1001 replies to this topic

[Jim Drago]

In your estimation what would 1mm or restriction do to the car?
 
Sean

We have a difference on opinion in most of the rest. I can say there is plenty to do on my cars, so I have a hard time believing there is nothing to do on anyone's cars, not yours in particular, in general.

As far as plates.. If the consensus is we need a 5 HP header or a compression bump.. 1mm is not going to get you there. You are likely talking another 2-3mm. Another 2-3 mm plate reduction ( IMO) will force us to build 1.6 cars which as you know I think is a very bad idea for the class. That being said, only a 2-3 mm plate will have any noticeable effect. Not an easy call IMO in either direction.

[MPR22]

I concur with Sean. We coul just slow-down the NB cars a little. What if we took away the adjustable timing wheel?

Then people would cheat the ECUs.  That is why it was added.  Too many people had cheated ECU's so the adjustable FP and timing plate were added to negate the "at the time" untechable cheat.  

[MPR22]

What about the guys/gals with '94-97 cars that are pretty close now and just need a tweak?  Would slowing the NB cars just a touch make sense there?  

The SMAC should be finding a way to raise the NA 1.8 rev limiter.  That has been one of the weakest points on the cars that I have raced.   

[Sean - MiataCage]

This all makes a lot of sense. The rest of the SMAC are you listening ? The only issues- All 99-05 cars have to buy a new plate. With a 1.6 header only about 10 will really do it. The rest will complain about the cost and labor. Give the 1.6 the turn signal and intake wrap and wee how they do. Then we can look into plate changes.

 

Thanks Tom..... To be fair to the rest of the SMAC, we have all discussed this.  I will let them choose to give their stance if they so desire.  As with life people view things through their own glasses and some are not always the same.  I believe the discussion never gets very far in any circle because the "99 guys will never go for it".  The past and current SMAC all want what is best for the class and I believe that we will get there.  Due to past SMAC and other peoples work we are already very, very close.  Fine tuning at best

 

I agree with your assesment.  Lets start with turn signal etc and re-visit plate if need be later.

 

Thanks.... Sean

[LarryKing]

 

Then people would cheat the ECUs. That is why it was added.

 

Easy fix. Claiming rule for ECUs and/or SCCA hands-out sealed ECUs at each event. (Majors at least)

 

Ought to do this anyway.

[38bfast]

Here is the issue with smaller plates on the 99/VVT cars. For the most part they are a direct shift down of the entire power curve. A good 1.6 can produce the same or more power up top and added higher rev limit. So the problem between the 1.6 and the NBs it not on the top end. The 1.6 has legs up top. Reducing plate size would just make this disparity much bigger between cars. The SMAC has tested -2mm on both the VVT and 99 cars. Bottom line is plates do not address the differences between cars it actually makes it worse. 

 

Adding weight to the NBs. At this point they are believed to be maxed out in weight. They are killing bearings and tires right now. I think it would be a tough fight to convince the NB gang to add more weight to accommodate the 1.6. It would be a cost hit to every NB car in tire and bearing cost. That being said weight is what would somewhat address the torque disparity between cars. I don't believe we could make the 1.6 cars any lighter and it would be a very tough sell to make the NBs heavier. 

 

The other argument is that the parity between the 99 and VVT is extremely close, So lets not chance screwing that up. It would also mess with the balance of the 1.8, although not being spot on we know and have data to where we currently are at. 

 

 

So bottom line is weights and plates are not the slam-dunk fix all solution. 

[FTodaro]

Easy fix. Claiming rule for ECUs and/or SCCA hands-out sealed ECUs at each event. (Majors at least)

 

Ought to do this anyway.

That does not work with the VVT as the ECU is specific to the key. so you would have to swap a lot more that just the ECU.

 

But I will say, we should include in the discussion, any one caught cheating an ECU should get a one year, Time off for bad behavior penalty, if its undeniable they cheated. 

[Johnny D]

A lot of good points here. I like it's being put on the table for people to see how difficult this is.

Since Sean has the top prep can he do some testing ?

I've done the 37mm Rp and it sucks the life out of it.

I'd like to see +2/2 header, I see the concern on the top end. Can you use the SIR to get up top and then hold it.

This doesn't have to do with Majors or people building them or there's none in my region.

Are the NB guys a little worried any add will give them some competition at Mid-O ?

Id be up for letting the region make supps for RP/WT parity or at least let them play with the idea, maybe on a regional level

J~

[James York]

A couple of thoughts.  I guess I can throw my 2 cents in here.

 

First, constant debate/moaning will never end as long we are not on a single platform.  Someone will always feel shafted.  While probably unpopular to some, in my opinion two different SM classes would remove a need for the difficult balancing.

 

Second, go back to more street DOT type tires.  The Hoosier can make a hero out of many, and withstands the abuse of the heavier 99+ better than the old RA1's did.  Putting the class on something similar to the RA-1 type tire, would hurt the 99+ more than the lighter cars.

 

Hoosier makes a great tire, just maybe too good.

[Blake Thompson]

While probably unpopular to some, in my opinion two different SM classes would remove a need for the difficult balancing.

 

There are two gens of NA8, a NA6, NB1, and NB2 - each are balanced to one another.  So pair off the NA6 and listen to the NA8 bitch in our place.

[38bfast]

Potential challenges with adopting headers,

 

Lots of designs out there. We have seen reports from 2/2 to 5/5. and whats to say better design may still be out there. 

 

So if we make a rule that makes any header available we do not know where the limit is. Sean could invest $10000 dollars developing one that could make 10/10. its a variable that is out of our control if we make them open. The cost could be wildly variable as well. Kinda the issue we had with open pressure plates and clutches we have had in the past. 

 

next option would be to spec a header. To accomplish this a manufacture would have to be held accountable for producing their product within a tight tolerance. Possibly could be done but has not been investigated. I am sure the price would reflect the request. 

[Jim Drago]

Easy fix. Claiming rule for ECUs and/or SCCA hands-out sealed ECUs at each event. (Majors at least)
 
Ought to do this anyway.

I agree on ECU, but you can still get the timing without ecu and without plate. Saul and I had it for years before the adjustable timing wheel was legal. It is a PITA and a lot of parts matching, but very doable.

[James York]

There are two gens of NA8, a NA6, NB1, and NB2 - each are balanced to one another.  So pair off the NA6 and listen to the NA8 bitch in our place.

That is not the logical split...

 

But it doesn't really matter.  This is the same discussion each year.  As long as there is differences, someone will not be happy.  I remember having a 45 mm plate in my 99.

[Bench Racer]

WOW James, we do agree on part of your post ^. Yours, "the Hoosier can make a hero out of many", mine, just as rain takes away some hero status (even with the Hoosier wets )

 

 

That ^ aside following are the only participation stats I could find on the SCCA site.

 

2015 Majors total Spec Miata event participation                 792. 23% compared to 2014 Non Majors

2015 Non Majors Spec Miata event participation thru July 1514. (someone have the 100% numbers for 2015?)

2014 Non Majors Spec Miata event participation              3,405.

 

Ralph, Jim said only 10 folks would buy a header and Sean suggested 25 out his way. 50 headers for a manufacture, Racing Beat, big deal. Sell 49 of them and I'll take the 50th header. If I remember correctly either the SMAC or the CRB or Mazda took compression off the table and until I have the facts, I presume the header was taken off the tables by the same folks or any one of them. Air and header weld clean-up will not get the 1.6 upwards to a next level, note I didn't say a constant podium car.

 

Jim, I'm going to forget I read your last post about illegal.

[Jim Drago]

A couple of thoughts.  I guess I can throw my 2 cents in here.
 
First, constant debate/moaning will never end as long we are not on a single platform.  Someone will always feel shafted.  While probably unpopular to some, in my opinion two different SM classes would remove a need for the difficult balancing.
 
Second, go back to more street DOT type tires.  The Hoosier can make a hero out of many, and withstands the abuse of the heavier 99+ better than the old RA1's did.  Putting the class on something similar to the RA-1 type tire, would hurt the 99+ more than the lighter cars.
 
Hoosier makes a great tire, just maybe too good.

Hoosier will make us a thinner tire, like a 195. Collins recommended that a few years ago and Hoosier was on board when I looked into it.

[Blake Thompson]

That is not the logical split...

 

But it doesn't really matter.  This is the same discussion each year.  As long as there is differences, someone will not be happy.  I remember having a 45 mm plate in my 99.

 

Right, like when all those liquidated NCs get lonely.  

[Jim Drago]

WOW James, we do agree on part of your post ^. Yours, "the Hoosier can make a hero out of many", mine, just as rain takes away some hero status (even with the Hoosier wets )
 
 
That ^ aside following are the only participation stats I could find on the SCCA site.
 
2015 Majors total Spec Miata event participation                 792. 23% compared to 2014 Non Majors
2015 Non Majors Spec Miata event participation thru July 1514. (someone have the 100% numbers for 2015?)
2014 Non Majors Spec Miata event participation              3,405.
 
Ralph, Jim said only 10 folks would buy a header and Sean suggested 25 out his way. 50 headers for a manufacture, Racing Beat, big deal. Sell 49 of them and I'll take the 50th header. If I remember correctly either the SMAC or the CRB or Mazda took compression off the table and until I have the facts, I presume the header was taken off the tables by the same folks or any one of them. Air and header weld clean-up will not get the 1.6 upwards to a next level, note I didn't say a constant podium car.
 
Jim, I'm going to forget I read your last post about illegal.

Why in the world do I answer
Jim did not say 10 cars, Tom did, Jim quoted it
No specs were violated in my timing, timing was not speced ... no parts modified, 100% legal!

[38bfast]

Bench I would think just about every 1.6 would add the header if made available. JMHO. Its one part that makes everyone feel good about bolting on. Shiny new SS part. lots of bling factor. 

 

Its not as easy to just pick one out of the bunch as a example. Currently we know nothing about RB header manufacturing process. It may be very tight or it may have a lot of variance. It has not been investigated. 

[38bfast]

My thoughts on what if between a Header and compression, i would favor compression. Has about the same affect on curve shape but is so much more controllable in tech. Exact same for everyone with no variance. Path of least resistance with most predictable results. 

[Johnny D]

Instead of the header, what if somebody did a (top prep) on a manifold (grind, etc) what would you get ?

We have enough of those.

Just throwing out ideas.
J~