1999 Miata in ITS?

[Colin Harmer]

Just wondering what the collective opinion of the mazda folks would be on making a 1999 miata a competitive ITS car?

Looking at the E36 BMW and Rx7 cars, it would seem not, but maybe I'm missing something?

Has anyone had a good hard look at this?

Thougts? Comments? Misc ramblings?

I'm all ears!

Thanks,

[Andy Bettencourt]

I think the 99+ Miata will be just like the other Miata' in IT now. A REAL good choice for the short and twisty or the short-momentum type tracks...on the big stuff, I don't think the lower power numbers will allow it to overcome the aero problem...

AB

[MMiskoe]

There was one that ran at NHIS this fall. It had a SM setup in it (I think) and the owner wanted to get some miles on it so he entered it in the ITS race starting from the back. I don't konw the specifics of the set up, but it was not built as an ITS car. He finished 13th out of 24 ITS finishers, (35 cars in the group), his fastest lap was 2 seconds off the fastest lap of the winner. Pretty impressive I thought, I will however tip my hat to the driver who seems to come out on top in any car he gets into.

[seckerich]

Check with Mike at ISC Racing. Kip ran an ITS miata at the SIC in Savannah and was pretty quick. Got killed on the long straight but closed up well in the tight stuff. With a slight weight break it would be a good pick.
Steve Eckerich
ITS 18 Speedsource RX7

[Colin Harmer]

OK, any thoughts on a 94 ITA Miata?

Let me know...

Colin

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Colin Harmer@Nov 18 2005, 01:41 PM
OK, any thoughts on a 94 ITA Miata?

Let me know...

Colin

65877


Same thoughts. I am converting a 1995 SM to ITA for the 2006 season. My thoughts on the car:

- I think it will be one of the best handling and braking cars in ITA
- I think the power potential is not huge but will be enough to compete on smaller tracks like NHIS and LRP.
- I think it will be very hard compete on big tracks like RA, Pocono, WGI...
- I think it will qualify well
- If it gets held up in the corners, it will be tough.
- My goal is 130-135whp...(160 crank)

AB

[Fastfred92]

For what its worth I submitted a request to the comp board to move the 99+ Miata to ITA with adjustments as needed..... Waiting for the Fastrack to come out with the denial.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 18 2005, 03:04 PM
For what its worth I submitted a request to the comp board to move the 99+ Miata to ITA with adjustments as needed..... Waiting for the Fastrack to come out with the denial.

65887


Fred,

Your letter was a short as they come. No supporting data, no facts or figures, nothing. What about it would convince anyone to rethink something that is only about a year old? The 99+ fits the process for a lightweight 142hp car.

You are looking at a 2650lb+ car in ITA...you think that is a better choice than in ITS? Maybe but what is there, 1 full-tilt car on the planet with 3 months of development time on it? I think waiting is a good choice. ITA may be the better place but it will have to weigh quite a bit...

I am resigned to the fact that cars like the Miata aren't going to be the best choice on the big tracks...but they should be able to compete very well on the momentum stuff.

AB

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 18 2005, 08:34 PM
Fred,

Your letter was a short as they come. No supporting data, no facts or figures, nothing. What about it would convince anyone to rethink something that is only about a year old? The 99+ fits the process for a lightweight 142hp car.

You are looking at a 2650lb+ car in ITA...you think that is a better choice than in ITS? Maybe but what is there, 1 full-tilt car on the planet with 3 months of development time on it? I think waiting is a good choice. ITA may be the better place but it will have to weigh quite a bit...

I am resigned to the fact that cars like the Miata aren't going to be the best choice on the big tracks...but they should be able to compete very well on the momentum stuff.

AB

65893



Andy

While my request was short and sweet I think the fact that what we see in Pro Spec Miata should provide a great insight to how a 99+ car will perform. Granted the level of prep is different (in IT ) but it is the same amount on any IT Miata ( 90 on ) thus you would assume similar results. Given the 99+ already weighs more and has a intake restrictor logic would point to similar performance as pre 99 Miatas with the same level of prep. This notion that people will get cars classed ( too high ) and spend wads of money ( to develop ) to be a back marker is crazy. Lets class a car were it has a chance then back it down if needed. The board will always be able to say nobody has fully "developed" car XXXX but in reality it is simply stupid to spend big money to be a back marker and develop a car that has no chance going in. Kip proved my point at the SIC this year: Fully preped 99 Miata ( $ no object ), great driver and team, most handling oriented track in the SE division, and mid pack result in ITS ( a distant mid pack vs. RX7's and e36 )

My .02 Fred

[RP Performance]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 18 2005, 07:07 PM
Same thoughts. I am converting a 1995 SM to ITA for the 2006 season. My thoughts on the car:
- I think it will be one of the best handling and braking cars in ITA
- I think the power potential is not huge but will be enough to compete on smaller tracks like NHIS and LRP.
- I think it will be very hard compete on big tracks like RA, Pocono, WGI...
- I think it will qualify well
- If it gets held up in the corners, it will be tough.
- My goal is 130-135whp...(160 crank)

AB

65881



Andy you will not have any problem with that HP, my 1.6 was in that range. I fell like I could find another 5 or 10 hp with ECU mods and some head work.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 18 2005, 05:31 PM
Andy

While my request was short and sweet I think the fact that what we see in Pro Spec Miata should provide a great insight to how a 99+ car will perform. Granted the level of prep is different (in IT ) but it is the same amount on any IT Miata ( 90 on ) thus you would assume similar results. Given the 99+ already weighs more and has a intake restrictor logic would point to similar performance as pre 99 Miatas with the same level of prep. This notion that people will get cars classed ( too high ) and spend wads of money ( to develop ) to be a back marker is crazy. Lets class a car were it has a chance then back it down if needed. The board will always be able to say nobody has fully "developed" car XXXX but in reality it is simply stupid to spend big money to be a back marker and develop a car that has no chance going in. Kip proved my point at the SIC this year: Fully preped 99 Miata ( $ no object ), great driver and team, most handling oriented track in the SE division, and mid pack result in ITS ( a distant mid pack vs. RX7's and e36 )

My .02 Fred

65907


Fred,

My point is that the Miata is classed right where it should be in ITS. It just may not have checkered flag potential on every track. It isn't alone in that regard. Give the ISC guys a little more time and I am sure the car will get quicker.

