1.8 Miata at Roebling

[zracre]

I know it is a good miata track...but the 1.8 of Van Steenburg is DESTROYING them there! 1:22.660?? wow! I wont even bother to go to the SARRC runoffs there! well over a second faster than the track record! Banging on the door of the ITS record...oh and 3rd overall?? wow! I know Mike is an awesome driver and has a very well prepared car but geez!

[charrbq]

Well, you know how those Integras were so fast that the Miata's would never stand a chance before. (tongue in cheek). Maybe that's why you had to add so much weight! I believe we have a new winner! After they destroy the competition in A this year, do you suppose they'll have to run with more weight? I suppose all you Integra drivers need to save your money on development and see what (or if) happens. B)

[jmark]

How about the ITS race?

[R2 Racing]

Evan, get use to it. I highly doubt it's the only time you'll see this this year.

Hopefully Andy is listening, between building one for himself, and the 1.8's will get the weight they deserve.

[RacerBowie]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

Yippee, a good driver builds a no-expenses-spared car and takes it to the track that is undeniably the best track in the Southeast for a Miata and is about 1 second below what Alex's Integra did there last year. Yippedy freaking doo.

A fast lap time at Roebling does not an overdog make. Chill out. I can go to Roebling in my tired 1.6 Miata and do 1:23.7s all day long, about a second back from that time. Take my same car to Road Atlanta, and I am ~1.5-2 seconds back from the torquier cars.

Different cars excell at different tracks. Big deal.

[Tristan Smith]

Speaking of your tired 1.6 Miata.....did I see that it was for sale? If so what's next for ya?

[RacerBowie]

Speaking of your tired 1.6 Miata.....did I see that it was for sale? If so what's next for ya?
[/b]

A work-of-art 1.8 Miata! Fully ground-up build.

As it currently stands, I think the 1.8 is a bit better than the 1.6. I think the biggest difference will be a little extra torque, which SHOULD help at Road Atlanta and places like it.

That said, I still take exception to the people saying the car is going to be a world beater in ITA and needs a bunch of weight. Kevin, you know I love you dude, but you are WAY off on this one. If, in a year or two, 1.8 Miatas are dominating at every track, then I will eat my words. A Miata dominating at Roebling is nothing new at all...that is the character of that track, long sweeping turns, no elevation changes, no slow corner exits. Front wheel drive cars in ALL classes hate it.

[JeffYoung]

Just got back from Roebling, my observations from midpack of the ITS/ITA/IT7 run group.

Kip Van Steenburg was FAST in an ITS Miata, had the pole on Saturday at 1:21 I believe. Mike Van Steenburg was 3rd at the time Bowie mentions.

Sunday, Steve Eckerich's Mazda was on the pole, I think the ITS Miata 3rd and Mike VS a few places back.

Roebling sort of sums up Andy's thoughts on the Miata though. It runs quick times but might not "race" so well with higher hp cars. Both races the BMW came from several places back on the start and got around the Miatas on the power section of the track, and the Miatas couldn't get around in the back half.

Interesting though. One guy looked at the ITS/ITA grid and said, "Damn! even ITS/ITA is turning into Spec Miata!"

Like Bowie said, wait until the results come in from a full prep Integra v. a full prep CRX v. Rickey Thompson v. a full prep 1.8 ITA Miata v. a full prep 240sx at VIR or Road Atlanta.

[seckerich]

I was behind Mike in the race Saturday and you can bet he had that car hung out everywhere. I qualified on crap tires and started 8th so I was behind him for a few laps. I can only wish I could carry that kind of speed through turns 1-2 and come out the other side. 10/10ths driven and prepped in my opinion. Great job.

[Fastfred92]

Oh Bowie, come on,,,,,, you know you are excited about a 1.8 !!!! I dont blame you, you have more Miata seat time than any other IT'er I know and with a bump in hp / tq you will be up front at RA too !!!!!

[JeffYoung]

And if it was not clear from my post, both of those Miatas were incredibly well driven. Fun to watch.

