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

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello Spec Miata Community » Spec Miata Archives » Spec Miata 2001-2009 » Assuming the 1.6 needs help? (Page 1)

 - Email this page to someone! | Subscribe To Topic
Page 1 of 2 1  2  next » 
 
Author Topic: Assuming the 1.6 needs help?
J.D.
Guest


Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted    Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

If we assume the 1.6 needs help, pick your top 4 ways to get there. Remember, we don't want a shift to the 1.6 in results but a shift in parity that allows better results from the 1.6.

Sean Yepez Verified Driver
Team Keeblerspeed

Region: SF
Car #: 94
Year : 94
Posts: 671
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Sean Yepez     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

More weight and plate on the '99 would also help the '94 in addition to the 1.6. It would require fewer cars to make changes. After all, cams for all the 1.6's would cost the class more than lead and plates for 1999's.

--------------------
2008 San Francisco Region SMT Champion

tahoe z Verified Driver
2007 NASA 25hr Champion E2 / 2008 NASA 25 HR E2 2ND place

Region: san francisco
Car #: SFR # 62 1.6/ SMT / 1.8 /# 62 ITA
Year : 89smt / 94 ita
Posts: 172
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for tahoe z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

how about a 99 1.8 in it!

--------------------
kim willcox

Mike C Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: WDCR - 042
Car #: 75
Year : 93 & 95 & 99
Posts: 3727
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Mike C   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

None of the above. I choose this answer all four times.

--------------------
Mike Collins
MEATHEAD Racing
http://www.SHEETZ.com
The MEATHEAD Racing 2010 Calendar is up!!!!
www.MEATHEADRacing.com
SMAC Member
WDCR-SCCA SM Drivers Rep.
ALL OPINIONS ON RULES OR SPECIFICATIONS ARE JUST THAT, MY OPINIONS!

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

Well Mike since your so negative, how about a positive comment or do you think we have parity.

Pat

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

Arrow Karts

cam Verified Driver
Cheap member

Region: southwest
Car #: 14
Year : 90
Posts: 739
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cam   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Maybe this is a stupid question abound CAM shafts, but I thought installing a hot CAM generally shifted the peak power but will not add more torque. Meaning that we can move peak torque from 4K rpm to 5K RPM (still close to the same amount of torque) but the way horsepower is calculated, one will see impressive gains in the peak HP number. But for most applications, this new higher peak HP value will not accelerate the cars any better. At least this has been my general understanding for years. Link to very out of date site. If Im wrong, please correct me and point me to site so I can read up, else, if Im right, then how will adding CAMs help the 1.6?

TIA

--------------------
"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
~Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."
~Thomas Jefferson

J.D.
Guest


Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted    Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

None of the above noted, I thought you would pick one or two Meat, lol

These polls are for fun, Drago is laughing and laughing.... [duck]

Zauskycop Verified Driver
Member

Region: Chicago
Car #: 45
Year : 1991
Posts: 115
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Zauskycop     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I would guess one would have to be careful with a "hot" cam. Once you go to a certain point, you will lose the benefit of the cam without the proper springs on the valves and such. Since I am new to the SM community (picking up my car next week) I don't have the knowledge to say how much cam a "spec" engine can handle...

Tracy Ramsey

--------------------
Tracy Ramsey
Team Blenderblaster

tahoe z Verified Driver
2007 NASA 25hr Champion E2 / 2008 NASA 25 HR E2 2ND place

Region: san francisco
Car #: SFR # 62 1.6/ SMT / 1.8 /# 62 ITA
Year : 89smt / 94 ita
Posts: 172
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for tahoe z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

if you help the 1.6, here in san francisco,you will kill all 1.8s,as 1.6 is the car to have here this year.

--------------------
kim willcox

Scott Malbon Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Member

Region: Blue Ridge Region (103), SEDiv
Car #: 52
Year : 94
Posts: 314
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Scott Malbon     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Interesting. Remember, the class started with the 1.6s. The goals of the SM class are low cost, good performance, reliable cars, and parity now that the 1.8s are in. But the newer cars (99+) are pulling away even with RPs and weight. Do we want to slow them down or help the nimble 1.6s? Should the class be tied to the performance of the 1.6? What would be the cost and performance of a spec cam for the 1.6? And I hope another goal of SM is to keep us together with big fields and the constant challenge of parity.

Scott
SEDiv #52 (94)
building a 99

Mike C Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: WDCR - 042
Car #: 75
Year : 93 & 95 & 99
Posts: 3727
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Mike C   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
Well Mike since your so negative, how about a positive comment or do you think we have parity.