I think everyone has to look at the car they are considering building and if it doesn't add up on paper that it may be a contender - then the stupid thing may very well be spending big money to build one and then crying wolf when prod-style comp adjustments are the only thing that will bring it to the podium.

I don't think the SM reference holds water either. The 99+ has to be 'dumbed down' so much in SM (2500lbs, 43mm restrictor) that you can't compare it to a car with open intake @ 2300. The 99+ has WAY more potential when the SM rules go away.

AB

[JeffYoung]

Fred, Mike Van Steenburg routinely BEATS fast S cars at Roebling and CMP in his ITA Miata. He even took an OVERALL win at CMP last year -- and it wasn't a chump ITS field as Kent Thompson was there in his very fast Second Gen RX7.

Andy has this nailed. The Miata (of which I have two, and have raced them in both ITA and SM) is a fantastic momentum/twisty track car. It can be a giant killer on those tracks.

At VIR, Lowe's, Road Atlanta, what it gains in the corners is not enough to overcome its issues with aero and power on the straights.

Miatas are presently very competitive in ITA in my region.

[lateapex911]

Good post Jeff, wasn't Thompson just at the ARRCs? What did he turn there for times? I seem to remember that car at the front of th grid for the enduro.

[JeffYoung]

Jake, Rick qualified fifth for the ARRC sprint race, and got up to 2nd but couldn't get around Lukas who took the win. He ran a 1:46 which I know was the fast lap of the race, and possibly an IT7 track record? He told me in an e-mail that the motor is down on power, so I suspect he is probably capable of another second or two. By comparison, the fast A cars ran 42s I think with the new Turn 10.

Not sure if Rick or Attila Lukacs got any clean laps though as they had a split start with the 7s out back. Also not sure if he ran the Enduro or not....

The 7 is still a bit of an enigma to me. We've got a fast group of them here that run with the A cars at VIR, CMP and Roebling. The ARRC results don't lie though, they don't seem to be able to compete there.

I'm not sure what the solution is. Hard for me to see them as a B car when I get beat by them regularly in my S car, but the case for B is pretty strong. That is a tough one.

Rick, jump in at any time with more details.

[lateapex911]

LOL< Actually Jeff, I was talking about KENT Thompson, from your post. Mike V came to Lime Rock, and ran the ITA Miata in the NARRC Runoffs in 04, and was fast..in the low 3s or high 2s if i remember..good for around 5th or so. And it is a momentum track.

Kips (VanSteenberg) cars are always well turned out, and he can drive too.

[Colin Harmer]

SM pole at the ARRC 1:44:525
ITA Pole at the ARRC 1:42:458 (CRX Si)

There didn&#39;t seem to be a competetitve ITA Miata at Atlanta this year, so we can&#39;t really validate any results from this. But....

I don&#39;t think it&#39;s un reasonalble for a Miata in IT Trim to be able to find 2 seconds and "get in the game" in this class.

I look at:
-Suspension (good d/a shocks, adjustable bars, spring rate choice, light rims, bushings)
-Rear End
-Head (port matched, .5 compression bump)
-No restrictor
-Exhaust (race header)
-Fuel Mapping (ECU mods/replacement)

And think to myself that there&#39;s at least 1.5-2 seconds in all of this.

I think a competitive ITA Miata is a pretty solid bet....Time to start the deep thought process!

[Colin Harmer]

Just to add to the debate...

I&#39;m presuming that the 1.8l at 2380# will be quicker than a 1.6 at 2205#?

Seems like that motor would easily make up for the 175#....

Any thoughts on this?

[JeffYoung]

Sorry Jake --- I think I saw Kent Thompson ran a 1:40 in Enduro qualifying. Damn good lap.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Colin Harmer@Nov 20 2005, 12:36 PM
SM pole at the ARRC 1:44:525
ITA Pole at the ARRC 1:42:458 (CRX Si)

There didn&#39;t seem to be a competetitve ITA Miata at Atlanta this year, so we can&#39;t really validate any results from this. But....

I don&#39;t think it&#39;s un reasonalble for a Miata in IT Trim to be able to find 2 seconds and "get in the game" in this class.

I look at:
-Suspension (good d/a shocks, adjustable bars, spring rate choice, light rims, bushings)
-Rear End
-Head (port matched, .5 compression bump)
-No restrictor
-Exhaust (race header)
-Fuel Mapping (ECU mods/replacement)

And think to myself that there&#39;s at least 1.5-2 seconds in all of this.

I think a competitive ITA Miata is a pretty solid bet....Time to start the deep thought process!

66067


I have seen this kind of thought process before and I don&#39;t buy into it. Here is why:

- SM&#39;s run in packs. On tracks like WGI, just running with another car or two can lower your lap times by OVER A SECOND due to aero.
- SM&#39;s do not hold each other up in corners. Anytime they run with other classes, racing times are significantly lower.

I do think the cars will get faster but by no means will they dominate. They should qualify well but when cars that are slower in corners and faster on the straights (CRX&#39;s, Integra&#39;s, 240SX&#39;s) get in front of them, it kills the ability to run what they can run alone. I do think they can run up front, but maybe not front, front. I just don&#39;t think the math is linear from SM to ITA like it may be in other examples.