[R2 Racing]

Kevin, you know I love you dude, but you are WAY off on this one. If, in a year or two, 1.8 Miatas are dominating at every track, then I will eat my words. A Miata dominating at Roebling is nothing new at all...that is the character of that track, long sweeping turns, no elevation changes, no slow corner exits. Front wheel drive cars in ALL classes hate it.
[/b]
I'm not denying the quality of the car or the driver. Everyone knows that the Van Steenburg's don't show up at the track with anything less than a spectacularly prepared car and they can drive the wheels off of them. But I also believe that there's a reason why of all of the new classifications and weight adjustments for 2006, this is the one that seems to be getting the most discussion. There's probably a reason for that. Lay out the specs of a 1.8L Miata and a Integra side by side, then add RWD to the Miata and add ~225lbs (can't remember the excat number) to the Integra, and it's pretty clear. Hell, if I ever thought my ass could ever fit in one, I'd consider building one myself.

I understand that Roebling may be very, very fitting for a Miata but come on, 1 second ahead of the ARRC winning car? I'd buy half a second maybe. Also remember that those Integras are carrying 115lbs more now than they were last year.

I haven't been that up in arms about it because I'm confident that it'll work out. There are going to be several very good 1.8L Miata efforts showing up at tracks this year with great drivers. I believe that by the end of the year, we'll get a good indication of what the results end up showing one of these cars can do when fully prepped and properly piloted. If they show to be "on par" and competitive, than bravo competition board! If it shows that they're winning everything and busting track records, the competition board will/should adjust them accordingly at the end of the year as they promised to with all new classifications.

[RacerBowie]

I'm not denying the quality of the car or the driver. Everyone knows that the Van Steenburg's don't show up at the track with anything less than a spectacularly prepared car and they can drive the wheels off of them. But I also believe that there's a reason why of all of the new classifications and weight adjustments for 2006, this is the one that seems to be getting the most discussion. There's probably a reason for that. Lay out the specs of a 1.8L Miata and a Integra side by side, then add RWD to the Miata and add ~225lbs (can't remember the excat number) to the Integra, and it's pretty clear. Hell, if I ever thought my ass could ever fit in one, I'd consider building one myself.

I understand that Roebling may be very, very fitting for a Miata but come on, 1 second ahead of the ARRC winning car? I'd buy half a second maybe. Also remember that those Integras are carrying 115lbs more now than they were last year.

I haven't been that up in arms about it because I'm confident that it'll work out. There are going to be several very good 1.8L Miata efforts showing up at tracks this year with great drivers. I believe that by the end of the year, we'll get a good indication of what the results end up showing one of these cars can do when fully prepped and properly piloted. If they show to be "on par" and competitive, than bravo competition board! If it shows that they're winning everything and busting track records, the competition board will/should adjust them accordingly at the end of the year as they promised to with all new classifications.
[/b]

Alex's time was last year, before the weight, I'll give you that, but I still say throw out Roebling, at least until it gets some decent pavement. Front drivers have about 3-5 laps before they pick up a death-push there as the track is now.

I am pretty sure that the 1.8 is faster than the 1.6 (obviously) but I really don't think it will be a killer on a track like Road Atlanta, or VIR, etc... I think between the lack of torque and the horrendous aero they will turn out to be GOOD cars, but not cars that can run away. The goal of the ITAC, in other words. Every car right now seems to have a strength and a weakness...perfection!

As it stands right now, if money were no object, here is what I would be thinking:
Short Race = Integra (but it better be short, because I think you guys are gonna have trouble keeping tires on 'em)
Medium Race = NX2000 (Greg will win the ARRC this year if you don't beat him Kevin, if he can keep it together and custom-build every part on the damn car!)
Long Race = Miata, Miata, Miata, Miata! I like me some enduros. I think when I finish my 1.8 it will be fast enough to stick around and watch the battle for the lead at the ARRC, and capitalize if someone screws up, but put it in the lead coming out of turn 7 at Road Atlanta and it will be about 3rd or 4th by turn 10!

[charrbq]

Say what you want, but I'd be willing to bet a bowl of gumbo, that out of the six cars in impound after the ITA race at the ARRC, that 4 of them will be 1.8 Miatas, and the majority of the Integra guys will be in the paddock with a case of the reds...and a beer...or two. :unsure:

[Fastfred92]

Say what you want, but I'd be willing to bet a bowl of gumbo, that out of the six cars in impound after the ITA race at the ARRC, that 4 of them will be 1.8 Miatas, and the majority of the Integra guys will be in the paddock with a case of the reds...and a beer...or two. :unsure:
[/b]


Shhhhh, Chris dont tell anyone but we are going to try sneaking a BMW in that impound too.......

[RacerBowie]

Say what you want, but I'd be willing to bet a bowl of gumbo, that out of the six cars in impound after the ITA race at the ARRC, that 4 of them will be 1.8 Miatas, and the majority of the Integra guys will be in the paddock with a case of the reds...and a beer...or two. :unsure:
[/b]

I'll bet you, but we'll make it a six-pack, as I have no gumbo to bargain, and if by some fluke I am wrong, I am not giving up my spot at the cajun party!

Even if my car is finished and runs well, there is no way there will be 4 miatas out of 6 cars at the ARRC impound. No Way.

[steve s]

those miata was very fast but was well prepped.steve e nice talking to you up there.
tom and barry in it-7 nice race guys.sam h. sorry for the hit i really tried to stop.
we tested the bmw with the SIR and the best time we ran was in the 1.24-1.25 range
needless to say what the verdict will be,since on sunday for those who was there will 2nd this steve e
car is well prepped and was right there with carlos on the FP restr.he almost passed him on the line. with the SIR we won't even beat the ita miata .
good job SCCA in killing the class killer maybe now you can do the same for the ita miata.and probably level the field .

[charrbq]

No gumbo or similar tasty delight...no bet! :018:

[dj10]

those miata was very fast but was well prepped.
we tested the bmw with the SIR and the best time we ran was in the 1.24-1.25 range
needless to say what the verdict will be,since on sunday for those who was there will 2nd this steve e
car is well prepped and was right there with carlos on the FP restr.he almost passed him on the line. with the SIR we won't even beat the ita miata .
good job SCCA in killing the class killer maybe now you can do the same for the ita miata.and probably level the field . [/b]

Steve, are you saying that a well built BMW only ran 1:24's and a ITS miata ran 1:21 ?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Someone's got to be pulling my chain!!!!!! If this is the case, then it proves the point, there is a lot of difference between theory & practical application! LOL, this is scaring the hell out of me.

[JeffYoung]

Let's bring some reality to this discussion.

On Saturday, the ITS BMW started 3rd or 4th, pulled the field at the start, and ran off and hid to the tune of a 12 second victory.

On Sunday, the ITS BMW got around the ITS Mazda on the pole at the start with some contact. It then went off in Turn 1/2 complex and the ITS Mazda took the lead. The ITS BMW ran it down and passed the ITS Mazda. At this point, the track was hot, slick and tires were going away. The ITS Mazda nearly passed the ITS BMW at the s/f line but the ITS BMW took the win and swept the weekend.

The ITS BMW I assume was running last year's FP restrictor. I see above that they claim they can't get more than a 1:24 out of the car with the SIR. That would be fast enough to run 3-4 place in that field.

The ITS Miata and an ITA Miata ran very fast times. Roebling, as noted above, is a Miata friendly track with one power section. SMs run 1:24 now there.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Thanks Jeff. Reason # 10042 that you can't use second hand on track data.

:dead_horse:

AB

[dj10]

Thanks Jeff. Reason # 10042 that you can't use second hand on track data.
AB [/b]

I saw the results on "mylap". I can only hope that the BMW, Steve was speaking (tested the SIR) about was not Carlos Garcia's car! A 1:24 was good enough to run 4th or 5th but no one I know built a car to run 4th or 5th. I can only hope Steve was wrong. :unsure:

[JeffYoung]

And Houston, we have identified the problem. What entitles EVERY car (BMW included) to be able to win in ITS?

[dj10]

What entitles EVERY car (BMW included) to be able to win in ITS? [/b]

Lets hope it's driver ability and not because ANY car is ham strung. :D

[Fastfred92]

And Houston, we have identified the problem. What entitles EVERY car (BMW included) to be able to win in ITS?
[/b]

Jeff, not to stir the pot but why would you build a car and not think you had a shot at a win??? I dont think anybody thinks the BMW is entitled to win but should not be forced not to win or to never have a chance at a win.......

[JeffYoung]

Guys, I would say that, for the most part, EVERY car in ITS other than a 240z, an E36 325 and a Mazda RX7 is a longshot at best to win. People still build them anyway (including me). So, yes, DJ, there are a lot of "hamstrung" cars out there, 90% in ITS actually.

I don't personally agree with the SIR, but my subjective evaluations -- which are in no way dispostive -- from this weekend are that the FP restricted 325is is just too much for the rest of the field. Fixing that problem is not making sure the BMW can't win. Until SIR cars actually show up and race (and it seems doubtful they will, for some reasons that I agree with and some I don't), this whole idea that the 325 has been "killed" is hypothetical.

