411 replies to this topic

[Sean - MiataCage]

I find it interesting how so many of you are against better racing.  Isn't that what you got into this class for in the first place?  The basic facts are that the 1.6L is not competitive.  Quit being scared to be beat by a 1.6L angry hair dressers car and be honest that it needs some (NOT MUCH) help.  It's getting so ridiculous right now....  We all sound like a bunch of AS Drivers trying to either cheat our way to the top or be completely selfish and use smoke and mirrors to keep another vehicle down to feel better about our chances of winning.  Please don't turn this into the car of the year type of class.  If you do that I promise you it will come back to bite you in the ass when your car is the outcast, so recognize your roll now and do the right thing.  Doing the right thing for some may simply be keeping quiet about a topic you have no first hand experience with and for others it is just being honest and looking at the class and not your car.

 

I have all models of the cars, so I can race whatever I want.  My motivation here is to keep the 1.6L relevant because it keeps new people coming into the series at an affordable level and allows them an upgrade path to the newer products.  More racers, better racing, more fun.  All anyone new wants is to know that hey have a chance to win.  They will not and are not buying cars that are known to be un-competitive.  At this point 1.6L cars are easier to part out then sell as a complete car.  That is not good for the series.  Vintage sucks, so that isn't an option and creating yet another class within SCCA in my opinion isn't the answer either.  In my part of the country the options for new racers are SRF, Spec46, Spec30 and SM.  SM used to be the no brainer as we had the car counts and the playing field was pretty level.  Now the class is branded as cheaters and off duty taxi drivers that crash into everything which we all know is absolutely untrue.  The newbies feel like they have to go all the way to a VVT car now to be competitive.  There are too many decent 1.6's around that should be changing hands and bringing more new people into the class, but it just doesn't seem like it's happening.

 

It is my belief that a 1.6L will NEVER again be the car to have even if you gave it a turbo.  It's harder to prep and drive than the newer stuff and most just don't have that skill set to do both.  It just needs a little bit of help.  Take a step back, look at what is best for the class and not just your own vehicle and just be honest about it.

 

For those of you that want to continue to talk about the past and what a 1.6L did, please keep in mind that when we went to Hoosiers it hurt the 1.6L more than it did the 1.8's. due to the larger circumference compared to a shaved Toyo RA1.  When we are on Toyo's the tire was so much more of a factor in prep than the Hoosier.  The Hoosier is bolt on and go, where the Toyo you had to have the testing and background to know which tire was best at which track.  If you felt parity was spot on in the Toyo days then by default you should agree to a little bit of help for the 1.6L due to the tire change.

 

My 2 cents...... Sean

[Jim Drago]

Pat - Not intended as a flame, but I would hazard an educated guess that the reason that they are NOT being built is because they have proved to be UNCOMPETIVE. Nothing to do with cost. Once again, just my opinion

I would agree to this in some extent.. If "I"( and I am not the only one) felt the 1.6 was the best car to build.. I would spend whatever it took and cut a leg off if needed to make weight. But Pat is correct in a top build 1.6 now would eclipse the cost of a top prep NB car and the degree of difficulty to achieve one is 1.25x +/-(guesstimate) harder to achieve

[Sean - MiataCage]

Ron we have received letters in the past requesting help for the 1.6. But currently have only received one letter in response to the member input from the details in the fast track.

 

Unfortunately I see 3 groups of people working on the problem right now.  SCCA-SMAC, SCCA-Tech, and Mazda.  Writing a letter without any data to back up a point or educated guess is useless.  I realize how the system works and that letters drive the system, but until we have some factual data on what changes will do to the cars it's just a big huge waste of time.  SCCA(Tech)  is supposedly working on testing now that will show what each improvement does to the car on the dyno.  There is also rumor of some cars making upgrades and DQ'ing themselves from races and going out and racing to see how they race.

 

In my opinioni the request for input is pre-mature and needed to be done later after SCCA Tech has completed their testing.

 

Sean

[Steve Scheifler]

Jim, we're on the same page regarding pandering, socialistic handouts, whatever you want to call it, that would give a clear advantage to one car. I'm also opposed to appeasement by throwing some "popular" but largely ineffectual bone to the 1.6 just to shut them up. And you are right, I have been out of touch which is why I'm playing devil's advocate to call BS from both sides rather than taking a firm stand on either. Speaking of which, let's not over state the difficulties of the 1.6. With the adustable FPR and AFM combined with a wideband and other data, if it already has a clear advantage anywhere with Majors there would be people at the front bringing them.

