Spec Miata Community   
search | help | calendar | games | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello Spec Miata Community » SpecMiata.com » Spec Miata » Runoffs notes from Jim Daniels (Page 2)

 - Email this page to someone! | Subscribe To Topic
Page 2 of 7 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  next » 
 
Author Topic: Runoffs notes from Jim Daniels
Dusty Bottoms Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
99 all the way!

Region: Lone Star
Year : 1990
Posts: 4253
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dusty Bottoms     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

yawn....

--------------------
"Your victory is tainted! Asterisk! Asterisk!!!"--Lisa Simpson

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Dusty Bottoms:
yawn....

The best post yet! [yep]

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

All these torque modifiers have already been discussed by SMAC/CRB and the outcome was weight and rp adjustments, fully knowing that the track specific and Runoffs torque problem would remain the same. Please correct me if I'm wrong Dave, Dave, Mike, Sam and Tom, but I don't see anything changing in that regard.

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

Dusty Bottoms Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
99 all the way!

Region: Lone Star
Year : 1990
Posts: 4253
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dusty Bottoms     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by B Wilson:
All these torque modifiers have already been discussed by SMAC/CRB and the outcome was weight and rp adjustments, fully knowing that the track specific and Runoffs torque problem would remain the same. Please correct me if I'm wrong Dave, Dave, Mike, Sam and Tom, but I don't see anything changing in that regard.

-bw

It's amazing nobody is willing to change how things are done and take a risk...on a "job" that doesn't pay...not only does it not pay, it SUCKS! For me there was only one reason to volunteer and that was to bring change...but at the SMAC level, there isn't much you can do. (no pressure Draahhhgo). [Big Grin]

--------------------
"Your victory is tainted! Asterisk! Asterisk!!!"--Lisa Simpson

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Sucks even worse for Draahhgo when folks accuse him of pushing rules to sell parts. Hoping I never hear that one again, as it's absolutely not true. These things aren't brought up and decided by one guy.

I trust the SMAC/CRB/BOD and feel they have the best interest of SM at heart. It's our job to give input and this forum helps us sort out our collective thinking.

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I am not sure why a track specific rule for the runoffs (road america), could not be feasible. There is a parity issue at that track, IMHO, but, it isn't at most other tracks. I want a class with all SM cars, but also want to feel like we have an equal chance at winning.

One of the biggest problems we have running a 1.6 at the runoffs, is the lack of other 1.6 cars to work with in qualifying and racing. Your not going to get a 99 to work with you. The 99 car and 1.6 cars are fast in opposite parts of the track.

We (1.6) need help at the runoffs, as long as it is held at R/A, how to do that is the $64000.00 question. If we have the same situation next year, we will be running NASA next year. That isn't the best 1.6 track either but better than R/A and much closer for us to attend

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by tburas:
I vote for Playing Golf or This; This is Badass

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNqx8XZIWnI

Or this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXIC3oa-kb0&feature=player_embedded

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

mr von charbonneau
Member

Region: 83
Car #: any
Year : any
Posts: 229
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for mr von charbonneau   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

i will drive a 1.6 any where one on one with a
99 pick the place winner takes all and end it .

will fly tommorrow

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Sure you say that this week [Big Grin]

Congrats!!!

-b

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

mr von charbonneau
Member

Region: 83
Car #: any
Year : any
Posts: 229
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for mr von charbonneau   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

why not hey bruce come to sebring my pick 1.6
you drive my d-tuned 99

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I would SO love to do that!!! Keep that offer open until next year and I'm in! Right now I've got a regional champtionship and a really long race to win!

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

Tom Sager Made Donation to Website
Member

Region: Chicago
Car #: 94
Posts: 176
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Tom Sager     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by B Wilson:
Sucks even worse for Draahhgo when folks accuse him of pushing rules to sell parts. Hoping I never hear that one again, as it's absolutely not true. These things aren't brought up and decided by one guy.

I trust the SMAC/CRB/BOD and feel they have the best interest of SM at heart. It's our job to give input and this forum helps us sort out our collective thinking.

