Exhaust?

[IPRESS]

Are exhausts that end past the rear axel and turned down legal in IT?
SM is having a small battle over a rule change at midseason to make this type exhaust illegal. Someone suggested they were legal for IT.
Mac

[Geo]

I'm kind of curious how it matters to SM what is legal in IT.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[joeg]

While George is correct, in answer to your question, they would be perfectly legalin IT.

All you need to make sure is that it ends past the driver and away from the body. (and yes, ending in the middle of the car and directed toward the ground is appropriate)

Cheers.

[oanglade]

And to answer George's question, it's because some people have mentioned that one of the reasons (the reason?) for the latest SM rule chan, err. "clarification" is to prevent carbon monoxide poisoning (or something like that) inside the cockpit.

It matters to SM in that if it is good enough for IT, then why shouldn't it be good enough for SM?



------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[pgipson]

I seem to recall that, when given the choice, the decision was that SM rules would be based on showroom stock, rather than IT. The same issue exists with Spec RX7 (also based on SS rules) in that the exhaust has to exit in the stock location. That is one of the problems with using showroom stock as the baseline for the rule set. You need dispensation (in the form of specific rules allowing a change) to deviate from the SS configuration.

[oanglade]

pgipson,
Yes, if the SM rules don't mention it, then it follows SS rules.

There was (is) a specific SM rule for exhausts and that overrides the SS rules. The rule has been "clarified" from this in the original rules on the GCR:

"The factory exhaust system beyond the OEM front down pipe may be replaced, provided:
a. Said replacement system retains the original configuration, e.g. single tube design, and the tubing diameter is a maximum of 2.25".
b. The system shall exit behind the rear subframe.
c. No expansion chambers. A single muffler may be added.
d. The system meets all event specific sound requirements (see GCR Section 12)"

To this in February:
"1. Section 17.1.9.C.1.d.1.b., p. 6, clarify by replacing with the following: The system shall exit behind the rear subframe, but where it is present (from the header to its end) it must follow the Stock OEM path and be in the stock location."

To this in July:
"1. Section 17.1.9.C.1.d.1.b., p. 6, clarify
by replacing with the following: The pipe
may end anywhere after the rear subframe,
provided its outside the bodywork.
Forward of the subframe, the pipe must
follow the original path configuration of the
OEM exhaust system."

I wonder if in September they will add that cat. converters need to be in place...

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[lateapex911]

Yes, but have you lookes at SRX7 rules?? Far from SS! A lot of dispensation went on there!

I would say SRX7s are ITA RX-7s with a little less freedom of choice in the suspension, the set up and the tires...but they are much closer to IT than they are to SS.

And Miatas too fall into that category. I think the SS thing is more lip service. And, maybe more to the point, the desire to NOT associate themselves with IT, as that might be seen as reason to keep them from going National, and to the Runoffs and.....

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[apr67]

I think some real lip service may be going on.

If we were going to have the SS exhaust rule, we would not have a Spec Miata exhaust rule. So once we endup with our own rule in our own rulebook, why is it goofy?

But. I think the IT guys may want to watch this. If the SCCA really sticks it's back up about Carbon Monoxide, then it is likely that IT would get drug into the fray.

SM it very much like SS was in the 90's. Remember trunk kits? These cars are very much like gutted SS cars with a trunk kit. Very few items are 'open'.

But that is neither hear nor their.

Alan

[planet6racing]

If CO is a concern in SM, just pop the top...

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

[IPRESS]

George, You need to be on ourside. I have been fighting like He _ _ for three years to try to get a better shake for "regional only" cars in SOWDIV. SM with it's numbers has become a good thing $$wise for the regions. If they (regions) give the "regional only" group more track time to make sure a bunch of SMs show up, the IT cars will get the same time. I also think SM can help raise the regional racers status. I know our regional board is changing their thinking that people just run regional cars to learn so that they can get in a national class to "really" race. Regional racing in the SE is as good as it gets when I have been over there. and I hope our people realize it can be somewhat that way in our Div. I think you will see more Dbl. Reg. weekends in SOWDIV in the future.
Mac

[This message has been edited by IPRESS (edited June 19, 2004).]

[Geo]

Originally posted by IPRESS:
[B]George, You need to be on ourside. I have been fighting like He _ _ for three years to try to get a better shake for "regional only" cars in SOWDIV.

OK, now I need to ask what this has to do with the question at hand?

How is my asking how a SM rules matters to IT not being on anybody's side. To me it's a non-issue for IT.

That said, I can now understand to some extent the question from the SM folks regarding why they can't whilst IT can, but that also strikes me as a bit of "but Jimmy's mom let's him."

In point of fact, it's my opinion that the SMAC is making the right call and perhaps the rule should be changed across all classes. I think there should be better coordination between the various advisory committees and the CRB. But, we are starting to see that now also. The ITAC has coordinated with the PAC on a couple of issues already to maintain some continuity between P and IT.

But again, this is not about being on someone's side or not. IMHO the issue you make is a red herring.



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[oanglade]

never mind...

[This message has been edited by oanglade (edited June 20, 2004).]

[IPRESS]

Sorry I asked.
( I just wanted to make sure I could run ITS when the race day schedule permits. With the "good" exhaust.)

[IPRESS]

pgipson,
There was never a rules choice given. The clinging to SS always creates some problems. The rules probably should be somewhere between SS and IT (and they actually are.)

Ony you want my JD exhaust, it looks like I need one off a Kenworth that exits over the roof! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
Mac

[JIgou]

Originally posted by Geo:

In point of fact, it's my opinion that the SMAC is making the right call and perhaps the rule should be changed across all classes.


There's a SMAC?

(Yes, this is a serious question....)

Jarrod

[Geo]

Originally posted by JIgou:
There's a SMAC?

(Yes, this is a serious question....)

Jarrod

Well, I don't run Wreck Me Otter, but it's my understanding that one was formed.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[Knestis]

How ironic that it should be called SMAC. Assuming I'm pronouncing it correctly...

K

[oanglade]

That's gonna leave a mark!
http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by planet6racing:
If CO is a concern in SM, just pop the top...

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Gregg

[oanglade]

Originally posted by gsbaker:
http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Gregg

Well,

All Miatas in SM AS WELL AS IT will now be able to "pop the top" from 1/1/05, according to the August Fastrack.

Won't help the SM's much (they already could in 2004), but it will help the IT Miatas drop an easy and quick 40+ pounds if needed to get to min. weight.

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[CaptainWho]

Originally posted by oanglade:
(Removing the top) won't help the SM's much (they already could in 2004), but it will help the IT Miatas drop an easy and quick 40+ pounds if needed to get to min. weight.

Any estimates whether the 40 pound weight reduction will make up for the additional aerodynamic drag? I've heard rumors that a topless Miata loses about 1.5 seconds at Roebling (2.02 mile course) compared to the same car with the top on.

------------------
Doug "Lefty" Franklin
NutDriver Racing (http://www.nutdriver.org)

[oanglade]

I don't know if the weight reduction will make up for the higher drag, but 1.5 seconds on a 2 mile track sounds like a lot to me.

The times that I've run a Miata without a hardtop at a track it has been pretty similar in terms of lap times to Miatas with hardtop, but I've never tried a before and after on the same car.


------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[wbp]

No testing was done with a Miata, but we did test an MG Midget with and without the factory hardtop. At Road Atlanta, the top end was 7 MPH slower without the hardtop, and removing it added 3 seconds per lap.
Sadly for us, SCCA rules prohibited using the hardtop on the Midget.

------------------
Bill

[CaptainWho]

Originally posted by wbp:
... did test an MG Midget with and without the factory hardtop. At Road Atlanta, the top end was 7 MPH slower without the hardtop, and removing it added 3 seconds per lap.
...

Well, since that's 3 seconds in 2.54 miles, it makes the 1.5 seconds in 2.02 miles more believable, at least to me.

------------------
Doug "Lefty" Franklin
NutDriver Racing (http://www.nutdriver.org)

[oanglade]

So the CRB has put out a Technical Bulletin on the Spec Miata exhaust:

Check it out:
http://www.scca.com/_Filelibrary/File/TB04-08a.pdf


They say that the intent of having the exhaust come out of the bodywork is to make sure that there are no trapped gases under the car and possibly drawn into the driver's compartment.

So, how long do you guys think it will be before the exhaust rules for IT are changed also?



------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[dickita15]

I was speaking with a comp board member asking about this and there seems to an be honest difference of opinion on what was allowed with the old rules.
"exhaust shall exit behind the driver, and shall be directed away from the car body."
now I would think that a turn down in front of the rear axel would be legal. some thought that it has to exit out the side or rear. I know this will be addressed again. In a GT car exiting under the car would not be good with there lack of body work, but the question is does it create a problem in an unibody car like we race.
I think this is a case of unitended consequences and will be more thoughly thought thru soon.
dick

[dickita15]

boy am i a friggin pyscic. there is a tech tech bulletin on the scca garage site dated 6/21 backing off the rule change. they say they will reconsider the implication for the future.
dick

[ITSRX7]

I think that any current SM's or IT Miata cages won't be very legal without the top. They SHOULD have to follow prod-style cage rules for open-top cars...and will need to be a lot taller to be legal...and won't fit inside factory tops.

AN

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[oanglade]

Andy,

I looked all over the GCR and ITCS and all I could find was that the top of the helmet would have to be 2 inches below the top of the main hoop. I bet I can already pass that with the cage and hardtop and the seat bolted to the floor.

But I really doubt that I'll race without the top.

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA