411 replies to this topic

[davew]

Sean, not disagreeing with you, but want to point out a couple facts.

 

The tire change was requested by the majority of the currently racing drivers back in the day. The vast majority of letters was "we want Hoosier". It was not a SMAC decision. In fact the SMAC was kept out of the decision completely. It was made by SCCA corporate. I do feel that the SMAc would have kept the Toyo based on the tire test. But we where not asked.

 

If the Hoosier tires are the only reason the 1.6 is not competitive, why are the 1.6's not cleaning up in NASA on the parity Toyo tire?

 

Kyle, you hit the nail on the head. We need to eliminate the culture of cheating in this class. Then we can talk parity. And yes, the adjustable fuel regulator and the slotted timing wheel where allowed to offset the cheated ECU. Which SCCA corporate could not police.

 

If some people had not messed with the computers, we would have stock fuel pressure and wheels.

 

dave

[MPR22]

 

 

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.

 

 

Sorry didn't mean to yell at you about the tires, it was a class issue,  I think they are the most expensive part that could be changed and make us all spend less money.  Reduce the grip and make us drive.  

 

Wasn't implying the non front runners cars don't matter, just implying that the car better be tip top if you think you are going to win.  I had a 1.6 give me all i could handle at TWS in my VVT.  Another few laps and he had me.  So his really solid 1.6 was essentially the equal to my VVT. 

 

Don't agree with adding weight only to the 99+, not sure this is as helpful to the 1.6 and eventually you will hit a tipping point where the extra weight will hurt the 99+ so badly they will not be able to race at the end.  

 

2285 and 2415  That is a compromise but not sure how people aren't making weight in 1.6s'  Mine is 2020 dry.  A  250 lb driver makes weight with a gallon of fuel.  I know we have some big boys in these cars but the number over 250 can't be significant number of the racers.  And if the car isn't an overdog they just build a 99.  I had trouble making weight in my 99 at 235lbs.  

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Sorry didn't mean to yell at you about the tires, it was a class issue,  I think they are the most expensive part that could be changed and make us all spend less money.  Reduce the grip and make us drive.  

 

 

 

Front runners were stickering up with Toyos back int he day only they needed 5 sets of stickers one at 1/32, 2/32,3/32, 4/32, and full tread.

 

Very few tracks favor an older tire.

[Jim Drago]

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?

Not sure who told you this.. but obd1 computers are easier to manipulate than obd2 computers, at least in miataland.

[FTodaro]

IMO the SM7 has gone a long way to make the tire budget better. The RA-1 was a costly tire to run at my home track as the would grain and sometimes you would trash a set in one session. I am more than happy with the SM-7 from a cost standpoint.

 

We can complain about the Grip and being the cause of bearing failure but like many of the other opinions on this site, its just an opinion, because i think there is evidence that the bearings quality had also dropped.

 

I see the problem on the 1.6 is finding a cheap fix( for those who think it has a problem) that the average joe is going to take advantage of.

 

I would support 100% the heat soak issue right now, as i have witnesses it. beyond that "show me the money".

[Sean - MiataCage]

Sean, not disagreeing with you, but want to point out a couple facts.

 

The tire change was requested by the majority of the currently racing drivers back in the day. The vast majority of letters was "we want Hoosier". It was not a SMAC decision. In fact the SMAC was kept out of the decision completely. It was made by SCCA corporate. I do feel that the SMAc would have kept the Toyo based on the tire test. But we where not asked.

 

If the Hoosier tires are the only reason the 1.6 is not competitive, why are the 1.6's not cleaning up in NASA on the parity Toyo tire?

 

Kyle, you hit the nail on the head. We need to eliminate the culture of cheating in this class. Then we can talk parity. And yes, the adjustable fuel regulator and the slotted timing wheel where allowed to offset the cheated ECU. Which SCCA corporate could not police.

 

If some people had not messed with the computers, we would have stock fuel pressure and wheels.

 

dave

Fair enough Dave.  I wasn't so much blaming the reason for the tire choice, but simply that the tire did have an impact on the 1.6L.

