118 replies to this topic

[Brandon]

I run a 97. Never felt the need to cheat like that. I cheat other ways like removing airbag wiring, removing the speaker wires from the doors. Running my wipers lower than the stock location. You know, real cheats with real performance advantages unlike chipped ECUs.

 

If proof and evidence was as simple as what you just put forward, the 1.6 parity debate would have been settled by you guys long ago. You proved Mikes point and are also playing both sides of the fence. But I understand that. You run a NA 1.8 . And like Mike said, the key to get something changed is to get together enough people running the platform to complain. Which is a form of evidence I guess.

 

I've put forth a similar argument to yours. The evidence that the NA 1.8 needs something is that if the big boys(pun intended) aren't running a particular year then it must be disadvantaged. That didn't fly.

 

As a case study and to help us determine a clear track to bringing parity to the NA 1.8 so we can avoid the 5+ years of back and forth that happened on the 1.6, what was the clear evidence that compelled the rule changes for the 1.6? Lets fast track this effort and model the 1.6 path.

 

That's very noble of you to not "cheat" in the way I described yet that doesn't seem to get us (NA1.8 drivers) anything except for being able to claim to have a "fully prepped" version of our car.  Which doesn't seem to amount to a hill of beans when it comes to 'data' everyone tosses back in our face as required before accepting a change proposal.

 

And I'm not only playing each side of the fence but also the top: I'm on the SMAC! *thumbs up*

 

Again, I've made no plans whatsoever to pursue any of the items I proposed.  However they all directly mitigate the known underlying limitations of the platform nor are they are an exploitation or expansion of what the 99+ owners did in 2013.  These "cheats" would essentially make my car "spec" with a '99-00 outside of the aerodynamics and everyone feels a '99 is competitive with a '00, right?

[TommyB]

I'm not sure how many divisions have adopted the SM2 class but, somewhere along the line  it appears some folks in the NE division thought there was a significant enough parity issue to establish a separate class for the NA's....or was this just an easy way to allow more cars to double dip and increase revenue ....or both?

 

I still wish someone would educate me on how one takes 50lbs off a fully prepared and compliant car...Unless you can replace glass with lexan, steel with fiberglass/ CF ,etc and since these aren't Prod or GT cars you can't do this, right?

[Jamz14]

That's very noble of you to not "cheat" in the way I described yet that doesn't seem to get us (NA1.8 drivers) anything except for being able to claim to have a "fully prepped" version of our car.  Which doesn't seem to amount to a hill of beans when it comes to 'data' everyone tosses back in our face as required before accepting a change proposal.
 
And I'm not only playing each side of the fence but also the top: I'm on the SMAC! *thumbs up*
 
Again, I've made no plans whatsoever to pursue any of the items I proposed.  However they all directly mitigate the known underlying limitations of the platform nor are they are an exploitation or expansion of what the 99+ owners did in 2013.  These "cheats" would essentially make my car "spec" with a '99-00 outside of the aerodynamics and everyone feels a '99 is competitive with a '00, right?

huh?

[Rob Burgoon]

 

 

I still wish someone would educate me on how one takes 50lbs off a fully prepared and compliant car...Unless you can replace glass with lexan, steel with fiberglass/ CF ,etc and since these aren't Prod or GT cars you can't do this, right?

 

Calm yo tits, that was hypothetical.

 

I'll bang my usual drum of just putting an asterisk on the spec line for 1.6 and 1.8 that says "deprecated, no longer fully supported.  Recommend upgrade"

[Danica Davison]

You can take 50 pounds out easy if you have a 50 pound lead weight in the car to begin with 

[CarbonRacer]

I cannot run a cool suit because my car will be way over weight. My car has no added weight so for my car to lose 50 lbs. I would have to cut my left leg off and use a hand clutch.

[Danica Davison]

How bad do you want to win though   It might be worth it

[TommyB]

its one thing to put a new number on the side of the car , its another to get to that number, especially down.

 

No lead weight in my car as I'm 6' , 215 lb's with a 36-37 inch waste. I'm proud to say this is only 15-20 lbs heavier than my weight out of" basic "training" back in the early 70's....

so at age 67 not a lot of execss flab hanging off these bones.

 

Not sure what driver weight was used initially to set a base line but 175# would probably sound about right, which would mean anyone pushing 200 +/- is at a real disadvantage .

 

Maybe putting Danica in the car is the answer

[Danica Davison]

Tommy do you have a cool suit in the car?

[Brandon]

huh?

 

There were three items in my post - which of them have I done my usual "unclear clarification"?

[Jamz14]

The only thing I understood is that you are playing both sides of the fence.

[Bench Racer]

I cannot run a cool suit because my car will be way over weight. My car has no added weight so for my car to lose 50 lbs. I would have to cut my left leg off and use a hand clutch.

Race ready car weight without driver?

 

Driver with gear weight?

 

My 1990 with 1 gallon of gas, 2 gallon cool suite water and extra cage tubes is 2020 pounds.

If one builds/buys a car which is over weight, that's a real issue.

[TommyB]

John, no cool suit as of now.

 

It seems as though if you are just physically to big for the class/car kinda tough cookies.

 

Any talks about reducing weight of the NA 1.8's will probably be fruitless for me or anyone else facing the  same issue.

 

Although I don't know him personally, it sounds like Drago is a big guy.

 

He either doesn't drive a NA or if he does,he drives the pants off it.  Just say'n.

[Danica Davison]

Okay, I see your car on your profile is a 99, not an NA so I was confused because I am 6'3 240 and had to put weight in my 99.

[Bench Racer]

Drago is a large dude, 6' 3" ish, 300 # ish, all guess work.

 

Drago drives 99 plus cars.

[Bench Racer]

TommyB, sorry for asking your weight, re-read. Your car must be heavy. I'm about equal weight and height to you along with 7 years older and come in just under 2275 minimum weight with some added weight.

[CarbonRacer]

I have owned two different 97 NA 1.8's and there is no way the weight can be reduced to 2020 lbs. I would have to remove another 130 lbs. out of the car and I don't have a cool suit or have extra tubes in the roll cage.

[Bench Racer]

My only point of offering that a 1990 1.6 can be built to 2020 pounds is that it's real. Also I have read on this site info from a SM prep shop that a 99 can be built to 2100 pounds. Not a slam or flame, but with those numbers it seems a NA 1.8 could be built between 2020 and 2100 pounds. 94-97 minimum weight 2350 pounds.

[Jamz14]

2020 lbs is a stretch on a 97. But sub 2100 is possible with only minor rule consideration. At 2150 or so right now.

[Bench Racer]

James, I qualified my 2020 pounds to a 1990 spec line. I didn't  say a 1994-1997 weighs 2020.