Hope that did not sound rude.

[dj10]

Hope that did not sound rude. [/b]

No it didn't sound rude. I'm hoping to make my SIR debut at VIR 5/12, this track has everything for a great test. I actually hope to meet some of you there. My only concern was the statement made by Steve that the BMW's best time was 3 seconds slower than race times when tested with the SIR. I'll be on the dyno tomorrow to test my SIR. Sorry, I didn't mean to start a SIR debate here. That ITS Miata was cooking

[JeffYoung]

DJ, I agree, let's drop the SIR stuff.

I will see you at VIR (probably your rear bumper, from a distance, only....lol). Stop by our paddock and say hello. I'll do the same if I see your car. Always enjoy meeting people from the board.

The ITS Miata at VIR had to be seen to be believed. It was SMOKING fast. But Steve E. and Peter Eels (Wells?) in RX7s were as well. Carlos Garcia in the 325 was a little slower in qual but obviously raced well and won both races. I had a great weekend, for me, so I'm happy too.

See you at VIR. Have you been there? For SARRC/MARRS it gets REAL crowded. If you can get down Thursday night (or up, not sure where you are located), you should try to do so.

[dj10]

See you at VIR. Have you been there? For SARRC/MARRS it gets REAL crowded. If you can get down Thursday night (or up, not sure where you are located), you should try to do so. [/b]

I was at VIR on my 750 Honda the last race before VIR closed. Was that in 1975? :D Beleive it or not I won both my races that weekend, then they closed the track (hope it wasn't something I did...hehe). So, it's been awhile. ;) I'm coming down from PA so it's about a 8 hr tow. I thought or hope Steve E. was going to save me a spot. :D I'll be down Thrusday. I'm sure we will see each other, looking forward to it.

[charrbq]

Thanks Jeff. Reason # 10042 that you can't use second hand on track data.

:dead_horse:

AB
[/b]
Can't is a large word, Andy. I agree that one car, one track, and one person's opinion of the packaged performance is highly subjective. But it's the real world. Printed specs and formulas are important, and are constant, but on track performance is where you see the fruits of your labor. It's written that we will only have a place to race, but no guarntee to win. But, as written earlier, why go to the trouble and expense of building a car for a class that you know from the getgo won't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning?
That is, unless you're really cheap, kinky, or like British cars (grin).

[Andy Bettencourt]

And you are right Chris. I just wanted to point out we can't get our panties in a bunch about something we don't know enough about. On-track should be used for trending, not snap judgements.

1.8L Miata guys won't be happy to hear this but I will be submitting my dyno data to the CRB for full review to ensure the car fits the process.

AB

[Fastfred92]

Andy, sounds like maybe that dyno sheet has some info that some of us expected it to have :unsure: Will some weight adjustment be forthcoming? Will my 318 e36 have a slight chance to stay on the same lap with you now? :P

[steve s]

sorry guys for not responding sooner .without hijacking the thread i'll say we lost about 8 HP at 3500RPMS and gradually increased till at 7000 RPMS we lost about 18 HP.and about 8 ft lb torque.we ran the SIR on friday morning and after lunch we went back to the FP . for the guys who were there they can compare the performance.
if we meet steve e again and we have the SIR we don't stand a chance to beat him[the rx7].just goes to show that a well prepped rx7 can run with the BMW.with the FP.
don't get me wrong now,the BMW needs some restriction but i think 29mm is too small. maybe 31 or 32 mm???? we did not test any other ones too expensive.
i do believe we can loose about 10 hp and be very competetive in the class.or give us back 6-8HP. and it would be fair.
p.s. on a side note those non bmw guys that complain about the junyard motor bmw are really fast and beating them you should do some reserch on the bmw there are a lot of them out there with m3 engines looks almost the same.a friend of mine went to VIR recently and saw a couple car with that engine.running in ITS. not calling anyone a cheater but when you have guys trying to win legally and then some one looks for the easy way out we all suffer.
carlos and myself would not race if we did not think we had a chance to win ,some people do it for fun that's why they build noncompetetive cars. we do it for the glory that piece of wood!!! thank you all for accomodating me and letting me rant and rave. :024:

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy, sounds like maybe that dyno sheet has some info that some of us expected it to have :unsure: Will some weight adjustment be forthcoming? Will my 318 e36 have a slight chance to stay on the same lap with you now? :P [/b]

Actually Fred, I have no dyno info yet. The reason I said that about 'not being happy' is that the sheets will be submitted when I get them so there won't be any time period of 'secret-power' levels.