 

I can't speak to NASA as I don't race them anymore, but all I can say there is that in the 13 NASA Champs at Miller (pre Whistle/STR gates), my team was all on worn down tires (weight and circumference) and a lot of others were not.  We won all 3 races in 1.6's against some 99/00's and VVT's.  I don't know who is racing what where in NASA anymore.

 

I am not saying that the tire was the only reason, I am simply trying to get the 1.6L something and to me what the tire did to the car is not subjective.  I believe it can be proven by someone smarter than me with mathematical calculations.  There are too many people trying to show video's and talk about this guy passed me here and shouldn't have subjective type of stuff, so I was simply trying to work with a baseline that wasn't subjective and is measurable in my opinion.  My stance has always been...... Eliminate some of the cheats and then put the 99/00 back to 2450 like it was and call it good.  I don't think much of anything else would need to be done.

 

Problem is no one with a 99 is going to agree to it.  This is where we need people to look at the good of the class and not one particular car to do what is best for ALL racers not just the CURRENT vocal majority.  I applaud all you have done for the class and believe we are probably on the same page.  I also applaud Danny right now for publicly taking on a position that is not favorable to most.

 

Sean

[Sean - MiataCage]

Sorry didn't mean to yell at you about the tires, it was a class issue,  I think they are the most expensive part that could be changed and make us all spend less money.  Reduce the grip and make us drive.  

 

No worries, we all just want to race and have fun right?

 

Wasn't implying the non front runners cars don't matter, just implying that the car better be tip top if you think you are going to win.  I had a 1.6 give me all i could handle at TWS in my VVT.  Another few laps and he had me.  So his really solid 1.6 was essentially the equal to my VVT. 

 

Agree.

 

Don't agree with adding weight only to the 99+, not sure this is as helpful to the 1.6 and eventually you will hit a tipping point where the extra weight will hurt the 99+ so badly they will not be able to race at the end.  

 

When we were at 2450 they didn't have problems so I know it can be done.  It is my opinion that the easiest and cheapest way to minimize the torque advantage is with weight being added to the car that makes the torque, not being taken off of the one that doesn't.

 

2285 and 2415  That is a compromise but not sure how people aren't making weight in 1.6s'  Mine is 2020 dry.  A  250 lb driver makes weight with a gallon of fuel.  I know we have some big boys in these cars but the number over 250 can't be significant number of the racers.  And if the car isn't an overdog they just build a 99.  I had trouble making weight in my 99 at 235lbs.  

 

For me it's not so much about making the total weight number, but about having some ballast in the car to offset driver and help with cross weights.

 

Sean

[Tom Sager]

While there has been some negativity as pointed out over the past few months around here and on various rules topics, I think it has been a positive overall. SCCA and NASA came to good conclusions on the head rules in spite of all the angst that was expressed in the process. This board has been more active than in some off-seasons with more people voicing opinions than I can remember.  With a few tweaks we may very well have the best ruleset for the times that we have had in a while.  The process may be and may have been clunky and ugly at times but I see progress since the NASA Champs and Runoffs.  

[LarryKing]

OK, get rid of the 99+ timing wheel and FPR and police the ECUs. That and switch to the Toyo RR (sure would make NASA-SCCA crossover cheaper)

 

When the NB was added to the class it was an underdog. The 1.6 hasn't gotten slower - must be those pesky rule changes I keep hearing about.

[pat slattery]

Answer one question honestly.

 

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

No, but having the 99 the dominant car for the past 5 years has not been good for many. Who has benefited the most from the having the 99 the top dog, the people who are building these cars IMHO

[Tom Sager]

OK, get rid of the 99+ timing wheel and FPR and police the ECUs. That and switch to the Toyo RR (sure would make NASA-SCCA crossover cheaper)

 

When the NB was added to the class it was an underdog. The 1.6 hasn't gotten slower - must be those pesky rule changes I keep hearing about.

Walter, I've been keeping a sequential log of suggested rule changes over the past 6 months.  I've have logged yours and for future reference it is number 3,196  

[MPR22]

No, but having the 99 the dominant car for the past 5 years has not been good for many. Who has benefited the most from the having the 99 the top dog, the people who are building these cars IMHO

Understand your frustration at the perceived conflict of interest, I have had similar thoughts from time to time, I inherently distrust rules makers.

