1.8 Miata at Roebling

[Eagle7]

... Does the RX-7's "lack of torque" against its better aero/brakes/lower CG (and remember the BEST example can do 190rwhp) ...[/b]

Sorry, but I can't let this go by uncontested. Thats about 10 HP higher than I've ever heard anyone admit to. Got anything to back it up, or is it just political posturing?

[its66]

Hey Jeff... The SIR is definitely "working". Does the RX-7's "lack of torque" against its better aero/brakes/lower CG (and remember the BEST example can do 190rwhp) ....
[/b]

Where can I get one of those???

[seckerich]

Sorry, but I can't let this go by uncontested. Thats about 10 HP higher than I've ever heard anyone admit to. Got anything to back it up, or is it just political posturing?
[/b]

I have to agree--just might not pass impound. Notice how BMW numbers are down to 185-195 and RX7 are up to 190 when it helps the arguement. I'm sure there are some really "optimistic" examples of both that have not been torn down but the legal numbers are what they are. Give me the 50-60 ft/lb of torque advantage of the Bimmer and I'll take the SIR.

[JeffYoung]

You talk about ITS, and the SIR will come up. A shame, but so it goes.....

[orlando_wrx]

You talk about ITS, and the SIR will come up. A shame, but so it goes.....
[/b]

Unfortunately this WAS an ITA thread :P

[buldogge]

Nothing more to back it up than you have of 210 rwhp E36's. Simply relaying what I have been told by RX-7 drivers in the past.

Sorry, but I can't let this go by uncontested. Thats about 10 HP higher than I've ever heard anyone admit to. Got anything to back it up, or is it just political posturing?
[/b]

Unless there's a miscommunication...we are running an SIR now...you know that...right?

If the "best of the best" RX-7 exists, that is what we classify the car by...right (or does that only apply to BMW?)?

BTW...don't forget to take the 170# as well.

I have to agree--just might not pass impound. Notice how BMW numbers are down to 185-195 and RX7 are up to 190 when it helps the arguement. I'm sure there are some really "optimistic" examples of both that have not been torn down but the legal numbers are what they are. Give me the 50-60 ft/lb of torque advantage of the Bimmer and I'll take the SIR.
[/b]

[orlando_wrx]

Just double checked the gcr and couldn't help but notice the only real difference between ITS miata and ITA 1.8 Miata is 5 lbs and .5 comp ratio. Doesn't seem that a 1.8 ITA is that far off of eing an S car. Maybe I should ditch my current project and move to a Miata? Nah, I'm building what I want to experiment with, and try to do well with a car that everyone says can't be done rather than go with a no-brainer choice.

[zracre]

Cool!!! It will be good to see a full effort MR2 out there...I hope you can get some good power out of it. It seems like it would be the best handling ITA car on the planet! All the tracks us winers say are Miata tracks should also be MR2 tracks.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Just double checked the gcr and couldn't help but notice the only real difference between ITS miata and ITA 1.8 Miata is 5 lbs and .5 comp ratio. Doesn't seem that a 1.8 ITA is that far off of eing an S car. Maybe I should ditch my current project and move to a Miata? Nah, I'm building what I want to experiment with, and try to do well with a car that everyone says can't be done rather than go with a no-brainer choice. [/b]

1994 Miata: 128hp/110ft lbs 2380 in ITA
1999 Miata: 140hp/119ft lbs 2375 in ITS



Also included for the 99+ are some upper suspension design changes that allow a much lower car to be effective.

[zracre]

1994 Miata: 128hp/110ft lbs 2380 in ITA
1999 Miata: 140hp/119ft lbs 2375 in ITS



Also included for the 99+ are some upper suspension design changes that allow a much lower car to be effective.
[/b]

12hp/9ft lbs and 5# is the difference between an ITS and ITA Miata...oh yea and that horrible 1994 miata suspension...

[charrbq]

12hp/9ft lbs and 5# is the difference between an ITS and ITA Miata...oh yea and that horrible 1994 miata suspension...
[/b]

[DavidM]

1994 Miata: 128hp/110ft lbs 2380 in ITA
1999 Miata: 140hp/119ft lbs 2375 in ITS



Also included for the 99+ are some upper suspension design changes that allow a much lower car to be effective.
[/b]

Wow! I didn't realize the numbers for the S and A cars were so close. Those are crank numbers, right? What're the target hp/weight ratios for A and S? The Miatas get the rear-wheel adder. