94 Protege classification

I dont think I missed the listing that is why I am sending out this thread. I am looking at building up a 94 Mazda Protege 1.8. Why you ask, it is because I can transfer many dollars worth of components from the car I currently have to the Protege and also get factory support. Anyway I looked in the GCR to make sure it would be classed in ITA but only the 90-93 1.8 is listed. I could not find it listed anywhere. I have a factory manual and various other documentation that shows this car exists. I have sent an email to SCCA but no response yet. Would you suggest other types of communications or is that all there is?

ITB, dood. Look for the 99-00 listing.

That 1.8L Protege kicked some serious tail at the ARRC last November...with a little more development it'll be a rocket ship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

ITB, dood. Look for the 99-00 listing.

That 1.8L Protege kicked some serious tail at the ARRC last November...with a little more development it'll be a rocket ship.

---

Just for my clarification I shall ask, Why would a 90-93 be ITA but 94 be ITB? Also how would it be classed in 99-00 listing? Same engine and frame.

90-93 is in ITA
94 not classified
95-98 is in ITA
99-00 is in ITB


Why? "Because".

QUOTE=Greg Amy;304430]90-93 is in ITA
99-00 is in ITB
94-98 is not classified.

Why? "Because".[/QUOTE]
:happy204: OK that explains it!!!! So if I want to use this car I need to get it classified. Is that worth the trouble or would it be loads smarter to get a 93?

Post the stock hp for each car and if it's SOHC or DOHC and what years.
*********************
The 1999-00 Protege ES is a 122hp 1.8L. Given those numbers, it was estimated that it would have a real hard time getting to an ITA weight of around 2165 (1980 without driver) and a curb weight of around 2550lbs. It was placed in ITB using a 30% adder (because all 16V cars in ITB get 30% per the CRB. )

The 90-93 car is listed at 125hp and about a 2450lb curb weight.

In 1994, there were two different versions of the 1.8. A SOHC and a DOHC. The DOHC was the same motor as the Miata except exhaust manifold (rated at 128hp) with the carried over 125hp rating. The SOHC 1.8 was rated at 103hp.

Adding the 1994 year to the current listing should be a no-brainer as it had the same motor and body as the 1990-1993. 1995 transitioned to the different body and went backwards to the 122hp rating.

The reason most cars or years aren't in the ITCS is simply because people have not requested it yet.

:shrug:

I was impressed with that Protege at the ARRC; were I headed to ITB that car would be one of the ones on my list.

Conversely, were I headed to ITA, that car would not be...make this simple comparison:

- Mazda Miata, xxx ponies, rear wheel drive, multi-link a-arm suspension, perfect weight balance, 2380#
- Mazda Protege, less than xxx ponies (smaller MAF, worse intake manifold), front wheel drive, strut suspension, nose heavy, 2325#

Any questions...?

On edit:
In looking at the GCR to make the above comparison, I see I missed the 95-98 in ITA. Prior post corrected. Note that the 95-98 and the 90-93 Protege in ITA are classified at the same weight, but the later car has higher compression, longer wheelbase, and better gear ratios. Given a choice, I'd not go for the earlier one in ITA...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

:shrug:

I was impressed with that Protege at the ARRC; were I headed to ITB that car would be one of the ones on my list.

Conversely, were I headed to ITA, that car would not be...make this simple comparison:

- Mazda Miata, xxx ponies, rear wheel drive, multi-link a-arm suspension, perfect weight balance, 2380#
- Mazda Protege, less than xxx ponies (smaller MAF, worse intake manifold), front wheel drive, strut suspension, nose heavy, 2325#

Any questions...?

On edit:
In looking at the GCR to make the above comparison, I see I missed the 95-98 in ITA. Prior post corrected. Note that the 95-98 and the 90-93 Protege in ITA are classified at the same weight, but the later car has higher compression, longer wheelbase, and better gear ratios. Given a choice, I'd not go for the earlier one in ITA...

---

I see your point thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

Post the stock hp for each car and if it's SOHC or DOHC and what years.
*********************
The 1999-00 Protege ES is a 122hp 1.8L. Given those numbers, it was estimated that it would have a real hard time getting to an ITA weight of around 2165 (1980 without driver) and a curb weight of around 2550lbs. It was placed in ITB using a 30% adder (because all 16V cars in ITB get 30% per the CRB. )

The 90-93 car is listed at 125hp and about a 2450lb curb weight.

---

I see this as no great improvement over what I currently have then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wepsbee

I see this as no great improvement over what I currently have then...

---

...except for the manufacturer support...how much of an advantage is that in the long run, in terms of technical support, significant reductions in parts prices, and prestige for winning in a Mazda instead of a Ford... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

The 1999-00 Protege ES is a 122hp 1.8L....

---

And therein lies the key to its underdog status. Based on what I saw at Road Atlanta, that number is significantly under-rated. Given the same engine as the Miata, with ever-so-slightly-higher compression, only slight differences in intake design, and the additional of open intake and Megasquirt (look what a better ECU did for the 1.8L Miata vis-a-vis 94 to 97) I suggest we're actually looking at a mid- to high-140s-wheel pony car in ITB...just a SWAG, nothing to support that premonition.