However, do two wrongs make this right?

[MPR22]

Sorry didn't mean to yell at you about the tires, it was a class issue,  I think they are the most expensive part that could be changed and make us all spend less money.  Reduce the grip and make us drive.  
 
No worries, we all just want to race and have fun right?
 
Wasn't implying the non front runners cars don't matter, just implying that the car better be tip top if you think you are going to win.  I had a 1.6 give me all i could handle at TWS in my VVT.  Another few laps and he had me.  So his really solid 1.6 was essentially the equal to my VVT. 
 
Agree.
 
Don't agree with adding weight only to the 99+, not sure this is as helpful to the 1.6 and eventually you will hit a tipping point where the extra weight will hurt the 99+ so badly they will not be able to race at the end.  
 
When we were at 2450 they didn't have problems so I know it can be done.  It is my opinion that the easiest and cheapest way to minimize the torque advantage is with weight being added to the car that makes the torque, not being taken off of the one that doesn't.
 
2285 and 2415  That is a compromise but not sure how people aren't making weight in 1.6s'  Mine is 2020 dry.  A  250 lb driver makes weight with a gallon of fuel.  I know we have some big boys in these cars but the number over 250 can't be significant number of the racers.  And if the car isn't an overdog they just build a 99.  I had trouble making weight in my 99 at 235lbs.  
 
For me it's not so much about making the total weight number, but about having some ballast in the car to offset driver and help with cross weights.
 
Sean

I believe at 2450 I had a 2mm larger plate, could be wrong I've slept since then.

Thanks for voicing your rational for adding weight to the 99 as opposed to lowering weight on the 1.6. Cards on the table for this discussion is a good thing.

And I promise you at 2450 the tires will go off on the 99+ late in the race, especially the TOYO RRs.

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Ok I hope this works because this is the first time I posted a video.

 

This is a top level prepped 99 and top level driver vs my 91 NA garage built car that I built.

 

Now some of you might know who built the car and some of you might know who the driver is but PLEASE DO NOT SAY OR USE any names as i just put this video up for opinions only.

 

http://youtu.be/kOLoMec6XIg

 

Now Im up for everyones opinion on what they think ?

 

1] is there a parity issue

2] driver issue

3] level of prep [set up] issue

4] opinions ?

 

Sorry for the poor video quality and you can fast forward to when he gets around me. The main place is out of turn 13,this could be a second or third gear turn.

 

Just curious of what you guys think,dont worry your not going to hurt my feelings so flame away !

[MPR22]

Ok I hope this works because this is the first time I posted a video.
 
This is a top level prepped 99 and top level driver vs my 91 NA garage built car that I built.
 
Now some of you might know who built the car and some of you might know who the driver is but PLEASE DO NOT SAY OR USE any names as i just put this video up for opinions only.
 
http://youtu.be/kOLoMec6XIg
 
Now Im up for everyones opinion on what they think ?
 
1] is there a parity issue
2] driver issue
3] level of prep [set up] issue
4] opinions ?
 
Just curious of what you guys think,dont worry your not going to hurt my feelings so flame away !

Video is marked private, go back YouTube and tell it public

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

See if it's working now !

[Michael Novak]

Bob

Last corner onto the straight is a second gear corner- every time.

[ECOBRAP]

The video has too many variables to draw any meaningful conclusions. Although watching that S2000 walk away at the beginning seemed eerily familiar to following a 1.8 LOL. (joke  )

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Best would be to watch from the 12:00 min time on and compare from there.

 

Its hard to see because of the crappy video but if you watch when he hits the brakes and im still on the gass. Same coming out of the last corner you can tell im on the gas sooner but he still pulls away.

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Bob
Last corner onto the straight is a second gear corner- every time.

Mike believe it or not I turned a faster lap going through T13 in 3rd gear. The main reason is it took longer for me to find 3rd gear mid way through the corner. It took awhile to get it right but when I figured it out it was faster.