Greg A. will be fully up to speed as I do stuff.


i'll say we lost about 8 HP at 3500RPMS and gradually increased till at 7000 RPMS we lost about 18 HP.and about 8 ft lb torque.we ran the SIR on friday morning and after lunch we went back to the FP . for the guys who were there they can compare the performance.
[/b]

That is right in line with the CRB testing as outlined by Bob on this site. Take a 205whp version and you are at 187whp with 170+ ft/lbs @ 2850. Still a car to contend with in a BIG way. But like everyone else in the class, you will have to prep to the max to get to the front.

AB

[steve s]

this car is prepped to the max legally. 205 WHP we don't have .let's see or hear what hp number you guys got out of your SIR testing.not what someone said his car was making because he want to sell it!!!!i i agree with you .with what you said about the SIR . it's doing it's job as advertised. but i think your starting HP numbers are off on the high side.and i'm will to bet that the cars you tested gave about 195HP max if it's legal and on a dynojet.
i have not said anything on this issue because i did not have any facts about the SIR and the damage it would do. but we have tested and i know now,and so will all the other drivers out there.

[JeffYoung]

Steve, there are a lot of credible people saying 205 whp is easily achievable and more is possible. You knock 18 whp and 8 ft/lbs off of the 325 at 205 whp and you get 187 whp and way better torque than the RX7. The 7 is a bit lighter, slightly less hp and better brakes. Now THAT would be a great race.

But I still hate SIRs. Would you guys prefer the weight?

[buldogge]

Hey Jeff... The SIR is definitely "working". Does the RX-7's "lack of torque" against its better aero/brakes/lower CG (and remember the BEST example can do 190rwhp) really justify its lower weight spec in the post-SIR era??? Given that the SIR is "doing it's job" (too well) perhaps we should consider changing the E36 weight to 2750#. This would accomplish two things:

1) closer to parity
2) preparation for a possible move to ITR if/when it happens

BTW, even the 2750# is gonna prove hard to get down to unless you are a 150# driver. It may well be a gift weight that is unobtainable (see the other threads re: this same issue w/ MR2/etc.) within the IT ruleset.



Steve, there are a lot of credible people saying 205 whp is easily achievable and more is possible. You knock 18 whp and 8 ft/lbs off of the 325 at 205 whp and you get 187 whp and way better torque than the RX7. The 7 is a bit lighter, slightly less hp and better brakes. Now THAT would be a great race.

But I still hate SIRs. Would you guys prefer the weight?
[/b]

[JeffYoung]

Mark, a statement first: I no be likin' SIRs. I think it is the wrong way to go.

But, the debate over what the SIR does to a BMW is academic at this point. No one has built a fully developed version of one. Once they do, and the car cannot compete with an RX7, then maybe it is time to rethink this.

Am I right that the RX7 is presently at 2680? And the BMW at 2850? So that is 190 lbs. Subjectively -- totally subjectively -- I would say yes, the major difference in torque equals the minor differences in CD, lower CG and slightly better brakes (which I don't know is true for sure).

Are you working on the SIR now? I acknowledge the timing stunk. How much time and effort will it take you to adjust your ECU and/or gearing (if needed) compensate? How many dollars? Those are the things I find unfair about the SIR, the timing and the cost of development that were imposed on you guys. With weight, there would be changes, but it would have been different -- some suspension setup, brakes maybe, tires...

On to ITR -- you don't think the car can get down to 2750? My understanding is that the car was moved from 2950 to 2850 because the BMW guys indicated they couldn't get to 2950 without a lot of ballast (back when it was limited to 100 lbs). The guys on the Bimmerforum board seemed to think 2750 was possible. Is there a problem? I'm seriously just asking the question, because it is important, very important, to ITR. One of the 3 main goals of ITR (find a place for higher hp newer cars, give the tuner crowd a place to race and give the E36 an unrestricted home to race) is to fix your problem.

Let me know, and feel free to e-mail me at [email protected] if you want to discuss "off line."

Thanks Mark.

Jeff

[zracre]

Another thread sucked into the SIR debate...I thought this one was about a 1.8 Miata??