Now having said all that, Bred DePedro has succeeded both at long tracks and short but his progam is matched only by his driving. I hope I can be as successful!

AB

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 21 2005, 03:50 AM
I have seen this kind of thought process before and I don&#39;t buy into it. Here is why:

- SM&#39;s run in packs. On tracks like WGI, just running with another car or two can lower your lap times by OVER A SECOND due to aero.
- SM&#39;s do not hold each other up in corners. Anytime they run with other classes, racing times are significantly lower.

I do think the cars will get faster but by no means will they dominate. They should qualify well but when cars that are slower in corners and faster on the straights (CRX&#39;s, Integra&#39;s, 240SX&#39;s) get in front of them, it kills the ability to run what they can run alone. I do think they can run up front, but maybe not front, front. I just don&#39;t think the math is linear from SM to ITA like it may be in other examples.

Now having said all that, Bred DePedro has succeeded both at long tracks and short but his progam is matched only by his driving. I hope I can be as successful!

AB

66107




Andy, using your own valid argument explain to me how you see the 99+ cars ever having a chance in ITS when you admit the early cars have little chance in ITA.... Using these same ARRC results show me the 99+ cars that outshine the early ones in SM?

My argument is that the additional mods allowed in IT are linear in that they apply to ITA the same as ITS. Given that in SM or Pro SM the 99+ has had no real advantage given a set of rules to equalize them ( read like IT comp adjustments ) so I can very easily see a ITA 99+ Miata being a competitive car, not a OVERDOG. No scenario, in my opinion, has the 99+ competitive in ITS.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 21 2005, 10:44 AM
Andy, using your own valid argument explain to me how you see the 99+ cars ever having a chance in ITS when you admit the early cars have little chance in ITA.... Using these same ARRC results show me the 99+ cars that outshine the early ones in SM?

My argument is that the additional mods allowed in IT are linear in that they apply to ITA the same as ITS. Given that in SM or Pro SM the 99+ has had no real advantage given a set of rules to equalize them ( read like IT comp adjustments ) so I can very easily see a ITA 99+ Miata being a competitive car, not a OVERDOG. No scenario, in my opinion, has the 99+ competitive in ITS.

66129


I am trying to say that the Miata&#39;s may not be THE cars for the class because they may only be 100% competitive on tracks that are small and not power-oriented... because I don&#39;t know if they can make enough power to overcome the very real aero issues they have.

The IT mods are linear between ITS and ITA - but they are not linear between a 1.6L SM, a 1.8L SM and a 99+SM. The 1.6&#39;s have no restrictor plate and a well developed open intake. The 99+ (in Pro) has a 43mm restrictor and a factory airbox. Just taking those handicapps off the 99+ should put it 24-25 stock hp up on the 1.6 in ITA.

Like I said, to &#39;fit&#39; in ITA, it would have to weigh 2650ish lbs. You like that number in ITA or 2400 in ITS? It&#39;s a tough call, I will admit...it just may be that the Miata is a car that may not be destined to dominate ITS...and there really isn&#39;t anything wrong with that. We aren&#39;t in the business of balancing every car on the tip of a pin-head...

Now when the 2006 MX-5&#39;s come out of the new Pro series in years, THAT will be an ITS car. :D

AB

[ralph mcconnell]

Originally posted by JeffYoung@Nov 19 2005, 05:38 PM
Fred, Mike Van Steenburg routinely BEATS fast S cars at Roebling and CMP in his ITA Miata. He even took an OVERALL win at CMP last year -- and it wasn&#39;t a chump ITS field as Kent Thompson was there in his very fast Second Gen RX7.

Andy has this nailed. The Miata (of which I have two, and have raced them in both ITA and SM) is a fantastic momentum/twisty track car. It can be a giant killer on those tracks.

At VIR, Lowe&#39;s, Road Atlanta, what it gains in the corners is not enough to overcome its issues with aero and power on the straights.

Miatas are presently very competitive in ITA in my region.

65977

[ralph mcconnell]

Originally posted by JeffYoung@Nov 21 2005, 02:51 AM
Sorry Jake --- I think I saw Kent Thompson ran a 1:40 in Enduro qualifying. Damn good lap.

66105

you are right, jeff we did do a1.40.8 for the enduo, that was jeff hill driving. kent did a1.40.7 for 4th in the sprint qualifing. put a string of 1.41&#39;s together in the race, ending in 5th. i am still happy with that run !! yes mike did win at cmp ,he was racing with ita honda at the time. i told kent not to race with those two. we had a big lead over 2nd its. but YES ,mike&#39;s miata is a quick car.

[Chris Wire]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Nov 18 2005, 03:04 PM
For what its worth I submitted a request to the comp board to move the 99+ Miata to ITA with adjustments as needed..... Waiting for the Fastrack to come out with the denial.

65887


Well Kip VanSteenburg just shot your request all to hell at Sebring today.

I don&#39;t have times but he qualified top ten in a field of over 30 ITS cars and finished 6th. And this is on the 3.7 mi. Long Course. Just how competitive the car will ultimately be remains to be seen, but from what I witnessed, an "A" car it ain&#39;t.

Didn&#39;t seem to give up too much on the straights that I could see. He was right on the bumper of the CFR ITS Champion pretty much the whole race. That RX7 has a fresh ISC engine with all the goodies. Now maybe he was getting out of the corners better so it just looked like he wasn&#39;t getting pulled down the straight, but I couldn&#39;t tell that from my vantage point up high.

Sorry to break it to you, but I wouldn&#39;t waste any more paper. That dog won&#39;t hunt.

[mdaniels]

Bringing this one back to life...

In reading the 2006 car classifications here (http://www.scca.org/_FileLibrary/File/ImprovedTouring.pdf) I only see the &#39;90 - &#39;95 Miata listed in there under ITA, and the &#39;99 under ITS. What happened to the &#39;96 and &#39;97? Curious if anyone knows why this car isn&#39;t currently classified in IT?

Matt

[Andy Bettencourt]

The 96 and 97 should hit ITA as an ommission at the same weight as the 94-95. 2380.

[Greg Amy]

The 96 and 97 should hit ITA as an ommission at the same weight as the 94-95. 2380.
[/b]

Uh, whaaaaa....? You&#39;re bringing in a 133hp (stock), rear-wheel-drive, four-wheel disc, multi-unequal length control arm, perfect weight distribution, best-handling-in-the-last-ten-years car into ITA at 2380 pounds?

Two thousand three hundred and eighty pound, right? The same cars that were doing very-damn-near ITA times on spec non-adjustable Bilsteins, weenie swaybars, no headers, no intake, 45mm throttle body restrictors, stock final drives, 2350 pounds, and Toyo RA-1 tires?

Tell me you&#39;re joking. Seriously.

If not, you just completely handed the class away and made every other ITA car obsolete. The 94-95 (128hp stock) is bad enough, but this is just...I can&#39;t even think of a word for it...

You sure you don&#39;t want to run that formula maybe one more time...?

On edit:I&#39;m still trying to get my brain around this idea...

2380 for the &#39;96 Miata. The 1992 Saturn SC starts with ~10 less horsepower than the Miata, has front wheel drive, McPherson struts, and is nose heavy, yet it only weighs 50 pounds less in ITA. The 1992 NX2000 starts with 7 more horsepower than the Miata, has front wheel drive, McPherson struts, and is nose heavy, yet weighs 150 pounds more than the Miata in ITA. Both FWD cars are not what one would consider the penultimate in handling and braking. Most ITAC members that post here have noted that anything within 100 pounds of target weight is not considered significant.

How about the Integras? ~7 more ponies that the Miata, front wheel drive, nose heavy. Good handling but now 215 pounds heavier than the Miata. I am confident there are numerous other illustrative, relative examples of why this Miata is significantly underweight for the class...

What am I missing here...?

Are you guys sure you don&#39;t want to run these formulas maybe one more time...?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Easy Greg. You should know about the Miata&#39;s before you freak out. The 94-97 motors are IDENTICAL. When you order a crate from Mazda, you get the same thing for any of those years - from oil pan to head... the ONLY difference in the cars is the change from OBD-1 to OBD-2. It&#39;s 100% software.

Since this modification is legal in IT, there is effectively ZERO difference in the cars in IT-prep.

On edit: Talking with Bowie Grey and Mike VanSteenburg on the 1.6 vs. the 1.8 - neither can decide which one they would think will be better. Bowie chose to rebuild his 1.6 instead of building a 1.8 and Mike told me just yesterday that he thinks his 1.6 will PROBABLY turn out to be the better racecar.

AB

[Greg Amy]

...which means that the 1.8L Miatas as a whole are out of line...and, what other cars did you give the "it&#39;s only due to the software" (or whatever) consideration when running them through the formula...? We&#39;ve been told this is a straight-up, objective, mathematical consideration based on the physical characteristics of the cars as provided by the manufacturer...if the 1.8L Miatas as a whole are being considered 133 hp for the purposes of running through this formula, then this formula should have come up with a number SIGNIFICANTLY higher than 2380#...

I understand the weight is a "magic rollcage number." And, as I&#39;ve said in the past, that&#39;s an completely unreasonable excuse for setting weights; quite absurd and rude to everyone else in the class. And don&#39;t forget, I was one of the originals that wrote letters to the CRB last year requesting to reclassify the 1.8L Miata into ITA!

This brings this consideration for the dual-purpose Miata into a whole &#39;nother light. We are bastardizing this new "objective" formulaic process. Can I submit the minimum weight for my car for NASA&#39;s SE-R Cup in order to allow me to be dual-purpose, too? (Joking, of course, but you get my drift...?)

If this is the standard, that the Miata can never weigh more than 2380 pounds in a misguided desire to allow the MX-5 to run multiple classes, then the 1.8L Miata should become the defacto standard for the ITA "formula". Reverse-engineer that formula so that it fits the 133hp 1.8L Miata at 2380# and then recalculate everyone else to match. It&#39;s the only equitable thing to do; anything else is pure bastardization of a process that, up to this point, has been pretty reasonable...

Go ahead: run the numbers. Tell me what the NX, the Integras, and the CRX would weigh if we had the same weight break as the Miata.

Sorry, guys, but you&#39;re losing me fast...all I&#39;m asking for is the same exact consideration as all my competitors; nothing more, nothing less.

[Greg Krom]

How about the SOHC Neon? 132 stock HP, FWD, and 70 lbs heavier than the 1.8 Miata!

When these two cars raced together in SS (Miata in B, Neon in C), the Miata was always significantly quicker given comparable prep and driving ability.

Lets not even get into the DOHC Neon which is unfairly classified at 2600 lbs, though it was also slower than the Miata in SSB.

For the most part, I really like the way that the formula has worked out and think that ITA is poised to be a terrific class. That said, the 1.8 Miata at that weight seems to have the potential of being an overdog.

To Andy&#39;s point that the only difference is software. A conversion of an OBD-1 car to OBD-2 hardware and software would only be legal if the cars were listed on the same spec line, correct? So until the &#39;96 & &#39;97 cars are added to the spec line that update is not legal, therefore the addition of the ODB-2 cars should cause the Miata to be rerun through the process. Or alternatively the ODB-2 car gets it own spec line and a higher weight.

Maybe the 1.8 Miata should get an SIR? Just kidding!!!

[Andy Bettencourt]

How about the SOHC Neon? 132 stock HP, FWD, and 70 lbs heavier than the 1.8 Miata!

When these two cars raced together in SS (Miata in B, Neon in C), the Miata was always significantly quicker given comparable prep.

Lets not even get into the DOHC Neon which is unfairly classified at 2600 lbs, though it was also slower than the Miata in SSB.

For the most part, I really like the way that the formula has worked out and think that ITA is poised to be a terrific class. That said, the 1.8 Miata at that weight seems to have the potential of being an overdog.

To Andy&#39;s point that the only difference is software. A conversion of an OBD-1 car to OBD-2 hardware and software would only be legal if the cars were listed on the same spec line, correct? So until the &#39;96 & &#39;97 cars are added to the spec line that update is not legal, therefore the addition of the ODB-2 cars should cause the Miata to be rerun through the process. Or alternatively the ODB-2 car gets it own spec line and a higher weight. [/b]

Greg and I have been debating off line heavily...

The DOHC Neon is 150hp - 10hp higher than the Integra, yet weighs less. &#39;Unfairly&#39; classified? 10 more hp than the NX/SE-R and weighs only 85lbs more. Unfair?

Showroom stock performance has little, if anything, to do with IT performance. The biggest variable in SS is stock suspensions - ride height and springs specifically - which are out of the equation in IT.

I mention elsewhere that two Miata drivers with over 2 years of IT Miata experience have said that they think the 1.6 is/will be the better racecar. I think it will be damn good on the momentum stuff (when on a clear track) be marginal at best on the power stuff - and be a dead duck in traffic. Just like all cars, it has it&#39;s strengths and weeknesses.

Overall, if I was confident I could keep one reliable, I think the 240SX with a Rebello would be my ride.

AB

[zracre]

Easy Greg. You should know about the Miata&#39;s before you freak out. The 94-97 motors are IDENTICAL. When you order a crate from Mazda, you get the same thing for any of those years - from oil pan to head... the ONLY difference in the cars is the change from OBD-1 to OBD-2. It&#39;s 100% software.

Since this modification is legal in IT, there is effectively ZERO difference in the cars in IT-prep.

On edit: Talking with Bowie Grey and Mike VanSteenburg on the 1.6 vs. the 1.8 - neither can decide which one they would think will be better. Bowie chose to rebuild his 1.6 instead of building a 1.8 and Mike told me just yesterday that he thinks his 1.6 will PROBABLY turn out to be the better racecar.

AB
[/b]

Um...HUH??? OBD-1 and OBD-2 cars are very different with an open ecu rule. 2380 no restrictor 040 over header intake really good brakes really good suspension hoosiers oh and rear wheel drive...so why is my integra 215# heavier??? I have been racing SM for a few races now and the top guys are turning laps close, but not better than top ITA times...in a SS type class! Imagine if the effort was put forth on those cars for A. I am bolting lead to my car...staring at my SM...thinking...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Um...HUH??? OBD-1 and OBD-2 cars are very different with an open ecu rule.[/b]

How so? If the ECU&#39;s are open, how can you make one better?


2380 no restrictor 040 over header intake really good brakes really good suspension hoosiers oh and rear wheel drive...so why is my integra 215# heavier??? I have been racing SM for a few races now and the top guys are turning laps close, but not better than top ITA times...in a SS type class! Imagine if the effort was put forth on those cars for A. I am bolting lead to my car...staring at my SM...thinking... [/b]

Build one. You will see why a Miata in &#39;non-Miata&#39; traffic is a dog. SM times are marginalized for comparision for a variety of reasons that I have stated before in this thread.

SS-BASED class. Full suspension, Hoosiers and engine development that gets them to within 10% of the power? Don&#39;t look any longer! Write that $9K check to Sunbelt !!! :wacko:

[Greg Krom]

Greg and I have been debating off line heavily...

The DOHC Neon is 150hp - 10hp higher than the Integra, yet weighs less. &#39;Unfairly&#39; classified? 10 more hp than the NX/SE-R and weighs only 85lbs more. Unfair?

Showroom stock performance has little, if anything, to do with IT performance. The biggest variable in SS is stock suspensions - ride height and springs specifically - which are out of the equation in IT.

I mention elsewhere that two Miata drivers with over 2 years of IT Miata experience have said that they think the 1.6 is/will be the better racecar. I think it will be damn good on the momentum stuff (when on a clear track) be marginal at best on the power stuff - and be a dead duck in traffic. Just like all cars, it has it&#39;s strengths and weeknesses.

Overall, if I was confident I could keep one reliable, I think the 240SX with a Rebello would be my ride.

AB
[/b]

In the case of the Miata R and Neon ACR, I would say that comparable showroom stock performance is VERY applicable to IT. Neither cars in SS trim had typical "stock" suspension, both had good "sport" suspension packages available with decent shocks, springs and swaybars. The packages on each car were very comparable to each other.

It also doesn&#39;t matter what drivers or tuners "think" is going to be a better car. What does the formula say?

You have a 1.8 Miata and SOHC Neon. The Neon has (marginally) less horsepower, front wheel drive, an inferior suspension, past history has shown it to be slower than the Miata and it weighs 70 pounds more?!?!?! How does that fit any formula????

[zracre]

I have no problem with the miata being there...but the SOHC neon points are good...does the same formula for that car apply to the 1.8 miata?? oh and those comparable ITA times were run in 1.8 cars on toyos WITH RESTRICTOR PLATES!!!! And in my experience, the miata is a ninja in traffic under braking and mid corner transitions, where the integra is a pig...and I havent driven it with the extra lead in it yet...

[Andy Bettencourt]

In the case of the Miata R and Neon ACR, I would say that comparable showroom stock performance is VERY applicable to IT. Neither cars in SS trim had typical "stock" suspension, both had good "sport" suspension packages available with decent shocks, springs and swaybars. The packages on each car were very comparable to each other.

It also doesn&#39;t matter what drivers or tuners "think" is going to be a better car. What does the formula say?

You have a 1.8 Miata and SOHC Neon. The Neon has (marginally) less horsepower, front wheel drive, an inferior suspension, past history has shown it to be slower than the Miata and it weighs 70 pounds more?!?!?! How does that fit any formula???? [/b]



128hp for the Miata, 132 for the Neon. 110ft/lbs for the Miata, 129ft/lbs for the Neon.

I disagree on the SS suspensions. Miata R package was spoilers, revalved shocks, no A/C, no leather and no P/S. That&#39;s it. The ACR was bars, tranny ratio and no options (for the first year or so - then you could get A/C etc.) IIRC.

[zracre]

I thought torque was not part of the formula?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I have no problem with the miata being there...but the SOHC neon points are good...does the same formula for that car apply to the 1.8 miata?? oh and those comparable ITA times were run in 1.8 cars on toyos WITH RESTRICTOR PLATES!!!! And in my experience, the miata is a ninja in traffic under braking and mid corner transitions, where the integra is a pig...and I havent driven it with the extra lead in it yet... [/b]

The 2005 ARRC cars run open tires...Hoosiers and Goodyears.

ITA: 1:42.0
SM: 1:44.6

Both track records. Think 15 more HP and a better rear ratio makes up for 2.6 seconds? That&#39;s a big maybe. And remember, Miata&#39;s don&#39;t hold each other up in the corners - and the bump draft each other to artificially quick laps.



I thought torque was not part of the formula? [/b]

Not part of the mathematical portion - but the subjective portion, the "adders" - you bet it is. That is why we call it a &#39;process&#39; because it&#39;s isn&#39;t straight math.

[Greg Krom]

I have no problem with the miata being there...but the SOHC neon points are good...does the same formula for that car apply to the 1.8 miata?? oh and those comparable ITA times were run in 1.8 cars on toyos WITH RESTRICTOR PLATES!!!! And in my experience, the miata is a ninja in traffic under braking and mid corner transitions, where the integra is a pig...and I havent driven it with the extra lead in it yet...
[/b]

I have no problem with the Miata being in ITA either, in fact I believe that it belongs in ITA, but it should be classified utilizing the same formula as all of the other vehicles. The Miata does not need any special treatment applied to it.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I have no problem with the Miata being in ITA either, in fact I believe that it belongs in ITA, but it should be classified utilizing the same formula as all of the other vehicles. The Miata does not need any special treatment applied to it. [/b]

It was classed using the same process.

[Greg Krom]

128hp for the Miata, 132 for the Neon. 110ft/lbs for the Miata, 129ft/lbs for the Neon.

I disagree on the SS suspensions. Miata R package was spoilers, revalved shocks, no A/C, no leather and no P/S. That&#39;s it. The ACR was bars, tranny ratio and no options (for the first year or so - then you could get A/C etc.) IIRC.
[/b]

Are you saying that the higher torque of the Neon offsets the RWD, higher HP, better suspension.... of the Miata, and is in fact worth a higher weight for the Neon?

I thought the OBD-2 Miata&#39;s were 133 HP? I also thought the Miata had more suspension improvements than that but my memory could be cloudy.

The ACR included revalved shocks, larger rear bar, different 5th gear ratio (same FD) and improved steering ratio, plus lighter weight due to lack of options, less sound deadening, etc.

[zracre]

ok back to the ITS subject, heres a question...If you compare the RX7 numbers with GSR and 99 Miata numbers, is it close? you say adders and such but the miata in S is obviously waaay down on power, and the GSR has almost identical power and torque figures (RX very slight advantage on the numbers ive seen...but if SERRA&#39;s numbers are good...dead heat) should have a minus for smaller brakes/front drive/crappy aero (compared to the RX)...so why is it 10# heavier than said RX?? I know SCCA does not guarantee competitiveness, but if all it takes is to re look at the formula...they cant be the same. If the Integra lost 80# and 500 people built them do you think they would dominate?? of course because so many are spending big $$ on it to go win...then it is stamped an overdog. The point is to make all cars equal in full prep trim. I&#39;d love to see many makes battle for wins...ITA seems like it will shape up this year...

[Greg Krom]

It was classed using the same process.
[/b]

Using the &#39;94-&#39;95 numbers for the Miata or &#39;96-&#39;97?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Using the &#39;94-&#39;95 numbers for the Miata or &#39;96-&#39;97? [/b]

94-95. The 94-95 was the only car in ITS when a request for reclass came down. After that decision had been published, a request came in to add the 96-97. Since the engines are idential except for an open item in IT, therefor having the same exact IT-prep potential, it was decided to put them on the same spec line.

AB


ok back to the ITS subject, heres a question...If you compare the RX7 numbers with GSR and 99 Miata numbers, is it close? you say adders and such but the miata in S is obviously waaay down on power, and the GSR has almost identical power and torque figures (RX very slight advantage on the numbers ive seen...but if SERRA&#39;s numbers are good...dead heat) should have a minus for smaller brakes/front drive/crappy aero (compared to the RX)...so why is it 10# heavier than said RX?? I know SCCA does not guarantee competitiveness, but if all it takes is to re look at the formula...they cant be the same. If the Integra lost 80# and 500 people built them do you think they would dominate?? of course because so many are spending big $$ on it to go win...then it is stamped an overdog. The point is to make all cars equal in full prep trim. I&#39;d love to see many makes battle for wins...ITA seems like it will shape up this year... [/b]

Guys, I can&#39;t keep saying this over and over. When the re-org happend, cars were looked at that stuck out. If you were over 100lbs &#39;off&#39;, you got a switch - porvided we have interest and info. If you were less, you got consideration but not neccesarily a change. Some were made that made sense...like a BMW example of a 25lb break due to 3-4 other cars with the same drivetrain getting to 2600. We are just trying to get everyone on the same planet, not balance everyone on the head of a pin - it&#39;s impossible.

50-75 lbs doesn&#39;t bring an underdog into competitiveness IMHO.

[Greg Krom]

Are there hardware differences between the 94-95 and 96-97 Miatas that result in the 5 hp difference or is it truly 100% software derived? In other words is the 94-95 ECU and related hardware capable of being reprogrammed to match the performance of the 96-97?

I don&#39;t know, maybe I&#39;m just being cynical, but I still suspect that the 1.8 Miata has been classified as a possible overdog. Which is disappointing when the rest of the class appears to be so closely matched.

Of course, its all theoretical at this point until some serious cars get built and campaigned.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Zero hardware changes.

[zracre]

I am not questioning the intent...just the process...the RX7/GSR comparo and the SOHC Neon/Miata comparo...what brings it minutely above the RX in weight...I&#39;d love to understand the process as many here would...if it is a mathematical equasion, sheer numbers, that would be easy to digest especially considering the minute weight difference (10#). Understanding the process would cut down the absurd arguements on this site...and since we all (racers and members alike) own this club, why are we in the dark? It seems like the members are kept at arms length for reasons unknown. If the process is owned by the club...we own it and deserve to know it. All the nascar guys know the aero specs and rules, WC guys have a weights rewards process...how do we arrive at numbers is the $1,000,000 question and why are we arguing about it...I am not trying to argue...just know the how and why.

[mdaniels]

The 96 and 97 should hit ITA as an ommission at the same weight as the 94-95. 2380.
[/b]

Thanks, Andy - just the information I was looking for.

Is this some kind of world record for size of can of worms opened in ones first post on this forum? :D

[Andy Bettencourt]

Is this some kind of world record for size of can of worms opened in ones first post on this forum? :D

[/b]

Nope. Far from it!


I am not questioning the intent...just the process...the RX7/GSR comparo and the SOHC Neon/Miata comparo...what brings it minutely above the RX in weight...I&#39;d love to understand the process as many here would...if it is a mathematical equasion, sheer numbers, that would be easy to digest especially considering the minute weight difference (10#). Understanding the process would cut down the absurd arguements on this site...and since we all (racers and members alike) own this club, why are we in the dark? It seems like the members are kept at arms length for reasons unknown. If the process is owned by the club...we own it and deserve to know it. All the nascar guys know the aero specs and rules, WC guys have a weights rewards process...how do we arrive at numbers is the $1,000,000 question and why are we arguing about it...I am not trying to argue...just know the how and why. [/b]

The process has been outlined many times on this site - as well as the parameters for getting a weight change in the recent &#39;recalculation&#39;, &#39;reorg&#39; or whatever you want to call it as long as you don&#39;t call it "competition adjustments&#39;.

AB

[Colin Harmer]

Well the irony of it all is that ...as the "instigator" of this thread, I have enjoyed all the comments that have been made during the last while... I asked the question as I has looked at a ITS ex-Grand AM car and thought that might be the way to go, that car sold, but I still wanted to make a change from FWD to RWD and find something competitive. I didn&#39;t want to go with a SM as the cars just don&#39;t allow "tinkering" for me. Long story short...I&#39;ll be wheeling a &#39;94 ITA Miata sometime soon. Stu at BSI is building the mechanicals, and I&#39;m doing the electricals, between us, it should be a pretty good car. A class "killer" I don&#39;t think so, as the Honda product is going to be hard to beat for power, but if the track is twisty we should be able to give them an honest run...

Won&#39;t know much more until it hits the track for the first time (in about a month)...

Details to follow.

PS: Look out for my ITB golf in the NE as that&#39;s it&#39;s new home!

[MMiskoe]

Has anyone gotten real HP numbers off a 1.8 in IT trim yet? I&#39;m curious if the Miata motor will respond as well to the IT mods as some other motors. Some motors gain more from the (mostly exterior) changes that IT allows - look at the Wankels as your best example.

I guess the question is valid for the 1.6&#39;s that have been in ITA for a while now. How do those motors compare to an SM motor HP wise?

I&#39;d say its a safe bet that the SM class has figured out the best way to squeeze power out of those motors w/ the restrictions that they have, so move on from there, what do you get? Then are those #&#39;s in line w/ the weight/pwr ratios typical for the class?

[gpeluso]

:D Does any know if the 96-97 model fits in ITA or is it still in ITS? Seems like a great ITA car along with th 94-95 model.

Thanks
Greg

[Andy Bettencourt]

Has anyone gotten real HP numbers off a 1.8 in IT trim yet? I&#39;m curious if the Miata motor will respond as well to the IT mods as some other motors. Some motors gain more from the (mostly exterior) changes that IT allows - look at the Wankels as your best example.

I guess the question is valid for the 1.6&#39;s that have been in ITA for a while now. How do those motors compare to an SM motor HP wise?

I&#39;d say its a safe bet that the SM class has figured out the best way to squeeze power out of those motors w/ the restrictions that they have, so move on from there, what do you get? Then are those #&#39;s in line w/ the weight/pwr ratios typical for the class? [/b]

Matt,

This is the info I have:

I will have some numbers for you in about 45 days WITH programmable fuel management. This is for a 94-97 1.8. A 30% increase (optamistic) will net 136whp using an 18% factor for drivetrain losses.

You are gonna have to spend the $ to make one of these run fast within ITA. Also factor in the 110ft/lbs of torque thay will make max. I think a great qualiying car and not bad on LRP but the big stuff maybe a problem and traffic will be a nightmare. You know how many SM&#39;s pass you when you make a mistake? TONS.

HP numbers are in line, torque numbers are way low for the class but the suspension design may keep in in the hunt.

