411 replies to this topic

[Andy Mitchell]

I don't think some folks on here realize just how off-putting all this negative talk is for a new racer. If you are just starting out, even a cheap car + trailer + truck (+ suit, Hans, license etc.) is going to set you back  20-25K easy. Then they google and find this site... where a fair percentage of the posters make it clear that the cheap car they are about to buy isn't competitive and a good chunk of the top-level  guys would like to make all the 1.6's go away anyway. Not a good message to be sending IMHO, if you want to attract new people to the class.

 

And it's BS. My car is a cast-off 1.6 (formerly from Waterford Hills, incidentally!), and it's been great. Racing at the club level, it's hard to see much difference in the various cars. The freshest engine makes more difference than the year of the car at my level.

 

Sorry for the rant, it's been snowing like a bugger up here and there's not much else to  do. Come on spring!

[davew]

So which is it?

A. The 1.6 is fine as is - depends on the track

B. The 1.6 needs just a little help

C. The 1.6 needs a drivetrain transplant from an NB car

D. The 1.6 is completely obsolete and should be classified separately from real SMs

E. Any attempt to make a spec class equal means you're some kind of commie, socialitizer.

 

A- I don't think there are many people who agree with this statement.

B- We need to determine through testing, what the "little help" needs to be.

C- Again, I would allow the 1.6 to transplant a NA 1.8, not the NB version

D- I would be in favor of making a class similar to the WDCR version of SSM into a GCR class. This is for NA cars with a few restrictions from current SM specs. And then stop trying to make the NA1.6 competitive at the National/Majors level. Still allow it, just stop the whining.

E- lots of Miata's are commie red, what is the color of socialism?

 

dave

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

A- I don't think there are many people who agree with this statement.
B- We need to determine through testing, what the "little help" needs to be.
C- Again, I would allow the 1.6 to transplant a NA 1.8, not the NB version
D- I would be in favor of making a class similar to the WDCR version of SSM into a GCR class. This is for NA cars with a few restrictions from current SM specs. And then stop trying to make the NA1.6 competitive at the National/Majors level. Still allow it, just stop the whining.
E- lots of Miata's are commie red, what is the color of socialism?

dave

I'm sorry Dave but D is the easy way out and does nothing for the class. Put the shoe on the other foot and then tell me how you would feel.

If you paid attention to the new guys on this sight the are getting upset listening to all of the whining and that won't bring guys to the class. I'm sorry but making another class for the NA's is going backwards IMHO !

Let's just fix the problem and move on. This way the new guys can feel like when the time comes they can move up in the class and be competitive with the car they chose. If some people are sitting on the side line reading all of this they will never join this class because they couldn't afford a 20-35k car.

Now if they can afford a 8-10k start up car knowing when the time comes they can add some money to there 1.6 and be able to go race at the Majors level and be competitive they would. So simply by helping the 1.6 you are helping the class wether guys on here believe this or not. It's not going to happen overnight but trust me by saying keeping the 1.6 alive it will keep this class growing in the years to come.

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

I'm sorry Dave but D is the easy way out and does nothing for the class. Put the shoe on the other foot and then tell me how you would feel.
If you paid attention to the new guys on this sight the are getting upset listening to all of the whining and that won't bring guys to the class. I'm sorry but making another class for the NA's is going backwards IMHO !
Let's just fix the problem and move on. This way the new guys can feel like when the time comes they can move up in the class and be competitive with the car they chose. If some people are sitting on the side line reading all of this they will never join this class because they couldn't afford a 20-35k car.
Now if they can afford a 8-10k start up car knowing when the time comes they can add some money to there 1.6 and be able to go race at the Majors level and be competitive they would. So simply by helping the 1.6 you are helping the class wether guys on here believe this or not. It's not going to happen overnight but trust me by saying keeping the 1.6 alive it will keep this class growing in the years to come.

I'm sorry but a lot of people on here are thinking about them selfs only and not the health of the class !

