take back the 25lbs and then another 25lbs so that they 99 does not steam roll the car at the end of the straights.

 

Who is with me?  

Deal with your cars inherent weakness and race it accordingly.

 

 Strange that they added weight and took away the only advantage the car had over a 99 based on whatdata I have no idea.  Especially in light of Compression gate and the possibility that some of the ECUs have been tampered with.  Again, I have plenty of video of 99s just flat passing me at the end of the straight with no run whatsoever on me.  I could provide data showing the exit speed and top speed to show them what a legal eagle top prep VVT can do.  

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Everything you guys are talking about is exactly what happened to the 1.6 in the first place. The 99 was made the car to have by the rule changes the SMAC put into place. Now the 1.6L is not the car to have because of the rule changes. Shit.... The one guy who said the only race he won recently doesn't even race a 1.6L. Why do you think that is? Because it is not competitive enough (close) to win at most tracks. The day the 1.6L had to move to Hoosiers it could no longer compete at the pointy end of the gjrid with the 99-05 cars. Parity was very, very good prior to the Hoosiers. You can not deny the changes to the tire didn't hurt the 1.6L more than any other. Dewhurst or someone smarter than me can calculate the impact it had based on circumference. I can tell you it was 2 to 3hp on our dyno.

I think you guys are focusing on the wrong thing here. Its not about how many 1.6's win at Majors or the runoffs for that matter. Its about the grass roots guys on any given weekend who can not win against 99-05 cars that are equally prepped and equally driven. If the guys entering the series don't think a 1.6L is capable of winning at a regional level (regardless of their talent) then we get into the situation we are in right now which is they choose to consider other classes because of the price of a 99-05 car to be built or bought is more in line with a Spec30, SRF and Spec46.

At a bare minimum we need to compensate for the effective change of the Hoosier tire from the RA1 which the rules parity was designed around at the time.



I hate to be the one to say it, but here goes........ We don't honestly have a real clue as to how far off the 1.6L is, because it was competing against cars that have found to be illegal. Not just a few, and not for just the runoffs.

Part of fixing the 1.6L is also maintaining legality on the 99-05 cars. Since I have been accused of not telling certain people the exact moment of which my team and I started thinking about a STR protest last year, here is my fair warning for 2015.

I am coming after VVT computers. We have purchased 2 VVT cars that have had computers that were tampered with, so I know they are out there. I am working with Mazda and AIM and believe we can catch an illegal VVT Computer through the OBDII port and a SOLO DL. AIM has expressed some interest in helping solve this problem, so that will be my compliance focus for 2015. Mark... I will send you a certified letter to make sure you get it.

Thanks.... Sean

Agree 100%

I can honestly say I ran my fastest times on the Toyo's .

[FTodaro]

Deal with your cars inherent weakness and race it accordingly.

 

 Strange that they added weight and took away the only advantage the car had over a 99 based on whatdata I have no idea.  Especially in light of Compression gate and the possibility that some of the ECUs have been tampered with.  Again, I have plenty of video of 99s just flat passing me at the end of the straight with no run whatsoever on me.  I could provide data showing the exit speed and top speed to show them what a legal eagle top prep VVT can do.  

It was all that transparent testing that took place during headgate.

 

I actually have a legitimate question who all is on the SMAC now

Danny

Ralph

Brandon

who else?

[Sean - MiataCage]

 

Then change the freaking tire to something that is more economical for the masses.  Why change the car because we put too much grip on the car.  I agree that the tire is the most likely cause of the lack of perceived difference in the cars.  Will the SCCA/NASA change tires this year?  NO.    It gets back to: if you run too hard you should have the tires go off.  Reducing the weight should have a similar effect and is FREE! 

 

Apparently you think I have the control to change the tire and I don't.  It's not about tires going off, its about the circumference of the tire being larger than a shaved Toyo RA1 which is what the parity was set on at the time.  I could car less what tire we run.  Sears Roadhandler, whatever.....

 

 

I dont' know about in your area but the same guys that run Majors run Regionals, the grassroots guys isn't winning a race or even making the podium without a top prep car in Texas.  

 

OK, so if your not a front runner then your car doesn't matter?  

 

Weight reduction is the easiest way to achieve this, oh and did I mention it is free and could be implemented by the next Major if we all act today!  

 

I COMPLETELY agree, but since the 1.6's are hard to make weight for many, then I assume you are ok with adding weight to the 99/00 instead?

 

Were they SM builds or street cars?  Maybe a problem that none of us VVT owners know we have.  Definitely interested in teching this on my car and other VVTs.  I doubt mine has this problem as I have plenty of video of 99s running by me at the top end.  

 

SM builds from 2 different parts of the country.

 

[Sean - MiataCage]

And to be fair to all drivers/groups Sean...finding advantages legally, tech shed legal, or flat out illegal does not know a car year! No doubt OBDII computers are easier to manipulate than the OBDI years. I would hope SCCA/NASA are ahead of you on this! Is REM parts(in SM) also on that hit list of yours? 

 

Hi Ron....  My response is the same today as it was last time you asked me about REM.  It is up to you to determine the legality for the part and class that you are running your car in.  It's completely obvious and easy to check, so it doesn't need any special attention just someone to take the time to look.  VVT computers is a completely different story based on the security system. But you already knew this.......  

[Sean - MiataCage]

Answer one question honestly.

 

Would making the 1.6 the COTY be better for the class?  

 

To be CRYSTAL CLEAR I am not advocating in anyway shape or form to turn the 1.6L into the car of the year.  I am advocating for a little bit of help to improve upon the parity in this class we all know and love.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

 

 

I hate to be the one to say it, but here goes........  We don't honestly have a real clue as to how far off the 1.6L is, because it was competing against cars that have found to be illegal.  Not just a few, and not for just the runoffs.

 

 

Thanks.... Sean

 

I hate to say it back but the same engine builders of the 99+ heads that were to high on compression and had str work are the same builders who were building 1.6 heads...  So who knows how many of those cars have both mods?  

 

And yes the VVT's have computers as I have purchased one in the past with illegal computer as well, but then I have purchased two used 99's with the same...  The real question here is does the VVT computer cheat still give enough enhancement to be worth the money to do it?  The 99 computer cheat IMO was largely defeated by the allowance of timing wheel and adjustable fuel. 

 

We will never catch all the cheats of those who want to cheat, the best we can hope for is to stop the cheats with the biggest benefits.