Pat

I am not negative... I am a realist. Here in the Northeast the 1.6 can (and does) win routinely at Summit, NJMP, VIR, Nelsons. Watkins probably gives the nod to the '99 because of the hills but not by much. I have (had) one of the fastest '99's around and I am not a bad driver and a '99, 1.8 and 1.6 have all won at Summit this year.

Road America is just like Topeka. Each track gives a slight nod to a particular car. Topeka likes the 1.8. Alot of those same fast '99's ran Topeka only to get beat by a 1.8. Steve was on the podium last year with his same '99 but did not dominate like the 1.8's.

How many 1.6's are prepped to the same level as the three cars I took apart. Not many, none at the runoffs that I saw and I saw over 50% of the cars in the tech shed.

So please stop trying to make your apple (not directed soley at you Pat) look and perform like his orange when he watered his orange everyday, made sure it had the perfect amount of sunshine, bought the best fertilizer, tested samples daily and you just waited until yours looked ripe but never tested it. Then complain that all that time effort and MONEY gave the orange an unfair advantage.

After sampling all of the cars in the tech shed leading up the race I was surprised by none that made it in there based on my examination. The only car I thought belonged there that I saw that was not there was Keith Verges 1.6.. Yes there were some other exceptional cars but only a few of them did I think were extrordinary.

If anyone feels the need for change you have to write letters to the CRB via the SMAC NOW!!!!!

I have reviewd the results across the country and the cars are the closest they have ever been. From my perspective expect rules to define some do's and don't(s) to stop some rules creep, but I am fan of rules stabilty and am not a fan of the "car of the year".

The Runoffs results and data will be reviewed by professionals just like the data from the Sprints and then some if any decisions may be considered.

--------------------
Mike Collins
MEATHEAD Racing
http://www.SHEETZ.com
The MEATHEAD Racing 2010 Calendar is up!!!!
www.MEATHEADRacing.com
SMAC Member
WDCR-SCCA SM Drivers Rep.
ALL OPINIONS ON RULES OR SPECIFICATIONS ARE JUST THAT, MY OPINIONS!

Sean Yepez Verified Driver
Team Keeblerspeed

Region: SF
Car #: 94
Year : 94
Posts: 671
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Sean Yepez     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Mike C:
quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
Well Mike since your so negative, how about a positive comment or do you think we have parity.

Pat

I am not negative... I am a realist. Here in the Northeast the 1.6 can (and does) win routinely at Summit, NJMP, VIR, Nelsons. Watkins probably gives the nod to the '99 because of the hills but not by much. I have (had) one of the fastest '99's around and I am not a bad driver and a '99, 1.8 and 1.6 have all won at Summit this year.

Road America is just like Topeka. Each track gives a slight nod to a particular car. Topeka likes the 1.8. Alot of those same fast '99's ran Topeka only to get beat by a 1.8. Steve was on the podium last year with his same '99 but did not dominate like the 1.8's.

Mike, even though Steve did not win last year, he did run the fastest overall race lap at Topeka. He was driving a '99, and this was before the plate change on the '94. Therefore, it seems like the '99 was competitive there as well.

--------------------
2008 San Francisco Region SMT Champion

Rowdy Price
Member

Region: WDCR
Car #: 51
Year : 94 R
Posts: 68
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Rowdy Price     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I am not negative... I am a realist. Here in the Northeast the 1.6 can (and does) win routinely at Summit, NJMP, VIR, Nelsons. Watkins probably gives the nod to the '99 because of the hills but not by much. I have (had) one of the fastest '99's around and I am not a bad driver and a '99, 1.8 and 1.6 have all won at Summit this year.


I am not a bad driver..... Now that's funny

--------------------
Brian price ITA #51
http://www.RPPerformanceracing.com
UNLIMITED AUTOBODY & COLLISION.COM PERFORMANCE AUTOWORKS WV.COM
2009 WDCR ITA CHAMPION
2010 WDCR ITA CHAMPION
UNLIMITED RACING

cnj
Member

Region: SW Division
Car #: 32
Year : 1999
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cnj     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

From the point of view of a 99 owner, this is an "are your still beating your wife?" set of questions. I'm screwed if I vote for the 1.6 to be made faster and screwed if the only people voting are 1.6 owners.

Nice one JD !

Craig J

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

I'm ok with double and triple checking all of the data before any changes are made. I just want my 1.6L to be competitive provided that I prepare it to the Nth degree.

Casey Z Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: MidDiv
Car #: 13
Year : 92
Posts: 2873
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Casey Z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by cnj:
From the point of view of a 99 owner, this is an "are your still beating your wife?" set of questions. I'm screwed if I vote for the 1.6 to be made faster and screwed if the only people voting are 1.6 owners.

Nice one JD !

Craig J

Take the 5th on the advice of counsel... [Wink]

--------------------
----------------
Z Brothers Racing / East Street Auto

Casey Z - 1.6 Kettle
MidDiv National #13

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

Maybe SCCA will be happy with an all 99 Runoffs next year. Make no changes and you will have a good shot at it.

pat

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

Arrow Karts

B(Kuch) Kucera 45 Verified Driver
Veteran Member

Region: NeOh
Car #: 45
Year : 1991
Posts: 858
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B(Kuch) Kucera 45   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Wouldn't a header give the 1.6 more torque on low end?

And if it does couldn't they ok it to be used for the Runoffs only,not the rest of the season?

--------------------
Bob
!KUCH!

"All my drinking buddies have a racing problem"

Casey Z Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: MidDiv
Car #: 13
Year : 92
Posts: 2873
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Casey Z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by B(Kuch) Kucera 45:
Wouldn't a header give the 1.6 more torque on low end?

And if it does couldn't they ok it to be used for the Runoffs only,not the rest of the season?

Maybe, but developing a header that gave the right amount would be a big development process. Plus the 1.6 header is actually pretty nice when you compare it to the brick that is on the 99's.

--------------------
----------------
Z Brothers Racing / East Street Auto

Casey Z - 1.6 Kettle
MidDiv National #13

Nigel Stu Verified Driver
Member

Region: Detroit
Car #: 66
Year : 1992
Posts: 105
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Nigel Stu   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

take the hard top off the 99+ cars.

saves money for everyone, and wont impact the 99+ cars as much on other tracks, just the big long straights and top speed like at RA.

Plus its fun racing topless!

--------------------
Ben Schaut
Schaut Speed Motorsports
GLDiv / WHRRI
#66 Blue/White/Black

J.D.
Guest


Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted    Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I hardly think a fun poll is screwing anyone. But perhaps that same consideration and empathy can be directed to the 1.6 owner, there frustration is not limited to JD posts, its lived each race weekend where a real '99 is racing. Who is already screwed is my concern......

J.D.
Guest


Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted    Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I hardly think a fun poll is screwing anyone. But perhaps that same consideration and empathy can be directed to the 1.6 owner, there frustration is not limited to JD posts, its lived each race weekend where a real '99 is racing. Who is already screwed is my concern......

Casey Z Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: MidDiv
Car #: 13
Year : 92
Posts: 2873
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Casey Z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Mike C:
quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
Well Mike since your so negative, how about a positive comment or do you think we have parity.

Pat

I am not negative... I am a realist. Here in the Northeast the 1.6 can (and does) win routinely at Summit, NJMP, VIR, Nelsons. Watkins probably gives the nod to the '99 because of the hills but not by much. I have (had) one of the fastest '99's around and I am not a bad driver and a '99, 1.8 and 1.6 have all won at Summit this year.

Road America is just like Topeka. Each track gives a slight nod to a particular car. Topeka likes the 1.8. Alot of those same fast '99's ran Topeka only to get beat by a 1.8. Steve was on the podium last year with his same '99 but did not dominate like the 1.8's.

How many 1.6's are prepped to the same level as the three cars I took apart. Not many, none at the runoffs that I saw and I saw over 50% of the cars in the tech shed.

So please stop trying to make your apple (not directed soley at you Pat) look and perform like his orange when he watered his orange everyday, made sure it had the perfect amount of sunshine, bought the best fertilizer, tested samples daily and you just waited until yours looked ripe but never tested it. Then complain that all that time effort and MONEY gave the orange an unfair advantage.

After sampling all of the cars in the tech shed leading up the race I was surprised by none that made it in there based on my examination. The only car I thought belonged there that I saw that was not there was Keith Verges 1.6.. Yes there were some other exceptional cars but only a few of them did I think were extrordinary.

If anyone feels the need for change you have to write letters to the CRB via the SMAC NOW!!!!!

I have reviewd the results across the country and the cars are the closest they have ever been. From my perspective expect rules to define some do's and don't(s) to stop some rules creep, but I am fan of rules stabilty and am not a fan of the "car of the year".

The Runoffs results and data will be reviewed by professionals just like the data from the Sprints and then some if any decisions may be considered.

Mike,

I find this post to be disingenuous at best. You concede that the 1.8 was the CTH at HPT. At the same time you say that the perfectly groomed orange (99) was the difference at RA. Are we to assume that all the 99's at HPT were just poorly prepped like you claim the few 1.6's at RA were this year? Do you really expect anyone to buy that argument? Those driver's program hasn't changed. The track did. I don't mean this to take away from any of the top drivers at RA. Great drivers in great cars that deserved their place on the podium.

Now let's take a look at the biggest red herring out there. The "No top 1.6's at the Runoffs." Why do you think they weren't there? further, let's go through the field and see who was in a 99 this year at the Runoffs and who was in one two years ago. Change out those rides and you have a much better mix of cars in the top 15. So why are they in 99's now? Because they have top programs, know what car is the CTH and spent the cash to make it happen.

I find the view point you are taking just as disturbing as the one Todd put out earlier today. Hey, it takes a lot of cash to get there. On that I agree. The question is can you or I spend the cash on the car you own and get there. You and I both know the answer is no. So does every other rational thinking person. That is unless you have a 99 in the garage.

Finally, you may have reviewed the results from across the country and the cars may be closer than ever in your opinion, but many have reviewed the results from the Runoff's and can clearly see the cars are further apart than ever. If that is parity, I need some one to show me the new math definition I missed. You have my letters from the last two years, I don't need to write a new one.

For the peanut gallery guess what, SM.com megamods are not in lock step. We go at it at each other with the best of them...

--------------------
----------------
Z Brothers Racing / East Street Auto

Casey Z - 1.6 Kettle
MidDiv National #13

Blake Clements Verified Driver Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: SW - Houston
Car #: 6
Year : 99, 96
Posts: 2262
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Blake Clements   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by pat slattery:
Maybe SCCA will be happy with an all 99 Runoffs next year. Make no changes and you will have a good shot at it.

pat

Pat, I'll rent you mine [Smile] [Big Grin]

--------------------
Blake Clements

PhillipsRacePrep/SP Induction Systems/East Street Racing/MiataCage.com/Carbotech/WBR Graphics

www.blakeclements.com

Edens Verified Driver
Member

Region: ARK
Car #: 26
Year : 1993
Posts: 107
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Edens     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

How many people would mind there car not being competitive all year... as long as it was competitive at the RunOffs???

All you guys that say it takes money to run up front and it doesn't matter which car, prove us all wrong... you guys have the money, build a 1.6 and show us how it's done.

and yes, I was at RA!!!

--------------------
1993 Spec Miata
sponsored by:
MTECH- Miata TECHnology
Sherwood Tire Pros

cnj
Member

Region: SW Division
Car #: 32
Year : 1999
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cnj     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

JD, my posting regarding getting screwed was in amusement at the poll.... pretty clever poll I thought actually.

Ok, so I think the following:

The 1.6 and possibly 1.8 need help at RA.

I don't think RA should be the only track determining car parity lest we simply swing the curve the other way and make 99's useless on many tracks.

We should find a way to make the 1.6 generate more power and torque and then drop weight on the 94 and 99 to make them more fun to drive, not to mention more similar in braking, cornering and acceleration to the 1.6. Alternatively use an custom ECU to bring the 99 and 94's power and torque output to 1.6 levels and then take a bunch of weight off the 99/94's.

I don't buy the argument that the 90's should not have to spend any money in the interests of the class. We all spend money to be competitive - otherwise Fat Cat would not have sold bumpstops this year.

Any class car should be able to win at runnoffs. Adding a bunch of weight to the 99 will slow them down in corners, but arguably not much on long straights, which is the issue that 90 owners are complaining about. Reducing the RP may do it at RA but then will screw up 99's everywhere else. Thats not parity. Get the cars engine output AND weight more similar if we want parity. Otherwise we simply have 3 versions of cars that each are faster on different tracks and even different parts of each track.

This is all just late night entertainment. Nothing this significant will change.

Craig J

IPRESS Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Moderator

Region: MidDiv / SOWDIV
Car #: #39
Year : 99 LS1 Miata
Posts: 1756
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for IPRESS     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Meat......you must not have viewed Verges 1.6. He hasn't scrimped on that one.

--------------------
Mac Spikes
IPRESS Racing
MER
East Street Auto
SAFERACER
Hoosier
Carbotech
MotorSport Ranch
Cresson, Texas
"To hell with you Gen. Sheridan...I 'll take Texas!"

LOREN WALLACE IS MY HERO!

Mike C Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: WDCR - 042
Car #: 75
Year : 93 & 95 & 99
Posts: 3727
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Mike C   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Mac get thicker glasses or longer arms. Verges is the only car I named in my post that had an extraordinary car that I did not see.

--------------------
Mike Collins
MEATHEAD Racing
http://www.SHEETZ.com
The MEATHEAD Racing 2010 Calendar is up!!!!
www.MEATHEADRacing.com
SMAC Member
WDCR-SCCA SM Drivers Rep.
ALL OPINIONS ON RULES OR SPECIFICATIONS ARE JUST THAT, MY OPINIONS!

tburas Verified Driver Series Champ
SM

Region: 003
Car #: 56
Year : 1990
Posts: 401
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for tburas   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

As a 1.6 owner, parity between the cars is always going to be problem...
I feel I have a really good 1.6, but I will never race Road Atlanta, Road America, and a hand full of others again. Simple reason...Torque

I am glad I do not make the call on what to change...

A simple solution might be a aluminum crank pulley. The current one is 3 Lbs 14 ouces, I found one on ebay that is 14 ouces and costs 38 bucks. What would 3 lbs off the crank shaft do?

--------------------
[URL=http://www.toddburas.com]
//East Street Auto//Traqmate//SafeRacer//

Mike C Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: WDCR - 042
Car #: 75
Year : 93 & 95 & 99
Posts: 3727
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Mike C   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

The "fast" guys are always building new cars because they can sell there high end cars and break even or will take the loss and start over. The car is expensive but nowhere near as expensive as what a serious campaign for a national championship cost. 85% of SM driver want local parity. And we are really close on that. 38 out of 2500 drivers will not determine our rules neither will one track.

--------------------
Mike Collins
MEATHEAD Racing
http://www.SHEETZ.com
The MEATHEAD Racing 2010 Calendar is up!!!!
www.MEATHEADRacing.com
SMAC Member
WDCR-SCCA SM Drivers Rep.
ALL OPINIONS ON RULES OR SPECIFICATIONS ARE JUST THAT, MY OPINIONS!

pat.ross
Member

Region: SOW
Car #: 70
Year : 1991
Posts: 21
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat.ross     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

If a cam change for the 1.6 would equalize torque at tracks like RA that have significant elevation change why not allow these cams at certain tracks and not at others? My son and I are just not getting into SM with a 1.6 and are developing our own engine program. Changing cams then adjusting timing is a 20-30 minute effort at most. The new cam could have specific characteristics that make it easy to determine in the tech shed. A challange would only require removal of the valve cover to prove or disprove.

Pat R

pat.ross
Member

Region: SOW
Car #: 70
Year : 1991
Posts: 21
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat.ross     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I meant "just now getting into SM"

Casey Z Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: MidDiv
Car #: 13
Year : 92
Posts: 2873
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Casey Z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Mike C:
The "fast" guys are always building new cars because they can sell there high end cars and break even or will take the loss and start over. The car is expensive but nowhere near as expensive as what a serious campaign for a national championship cost. 85% of SM driver want local parity. And we are really close on that. 38 out of 2500 drivers will not determine our rules neither will one track.

It has every year since the class went national. Why the change in policy now?

--------------------
----------------
Z Brothers Racing / East Street Auto

Casey Z - 1.6 Kettle
MidDiv National #13

Cajun Miata Man Verified Driver
Overdog Driver

Region: Houston; SWDIV
Car #: 15
Year : 99
Posts: 680
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Cajun Miata Man     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Casey Z:
quote:
Originally posted by Mike C:
The "fast" guys are always building new cars because they can sell there high end cars and break even or will take the loss and start over. The car is expensive but nowhere near as expensive as what a serious campaign for a national championship cost. 85% of SM driver want local parity. And we are really close on that. 38 out of 2500 drivers will not determine our rules neither will one track.

It has every year since the class went national. Why the change in policy now?
Why continue to execute a flawed policy? Can't we learn and do better?

And yes, you know I drive a 99.

--------------------
James York


sponsored by:
Stan's Auto Center, Lafayette LA
powered by:
East Street Racing, Memphis TN
set up guru:
Gilfus Racing, Austin TX

Cajun Miata Man Verified Driver
Overdog Driver

Region: Houston; SWDIV
Car #: 15
Year : 99
Posts: 680
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Cajun Miata Man     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

To build on what Mike made reference to, is preparation. Or lack thereof.

Some of the 1.6s I was around (some exceptions of course) were not even close to top shelf and fully prepped. Another part of prep, is practice. Steve G was at RA for something like a week before qualifying, others have run countless laps, but some drivers showed up maybe a day before qualifying and hope to do well? If you aren't flat in turn 7, carousel and the kink, the driver or set-up is off.

Anyway, there is a bunch of variables that determined who ran at the front. And I am not saying the 1.6 doesn't need a bit of help, it might at tracks like RA. But at some tracks, it is really close.

--------------------
James York


sponsored by:
Stan's Auto Center, Lafayette LA
powered by:
East Street Racing, Memphis TN
set up guru:
Gilfus Racing, Austin TX

Casey Z Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: MidDiv
Car #: 13
Year : 92
Posts: 2873
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Casey Z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Cajun Miata Man:
To build on what Mike made reference to, is preparation. Or lack thereof.

Some of the 1.6s I was around (some exceptions of course) were not even close to top shelf and fully prepped. Another part of prep, is practice. Steve G was at RA for something like a week before qualifying, others have run countless laps, but some drivers showed up maybe a day before qualifying and hope to do well? If you aren't flat in turn 7, carousel and the kink, the driver or set-up is off.

Anyway, there is a bunch of variables that determined who ran at the front. And I am not saying the 1.6 doesn't need a bit of help, it might at tracks like RA. But at some tracks, it is really close.

James,

I understand where you are coming from and I acknowledged as much in my post above. Mike decided not to respond. As I mentioned above, last year the 1.8 was the car for HPT, everyone acknowledges that. You and I are familiar with the programs at the front of the field. Did the 99 guys just get better at prep this year? Of course they didn't. The track just favors that car and the guys that knew it either built one or kept up there existing program. This whole notion that it was just better prep is a red herring. Sounds liked a good argument on its face, but when you give it the slightest test it fails reason. Ask Drago if he made huge changes in prep this year and if that made the difference.

--------------------
----------------
Z Brothers Racing / East Street Auto

Casey Z - 1.6 Kettle
MidDiv National #13

Keith in WA Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Pack Fodder

Region: NWR / Oregon
Car #: 88
Year : 95
Posts: 2000
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Keith in WA     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by pat.ross:
If a cam change for the 1.6 would equalize torque at tracks like RA that have significant elevation change why not allow these cams at certain tracks and not at others? My son and I are just not getting into SM with a 1.6 and are developing our own engine program. Changing cams then adjusting timing is a 20-30 minute effort at most. The new cam could have specific characteristics that make it easy to determine in the tech shed. A challange would only require removal of the valve cover to prove or disprove.

Pat R

Different cars have strengths and weeknesses at different tracks. That just helps the 1.6 at certain tracks. Now you have the issue where other tracks favor a nimble car over torque so the '99 could use help. Some tracks have quite a mix so you have to factor in the hills, straights, elevation changes, etc.

Aside from how expensive and complicated it would be to come up with the formula for each track so that all cars are perfectly matched with different allowances, the rules set would be enormous all just for one class of car which would quickly stop resembling what started as SM.

--------------------
Keith Novak
(Will work for tires)

andrew_anderson
National Member

Region: SC region and buccaneer
Year : 1991
Posts: 184
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for andrew_anderson     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I vote to allow a spec header for the 1.6. This would allow the car to compete in ITA better also, and maybe add a few pounds to the weight if needed.

It is almost impossible to find an oem header without a crack in it.

--------------------
Dish NetworkNew Dish Network customers receive a $40 rebate if you are an SCCA member!
Race Engineering. Championship winning engines.
Carbotech Brakes
Panic Motorsports
Low Country Communications
2343 Main HWY
Bamberg, SC 29003
800.371.6709

Cajun Miata Man Verified Driver
Overdog Driver

Region: Houston; SWDIV
Car #: 15
Year : 99
Posts: 680
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Cajun Miata Man     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Casey Z:
quote:
Originally posted by Cajun Miata Man:
To build on what Mike made reference to, is preparation. Or lack thereof.

Some of the 1.6s I was around (some exceptions of course) were not even close to top shelf and fully prepped. Another part of prep, is practice. Steve G was at RA for something like a week before qualifying, others have run countless laps, but some drivers showed up maybe a day before qualifying and hope to do well? If you aren't flat in turn 7, carousel and the kink, the driver or set-up is off.

Anyway, there is a bunch of variables that determined who ran at the front. And I am not saying the 1.6 doesn't need a bit of help, it might at tracks like RA. But at some tracks, it is really close.

James,

I understand where you are coming from and I acknowledged as much in my post above. Mike decided not to respond. As I mentioned above, last year the 1.8 was the car for HPT, everyone acknowledges that. You and I are familiar with the programs at the front of the field. Did the 99 guys just get better at prep this year? Of course they didn't. The track just favors that car and the guys that knew it either built one or kept up there existing program. This whole notion that it was just better prep is a red herring. Sounds liked a good argument on its face, but when you give it the slightest test it fails reason. Ask Drago if he made huge changes in prep this year and if that made the difference.

I must have missed what I meant to say. I was talking from my specific observations at RA of car/driver prep and how that surely influenced the results and that you just can't look at "the results". First hand observations do have value.

As another kind of example, Crispen went off on lap 1 in the kink and kissed the wall, surely causing some damage. Therefore his times and final place result shouldn't even be considered in the 1.8 equality equation since it could be "bad" data. People can't see that looking at live timing results on the sofa getting the 10,000 foot look.

--------------------
James York


sponsored by:
Stan's Auto Center, Lafayette LA
powered by:
East Street Racing, Memphis TN
set up guru:
Gilfus Racing, Austin TX

springfielddyno Verified Driver
Runoffs "MOVE OF THE RACE" (headlights)

Region: Ozark Mountain Region
Car #: 37, 31
Year : 96, 93
Posts: 775
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for springfielddyno   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Zauskycop:
I would guess one would have to be careful with a "hot" cam. Once you go to a certain point, you will lose the benefit of the cam without the proper springs on the valves and such. Since I am new to the SM community (picking up my car next week) I don't have the knowledge to say how much cam a "spec" engine can handle...


Tracy Ramsey

Don't worry,
1. The springs and valves will be good up to enough cam for 145 HP...
2. I really doubt this would ever happen...

While I may have some opinions, I'm holding off until I see the runoffs data along with the speed cast footage at the same time...

--------------------
Regards,
Sam H.
www.springfielddyno.com

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by tburas:
As a 1.6 owner, parity between the cars is always going to be problem...
I feel I have a really good 1.6, but I will never race Road Atlanta, Road America, and a hand full of others again. Simple reason...Torque

I am glad I do not make the call on what to change...

A simple solution might be a aluminum crank pulley. The current one is 3 Lbs 14 ouces, I found one on ebay that is 14 ouces and costs 38 bucks. What would 3 lbs off the crank shaft do?

Crankshaft vibration and shredded bearings... so I've heard.

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Brian Cates
Member

Region: Washington, DC
Posts: 231
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Brian Cates   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

OK, my 2 cents,

Yes the 1.6 is at a disadvantage at some tracks, mostly where there are significant hills. But on a fairly level track the cars are pretty equal, assuming no fancy gas.

We have 3 cars, a Pombo 1.6, a Schultz 1.6, both with top shelf RE engines and a Drago 99. The Pombo 1.6 car is the fastest qualifier at Summit Point, but we have to advance the timing so much and run it very lean, thus it won't go the full race distance without heat soaking and falling off in power.

The 99 is easier to race with, maintains consistant power but will not go thru the high speed turns as well as a 1.6.

However, as has been pointed out many times, if you are driving a 1.6 and get stuck behind a strong 99 during a race, you can't maintain the exit speed required to run with the 99 down the straight.

The lower weight 1.6 cars do handle better.

So to achieve more parity we need to drop the weight and torque in the 99 and possibly increase the torque in the 1.6.

How do you reduce torque in the 99? The simplest and cheapest way, as previously stated, is to run a larger diameter exhaust pipe. It would also be a good time to spec an exhaust for all of the 99's and possibly 1.8's.

You can increaase torque in the 1.6 by bumping compression ratio, (if the head allows?)or advancing cam timing. (But may not need to if the exhaust trick for the 99 solves the problem. This could easily be figured out with enough dyno runs)

Until the cars all run the same engine package there will always be differnces on the track. yes you could adjust per track with weight and restrictor plate size but that would be pretty hard to do at every race, but it probably could be done at the Championship race.

All in all, I think the cars are closer then ever, but a top flight 99 should be the car to have at Road America, Road Atlanta, etc.

Unsafe Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Team Saferacer

Region: Kansas City
Car #: 70
Year : 95
Posts: 477
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Unsafe     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I voted to choke down the '99. We can't add cost to the 1.6 in my opinion, so don't get fancy there. Let the '99 owners bear the expense to get them even, as it won't matter. The 94-97 cars are hurt, but its okay if it makes the 1.6 more desirable...now we just need to bring the '99 in line. In another post, I already mentioned that I would favor a track specific (Run-Offs) restrictor for the '99, just like the pros do. Cost is no object for '99 competitors, so I don't see an issue with it.

Add to: there were some good 94-97 drivers at the Run-offs, but the field just wasn't that deep. Choke off the '99 and see who shows up....baby steps.

--------------------
Mike Asselta
http://www.saferacer.com

cnj
Member

Region: SW Division
Car #: 32
Year : 1999
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cnj     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Mike, you are killing me (LOL). "cost is no object for 99 competitors".....don't I wish this was true!

Love all this stirring the pot stuff.

Craig J

oem steve
Member

Region: South East
Car #: #92
Year : 91
Posts: 189
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for oem steve     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Just don't take any more weight off the 1.6 I've already filled the cage and the tires with helium and have stocked up on slim fast, [Big Grin]

--------------------
email: standrewsexpress@bellsouth.net
visit us at http://www.standrewsexpress.com

Under powered and under driven

Unsafe Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Team Saferacer

Region: Kansas City
Car #: 70
Year : 95
Posts: 477
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Unsafe     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by cnj:
Mike, you are killing me (LOL). "cost is no object for 99 competitors".....don't I wish this was true!

Love all this stirring the pot stuff.

Craig J

LOL...didn't mean to be *too* insensitive CJ [Big Grin]

--------------------
Mike Asselta
http://www.saferacer.com

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

quote:
Originally posted by Unsafe:
The 94-97 cars are hurt, but its okay if it makes the 1.6 more desirable.

LOL ! I know of a least one 1.8 driver who's going to have a grabber when he reads this line !! Seriously, do you proof read your posts before you put them up. LOL !! [Razz]

Casey Z Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
MegaModerator

Region: MidDiv
Car #: 13
Year : 92
Posts: 2873
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Casey Z     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by cnj:
Mike, you are killing me (LOL). "cost is no object for 99 competitors".....don't I wish this was true!

Love all this stirring the pot stuff.

Craig J

I think you got your "Mike's" confused. [Wink]

--------------------
----------------
Z Brothers Racing / East Street Auto

Casey Z - 1.6 Kettle
MidDiv National #13

Unsafe Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Team Saferacer

Region: Kansas City
Car #: 70
Year : 95
Posts: 477
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Unsafe     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

D.B. - Seriously, I own and race one of the aforementioned 1.8's....I just think the class is best served by a strong 1.6 program.

My car is as fast as they come in the 94-97 category, and it feels to me that the whole 4th gear curve has been demolished, but we still have torque and our driving skills and can hold up well enough next to the 1.6. The guys in my division would die laughing if I was in here begging for relief for my car. The '99 needs to come back toward the mean, thus my opinion.

I will champion the 1.6, not because I race one, but because its best for the class...IMHO. I don't post much, but am taking a stand on this one.

And we can joke about budget '99 builds...but that's not reality. All the front runners in any model year are expensive, but the '99's take the prize by a wide margin. I want to see the podium be attainable to the best drivers (and many of the best were in '99's, nothing taken away from the talent at Road America this year), thus we come back to the roots of the class.

Just an opinion...fire away.

--------------------
Mike Asselta
http://www.saferacer.com

kverges Verified Driver
Moderator

Posts: 282
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for kverges     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Mike and James,

My 1.6 (no. 11 for this race, usually 61 in my Region) was prepped as much as I could with a fresh Zimmerman 1.6 in it and all the best prep I could throw at it. I even spent dyno time at Road America to dial in timing and the AFM adjustment to compensate for the spec fuel we were required to run. The only way I ran 4th in the 1st and third qualifying sessions was (1) it was wet in Q1 and I drove on the raggedy edge until I beached the car; and (2) I got some lucky "timing" drafts in Q3 where I could roll speed on the 99 in front of me but stay in its draft.

I just percolated from 5th to 14th during the race and it was truly demoralizing. I could roll speed on the exits of the 99s in front of me only to slowly lose to them over the straignts out of 3, kink and 14.

If there is a better way to prep the 1.6 for RA I am all ears, but I did everything I could think of for the Runoffs and finished mid-pack. I also made a point of coming to RA for the August MX-5 cup race and to get coaching from Eric Foss, last year's winner and then returned to run the Skip Barber MX-5 races at the end of August.

Please don't waste my time with telling me I can't drive - I might not be winner material, but had I a better car I would have done better than 14.

I honestly don't know what is the best way to try for more parity - only testing will tell that.

Personally, I want sealed engines. I don't really want to tinker with the car, if I did I'd race in Production or some other class. I want to maintain and prep the car and then just drive. And no, prep does NOT mean to me changing cams, cylinder heads, exhausts, etc, etc, etc. More like changing oil, checking plugs, leakdown, AFM adjustment, and suspension setup, that kind of thing.

--------------------
Keith Verges
Dallas
SM #61
SWDIV

 
Page 1 of 2 1  2  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: