STL rule request change.

I will be putting in a rule request change on this and was wondering how you guys felt.

• Spec Miata cars completely* conforming to Spec Miata class specifications are eligible for STL.

*With the exception of:
May remove restrictor plate.
Tires may conform to 9.1.4.P.1.
Wheels may conform to 9.1.4.3.F.1.
1.6L SM may run at 2132 lbs.
1.8L SM may run at 2398.5 lbs.


I know it may sound like a lot but it's not much really and even with those allownences a SM car is way under developed then an STL car.

The reason for the request would be to help make the class be more appealing for the tons of SM cars that may double dip. It would help make the SM care more competitve with true STL cars. Most guys won't run a different tire, but some may, and that would make for closer racing. Most will run the same SM wheel, but some may, go with a lighter 15x7. Who know some may just turn there car into a full STL car.

It's also quick and easy, pulling the plate, ballast, and slapping on new wheels would take no time.

Anyways let me know what you think. This is my first time doing this so need advice on how to do this and the best wording.

Thanks!

just pull the plate and call it an STU car - you can remove any bolt in ballast you want and still be way overweight by that standard. nothing I can think of on an SM car would be illegal in STU otherwise, though I might be overlooking something. bascially it's an unnecessary addition tot he rules from my perspective.

* you do needd a fire SYSTEM to run in STU outside fo the special allowances for IT/SM/etc... so there's one item. worht considering even in SM if you have to run ballast anyhow.

^^ I am not sure how STU got involved here... but I like the first post where SM is in STL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chip42

just pull the plate and call it an STU car...

---

Ditto (but STL, I think that's what Chip meant*). No special allowance needed, as all those suggested mods are allowed in STL and the legal weight for the STL 1.6L Miata is already 2132# and for the 1.8L it's already 2399#.

IIRC, the reason we put that "allowance" in there** was to specifically bring the option to the attention of the Spec Miata drivers...

GA

* Anything legal to STL rules is also legal for STU.
** The following verbiage is already in the rules: "Spec Miata cars completely conforming to Spec Miata class specifications are eligible for STL."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

** The following verbiage is already in the rules: "Spec Miata cars completely conforming to Spec Miata class specifications are eligible for STL."

---

Yeah but the way I read it is the SM needs to completely conform to SM rules.

Which means throwing on light wheels (sm wheels need to be 13 lbs) with hoosiers, and pulling ballast and the restrictor is not conforming to SM rules at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0100

Yeah but the way I read it is the SM needs to completely conform to SM rules.

---

Yes, but that's an inclusion to the rules, not an exclusion otherwise. It simply says that if you have a car that conforms to the SM rules, you're explicitly conforming to the STL rules. It does not require Miatas in STL to conform to SM rules; if you were to cover up the SM stickers (which you need to do when you're running STL), how would I know (or care) any differently?

Don't overthink it. Trust me, what you describe in your first post is perfectly conforming to STL regs without further rules needed. Slap some STL stickers on it and you're good.

GA

I know SM can run in ITA/ITS depending on year..

Is there anything in an SM car that would make it illegal for IT unless it was classed as a direct crossover like they are?

i.e. could you enter the car as an IT double-dipper instead of an SM double-dipper? entering it as IT car would allow you whatever weight wheels and whatever DOT tires you wanted to throw at it. what about the restrictor plate as well?

just throwing out ideas...

Edit.. and as tGA put it, if the car conforms to STL rules the way it goes on the track, who cares if it conforms to SM rules at that particular time-- as long as you turn it back to SM spec before running SM.
I rememeber a while back Tom Thrash would run his RX7 in EP and then add a wing, change intake manifold and carbs, then run the car in GT3.. long as he remembered to convert it back, then it was all good.

I think SM's are too low to be 100% legit in ITS or STL.

Damn you guys haven't notice yet I over think everything. lol

We all have that problem sometimes... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt93SE

Is there anything in an SM car that would make it illegal for IT unless it was classed as a direct crossover like they are?

---

It is NOT a direct crossover (there is no verbiage in the IT explicitly allowing SMs) and yes, there are a few SM items that do not conform to IT rules, such as de-powered steering racks and swapping of rear end components and such (and it's getting worse). There was a move a couple years ago to explicitly allow SMs in IT but it was quashed (I personally opposed it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0100

I think SM's are too low to be 100% legit in ITS or STL.

---

The min ride height in STL is 5 inches; is SM lower? It's a moot point, given the cars are explicitly allowed in STL.

GA

A semi moot point, as he wants permission to run the car in SM trim (I assume that means lower ride height), but with removed SM particulars. You're saying, "Run it as a Miata, ignore that it's an SM", which is fine, but he'll have to raise his ride height (assuming the SM ride height is indeed lower) to be legal in STL at 5".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateapex911

You're saying, "Run it as a Miata, ignore that it's an SM", which is fine, but he'll have to raise his ride height (assuming the SM ride height is indeed lower) to be legal in STL at 5".

---

Correct. What's the minimum ride height of a Smack MyOtter? Is it less than 5"? Is that the only deviation from the STL rules that would make the car illegal?

You're most certainly free to make the request, and it'll get a fair consideration, but from experience I can tell you there will likely be no mix-and-match of the prep rules for any one particular make/model. You can run under Spec Miata prep rules, or you can run under STL prep rules...I don't think that's unreasonable. - GA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

It is NOT a direct crossover (there is no verbiage in the IT explicitly allowing SMs) and yes, there are a few SM items that do not conform to IT rules, such as de-powered steering racks and swapping of rear end components and such (and it's getting worse). There was a move a couple years ago to explicitly allow SMs in IT but it was quashed (I personally opposed it).
GA

---

Umm, so what am I missing? I see SMs run in ITA all the time.... ??

I see Hondas with holes cut in the radiator panel for cold air, and cars with hard engine mounts and mustangs in ITB with clear plexi spoilers....doesn't make 'em legal.....

supposedly THOSE SMs are IT legal, still.

BTW, as I noted earlier, there are some required safety items that IT etc... can run without that a car being passed off as an ST_" car needs. there's also some goofy ST only requirements - the most notable of which I think was changed (it was at least recomended to be so) where the oil plug had to be safetywired or otherwise positively secured from loosening. I'd have to dig for more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Amy

Correct. What's the minimum ride height of a Smack MyOtter? Is it less than 5"? Is that the only deviation from the STL rules that would make the car illegal?

You're most certainly free to make the request, and it'll get a fair consideration, but from experience I can tell you there will likely be no mix-and-match of the prep rules for any one particular make/model. You can run under Spec Miata prep rules, or you can run under STL prep rules...I don't think that's unreasonable. - GA

---

Thinking further, I don't think there IS a min ride height on a SM....

And no, I won't TOUCH your otter!

Yeah there is no ride height min. in SM. Anyways I think I was just making a mountain out of a mole hill.