When I saw that car, first thing that popped into my head was "that car is the NX2000 of ITB". - GA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

And therein lies the key to its underdog status. Based on what I saw at Road Atlanta, that number is significantly under-rated. Given the same engine as the Miata, with ever-so-slightly-higher compression, only slight differences in intake design, and the additional of open intake and Megasquirt (look what a better ECU did for the 1.8L Miata vis-a-vis 94 to 97) I suggest we're actually looking at a mid- to high-140s-wheel pony car in ITB...just a SWAG, nothing to support that premonition.

When I saw that car, first thing that popped into my head was "that car is the NX2000 of ITB". - GA

---

And during that generation the Miata got changes bumping it to 140hp (the ITS version).

A crazy SWAG for sure seeing as how the Miata's can't touch that number. The 122hp rating is weird for sure given the 128/133 rating of the Miata, then the 140 rating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

Given the same engine as the Miata, and Megasquirt (look what a better ECU did for the 1.8L Miata vis-a-vis 94 to 97) GA

---

it did precisely "not much" for me.

i got the benefit i expected from the MS, and for the price it's a great product. but it's not the 10hp!!!!!! bump that many would like to believe.

More midrange?

I *think* I have more mid on the MS setup than I did on the Haltech due to better fuel and timing control, and better ability of the MS to read the distributor signal (I was "losing" pulses on the Haltech for some reason).

the biggest bump came in an area of the curve not used during racing. otherwise, the stock OBDII ECU does a very, very good job.

after talking to Mike VS and his brother Kip, they saw decent gains on teh older miatas, and according to Kip it was absolutely necessary on the ITS miata. Travis who tuned your car? and how did they do it?

Sam Henry of Springfield Dyno did it.

Done the same way you'd tune any car i'd guess. start at idle, and gradually working your way through the map increasing load and RPM as you go. add/remove fuel until you get to you target AF ratio, add/remove timing until it quits making power.

i did send the sheet to Jerry @ DIY and he said my results are in line with what he would expect for a car working within in the IT ruleset.

and this was as good of a comparison as you can get, with dyno runs done at the beginning of the day on the OEM ECU after already optimizing base timing & fuel pressure, MS plugged in and tuned, then OEM ECU plugged back in at the end of the day immediately after the two best runs with the tuned Megasquirt.

and yes, i would expect the 94-95 miatas to see bigger gains from the MS (or any other standalone) than i did on my 96. remember all that stuff about why the car should be listed based on the 128 number vs the 133? my experience verifies that decision as being appropriate.

Kip and Mike are pretty open about the Miatas. I don't know much about Mike's ITA Miata (don't even know if it is a 1.6 or 1.8) but I do know Kip told me the computer was necessary on the 99 ITS car in order to get it to rev to make power. I think he told me around 160, maybe slightly more, peak rwhp.

My personal view is that the Miatae are strong, nearly unbeatable at Roebling, but weaker at the up/down tracks like VIR and Road Atlanta.

Mike is a straight forward guy, I like his solution to the old computer rule, I can't remember the name brand of the computer but it was pretty slick. He may sell it on his website? Hell you could buy his whole car for 12k or less! Well you espeically could since it was rolled at roebling a month ago.

on the ITS cars htere were alot of teethign issues with the standalone, but I guess Kip figured it out while he was up north.

As i recall, he was blowing cam angle sensor with all to frequent regularity...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateapex911

As i recall, he was blowing cam angle sensor with all to frequent regularity...

---

correct.. if you give kip about 2 hours maybe more he can tell you the whole story! haha :D

LOL...but it's a good one. Really a case study in how to track down and fix a problem.

It was happening a lot. You'd go out for a session and pretty frequently you'd see the blue or the yellow car popping and bucking and headed in.

They got it fixed though.

I've got one of 2000 1.8 models. LIke the car at the ARRC last year, it started life as an SSC car. The engine is not the same as in the Miata (see below), which is not to say that dyno/ ECM mods won't help it. That's on down the line for us, though, we're just doing the minimum to get it on track in ITB trim for now (feeding a Spec Miata from the same pair of wallets).

Handling was the car's strong suit, as it had one of the famous "trunk kits" (shocks and springs, but no coil overs). We'll be on a slow development curve, but we think the car is well suited to the class. Had the ITAC not reclassified it from ITA to ITB, it would still be gathering dust in the back of the garage...

Hope to be on track for next month's MARRS/ SARRC @ VIR.

From the the Protege FAQ (http://www.protegefaq.net/):
Is it true that the Miata uses the same engine as my Protegé? All sorts
of speed parts are available for Miatas.
The 94-97 1.8L Miata uses an engine that is basically similar to the BP
engine found in the 1990-1998 1.8L DOHC Protegé (the 1999-2000 1.8L DOHC
Protegé engine is completely different, despite similar specs).... The 1999-2000 BP-ZE Miata engine is similar to the 1994-1997 Miata/Protegé
motor, but Mazda repositioned the intake ports slightly higher on the
cylinder head for increased power. Compression was also raised from 9:1 to
9.5:1. For Miata owners, this is good, but it's bad for Protegé fans because
a Protegé intake manifold will not fit on this cylinder head. Therefore, you
are stuck with a throttle body that faces the wrong end of the engine. To
date, this engine has not been sold in a FWD car anywhere in the world, so
there is no easy way to work around this problem.
.

That car was awesome to run with at the ARRC and a good driver too. I wish I was able to make MARRS/SARRC to battle with it again. It was obvious just watching it that it needed more suspension dev. Looked like a handful to drive.