Can you or anyone else on this site give me one good reason how a 20-35k car is going to keep this class growing in the future ?

Now if you give them an easy cheap way in knowing in a year or two they can add 2-8k to there car to make it competitive they will join us here at sm and not some other class. Now that's how you keep it growing !

[Bench Racer]

trial and error

 

Geek Squad attempting to help my new lap top do the lower left "quote" button, no luck.

 

Can anyone help?

[Bench Racer]

trial and error

 

And the friken cut and past doesn't work either.

[pat slattery]

The 1.6 should be the standard by which all cars are handicapped by, not the other way around like it  has morphed to

[davew]

I'm sorry but a lot of people on here are thinking about them selfs only and not the health of the class !

Can you or anyone else on this site give me one good reason how a 20-35k car is going to keep this class growing in the future ?

Now if you give them an easy cheap way in knowing in a year or two they can add 2-8k to there car to make it competitive they will join us here at sm and not some other class. Now that's how you keep it growing !

 

I probably have more invested in the success of this class than anyone here. I don't work on street cars, or Hondas or own an automotive parts recycling business. I work on Spec Miata only.

 

I wish we where not selling $30k cars. But that is what the current market wants. Don't blame the builder for filling the demand. Go price a new FVee. It is about the same as a SM. FF is double to triple.

 

Are we discussing what is best for Spec Miata as we currently know it? Or is the discussion about bringing more people into racing? Or are we just trying to grease the squeekey wheels? You tell me. Very few have offered any suggestion of how to proceed. What changes fit the rules, which fit the phylosophy, which fit the budget, and what can be enforced? Come up with an idea, test it, report the results and it may get approved.

 

Butch is willing to spend $2-8k to make his 1.6 competitive. Pat and Dave, what would you spend? Let's make cost the first line item to determine.

 

dave

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

I probably have more invested in the success of this class than anyone here. I don't work on street cars, or Hondas or own an automotive parts recycling business. I work on Spec Miata only.
 
I wish we where not selling $30k cars. But that is what the current market wants. Don't blame the builder for filling the demand. Go price a new FVee. It is about the same as a SM. FF is double to triple.
 
Are we discussing what is best for Spec Miata as we currently know it? Or is the discussion about bringing more people into racing? Or are we just trying to grease the squeekey wheels? You tell me. Very few have offered any suggestion of how to proceed. What changes fit the rules, which fit the phylosophy, which fit the budget, and what can be enforced? Come up with an idea, test it, report the results and it may get approved.
 
Butch is willing to spend $2-8k to make his 1.6 competitive. Pat and Dave, what would you spend? Let's make cost the first line item to determine.
 
dave

The answer to your question is both,what's the best for sm and bringing people to our class. I thought it kind of went together !

I'm sorry but the NA cars have been overlooked for 3 years and now is time to do something about it. I hope to have both a NA and a VVT this year and be glad to try a couple of things on the NA like the lower weight and turn signal removal and I'll let you know how it works.

My other problem will be when I come back with the results there will be some guys (politicians) on here that will say that's not good enough data.

[Tom Sager]

I'm sorry but a lot of people on here are thinking about them selfs only and not the health of the class !

Can you or anyone else on this site give me one good reason how a 20-35k car is going to keep this class growing in the future ?

Now if you give them an easy cheap way in knowing in a year or two they can add 2-8k to there car to make it competitive they will join us here at sm and not some other class. Now that's how you keep it growing !

Inexpensive cars and rentals help people get started and there are inexpensive examples of all of the cars available from time to time except for maybe VVT cars.  Yes, the cheap '99's are more than the cheap NA's but there are always cars out there that are cheaper than what it costs to build.  

 

My feeling is that the class needs to be true to the concept that any car can win.  That way if someone buys a cheap car or builds one without the best of everything, they can over time improve the car to be one that is competitive for a long time and they don't lose their investment in all the improvements, personalization and familiarity with the car.  Transaction cost (selling one car and building/buying another) is high when you consider the dollars and time at stake and not everyone uses or has the budget to let a prep shop do it all.   

