411 replies to this topic

[MPR22]

 

Its even cheaper to take the lead out.  

 

Not everyone that large builds a 1.6, ask Drago.  2026 with a gallon of fuel, at 259 lb man makes weight, what is the threshold before we stop adding weight to the 1.6 to accommodate large human beings.  Since you are so anxious to add weight to the NB's answer this.  Is making the tires degrade faster good for the class?  Tires are the number 1 expense, adding weight will add to the expense of the class.   Compromise is fine be me also.  2415 NB 2285 NA  same plates.  Increasing flow on the NB's is a bad weigh to achieve parity.  Are you willing to compromise or will you just say the same thing over and over.  Your 1.6's were every bit as good as 4 of the top 99s in the country at Miller Motorsports in Sept of 2013.  Why do you need to add 50 Lbs to the 99s to equalize the cars?     

[Pat Ross]

Actually, Sean, we have everything but a 1.8 NA.  We have a 1.6NA, a '99 NB, and a VVT.

 

Pat

[Sean - MiataCage]

Not everyone that large builds a 1.6, ask Drago.  2026 with a gallon of fuel, at 259 lb man makes weight, what is the threshold before we stop adding weight to the 1.6 to accommodate large human beings.  Since you are so anxious to add weight to the NB's answer this.  Is making the tires degrade faster good for the class?  Tires are the number 1 expense, adding weight will add to the expense of the class.   Compromise is fine be me also.  2415 NB 2285 NA  same plates.  Increasing flow on the NB's is a bad weigh to achieve parity.  Are you willing to compromise or will you just say the same thing over and over.  Your 1.6's were every bit as good as 4 of the top 99s in the country at Miller Motorsports in Sept of 2013.  Why do you need to add 50 Lbs to the 99s to equalize the cars?     

 

I am not anxious to add weight to the NB's.  What I am anxious about is fixing a problem without having to engineer and whole bunch of extra crap when weight (in my opinion) would suffice.  Compression, ecu's, headers etc all cost money and development time.  As I have stated before I believe the 1.6L only needs a little bit.

 

I am certainly willing to compromise and I like the 2415/2285 as a great place to start.  Maybe (hopefully) it would be perfect and we move on to the next chick car man drama.  Obviously I have no power to make anything happen, that is up to SCCA, NASA, CRB, Mazda and SMAC.  For what it's worth I like it a lot.  I don't think that the weight savings/addition is a one for one gain.... Meaning I don't think the 1.6L is going to accelerate by losing weight as the 99/00's acceleration rate would be effected.  I could be completely wrong, but I think the weight on the 99/00 has a bigger impact than the reduction on the 1.6L which just doesn't make the torque.  So now you got to get the rest of the 99/00 community to agree to a little more weight.

 

You are correct about the 1.6's at Miller but there are two major differences.  The first is we were not on Hoosiers and I don't believe we had the compression issues on the cars that showed up that we saw this last year.  I could be wrong, but I thought all the cars were pretty well balanced as far as parity.  But it was a pain in A$$ to get the right set of tires for that track on that day.   Some of the East coast guys will also tell you no one good showed up to that race.  I don't believe that, but I have heard that more than once.

 

Moving to the Hoosier took us down at least 2hp possibly 3hp.  All I want is to try to get some of that back to get us in a position that a 1.6L could win or podium at a big race if extremely well prepped and extremely well driven.

 

I think we are on the same page here.

 

Sean

[Sean - MiataCage]

Actually, Sean, we have everything but a 1.8 NA.  We have a 1.6NA, a '99 NB, and a VVT.

 

Pat

 

So does the 1.6L need any help relative to the other cars in your stable at the tracks you run?

[JRHille]

LOUD NOISES

[Todd Lamb]

http://25.media.tumb...jchtqo1_500.gif

[MPR22]

I am not anxious to add weight to the NB's.  What I am anxious about is fixing a problem without having to engineer and whole bunch of extra crap when weight (in my opinion) would suffice.  Compression, ecu's, headers etc all cost money and development time.  As I have stated before I believe the 1.6L only needs a little bit.
 
I am certainly willing to compromise and I like the 2415/2285 as a great place to start.  Maybe (hopefully) it would be perfect and we move on to the next chick car man drama.  Obviously I have no power to make anything happen, that is up to SCCA, NASA, CRB, Mazda and SMAC.  For what it's worth I like it a lot.  I don't think that the weight savings/addition is a one for one gain.... Meaning I don't think the 1.6L is going to accelerate by losing weight as the 99/00's acceleration rate would be effected.  I could be completely wrong, but I think the weight on the 99/00 has a bigger impact than the reduction on the 1.6L which just doesn't make the torque.  So now you got to get the rest of the 99/00 community to agree to a little more weight.
 
