1999 Miata in ITS?

[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]

ok back to the ITS subject, heres a question...If you compare the RX7 numbers with GSR and 99 Miata numbers, is it close? you say adders and such but the miata in S is obviously waaay down on power, and the GSR has almost identical power and torque figures (RX very slight advantage on the numbers ive seen...but if SERRA's numbers are good...dead heat) should have a minus for smaller brakes/front drive/crappy aero (compared to the RX)...so why is it 10# heavier than said RX?? I know SCCA does not guarantee competitiveness, but if all it takes is to re look at the formula...they cant be the same. If the Integra lost 80# and 500 people built them do you think they would dominate?? of course because so many are spending big $$ on it to go win...then it is stamped an overdog. The point is to make all cars equal in full prep trim. I'd love to see many makes battle for wins...ITA seems like it will shape up this year...

[Greg Krom]

It was classed using the same process.
[/b]

Using the '94-'95 numbers for the Miata or '96-'97?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Using the '94-'95 numbers for the Miata or '96-'97? [/b]

94-95. The 94-95 was the only car in ITS when a request for reclass came down. After that decision had been published, a request came in to add the 96-97. Since the engines are idential except for an open item in IT, therefor having the same exact IT-prep potential, it was decided to put them on the same spec line.

AB

ok back to the ITS subject, heres a question...If you compare the RX7 numbers with GSR and 99 Miata numbers, is it close? you say adders and such but the miata in S is obviously waaay down on power, and the GSR has almost identical power and torque figures (RX very slight advantage on the numbers ive seen...but if SERRA's numbers are good...dead heat) should have a minus for smaller brakes/front drive/crappy aero (compared to the RX)...so why is it 10# heavier than said RX?? I know SCCA does not guarantee competitiveness, but if all it takes is to re look at the formula...they cant be the same. If the Integra lost 80# and 500 people built them do you think they would dominate?? of course because so many are spending big $$ on it to go win...then it is stamped an overdog. The point is to make all cars equal in full prep trim. I'd love to see many makes battle for wins...ITA seems like it will shape up this year... [/b]

Guys, I can't keep saying this over and over. When the re-org happend, cars were looked at that stuck out. If you were over 100lbs 'off', you got a switch - porvided we have interest and info. If you were less, you got consideration but not neccesarily a change. Some were made that made sense...like a BMW example of a 25lb break due to 3-4 other cars with the same drivetrain getting to 2600. We are just trying to get everyone on the same planet, not balance everyone on the head of a pin - it's impossible.

50-75 lbs doesn't bring an underdog into competitiveness IMHO.

[Greg Krom]

Are there hardware differences between the 94-95 and 96-97 Miatas that result in the 5 hp difference or is it truly 100% software derived? In other words is the 94-95 ECU and related hardware capable of being reprogrammed to match the performance of the 96-97?

I don't know, maybe I'm just being cynical, but I still suspect that the 1.8 Miata has been classified as a possible overdog. Which is disappointing when the rest of the class appears to be so closely matched.

Of course, its all theoretical at this point until some serious cars get built and campaigned.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Zero hardware changes.

[zracre]

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.

[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

[Colin Harmer]

Well the irony of it all is that ...as the "instigator" of this thread, I have enjoyed all the comments that have been made during the last while... I asked the question as I has looked at a ITS ex-Grand AM car and thought that might be the way to go, that car sold, but I still wanted to make a change from FWD to RWD and find something competitive. I didn't want to go with a SM as the cars just don't allow "tinkering" for me. Long story short...I'll be wheeling a '94 ITA Miata sometime soon. Stu at BSI is building the mechanicals, and I'm doing the electricals, between us, it should be a pretty good car. A class "killer" I don't think so, as the Honda product is going to be hard to beat for power, but if the track is twisty we should be able to give them an honest run...

Won't know much more until it hits the track for the first time (in about a month)...

Details to follow.

PS: Look out for my ITB golf in the NE as that's it's new home!

[MMiskoe]

Has anyone gotten real HP numbers off a 1.8 in IT trim yet? I'm curious if the Miata motor will respond as well to the IT mods as some other motors. Some motors gain more from the (mostly exterior) changes that IT allows - look at the Wankels as your best example.

I guess the question is valid for the 1.6's that have been in ITA for a while now. How do those motors compare to an SM motor HP wise?

I'd say its a safe bet that the SM class has figured out the best way to squeeze power out of those motors w/ the restrictions that they have, so move on from there, what do you get? Then are those #'s in line w/ the weight/pwr ratios typical for the class?

[gpeluso]

Does any know if the 96-97 model fits in ITA or is it still in ITS? Seems like a great ITA car along with th 94-95 model.

Thanks
Greg

[Andy Bettencourt]

Has anyone gotten real HP numbers off a 1.8 in IT trim yet? I'm curious if the Miata motor will respond as well to the IT mods as some other motors. Some motors gain more from the (mostly exterior) changes that IT allows - look at the Wankels as your best example.

I guess the question is valid for the 1.6's that have been in ITA for a while now. How do those motors compare to an SM motor HP wise?

I'd say its a safe bet that the SM class has figured out the best way to squeeze power out of those motors w/ the restrictions that they have, so move on from there, what do you get? Then are those #'s in line w/ the weight/pwr ratios typical for the class? [/b]

Matt,

This is the info I have:

I will have some numbers for you in about 45 days WITH programmable fuel management. This is for a 94-97 1.8. A 30% increase (optamistic) will net 136whp using an 18% factor for drivetrain losses.

You are gonna have to spend the $ to make one of these run fast within ITA. Also factor in the 110ft/lbs of torque thay will make max. I think a great qualiying car and not bad on LRP but the big stuff maybe a problem and traffic will be a nightmare. You know how many SM's pass you when you make a mistake? TONS.

HP numbers are in line, torque numbers are way low for the class but the suspension design may keep in in the hunt.

AB

Does any know if the 96-97 model fits in ITA or is it still in ITS? Seems like a great ITA car along with th 94-95 model.

Thanks
Greg [/b]

Start from post #26 and read on. I have a feeling that there may be more than a few conversions from SM now that it's National. Bolting a header on and removing the RP ain't gonna get it done in ITA. Not by a long shot. Take a look at guys who hop between SM and ITA. Take a look at their race laps. No comparison. SM cars in SM go way faster than SM cars in ITA.

AB

[tnord]

i can say that 1.6 pro-SM motors of the sunbelt variety (not sure about this whole Huffaker thing) will make in the 120-125hp range. the highest i personally know of is 122, i'm guessing some of the guys that ran in the pro series probably made a couple more, but i'd say 125 is a pretty hard ceiling for right now. the 1.8 SM's have to weigh 100lbs more iirc, so i figure they crank out another 5hp. this may not be accurate, but there has to be some advantage in power curve or torque to overcome the weight.

so now were at maybe 127hp, take out the restrictor plate and i don't think it's a big stretch to assume 130hp. add in the extra modifications allowed in IT, and i would assume that the 1.8 in full IT trim will be somewhere north of 135hp. if someone cracked the 140hp barrier it wouldn't surprise me, it kinda depends how much effect that RP has on the SM.

<-----SMer who may switch over to IT this year, maybe in a miata, maybe not.

[Andy Bettencourt]

it kinda depends how much effect that RP has on the SM.

<-----SMer who may switch over to IT this year, maybe in a miata, maybe not. [/b]

The back to back testing we have on file shows a 2 hp difference between the 47mm and 45mm sizes and the complete removal of the 47mm restrictor is between 2-3hp on the 94-95.

AB

[Colin Harmer]

AB,

Your numbers for HP gains in removing the RP are about right. It&#39;s not some huge gain like I was (hoping) expecting... While the 1.6 may have some advantages, there were 2 primary reasons why the 1.8 will be the better car.

1. Torque-whilst low on both motors....more is always better, and enough of a HP difference to make up for the wieght split between the 2 cars.

2. Rear ends..The 1.8 is simply a better, tougher unit. I&#39;ve heard enough horror stories about 1.6&#39;s "dying"

94 all the way!

[tnord]

after being witness to somewhere around 20 diff failures on 1.6l cars in SM......the 1.8 is no doubt the way to go.

on the topic of restrictor plates, i would&#39;ve expected a greater effect than just 2-3 peak hp. is there more of an effect on the power curve from 5-7k than just peak #&#39;s? if the difference really is only 2-3 peak hp then why not just add a bit more weight and make it easier to police? i&#39;m sure there&#39;s a good reason, i just don&#39;t know of it.


i wonder if it&#39;s legal to take my 1.6l chassis and swap in 1.8l drivetrain and go IT racing? where&#39;s my GCR?

[Marcus Miller]

In IT would it not be legal to sap the 1.8 diff into the 1.6?
What other changes are required?

marcus (not a meotter expert)

[tnord]

i don&#39;t know what all the differences are, but here&#39;s the little that i do.

engine & diff (duh)
transmission is the same, though the 1.8diff has a different f/d
driveshaft
axles
rotors
i think theres a additional rear subframe brace that is easy to add on

to just change the diff all you need are axles, a driveshaft, and the diff itself.

[mdaniels]

In IT would it not be legal to sap the 1.8 diff into the 1.6?
What other changes are required?

marcus (not a meotter expert)
[/b]

I am far from any kind of IT expert, but:

From the GCR:

To maintain the stock basis of Improved Touring, updating and/or
backdating of components is only permitted within cars of the same
make, model, body type (e.g., sedan, station wagon, convertible, etc.),
and engine size as listed on a single Improved Touring Specification Line.