-bw

Agree. SMAC and CRB have done some very good work and they have devoted very valuable time in doing it.

I don't think this parity improvement thing is all that tough. We're never going to get to perfection but I think that we can get closer than we are.

Essentially we have weight, handling and power gaps between the cars. We can bring them closer. That might mean that one car or the other is impacted more. So be it. Classes evolve, there is no stopping that and we should feel fortunate that we have a class where staying competitive does not mean buying an entirely different car every few years. Parity improvement trumps shot term dissatisfaction about the changes IMO. It won't be free for everyone. Worth it when you consider longevity for older cars and competitive balance.

The SMAC and CRB should have all the data points they need to make adjustments. They just have to have a detemination and a mandate to do it.

1.6 needs more power and more weight
'99 needs less power and less weight.
1.8 is in between and can adjust up or down as needed.

'99 subframe makes cars more the same. Do it.
1.6 can be allowed higher compression, header, or more if needed.
'99 with adjustable FP and timing can be given a smaller restrictor plate.
Adjust weights to bring all cars closer together.

Similar power, weight and handling among the cars will reduce track specific advantages.

David Dewhurst
Veteran Member

Posts: 574
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for David Dewhurst     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by JIM DANIELS:

Lastly, no way in hell any driver in any level of 1.6 will ever beat a '99 at this track.

Same old shit I said last year.

1.6er's [banghead] , we could band together, cheat up (for Road America) our cars like some of the 99's did (fp, timing/CRB made them legal) & the CRB would make it all legal. Naw, that wouldn't work because they can see & touch our cheats.

YES, the SMAC & CRB work real hard, thank you. [thumbsup] BUT, this is the 21st century, let's be inclusive to the 1.6 at Road America. [help] SMAC/CRB, it's time to move off dead center with a different torque parity maker for Road America. Please, don't anyone expound about the suspension update if it flys. IMHJ, (I understand torque & bump steer) that isn't going to do $hit to the race results outcome at the pointy end.

I understand few of us compared to the total number race at Road America except that we race there several times a year.

Not writing any letters because I have my own sign (from Collins at the SM meeting) "Thank you for your input".

--------------------
Have Fun [Wink]

David Dewhurst
CenDiv
Milwaukee Region
Spec Miata #14

JIM DANIELS Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
Site Founder

Region: Mid-South
Car #: 76
Year : "You Pick"
Posts: 4422
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for JIM DANIELS   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Look at other classes, what happens when one car wins twice in a row, or even once?

We need to forget the spec word and treat these three cars like they are, different.

Based on what the CRB does for other classes, the '99 should get weight. If the 1.6 wins two, the weight comes off, just like other classes.

Bruce, put up your car, I will drive for you in the Champs '99 at Sebring [Smile] (after a quick tuning session at the dyno of course).

Champ, the point is that you "probably" could not win at RAM with a 1.6 or that would have been what you brought. Just trying to make it fair for the majority of the class even if only for one year out of every three.

--------------------
Jim Daniels

MAZDARACERS.COM

Steve D. Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Once you get past the gag reflex, the jelly ain't bad!

Region: Atlanta
Car #: 30
Year : 1999
Posts: 652
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Steve D.     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by JIM DANIELS:
Just trying to make it fair for the majority of the class ...

Finally some altruism in this class!

Kyle Burkhardt
Member

Posts: 111
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kyle Burkhardt     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by B Wilson:
Why should we care about the runoffs results, because I feel that the future health of SM relies on everyone having a chance to be competitive from the weekly regional races to the big show at the end of the year. Yes, holding the runoffs at RA has amplified this problem. It is pretty evident that there's a lot of people that think it's okay to only have one year being competitive for the runoffs, but it appears that ALL of those people also own that year.

-bw

+1. Less than 1% of SM racers do Runoffs/NASA Championships. Splitting up the classes would hurt SM at the regional level.

--------------------
Kyle Burkhardt
NASA Midwest
#12 SM

Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by cnj:
Deja vu circa 09.  Are we are going to have exactly the same discussions we had last year after Runoffs?  An avalanche of posts with 90 owners complaining that the 99 is an over dog, the 99 owners saying it ain't so and pointing to prep and driver skill.  Finally most people tacitly agree that RA is a 99 track and should not dictate modifications to the cars for the entire country? 

Do we know how to get the cars more equal (not the same as parity)?  Sure.  Make the suspension more equal (so they handle the same, thus no advantage).  Make the weight more equal (so corner entry and hence driving style is more equal).  Make the engine power and more importantly torque curves more equal (as Mark Pombo said a few months ago regarding his 90 - "TORQUE, I need more TORQUE!").  Can we do this?  Only if people are willing to allow the SMAC/others to be creative in their suggestions and are willing to spend a little money on their cars.  However as a class we resist spending any money, even modest amounts, on changes.  Unless its someone else spending the money of course.

Do we have parity right now?  I would not personally take a 90 to RA.  Some did.  But in my back yard in SW Div I get spanked by 90's all too often and I know I have a highly prepped 99 and would like to think I am a decent driver.  The evidence for 90's doing well at several of the SW Div tracks is not apocryphal.

Split the class?  Sure and then I race against half the numbers I am running with right now.  Makes changing to Spec Ford Racer sound very appealing.  Lets not mess up large fields. 

Craig J

craig
Your posts are always well thought out and well written. I agree 100%

The class will NEVER be split Nationally.

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

For those that don't know,
Altruism (pronounced /ˈæltruːɪzəm/) is selfless concern for the welfare of others.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Drago:
quote:
Originally posted by cnj:
Deja vu circa 09.  Are we are going to have exactly the same discussions we had last year after Runoffs?  An avalanche of posts with 90 owners complaining that the 99 is an over dog, the 99 owners saying it ain't so and pointing to prep and driver skill.  Finally most people tacitly agree that RA is a 99 track and should not dictate modifications to the cars for the entire country? 

Do we know how to get the cars more equal (not the same as parity)?  Sure.  Make the suspension more equal (so they handle the same, thus no advantage).  Make the weight more equal (so corner entry and hence driving style is more equal).  Make the engine power and more importantly torque curves more equal (as Mark Pombo said a few months ago regarding his 90 - "TORQUE, I need more TORQUE!").  Can we do this?  Only if people are willing to allow the SMAC/others to be creative in their suggestions and are willing to spend a little money on their cars.  However as a class we resist spending any money, even modest amounts, on changes.  Unless its someone else spending the money of course.

Do we have parity right now?  I would not personally take a 90 to RA.  Some did.  But in my back yard in SW Div I get spanked by 90's all too often and I know I have a highly prepped 99 and would like to think I am a decent driver.  The evidence for 90's doing well at several of the SW Div tracks is not apocryphal.

Split the class?  Sure and then I race against half the numbers I am running with right now.  Makes changing to Spec Ford Racer sound very appealing.  Lets not mess up large fields. 

Craig J

craig
Your posts are always well thought out and well written. I agree 100%

The class will NEVER be split Nationally.

Hmmm, seems I've heard about NEVER and national classes before [Smile]

Taking my conversations offline for now, job bekons.

Upgrade option should be considered asap!

I don't think anyone really wants to split the class. It's the easy way out -- but understand it won't happen at the national level (that's what i said earlier).

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

KG
Member

Region: dmvr
Year : 1990 and 1995
Posts: 112
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for KG   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Here is a novel idea do absolutely nothing.

Leave it alone for a whole year.

Wouldn't that be something.

(I'm planning to go to the runoffs in 2011 in a 1990. I know crazy)


Kurtis

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by mr von charbonneau:
i will drive a 1.6 any where one on one with a
99 pick the place winner takes all and end it .

will fly tommorrow

Congrats on the win you did a hell of a job, thought the Gorrilla was unbeatable.

Now about the 1.6, you missed your chance, at the runoffs [Big Grin]

Pat

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

d mathias Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Member

Region: OVR
Car #: 88
Year : 1991
Posts: 2401
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for d mathias     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

They also serve who fill the field.