[Jim Drago]

Jim, we're on the same page regarding pandering, socialistic handouts, whatever you want to call it, that would give a clear advantage to one car. I'm also opposed to appeasement by throwing some "popular" but largely ineffectual bone to the 1.6 just to shut them up. And you are right, I have been out of touch which is why I'm playing devil's advocate to call BS from both sides rather than taking a firm stand on either. Speaking of which, let's not over state the difficulties of the 1.6. With the adustable FPR and AFM combined with a wideband and other data, if it already has a clear advantage anywhere with Majors there would be people at the front bringing them.

see post 162

[FTodaro]

I have a question about trying to achieve parity. It's not specific to the 1.6, but it affects the 1.6 the most, because the MFG of the 1.6 is the least consistent, in parts.

Do you design the rules for the top prep car or the average prep car?

If you design the rules for the car that is average prep, not spending the money to flow parts match parts and spend 3 times more than it costs to build later models, with better parts, you leave the door open for the money teams to do that and build an over dog.

If you design the rules around the top prep car, matched everything, dynoed to the hilt, then you are going to pass on no benefit, to 90 % of the cars who's owners will not prep to the level needed to make the car competitive, under the rule set?

Which is part of the issue IMO.

[Steve Scheifler]

Jim, I think your perspective on relative build costs are not typical given your resources and reach, and what you would then have to charge for a finished car with labor etc. There are countless old 1.6 SMs available cheap enough that I'm confident I could have a well prepped car cheaper and much sooner than by starting the search for a good 1999 or later donor at a reasonable price.

[Steve Scheifler]

see post 162

See post 167.

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

Lol !

[Jim Drago]

Jim, I think your perspective on relative build costs are not typical given your resources and reach, and what you would then have to charge for a finished car with labor etc. There are countless old 1.6 SMs available cheap enough that I'm confident I could have a well prepped car cheaper and much sooner than by starting the search for a good 1999 or later donor at a reasonable price.

I have not flow tested an intake manifold or exhaust manifold in YEARS on NB cars. I have never had to send an afm off to be calibrated by the brake man. never had to come up with the next wafflemaker intake. Rarely do I need to adjust timing on the dyno on NB cars, it is literally a set it and forget it deal. I have never needed to buy a new torsen.. Just set lash and install. I think the gikens are $2000 now? Just the cost of the giken more than offsets the cost savings of the NA donor over the NB. You could possibly put a 1.6 together for close to the same price. However, if you factor in your time and actually build a car you would like to race, I am 100% confident that you will spend more time and money on the 1.6 car to achieve the same level of race car.

[Steve Scheifler]

Jim, You may have lost sight of the fact that historically, most production-based amateur race cars have been built at home by amateurs with a large investment of sweat equity. And as I said, we don't all have access to a huge pool of cheap donors. But even more to the point for many, a newbie could buy a "race-ready" 1.6 cheap, get through the schools (or what's left of them), do some track days and regionals, and think about "top prep" next season. THAT is the path the club needs to foster. Any racing is so expensive today that the average guy won't want to do that with a 1.6 if he believes that no matter what he spends later his car can't compete. He may be a future star, but the prospect of trying to later sell his boat anchor of a 1.6 and buy a later model is reason enough to look elsewhere or just stick with his street car and DEs. Those guys are out there, so even if you write off the mid-pack whiners who will never do what it takes regardless (paraphrasing your often stated position), the class, club and sport will benefit from a truly competitive 1.6.

[Jim Drago]

Jim, You may have lost sight of the fact that historically, most production-based amateur race cars have been built at home by amateurs with a large investment of sweat equity. And as I said, we don't all have access to a huge pool of cheap donors. But even more to the point for many, a newbie could buy a "race-ready" 1.6 cheap, get through the schools (or what's left of them), do some track days and regionals, and think about "top prep" next season. THAT is the path the club needs to foster. Any racing is so expensive today that the average guy won't want to do that with a 1.6 if he believes that no matter what he spend later his car can't compete. He may be a future star, but the prospect of trying to later sell his boat anchor of a 1.6 and buy a later model is reason enough to look elsewhere or just stick with his street car and DEs. Those guys are out there, so even if you write off the mid-pack whiners who will never do what it takes way (paraphrasing your often stated position), the class, club and sport will benefit from a truly competitive 1.6.