AB




:D Does any know if the 96-97 model fits in ITA or is it still in ITS? Seems like a great ITA car along with th 94-95 model.

Thanks
Greg [/b]

Start from post #26 and read on. I have a feeling that there may be more than a few conversions from SM now that it&#39;s National. Bolting a header on and removing the RP ain&#39;t gonna get it done in ITA. Not by a long shot. Take a look at guys who hop between SM and ITA. Take a look at their race laps. No comparison. SM cars in SM go way faster than SM cars in ITA.

AB

[tnord]

i can say that 1.6 pro-SM motors of the sunbelt variety (not sure about this whole Huffaker thing) will make in the 120-125hp range. the highest i personally know of is 122, i&#39;m guessing some of the guys that ran in the pro series probably made a couple more, but i&#39;d say 125 is a pretty hard ceiling for right now. the 1.8 SM&#39;s have to weigh 100lbs more iirc, so i figure they crank out another 5hp. this may not be accurate, but there has to be some advantage in power curve or torque to overcome the weight.

so now were at maybe 127hp, take out the restrictor plate and i don&#39;t think it&#39;s a big stretch to assume 130hp. add in the extra modifications allowed in IT, and i would assume that the 1.8 in full IT trim will be somewhere north of 135hp. if someone cracked the 140hp barrier it wouldn&#39;t surprise me, it kinda depends how much effect that RP has on the SM.

<-----SMer who may switch over to IT this year, maybe in a miata, maybe not.

[Andy Bettencourt]

it kinda depends how much effect that RP has on the SM.

<-----SMer who may switch over to IT this year, maybe in a miata, maybe not. [/b]

The back to back testing we have on file shows a 2 hp difference between the 47mm and 45mm sizes and the complete removal of the 47mm restrictor is between 2-3hp on the 94-95.

AB

[Colin Harmer]

AB,

Your numbers for HP gains in removing the RP are about right. It&#39;s not some huge gain like I was (hoping) expecting... While the 1.6 may have some advantages, there were 2 primary reasons why the 1.8 will be the better car.

1. Torque-whilst low on both motors....more is always better, and enough of a HP difference to make up for the wieght split between the 2 cars.

2. Rear ends..The 1.8 is simply a better, tougher unit. I&#39;ve heard enough horror stories about 1.6&#39;s "dying"

94 all the way!

[tnord]

after being witness to somewhere around 20 diff failures on 1.6l cars in SM......the 1.8 is no doubt the way to go.

on the topic of restrictor plates, i would&#39;ve expected a greater effect than just 2-3 peak hp. is there more of an effect on the power curve from 5-7k than just peak #&#39;s? if the difference really is only 2-3 peak hp then why not just add a bit more weight and make it easier to police? i&#39;m sure there&#39;s a good reason, i just don&#39;t know of it.


i wonder if it&#39;s legal to take my 1.6l chassis and swap in 1.8l drivetrain and go IT racing? where&#39;s my GCR?

[Marcus Miller]

In IT would it not be legal to sap the 1.8 diff into the 1.6?
What other changes are required?

marcus (not a meotter expert)

[tnord]

i don&#39;t know what all the differences are, but here&#39;s the little that i do.

engine & diff (duh)
transmission is the same, though the 1.8diff has a different f/d
driveshaft
axles
rotors
i think theres a additional rear subframe brace that is easy to add on

to just change the diff all you need are axles, a driveshaft, and the diff itself.

[mdaniels]

In IT would it not be legal to sap the 1.8 diff into the 1.6?
What other changes are required?

marcus (not a meotter expert)
[/b]

I am far from any kind of IT expert, but:

From the GCR:

To maintain the stock basis of Improved Touring, updating and/or
backdating of components is only permitted within cars of the same
make, model, body type (e.g., sedan, station wagon, convertible, etc.),
and engine size as listed on a single Improved Touring Specification Line.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I am far from any kind of IT expert, but:

From the GCR:

To maintain the stock basis of Improved Touring, updating and/or
backdating of components is only permitted within cars of the same
make, model, body type (e.g., sedan, station wagon, convertible, etc.),
and engine size as listed on a single Improved Touring Specification Line.
[/b]

While the quote is valid, you have to expand further. The 1.6 and 1.8 Miata&#39;s are on different lines in the ITCS so the swap is NOT legal.

AB

[Marcus Miller]

I coming from the standpoint diffs were legal, not updating/backdating across spec lines... my bad.


Marcus

[mdaniels]

While the quote is valid, you have to expand further. The 1.6 and 1.8 Miata&#39;s are on different lines in the ITCS so the swap is NOT legal.

AB
[/b]


That&#39;s exactly what I meant. I thought it spoke for itself!! Especially since it references engine size right in there as well.

Matt

[WillM]

Hello all,

I&#39;m a total IT newbie but have been around Miatas for a while. In the interest of sharing info, here is what I know about the hardware changes between the 94-95 and 96-97 Miatas:

94-95: 8.8:1 compression ratio pistons, ODB-I, 4-wire coil packs, optical CAS, factory rated hp @ 128
96-97: 9.0:1 compression ratio pistons, ODB-II, 3-wire coil packs, magnetic CAS, 2nd O2 sensor post cat, factory rated @133hp

Mid-way through &#39;95, Mazda moved to the true 9.0:1 pistons and added the ODB-II electronics, but did not use them (no 2nd O2 sensor).

In 1996, ODB-II was put to full use, including the 2nd O2 sensor, which is post cat. I believe the additional O2 sensor makes up for most of the 5hp gain (allows better control over fueling, ie: leaner), but the increased compression probably helps a bit too. I&#39;m not sure of the advantage, if any, between the 3 and 4-wire coil packs (4th wire was the tach signal).

The differences above are probably why Spec Miata requires different throttle restrictors for 94-95 vs 96-97 Miatas. :)