D.B. Cutler Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Huge Member

Region: Detroit
Car #: 5
Year : 1991
Posts: 1029
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for D.B. Cutler     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

If we don't want to allow 1.6L guys to change to 1.8L, how about letting us change to more torquey cams and a lighter flywheel?

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Cutler, I don't want to pee in your Wheaties, but go ask your engine engineer friends how easy it is to "add torque" (above 5500 rpm) to a modern high-revving 1.6L motor by fiddling with the cams. Aftermarket cams are good at adding power at the highest flow situations, but most of the time they rob "torque" versus stock cams. If the Church of the 1.6 is serious about this, then buy some cams, do some tests, and write your letters to the CRB.

Similarly, the flywheel ain't gonna matter much where you need it (all those times when the motor isn't changing RPM very fast to begin with).

If you're going to ask for something, at least ask for something that might actually HELP ... like an overbore allowance, a 1.8 conversion, getting rid of the MAF, getting a Zoloft prescription, etc.

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

'Strongbad'
Member

Region: Atlanta
Car #: 28
Year : 1992
Posts: 14
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for 'Strongbad'     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

There is nothing wrong with the 1.6's, except that the class was hijacked by the 1.8's! 1.6's outnumber the 1.8's by 3:1 or 4:1, yet need the most help and have to spend the most money to keep up??? Bring on the class war!

Or, have SCCA approve a 1.6 only National class and watch another +60 car field at the Runoffs in addition to the 99 class! Sounds like easy money for the SCCA or NASA.

Joseph Strong (1.6 driver)

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

It has been explained to me, that the light flywheel will not do much for the 1.6. The only real benefits would be in the 1st and 2nd gear range, but not in the usable range of our SM. I want more torque as well, but I am not sure this would be the panacea that the 1.6 community is looking for.

Pat

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

Colin MacLean Verified Driver
Fly Fifer

Region: Atlanta
Posts: 845
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Colin MacLean     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Talk of throwing parts at the 1.6 to make it "more competitive" just makes me shake my head. A Mazdaspeed $25 part is all that is required to equalize these cars. You slow the overdog down, you don't spend money making the others faster. The restrictor also has the benefit that you can tweak the balance between cars very easily, once you give the 1.6 say a flywheel you are now stuck with that decision for 3+ years. All well and good if we keep the runoffs at Road America but if they ever move back to Mid Ohio or even somewhere like Barber it'd be a different story!

--------------------
Colin MacLean
Flyin' MacLean Motorsports

d mathias Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Member

Region: OVR
Car #: 88
Year : 1991
Posts: 2401
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for d mathias     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Dwayne, What about a real header for the 1.6? Would that help?

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by 'Strongbad':
There is nothing wrong with the 1.6's, except that the class was hijacked by the 1.8's! 1.6's outnumber the 1.8's by 3:1 or 4:1, yet need the most help and have to spend the most money to keep up??? Bring on the class war!

Or, have SCCA approve a 1.6 only National class and watch another +60 car field at the Runoffs in addition to the 99 class! Sounds like easy money for the SCCA or NASA.

Joseph Strong (1.6 driver)

The 99s and 1.8s already out number 1.6s in many regions and within the next couple years it won't even be close. The notion that 1.6 owners should not have to spend money because they make up the majority of the fields just does not hold true anymore. Most new cars today are 99s and there is no reason the think that trend will not continue; they just make better race cars. My personal opinion is we will not see any changes to the cars because many, including myself, believe they are already equal except for maybe at RA (I have no idea if they are or are not). They are certainly equal at Barber, Sebring, PBIR, Daytona, Homestead, and Roebling.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

'Strongbad'
Member

Region: Atlanta
Car #: 28
Year : 1992
Posts: 14
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for 'Strongbad'     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Can someone (SCCA, NASA, Mazdaspeed?) provide real data regarding the actual count of 1.6's, 1.8's, and +99's that have been built or are in competition?

Mark Drennan Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
Champion - '08 SOPAC / '07 SFR

Region: SFR & CalClub
Car #: Various
Year : 1994
Posts: 131
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Mark Drennan     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
quote:
Originally posted by 'Strongbad':
There is nothing wrong with the 1.6's, except that the class was hijacked by the 1.8's! 1.6's outnumber the 1.8's by 3:1 or 4:1, yet need the most help and have to spend the most money to keep up??? Bring on the class war!

Or, have SCCA approve a 1.6 only National class and watch another +60 car field at the Runoffs in addition to the 99 class! Sounds like easy money for the SCCA or NASA.

Joseph Strong (1.6 driver)

The 99s and 1.8s already out number 1.6s in many regions and within the next couple years it won't even be close. The notion that 1.6 owners should not have to spend money because they make up the majority of the fields just does not hold true anymore. Most new cars today are 99s and there is no reason the think that trend will not continue; they just make better race cars. My personal opinion is we will not see any changes to the cars because many, including myself, believe they are already equal except for maybe at RA (I have no idea if they are or are not). They are certainly equal at Barber, Sebring, PBIR, Daytona, Homestead, and Roebling.
BS - they aren't equal and the only way to make them equal is to split the class. Equal lap times doesn't mean equal.

Take your pick...

1) an ever increasing number of disgruntled 1.6 & 1.8 drivers, many of whom eventually will leave SM because of this BS...myself included.

2) two classes, both with large fields, and no endless bitching/defending about parity. Sure, there will be some teething pains initially but it's what's best for the long-term health of our sport and will provide for much better racing.

volante Verified Driver
Member

Region: Mid-Div
Car #: 43
Year : 1995
Posts: 605
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for volante     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Colin is so right...Why is everyone so against slowing down the 99???Seems to me put a smaller RP on and maybe take a bit of weight off and your done.That way the rest of the class spends nothing!!!No splitting of the class,no subframes,cams,flywheels,etc.The 99's owners just giggle everytime they get off the dyno!!!

--------------------
volante

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I don't think the 99 is anywhere near out numbering the 1.6, but probably new builds they are for sure.

I know someone people will take this the wrong way because of business considerations, but there is no business in building 1.6 cars but there is in building 99 cars. The guys that build the cars have the most to loose if the 1.6 car was to become the cars to have. There are many 1.6 cars to be had, cheap, and that is bad for some who build cars for a living. Not trying to start a flame war, just the way I see it.

Pat

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Drennan:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
quote:
Originally posted by 'Strongbad':
There is nothing wrong with the 1.6's, except that the class was hijacked by the 1.8's! 1.6's outnumber the 1.8's by 3:1 or 4:1, yet need the most help and have to spend the most money to keep up??? Bring on the class war!

Or, have SCCA approve a 1.6 only National class and watch another +60 car field at the Runoffs in addition to the 99 class! Sounds like easy money for the SCCA or NASA.

Joseph Strong (1.6 driver)

The 99s and 1.8s already out number 1.6s in many regions and within the next couple years it won't even be close. The notion that 1.6 owners should not have to spend money because they make up the majority of the fields just does not hold true anymore. Most new cars today are 99s and there is no reason the think that trend will not continue; they just make better race cars. My personal opinion is we will not see any changes to the cars because many, including myself, believe they are already equal except for maybe at RA (I have no idea if they are or are not). They are certainly equal at Barber, Sebring, PBIR, Daytona, Homestead, and Roebling.
BS - they aren't equal and the only way to make them equal is to split the class. Equal lap times doesn't mean equal.

Take your pick...

1) an ever increasing number of disgruntled 1.6 & 1.8 drivers, many of whom eventually will leave SM because of this BS...myself included.

2) two classes, both with large fields, and no endless bitching/defending about parity. Sure, there will be some teething pains initially but it's what's best for the long-term health of our sport and will provide for much better racing.

Don't let the facts get in your way! We are not talking lap times but race results. The cars are equal at the tracks I mentioned; all you have to do is take a look at the race results. This year we have seen different 1.6s win at Daytona, Sebring, Barber, PBIR, Homestead, and Roebling against some of the fastest 99 in the country (including your runoffs winner). What's not equal? The prep, driving skill, or the car? RA may be different, as I said I don't know. But what I do know is that 1.6s are winning races and they do not make up the majority of the field anymore in many locations. In my opinion there is no reason to split the class or make changes for one track that many will not even go to.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

'Strongbad'
Member

Region: Atlanta
Car #: 28
Year : 1992
Posts: 14
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for 'Strongbad'     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Since I am not a 99 driver I might be wrong here, but I'm guessing a number of 99 drivers would love to loose the ballast and the RP in order to see what the car can really do. If there are enough cars then you could have your own class (maybe include the MX5)!
The ARRC should be real interesting for this reason. Kudos to Butch and the Atl Region for thinking out of the box with the miata classes!

Steve D. Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Once you get past the gag reflex, the jelly ain't bad!

Region: Atlanta
Car #: 30
Year : 1999
Posts: 652
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Steve D.     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
The guys that build the cars have the most to loose if the 1.6 car was to become the cars to have.

If you want to go all conspiracy theorist on this, wouldn't the builders be better off if the "car to have" changed every couple years? 2010 they build a fresh 99. 2011 a fresh 1.6 for the same Runoffs chaser. 2013 an early 1.8...

There are a lot of 1.6 cars already built. That doesn't mean there are a lot of 1.6 Runoffs quality builds out there.

Don't underestimate the power of the herd mentality. In mortals' hands, the cars are dead even.

Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. My opinion is a 1.6 car built to the level of the top 99's can not only compete at Road America, it can win! Shawn IMO was the only driver in a 1.6 capable of a top 10. If we all switched to 1.6 cars tomorrow, IMO its likely Shawn still doesnt win. He is certainly a very good driver, but no better or worse than 20+ other "good" drivers in that field including myself. There are also a handful that I feel are clearly better than myself and Shawn. The odds are still 20+:1 against.

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
I don't think the 99 is anywhere near out numbering the 1.6, but probably new builds they are for sure.

I know someone people will take this the wrong way because of business considerations, but there is no business in building 1.6 cars but there is in building 99 cars. The guys that build the cars have the most to loose if the 1.6 car was to become the cars to have. There are many 1.6 cars to be had, cheap, and that is bad for some who build cars for a living. Not trying to start a flame war, just the way I see it.

Pat

Pat sorry but in many regions the 1.6 are losing ground (in numbers to 99 and 1.8s) Look at the entry lists now and you will see 1.6s fading away. Your right that nobody is building 1.6s; which will only make those cars a larger minority in the future. Please don't take that the wrong way, I don't think they should go away. The only problem that I have is the argument that because there are more 1.6s that they should not have to share some of the burden if a change is made.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Steve D.:
quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
The guys that build the cars have the most to loose if the 1.6 car was to become the cars to have.

If you want to go all conspiracy theorist on this, wouldn't the builders be better off if the "car to have" changed every couple years? 2010 they build a fresh 99. 2011 a fresh 1.6 for the same Runoffs chaser. 2013 an early 1.8...

There are a lot of 1.6 cars already built. That doesn't mean there are a lot of 1.6 Runoffs quality builds out there.
+1
Don't underestimate the power of the herd mentality. In mortals' hands, the cars are dead even.


--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

volante Verified Driver
Member

Region: Mid-Div
Car #: 43
Year : 1995
Posts: 605
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for volante     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Jimmy thats so cute!!!A 1.6 can win in the right hands!!!

Shawn is a good driver anywhere and great at RA but he had fast lap because he was the last car in the 2nd lead pack of about 8 cars with a 60 mile per hour wind on the front straight.He was probably half throttle behind all those cars cutting that big ol' hole in the air in front of him.

--------------------
volante

John Mueller Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Okay, not the slowest anymore...

Region: SoCal
Car #: 13
Year : 1992
Posts: 847
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for John Mueller   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Colin MacLean:
... A Mazdaspeed $25 part is all that is required to equalize these cars. You slow the overdog down, you don't spend money making the others faster.

+1

--------------------
Thanks,
John Mueller
NASA SM National Director
http://www.Weekend-Racer.com
#13 "Tiger Miata" - 2009 SoCal SSM Champion

Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by volante:
Jimmy thats so cute!!!A 1.6 can win in the right hands!!!


Dave
Never made mention of 'fast lap' or 'right" hands. I can only judge off what I know and what I have seen first hand. ( just like everyone else) I know I raced Rich Weise for years, we were always tight one way or the the other. We were no different at Road America? Since then the 1.6 is lighter, the 99 heavier and the only real contender to show up since has been Shawn, so for me, it is hard to agree with the 1.6 can't win there group. The guys that should be complaining are the 94/97 guys? What tracks do they shine at?

This absolutely not an attack on Shawn or his driving.

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by volante:
Jimmy thats so cute!!!A 1.6 can win in the right hands!!!

Shawn is a good driver anywhere and great at RA but he had fast lap because he was the last car in the 2nd lead pack of about 8 cars with a 60 mile per hour wind on the front straight.He was probably half throttle behind all those cars cutting that big ol' hole in the air in front of him.

Thanks Dave for the kind words for Shawn.

I'am not saying Shawn is the best driver there, I would agree with Jim that there are probably a good 20 drivers that could win with the right breaks and equipment.

Some, get there judgement clouded though, between HP and driving ability.

Pat

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Okay the spin is getting a little too much here. The cars are not dead even, and nobody will ever believe that. They may be close, but certainly not dead even (one way or the other).

Like the good Dr. Maddog says, ignore this problem long enough, and there will be Consequences.

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by B Wilson:
The cars are not dead even, and nobody will ever believe that. They may be close, but certainly not dead even (one way or the other).

-bw

Not sure anyone said that, but havent read all the posts. I DO NOT believe they are dead even anywhere, nor do I believe a 1.6 can't win anywhere.


quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
Some, get there judgement clouded though, between HP and driving ability.

Pat

I agree with that as well. Lots of type A and egos at play here. [Big Grin]

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

volante Verified Driver
Member

Region: Mid-Div
Car #: 43
Year : 1995
Posts: 605
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for volante     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Nope not bad mouthing any persons.Field at Run Offs was full of talent from front to back,not one field filler from what I saw myself.Matter of fact I would say every person who ran has been on a SM podium at one time.
My point was car specific,this is still the best class in SCCA and unless something is done to bring back some of the 1.6 cars that are collecting dust this class will continue to shrink.I am all for bigger,better,faster,nicer looking race cars,thats part of racing,I get it.But the fact is this class has a lot of 1.6 cars,quit trying to make them faster or handle better,quit making those guys spend money to compete with the 99's every f**king year.Put the smaller RP on the 99 and take a bit of weight off.Simple and cheap.If that solution is off and the 99's then become the under dog,fine tweek something back in there favor.But the bottom line is you have to bring some of those 1.6 guys back and until they think they at least have a chance near the front you will have what you have Jimmy.

--------------------
volante

JIM DANIELS Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
Site Founder

Region: Mid-South
Car #: 76
Year : "You Pick"
Posts: 4422
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for JIM DANIELS   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Drennan:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
quote:
Originally posted by 'Strongbad':
There is nothing wrong with the 1.6's, except that the class was hijacked by the 1.8's! 1.6's outnumber the 1.8's by 3:1 or 4:1, yet need the most help and have to spend the most money to keep up??? Bring on the class war!

Or, have SCCA approve a 1.6 only National class and watch another +60 car field at the Runoffs in addition to the 99 class! Sounds like easy money for the SCCA or NASA.