I think we are talking about two entirely different things..

I have no problem with your ideals above, actually agree with most.

But that is not what I was addressing. I was addressing the cost of building a race car ( whether it be in someones back yard or at Penske) It is more expensive to build a 1.6 car. This has nothing to due with my access to donors. It has to do with what I listed above. You and all others have the same access at this point as Copart and IAA now allow non dealers to buy there. I think if looking, many can buy cheaper than me as I don't scour craigslist etc. 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.

[Bench Racer]

The history of the 1.6 engine is interesting, before it was implemented in the Chick car, it was in the 88/89 323 GTX with a turbo. Before being in the GTX, it was a 1.3.

[mhiggins10]

Just wanted to add a quick data point for you guys to consider.  I took the race results from the 2014 SOWDIV season (where car years were noted) and dumped them into a spreadsheet.  It's quick and dirty, and in no way do I guarantee that it's 100% dead accurate, but it's a reasonable start in my mind.  

 

 

Looking at average finishing position across the season, by generation:

 

Majors Races:

NA: 12.40

NA18: 3.50 (this was one car, which was clearly well driven and likely well prepped)

NA: 8.79

 

Regional Races:

NA: 8.71

NA18: 10.43

NB: 7.03

 

All Races:

NA: 9.12

NA18: 8.89

NB: 7.44

 

 

For the regional races, we've got a pretty good balance.  Looks like 80 NA finishes and 78NB finishes with 31 NA drivers, 38NB drivers and 6 NA1.8 drivers.   Looks like, *on average*, the NA loses out by almost 2 finishing positions.

 

 

Take this for what it's worth- I know we will all continue to argue details of parity until we're blue in the face and find the outliers and insist that the only race that matters is Runoffs, at whatever track it's at this year, since you have to equalize the class for Top-Prep, tech shed legal, big money guys, at majors events, etc., etc., etc.  Some folks will argue that this is a meaningless analysis since the prep level of the cars, individual racer budgets and driver talent and experience weren't figured into it.  That said, I'm not seeing anyone else building about models or pulling numbers or DOING analysis to try to solve the problem, so it's a small start.

 

 

In the end, I know there are 31 NA drivers that show up regularly in my region to enjoy what SM has to offer, and I'm sure none would complain if the gap were closed a bit to help make up the average ~2 position disadvantage that these back-of-the-cocktail-napkin numbers show.

 

 

 

 

I would bet analysis over the entirety of the SM class would be interesting.  Considering I had to copy out of pdfs, paste into a text editor, shuffle around in Excel and add the generation info, I'm not taking on that job...

 

Happy to attach the spreadsheet I used to get these numbers to share with others, but evidently I am not permitted to upload that kind of file (.xlsx).

[Steve Scheifler]

I think we are talking about two entirely different things..

I have no problem with your ideals above, actually agree with most.

But that is not what I was addressing. I was addressing the cost of building a race car ( whether it be in someones back yard or at Penske) It is more expensive to build a 1.6 car. This has nothing to due with my access to donors. It has to do with what I listed above. You and all others have the same access at this point as Copart and IAA now allow non dealers to buy there. I think if looking, many can buy cheaper than me as I don't scour craigslist etc. 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.

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.

[Danny Steyn]

You have two versions of sm, under what circumstances would you build a 1.6?  

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

 

 

I might build under option three, but most likely would hold out for option 4. That is our problem

Jim

 

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!!! :-) 

[Caveman-kwebb99]

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.

 

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. 

[Jim Drago]

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!!! :-)

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

Like me, 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 you do.

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

[Caveman-kwebb99]

 

 

 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.

 

 

 

How do you know this is what the average Joe SM racer wants.  Most are weekend warriors who want to drink beer and race, very few aspire to win the national championship IMO.  Everyone does want to do their personal best any weekend they show up to any track to race.  

 

Most leaders always have an adgenda, at least you posted yours even if its not what everyone else wants you to be doing on the SMAC.

[Danny Steyn]

How do you know this is what the average Joe SM racer wants.  Most are weekend warriors who want to drink beer and race, very few aspire to win the national championship IMO.  Everyone does want to do their personal best any weekend they show up to any track to race.  

 

Most leaders always have an adgenda, at least you posted yours even if its not what everyone else wants you to be doing on the SMAC.

 

Kyle - how does increasing participation work against the drivers in this class.