[buldogge]

Apologies...I just came into it at the end when this thread link was cross-posted in an SIR discussion.

I forgot no one was interested in what is happening after the implementation. Take you SIR like a man, boy.

Out of here...

ps...Jeff, at 225# I don't think I can make 2750#...a 175# probably can. I think 2800# is my limit (by my calculations)...so be it I guess.



Another thread sucked into the SIR debate...I thought this one was about a 1.8 Miata??
[/b]

[Eagle7]

... Does the RX-7's "lack of torque" against its better aero/brakes/lower CG (and remember the BEST example can do 190rwhp) ...[/b]
Sorry, but I can't let this go by uncontested. Thats about 10 HP higher than I've ever heard anyone admit to. Got anything to back it up, or is it just political posturing?

[its66]

Hey Jeff... The SIR is definitely "working". Does the RX-7's "lack of torque" against its better aero/brakes/lower CG (and remember the BEST example can do 190rwhp) ....
[/b]

Where can I get one of those???

[seckerich]

Sorry, but I can't let this go by uncontested. Thats about 10 HP higher than I've ever heard anyone admit to. Got anything to back it up, or is it just political posturing?
[/b]
I have to agree--just might not pass impound. Notice how BMW numbers are down to 185-195 and RX7 are up to 190 when it helps the arguement. I'm sure there are some really "optimistic" examples of both that have not been torn down but the legal numbers are what they are. Give me the 50-60 ft/lb of torque advantage of the Bimmer and I'll take the SIR.

[JeffYoung]

You talk about ITS, and the SIR will come up. A shame, but so it goes.....

[orlando_wrx]

You talk about ITS, and the SIR will come up. A shame, but so it goes.....
[/b]
Unfortunately this WAS an ITA thread :P

[buldogge]

Nothing more to back it up than you have of 210 rwhp E36's. Simply relaying what I have been told by RX-7 drivers in the past.



Sorry, but I can't let this go by uncontested. Thats about 10 HP higher than I've ever heard anyone admit to. Got anything to back it up, or is it just political posturing?
[/b]


Unless there's a miscommunication...we are running an SIR now...you know that...right?

If the "best of the best" RX-7 exists, that is what we classify the car by...right (or does that only apply to BMW?)?

BTW...don't forget to take the 170# as well.



I have to agree--just might not pass impound. Notice how BMW numbers are down to 185-195 and RX7 are up to 190 when it helps the arguement. I'm sure there are some really "optimistic" examples of both that have not been torn down but the legal numbers are what they are. Give me the 50-60 ft/lb of torque advantage of the Bimmer and I'll take the SIR.
[/b]

[orlando_wrx]

Just double checked the gcr and couldn't help but notice the only real difference between ITS miata and ITA 1.8 Miata is 5 lbs and .5 comp ratio. Doesn't seem that a 1.8 ITA is that far off of eing an S car. Maybe I should ditch my current project and move to a Miata? Nah, I'm building what I want to experiment with, and try to do well with a car that everyone says can't be done rather than go with a no-brainer choice. :023:

[zracre]

Cool!!! :happy204: It will be good to see a full effort MR2 out there...I hope you can get some good power out of it. It seems like it would be the best handling ITA car on the planet! All the tracks us winers say are Miata tracks should also be MR2 tracks.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Just double checked the gcr and couldn't help but notice the only real difference between ITS miata and ITA 1.8 Miata is 5 lbs and .5 comp ratio. Doesn't seem that a 1.8 ITA is that far off of eing an S car. Maybe I should ditch my current project and move to a Miata? Nah, I'm building what I want to experiment with, and try to do well with a car that everyone says can't be done rather than go with a no-brainer choice. :023: [/b]

1994 Miata: 128hp/110ft lbs 2380 in ITA
1999 Miata: 140hp/119ft lbs 2375 in ITS



Also included for the 99+ are some upper suspension design changes that allow a much lower car to be effective.

[zracre]

1994 Miata: 128hp/110ft lbs 2380 in ITA
1999 Miata: 140hp/119ft lbs 2375 in ITS



Also included for the 99+ are some upper suspension design changes that allow a much lower car to be effective.
[/b]

12hp/9ft lbs and 5# is the difference between an ITS and ITA Miata...oh yea and that horrible 1994 miata suspension... :cavallo:

[charrbq]

B) :lol:

12hp/9ft lbs and 5# is the difference between an ITS and ITA Miata...oh yea and that horrible 1994 miata suspension... :cavallo:
[/b]
:happy204: :birra:

[DavidM]

1994 Miata: 128hp/110ft lbs 2380 in ITA
1999 Miata: 140hp/119ft lbs 2375 in ITS



Also included for the 99+ are some upper suspension design changes that allow a much lower car to be effective.
[/b]

Wow! I didn't realize the numbers for the S and A cars were so close. Those are crank numbers, right? What're the target hp/weight ratios for A and S? The Miatas get the rear-wheel adder. Anything else? 5 lbs difference seems pretty miniscule at first glance, but maybe I'm missing something.

This is the car that the ITAC didn't want to give more weight because of the cage size, right? Something about wanting to make it easier for SM cars to cross-over (which I'm not sure is happening). So what is the resolution IF the car is too fast? You've now got people who have built cars with the lighter cage at the current weight. Are you gonna give the car more weight and tell them they have to re-do their entire cage? I hope it turns out the car isn't too fast cause I think it's gonna be a cluster if it is.

Anybody with a 1.8 Miata coming to Road Atlanta in July? You coming with the Integra in July, Evan? That would be a good comparison.

David

[Andy Bettencourt]

12hp/9ft lbs and 5# is the difference between an ITS and ITA Miata...oh yea and that horrible 1994 miata suspension... :cavallo: [/b]

Did I say that the M1 had a bad set-up? Just that the M2 was BETTER. Trying to define the difference between the S and A versions. :rolleyes:




Wow! I didn't realize the numbers for the S and A cars were so close. Those are crank numbers, right? What're the target hp/weight ratios for A and S? The Miatas get the rear-wheel adder. Anything else? 5 lbs difference seems pretty miniscule at first glance, but maybe I'm missing something.

David [/b]

I think the issue is that the 99+ looks initially on paper to be an A car (tons of other cars at those power levels in A) - and would have to weigh over 2600lbs based on the car config. This car weighs 2150 without driver! It was decided to run it in S at a lower weight - knowing it would have some strengths and weeknesses as compared to other cars in the class.






This is the car that the ITAC didn't want to give more weight because of the cage size, right? Something about wanting to make it easier for SM cars to cross-over (which I'm not sure is happening). So what is the resolution IF the car is too fast? You've now got people who have built cars with the lighter cage at the current weight. Are you gonna give the car more weight and tell them they have to re-do their entire cage? I hope it turns out the car isn't too fast cause I think it's gonna be a cluster if it is.

David [/b]

The cage size was/is a consideration in all classes. I have written a letter to the CRB asking this same question. My car is on the dyno TODAY and I told the CRB that if it seems out of whack (re: more gains in IT trim than the process estimates - 25%) then what is teh process to have it get some lead. They told me that there is precedent to make the change and grandfather the cage. Don't know the details on that but it is good news IMHO.

Let's also be careful on comparing these two cars. Only ISC has made an ITS version go fast on the twisty stuff. I think we need to see data on that car at a place like Daytona against the Teg's, RX-7's and E36's.

Besides, lap times from an Enduro are almost useless unless all the info is known - even more so than a Sprint. That Miata could have been as much as 70lbs under minimum during that lap while getting towed out on the fast stuff by a more powerful car from another class....coulda-woulda-shoulda.

AB

[charrbq]

.Besides, lap times from an Enduro are almost useless unless all the info is known - even more so than a Sprint. That Miata could have been as much as 70lbs under minimum during that lap while getting towed out on the fast stuff by a more powerful car from another class....coulda-woulda-shoulda.

AB
[/quote]
Heavier of the two drivers was in the car during the last half of the race and was weighed at impound. During his stint was when the lap record in the 20's was set...on worn tires.

[orlando_wrx]

Maybe start an ITA SIR uproar? :bash_1_:

[zracre]

Let's also be careful on comparing these two cars. Only ISC has made an ITS version go fast on the twisty stuff. I think we need to see data on that car at a place like Daytona against the Teg's, RX-7's and E36's.

Besides, lap times from an Enduro are almost useless unless all the info is known - even more so than a Sprint. That Miata could have been as much as 70lbs under minimum during that lap while getting towed out on the fast stuff by a more powerful car from another class....coulda-woulda-shoulda.