Joseph Strong (1.6 driver)

The 99s and 1.8s already out number 1.6s in many regions and within the next couple years it won't even be close. The notion that 1.6 owners should not have to spend money because they make up the majority of the fields just does not hold true anymore. Most new cars today are 99s and there is no reason the think that trend will not continue; they just make better race cars. My personal opinion is we will not see any changes to the cars because many, including myself, believe they are already equal except for maybe at RA (I have no idea if they are or are not). They are certainly equal at Barber, Sebring, PBIR, Daytona, Homestead, and Roebling.
BS - they aren't equal and the only way to make them equal is to split the class. Equal lap times doesn't mean equal.

Take your pick...

1) an ever increasing number of disgruntled 1.6 & 1.8 drivers, many of whom eventually will leave SM because of this BS...myself included.

2) two classes, both with large fields, and no endless bitching/defending about parity. Sure, there will be some teething pains initially but it's what's best for the long-term health of our sport and will provide for much better racing.

[thumbsup]

My opinion is that I could not win the Runoffs in a 1.6 or 1.8. I will refine that, my best finish on speed alone would be greatly diminished if I had a 1.6 or 1.8.

I could care less about what tracks what car is fast at. I was fired from the original SCCA AdHoc because I stood in the way of Spec Miata being condemed to a regional class only. (Mac, Don, Karl comment if you like) That's right, short my effort and that of a few others (insiders and fellow AdHoc members) who blew the whistle, you would not have a National class. That is a fact, search this site for the SCCA termination PDF that was posted!

My reason, RUNOFFS!!

Any of you can compete in any series at all those tracks where this or that car is better. BUT FOR NATIONAL RACING they need to be equal where the Runoffs is held, PERIOD!

Say what you will but the mass exodus to a '99 and the results it has achieved at the Runoffs tells the only story that needs to be told.

PARITY is no where in sight, plain and simple.

I know, I know, "level of prep". My response is simple, EXPLAIN why 99% of the fast and funded drivers choose the '99. To quote the 1%, Tony Coello, "I brought a turd to this event, if I lose the draft I'm hosed". (something like that)

I really don't get it, add 100 pounds to the '99 like most dominate cars get and see what happens. OR, do we actually go a third year with this nonsense?

1.6 and 1.8 folks, time for letters to your BoD. Splitting would be best, both groups would still out number other classes. Or, slow the '99s for a period, it's that simple.

Opinions over: [soapbox] Peace [group hug]

--------------------
Jim Daniels

MAZDARACERS.COM

Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Dave
I hear what you are saying, even agree on many levels, right up to where I wonder what many of the best 1.6 cars of 06 would do now with the current rules?


As far as splitting the class... Just so you understand how the process works. CRB can't wave a wand and make a new national class. It would have to start as a regional only class and meet the numbers before even being considered for a national class. so if we started today, it is years out, if ever.

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

volante Verified Driver
Member

Region: Mid-Div
Car #: 43
Year : 1995
Posts: 605
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for volante     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

My opinion is and only that,splitting the class would be a bad move.Bringing the class back together is a better solution.

As far as the 2006 RO 1.6 cars with current rule set,well take the drivers out of the equation and I think you would have the same results as the 5 or so cars at this years RO. [Wink]

--------------------
volante

Dan Tiley Verified Driver Series Champ
Are you followin' me, camera guy???

Region: SEDIV
Car #: 33
Year : Whatever's Available!
Posts: 311
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dan Tiley     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Splitting the class is NOT the answer. If this was done SMx & SMy would still run together at nearly all events, and the only difference would be that the trophy table would be bigger. The only perceived winner would be the 'overall' winner.

On top of that, the 99+ with their own class would probably lose the RP all together, and for the 1.6L drivers it would be like racing against ITA cars, where the average '99+ drivers would fly down the straights and park in the turns, holding up the fast 1.6L's. Very frustrating!!!

I vote again for equalizing weight amongst all cars (2400 lbs), and further restricting the 99+ cars. Reducing the RP size will require the 99+ to be allowed A/F adjustments (fuel pressure or other means) since they'll otherwise run so rich they'll look like diesels!

--------------------
Dan Tiley

Sponsored by Race Engineering

Spec Miata's fastest and best supported engine program!

 
Page 2 of 7 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  next » 
 

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
Hop To: