1999 Miata in ITS?

[JeffYoung]

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

[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.

[snapback]66105[/snapback]

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'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's miata is a quick car.

[mdaniels]

Bringing this one back to life...

In reading the 2006 car classifications here I only see the '90 - '95 Miata listed in there under ITA, and the '99 under ITS. What happened to the '96 and '97? Curious if anyone knows why this car isn'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'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'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't even think of a word for it...

You sure you don't want to run that formula maybe one more time...?

On edit:I'm still trying to get my brain around this idea...

2380 for the '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't want to run these formulas maybe one more time...?

[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?

[Andy Bettencourt]

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

[/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'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 'recalculation', 'reorg' or whatever you want to call it as long as you don't call it "competition adjustments'.

AB

[Andy Bettencourt]

Easy Greg. You should know about the Miata'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'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

[zracre]

Easy Greg. You should know about the Miata'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'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'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 'non-Miata' 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't look any longer! Write that $9K check to Sunbelt !!!

[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's only due to the software" (or whatever) consideration when running them through the formula...? We'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've said in the past, that's an completely unreasonable excuse for setting weights; quite absurd and rude to everyone else in the class. And don'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 'nother light. We are bastardizing this new "objective" formulaic process. Can I submit the minimum weight for my car for NASA'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'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're losing me fast...all I'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'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 '96 & '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'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 '96 & '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. 'Unfairly' 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'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

[Greg Krom]

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

The DOHC Neon is 150hp - 10hp higher than the Integra, yet weighs less. 'Unfairly' 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'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'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????

[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'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'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.

[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'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'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]

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]

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's a big maybe. And remember, Miata's don'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 'process' because it's isn'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.