AB
[/b]

The enduro lap times were all under track record...unless it was a bad traffic lap...a 1.5 hr race is a sprint race with these cars. If you saw MVS you would know he was at weight...he is not a little guy. Kip went across the scales and he is lighter. He was behind me the whole time for the 1st 20 min then got by when someone wrecked in the bus stop. I followed him around not able to gain on him anywhere. My fast lap was on lap 33 and his was late too. We were both working the draft just as everyone was (you have to to keep up there)...Dave, I am planning to be there in july for my ARRC practice!

[charrbq]

Sorry, my bad, I thought the big guy crossed the scales.

[ECR]

With all due respect,Andy,I think lap times from an enduro(at an aero friendly venue),when the driver is at his enduro pace/frame of mind,and the car in question blisters off a lap(succesion of them,actually)quicker than ever seen at a sprint or during qualifying,is not useless information,IMHO. BTW,iI don't see an ISC car being 7 much less 70 pounds light,and if you ask anybody there,the few tows he got only slowed him down. David Leira ITB GOLF ITA INTEGRA

[Andy Bettencourt]

The point is this: Laps during a race in an enduro CAN be from cars that are light due to lack of fuel. Teams that enduro a lot know exactly how much fuel to take to the scales. That may mean running heavy at first and at target with little fuel or that may mean running light at first and finishing with more fuel - or somewhere in between. We all know that the ISC cars are prepped to the N'th and driven just as well.

And we get data that all the cars were under track records. What does that tell us? Was Evan the previous record holder? If not, how far off?

Time will tell - trends will emerge. We have already had comments that the 99+ is too much for ITS based on Kip's results - AND requests to lighten it further because it can't compete!!!! Holy SMOKES!

Oh ya - and the letters from CRX drivers who SWEAR if they were going to do an ITA car from scratch - they would do it in an NX2000 because an undeveloped one did so well at the ARRC. 'Undeveloped'? HA!

The few 'tows' he got slowed him down? Then they were hardly tows.

:wacko:

AB

[orlando_wrx]

No real point arguing at this time guys :018:
For a little while it will be an unsuccessfull attempt to hinder the 1.8 miatas. However, after total domination of the class becomes apparent, the club will do something. If they fit in, then they fit in...there's just not enough data to take a firm stance either way just yet. Now, the 1.6 miatas have fit well in the class, so I was just figuring:

1.6 miata fits in ITA
1.8 miata fits with 1.6 miata with restrictor used in Spec Miata
1.8 miata should fit in ITA with restrictor used in Spec Miata

This goes along with the thinking of the "easy" transition from spec to IT.

And thank god, weve reclaimed the thread from the SIR debate!!!

[zracre]

The point is this: Laps during a race in an enduro CAN be from cars that are light due to lack of fuel. Teams that enduro a lot know exactly how much fuel to take to the scales. That may mean running heavy at first and at target with little fuel or that may mean running light at first and finishing with more fuel - or somewhere in between. We all know that the ISC cars are prepped to the N'th and driven just as well.

And we get data that all the cars were under track records. What does that tell us? Was Evan the previous record holder? If not, how far off?


AB
[/b]

He ran for 1 hour before his stop...that says something about fuel...I was not the record holder...John Dean in the famous 325e was before at a 2:22.2xx.

[RacerBowie]

What a bunch of freaking whiners. I am quite sure if the car ends up being to fast (not bloodly likely) it will get slowed down. Heaven freaking forbid a new car is classed that might be pretty good.

Jesus!

I am going to have to take a page from Greg Amy's book and check out of this site for a while. It takes all the fun out of racing.

Bowie

[zracre]

Do you think your 1.6 has a chance? I am not against all Miatas, I just want parity. If I had a 1.6 i'd be lobbying for some change too...I could just go build a 1.8 myself, but I HATE car of the year stuff. THAT takes all the fun out of it. I get bashed for racing an Acura by many and am called a winer...I dont care. ITA has seen some changes that were needed. I hope some others build cars different than hondas and miatas for ITA and can win. The Neons have the motor and Im sure they can handle so there is no reason they cant win too just as many others can. Im sure if a new honda was put in the class and it was that fast heads would roll!

[JIgou]

Something about wanting to make it easier for SM cars to cross-over (which I'm not sure is happening). [/b]

It's happening here now, and will only happen more as the season goes on and guys figure out they don't have a snowball's chance of making the Runoffs and they get sick of running on Toyos.

Jarrod