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Inexpensive cars and rentals help people get started and there are inexpensive examples of all of the cars available from time to time except for maybe VVT cars.  Yes, the cheap '99's are more than the cheap NA's but there are always cars out there that are cheaper than what it costs to build.  
 
My feeling is that the class needs to be true to the concept that any car can win.  That way if someone buys a cheap car or builds one without the best of everything, they can over time improve the car to be one that is competitive for a long time and they don't lose their investment in all the improvements, personalization and familiarity with the car.  Transaction cost (selling one car and building/buying another) is high when you consider the dollars and time at stake and not everyone uses or has the budget to let a prep shop do it all.

I agree with Tom and understand you will never get all of your money back from a race car but more then half would be nice !

I also agree 100% with your statement (" my feeling is that the class needs to be true to the concept that any car can win ")

[Tom Sager]

I'm sorry but the NA cars have been overlooked for 3 years and now is time to do something about it. 

I wouldn't say 3 years.  I believe the 2012 rules had the best intentions of bringing the cars together performance-wise with the move to closer weights and smaller plates.  We just didn't see the results we expected but there have been other factors such as the tire change and exploration of the new head rules and VVT development during this time.  I'd say we knew a year ago what we know now in terms of performance gaps and that changes should have been considered then.  

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

I wouldn't say 3 years.  I believe the 2012 rules had the best intentions of bringing the cars together performance-wise with the move to closer weights and smaller plates.  We just didn't see the results we expected but there have been other factors such as the tire change and exploration of the new head rules and VVT development during this time.  I'd say we knew a year ago what we know now in terms of performance gaps and that changes should have been considered then.

That's 3 years ( 2012 and now it's 2015 ) !


Just messing with you Tom because I'm board !

[Steve Scheifler]

I don't think some folks on here realize just how off-putting all this negative talk is for a new racer...

Andy, and all new or prospective SM racers, we do get it. But is it worse than jumping in blind only to learn the hard (and expensive) way that you made the wrong choice of car to suit your short and long-term goals?

Keep in mind that this class is so close that we are debating minutia relative to issues in other classes. A well driven 1.6 can beat any comparably prepared SM of any year if you are just a tic better than the other guy.

So whether you are in a basic build with minimal engine work or a perfect 10/10ths build, the biggest difference between cars at the same level is usually the driver. That's very hard to know for certain until you get to the front where there is more consistency and fewer/smaller mistakes, but even there things are really close. No one generation of car has enough inherent advantage to walk the rest so at most tracks you can at least be in the hunt. The question is whether an equally prepped and driven 1.6 ultimately falls a little short by getting checked up in the corners and losing momentum without the torque to recover, or slows a bit more than the others due to heat related issues (IAT, HLAs), etc.

So all this talk is not BS by any means, but it really isn't discernible until you get near the front for the simple reason that even a little farther back the differences in prep and driving completely overshadow the things we are discussing.

That's not to say this is important only for the front runners. When it comes to following the rules I hate it when someone dismisses a racer's concerns with something like "unless you are within a few tenths of the front it doesn't matter anyway". We need a level playing field for cars of equal prep and drivers of equal talent. But the truth is, if you are struggling in the middle of the pack there is a lot more to be found in better basic car prep and/or driving than anything we debate about in terms of parity. Even if that mid-pack VVT always kicks your butt out of a slow corner just like the guys up front complain about, chances are he wouldn't be ahead in the first place if your car was equally prepared and you were getting the most out of it.

In other words, any car you pick can be really, really close. If you want to learn to race and be confident that you will be able to beat anybody you can significantly out-drive, then any year SM will do. If you intend to build a fully prepped car and compete for wins at the Majors, it will be difficult to "significantly out-drive" ALL of the guys near the front, so the 1.6 may not currently be your best weapon at most tracks.

So unless there are at lest a few guys with a 1.6 who really think they have the level of prep and talent to compete, why all the fuss? I suppose, because no matter how much room there is for other improvements in our program, nobody likes to start out with a rules disadvantage or lose a single position because of it.

[pat slattery]

I probably have more invested in the success of this class than anyone here. I don't work on street cars, or Hondas or own an automotive parts recycling business. I work on Spec Miata only.

 

I wish we where not selling $30k cars. But that is what the current market wants. Don't blame the builder for filling the demand. Go price a new FVee. It is about the same as a SM. FF is double to triple.

 

Are we discussing what is best for Spec Miata as we currently know it? Or is the discussion about bringing more people into racing? Or are we just trying to grease the squeekey wheels? You tell me. Very few have offered any suggestion of how to proceed. What changes fit the rules, which fit the phylosophy, which fit the budget, and what can be enforced? Come up with an idea, test it, report the results and it may get approved.

 

Butch is willing to spend $2-8k to make his 1.6 competitive. Pat and Dave, what would you spend? Let's make cost the first line item to determine.

 

dave

Dave, I think I am already close, just need some rules help, new Motor from Ti-Speed, shocks rebuilt, 2 Mazda Comp rear ends, good AFM from Bennett, and air intake. 

 

Pat

[Tom Sager]

That's 3 years ( 2012 and now it's 2015 ) !


Just messing with you Tom because I'm board !

What I'm saying is that the jury was still out in 2012 and 2013 and since it's 10 degrees or so here, 2015 hasn't started.   

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Andy, and all new or prospective SM racers, we do get it. But is it worse than jumping in blind only to learn the hard (and expensive) way that you made the wrong choice of car to suit your short and long-term goals?
Keep in mind that this class is so close that we are debating minutia relative to issues in other classes. A well driven 1.6 can beat any comparably prepared SM of any year if you are just a tic better than the other guy.
So whether you are in a basic build with minimal engine work or a perfect 10/10ths build, the biggest difference between cars at the same level is usually the driver. That's very hard to know for certain until you get to the front where there is more consistency and fewer/smaller mistakes, but even there things are really close. No one generation of car has enough inherent advantage to walk the rest so at most tracks you can at least be in the hunt. The question is whether an equally prepped and driven 1.6 ultimately falls a little short by getting checked up in the corners and losing momentum without the torque to recover, or slows a bit more than the others due to heat related issues (IAT, HLAs), etc.
So all this talk is not BS by any means, but it really isn't discernible until you get near the front for the simple reason that even a little farther back the differences in prep and driving completely overshadow the things we are discussing.
That's not to say this is important only for the front runners. When it comes to following the rules I hate it when someone dismisses a racer's concerns with something like "unless you are within a few tenths of the front it doesn't matter anyway". We need a level playing field for cars of equal prep and drivers of equal talent. But the truth is, if you are struggling in the middle of the pack there is a lot more to be found in better basic car prep and/or driving than anything we debate about in terms of parity. Even if that mid-pack VVT always kicks your butt out of a slow corner just like the guys up front complain about, chances are he wouldn't be ahead in the first place if your car was equally prepared and you were getting the most out of it.
In other words, any car you pick can be really, really close. If you want to learn to race and be confident that you will be able to beat anybody you can significantly out-drive, then any year SM will do. If you intend to build a fully prepped car and compete for wins at the Majors, it will be difficult to "significantly out-drive" ALL of the guys near the front, so the 1.6 may not currently be your best weapon at most tracks.
So unless there are at lest a few guys with a 1.6 who really think they have the level of prep and talent to compete, why all the fuss? I suppose, because no matter how much room there is for other improvements in our program, nobody likes to start out with a rules disadvantage or lose a single position because of it.

+ 1 that's the point I was trying to get across !

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

What I'm saying is that the jury was still out in 2012 and 2013 and since it's 10 degrees or so here, 2015 hasn't started.

What you don't run your car at 10degs ?

Heck it's only -5degs here and I'm doing donuts in mine ! Lmao !

Just kidding

[davew]

Andy, and all new or prospective SM racers, we do get it. But is it worse than jumping in blind only to learn the hard (and expensive) way that you made the wrong choice of car to suit your short and long-term goals?

Keep in mind that this class is so close that we are debating minutia relative to issues in other classes. A well driven 1.6 can beat any comparably prepared SM of any year if you are just a tic better than the other guy.

So whether you are in a basic build with minimal engine work or a perfect 10/10ths build, the biggest difference between cars at the same level is usually the driver. That's very hard to know for certain until you get to the front where there is more consistency and fewer/smaller mistakes, but even there things are really close. No one generation of car has enough inherent advantage to walk the rest so at most tracks you can at least be in the hunt. The question is whether an equally prepped and driven 1.6 ultimately falls a little short by getting checked up in the corners and losing momentum without the torque to recover, or slows a bit more than the others due to heat related issues (IAT, HLAs), etc.

So all this talk is not BS by any means, but it really isn't discernible until you get near the front for the simple reason that even a little farther back the differences in prep and driving completely overshadow the things we are discussing.

That's not to say this is important only for the front runners. When it comes to following the rules I hate it when someone dismisses a racer's concerns with something like "unless you are within a few tenths of the front it doesn't matter anyway". We need a level playing field for cars of equal prep and drivers of equal talent. But the truth is, if you are struggling in the middle of the pack there is a lot more to be found in better basic car prep and/or driving than anything we debate about in terms of parity. Even if that mid-pack VVT always kicks your butt out of a slow corner just like the guys up front complain about, chances are he wouldn't be ahead in the first place if your car was equally prepared and you were getting the most out of it.

In other words, any car you pick can be really, really close. If you want to learn to race and be confident that you will be able to beat anybody you can significantly out-drive, then any year SM will do. If you intend to build a fully prepped car and compete for wins at the Majors, it will be difficult to "significantly out-drive" ALL of the guys near the front, so the 1.6 may not currently be your best weapon at most tracks.

So unless there are at lest a few guys with a 1.6 who really think they have the level of prep and talent to compete, why all the fuss? I suppose, because no matter how much room there is for other improvements in our program, nobody likes to start out with a rules disadvantage or lose a single position because of it.

 

Very well said, let me add another 2 cents

 

Many years ago, I was told marriage is not a 50-50 proposition. Both parties must put in 100% effort. In Spec Miata racing, the competition is so close that it take a 100% car and a 100% driver.

 

In my opinion, a 100% prepped and 100% legal 99-2000 would be 100%, A VVT would be 99.5%, a 1.6 would be 97% and the NA 1.8 at 95%. We are not talking big differences here. by contrast in most other classes a 10% difference would be acceptable.

 

If the typical track has 10 turns, and a race is 20 laps, each corner is 0.5%. SO the VVT driver has already screwed up 1 corner before the race even starts. The 1.6er has 6 bad corners under his belt. That is less than one lap difference. Remember we are comparing you(and me for that matter) to the Steyn, Voytek Drago etc. of our world. Start adding up your driving mistakes. Miss the apex by a foot, brake too late and lock 'em up, get held up by a backmarker, get passed at the wrong point by the leader. All of this adds up much faster than the inherent small difference between equally built and prepped cars.

 

What we are discussing is very minor to most classes. Spec Miata has such close competition that even minutia is important. Thus the dreaded $30+k build cost. I would bet there is more data expense in the SM field than the entire other 7 race groups. We really are looking for perfection, and close enough is just not close enough for anyone who feels they are in the under 100% car.

 

The point of discention is not what year needs help. It is how and how much.

 

dave

[Andy Mitchell]

Thanks for those comments guys. I think we are all actually on the same page. I actually initially got all fired up to reply to the noobie fellow who sounded a bit insecure about going out and giving it a go in his 1.6. That struck a chord with me because we are always trying to recruit folks to take the plunge and come race with us up here. It's easy to inadvertently discourage people (who might be a little overwhelmed by the whole thing anyway), but harder to tell them just how much fun it all is. And how close the cars really are.