Removal of quarter windows on Miata

[JohnW8]

I know Spec Miata folks can remove the quarter window on the driver side to make it easier to crawl out if necessary.
Question is, is this allowed for ITA?

Looking at a halo seat but I wouldn't be able to get out of the window with it in place. Anyone have the answer?

[chuck baader]

Loose weight...and that would be the reason I don't have a halo seat:happy204::happy204::happy204:Chuck

[Matt93SE]

9.1.3.9.m says "vent window" and its structure may be removed.
I'm not sure if it opens on a Miata, but you could argue that little window serves the function of a vent window since that's exactly the size and shape a vent window would be if it were there.

Also, since a SM is explicitly legal for ITA and its removal is allowed for SM, then I can't see where anyone would have a leg to stand on if they complained about it.

[Greg Amy]

...since a SM is explicitly legal for ITA...
That is incorrect...


...9.1.3.9.m says "vent window" and its structure may be removed...
I suggest that's within the spirit of the rules, especially since we can remove all door glass otherwise with NASCAr door bars.

[red986s]

John,

It is legal, I removed mine because of a new seat. Never had any problem going through tech. The little extra air flow was great during the warmer months.

[GKR_17]

It is legal... Never had any problem going through tech.

I agree that it's ok, but getting through tech has nothing to do with it. Their goal is to check for safety, not legality.

[Simon T.]

Sounds like a safety thing to me with no real performance benefit.

[Eagle7]

Sounds like a safety thing to me with no real performance benefit.
Yes, but the question was not whether it is a good idea, but whether it is legal. Those are very different questions. Make sure you keep them separate except when discussing potential rule changes.

[JohnW8]

Thanks for the replies. I'm kinda short at 5'7" so the seat would be closer to the steering wheel so the issue wasn't I'm too fat to get out of the window but rather the helmet wouldn't go through the opening left by the halo and the quarter window.

Thanks!

[Matt93SE]

That is incorrect...

the guys that are asking the questions are familiar with the relevant IT/SM rules and should understand the point I was inferring. In this case it wouldn't matter what year or engine it was-- SM is prepped within IT rules as far as bodywork is considered.

But yes.. Pardon my slip. Was in a hurry yesterday. just trying to help a guy out.

[mossaidis]

Matt... Matt... don't get upset with Greg. If you do, please please please watch this video... it makes alllll better. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=JEYAcKdwmiw

[Greg Amy]

Gawd, it's been a long time for that...that was a pretty fun year. Have you seen the lap of VIR...? I don't recall if we did Road Atlanta or not...

Matt, only reason I brought it up, I inferred you were saying that Spec Miatae are explicitly legal in Improved Touring A, such as they are in STU/L. That, of course is not true. There was a was a few years ago to specifically allow them into ITA, but it was shot down; there's just too many allowances in SM that contravene the regs in ITA (e.g., ride height, power steering rack looping, final drive housings, now specifically-allowed engine mods, etc.)

GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

There was a was a few years ago to specifically allow them into ITA, but it was shot down; there's just too many allowances in SM that contravene the regs in ITA (e.g., ride height, power steering rack looping, final drive housings, now specifically-allowed engine mods, etc.)

GA

And the list keeps growing and growing.

Also, it is NOT legal to remove the passenger side vent window UNLESS you put a NACA duct in.

[Matt93SE]

Ok, strange. I learned something there. I was told by a local guy (a tech inspector at that) that any 90-99 SM was allowed to run in ITA and 00+ were ITS. no "if they add 30lbs and raise the ride height and have to run power steering and change this" or anything.. just "if it's SM, it can run IT. and since it can run IT, it can run STU too." I've just always gone under the assumption he was correct, and here I go making an arse out of meself. :)
Then again, for me it doesn't matter much-- I'm a Nissan guy and have no say with SM or IT so it ain't my dog..


Matt... Matt... don't get upset with Greg. If you do, please please please watch this video... it makes alllll better. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=JEYAcKdwmiw

HAHAHAH! Thanks. I needed that after the week I've had.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Ok, strange. I learned something there. I was told by a local guy (a tech inspector at that) that any 90-99 SM was allowed to run in ITA and 00+ were ITS. no "if they add 30lbs and raise the ride height and have to run power steering and change this" or anything.. just "if it's SM, it can run IT. and since it can run IT, it can run STU too." I've just always gone under the assumption he was correct, and here I go making an arse out of meself. :)
Then again, for me it doesn't matter much-- I'm a Nissan guy and have no say with SM or IT so it ain't my dog..



HAHAHAH! Thanks. I needed that after the week I've had.

So they DO run in ITA and ITS respectively because prep level is currently 'below' what is allowed in IT. This upcoming year, Hoosiers are allowed so you will see some faster SM's at some tracks. Slower at others.

There will probably come a day when an IT guy gets pissed enough at a SM driver that they protest his car. The 99's will be legal in ITS but the other cars will have some issues. Your region MAY in fact explicitly allow them in if that happens but right now, IT guys don't so much care because they should be beating them.

[lateapex911]

m. If equipped, the vent window and its supporting structure may
be removed.

The allowance doesn't require that the window be operational. I was on the ITAC, as was Andy and Josh and Jeff (IT.com posters) when the rule was written. I actually sponsored (requested) the allowance, and the idea was to allow the area available to the driver for egress to be increased, as "halo" seats were becoming the norm.

[red986s]

The allowance doesn't require that the window be operational. I was on the ITAC, as was Andy and Josh and Jeff (IT.com posters) when the rule was written. I actually sponsored (requested) the allowance, and the idea was to allow the area available to the driver for egress to be increased, as "halo" seats were becoming the norm.

A very, very good decision, thank you!

[pitbull113]

let's just say i don't need the extra room to get out of the car. wouldn't it hurt the aero of the car by making the window essentially bigger?

[Marcus Miller]

Yep! The only question would be if the difference is material.

[red986s]

let's just say i don't need the extra room to get out of the car. wouldn't it hurt the aero of the car by making the window essentially bigger?

If you can egress your car with the door shut then I wouldn't bother removing the vent window. I got hung up every time I tried. I'd rather loose a second or two due to aero then end up a crispy critter.

But to answer the question, it hasn't effected my lap times at all.

[TStiles]

Matt... Matt... don't get upset with Greg. If you do, please please please watch this video... it makes alllll better. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=JEYAcKdwmiw

That sounds like the motorsports version of Beavis & Butthead

[Wreckerboy]

"He's in the keyhole." "No, I think he's in Mars."