You are correct about the 1.6's at Miller but there are two major differences.  The first is we were not on Hoosiers and I don't believe we had the compression issues on the cars that showed up that we saw this last year.  I could be wrong, but I thought all the cars were pretty well balanced as far as parity.  But it was a pain in A$$ to get the right set of tires for that track on that day.   Some of the East coast guys will also tell you no one good showed up to that race.  I don't believe that, but I have heard that more than once.
 
Moving to the Hoosier took us down at least 2hp possibly 3hp.  All I want is to try to get some of that back to get us in a position that a 1.6L could win or podium at a big race if extremely well prepped and extremely well driven.
 
I think we are on the same page here.
 
Sean

I don't know how we solve the Hoosier vs Toyo difference unless the two organizations run different weights. But since we have reached common ground on the weight ( at least you and I did) let's work on world peace.

[Jim Drago]

Stolen from John Davisons FB.. 

 

You must read in the Pinocchio voice

 

[Adax]

One way to add torque is with gearing. Is a lower (higher numerically) final drive ratio available? What about a shorter 5th gear so that all is not lost at the 4/5 shift?

 

AC

[Jim Drago]

One way to add torque is with gearing. Is a lower (higher numerically) final drive ratio available? What about a shorter 5th gear so that all is not lost at the 4/5 shift?

 

AC

Which also effects shift points and where the rev limiter hits.. There are pluses and minuses in just about everything.  We experienced this with 94/97 on the 4.3. the positive was we are all on the same gear, the negative is the 100 rpm lower for the na 1.8 guys.. 

[Bad Rusty]

Found an online discussion about Spec Miata transmissions and shifting techniques.  They must not have a DB limit at this track though

 

[Adax]

Which also effects shift points and where the rev limiter hits.. There are pluses and minuses in just about everything.  We experienced this with 94/97 on the 4.3. the positive was we are all on the same gear, the negative is the 100 rpm lower for the na 1.8 guys.. 

 

Of course, but 1.6's are already shifting at different points due to the torque difference (2nd instead of 3rd gear turn exits) and higher limiter. A lower final drive would mean we would not have to drop to 2nd to get out of the turns with the 1.8's. I think the shift point differences would otherwise be a wash and a reasonable trade-off for torque.

[Pat Ross]

Sean,

 

At MSR Houston and at TWS top flight NAs can battle on even footing with the NBs at least when the NAs are driven by "young guns" that have come up thru kart racing.  I am not sure why, but it may be that karters develop quick hands and the NA, being a less settled platform, requires quick reflexes to keep them on edge.  That being said, Gale Corley is always near the front at TWS in his NA, usually finishing in the 2nd thru 4th.

 

Just a comment for all to think on.  When a NA finishes 2nd or 3rd at TWS out of 40 entries, and when 25 of those entries are NBs, then how can we say that the NA is not competitive?  After all, the NA beat all but one or two of the '99s.  If the 99s are so dominant why didn't all of them beat the NA.

 

Pat

[pat slattery]

Why did those two 99 cars beat the other 99, cars ,   That is pretty lame logic

[MPR22]

Why did those two 99 cars beat the other 99, cars ,   That is pretty lame logic

Actually the logic was quite good, you even got it.  The drivers were better (that day),  not the cars.  If the 99s were that much better than Gale's 1.6, he would finish 10th or worse regularly.  I have never seen him finish 10th or worse at TWS. 

[Jim Drago]

Actually the logic was quite good, you even got it.  The drivers were better (that day),  not the cars.  If the 99s were that much better than Gale's 1.6, he would finish 10th or worse regularly.  I have never seen him finish 10th or worse at TWS. 

Doesn't Gale have a 99 car as well? Maybe he just likes the challenge?

[MPR22]

Doesn't Gale have a 99 car as well? Maybe he just likes the challenge?

Actually he has owned and raced a 99, NA 18 and the aforementioned 1.6.  He sold his 99 and I have only seen him in his 1.6 for the last year or so.  Must be he knows something about greener grass. 

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Actually he has owned and raced a 99, NA 18 and the aforementioned 1.6.  He sold his 99 and I have only seen him in his 1.6 for the last year or so.  Must be he knows something about greener grass.

Are we talking about a Reg.or at a Nat. ( major) level ?

[Bench Racer]

Are we talking about a Reg.or at a Nat. ( major) level ?

 

Holly $hit, I finally figured out how to do the quote thing on my new Windows 8.1 lap top.  
 

[Steve Scheifler]

Let's face it, most races have a very small number of drivers who can stay in the lead pack, assuming that there is at least one true wheel in the field. The vast majority of other cars, regardless of year, are irrelevant for this discussion. So for all we know, he happens to be the 3rd or 4th best out there, or he's the best but in an inferior car, or he's 10th best but has a superior car. Do you see how pointless any one example is without tons of additional data and facts?

And Pat, I don't recall anyone ever saying anything to warrant the "so dominant" remark. You erroneously imply what has never been claimed during this debate.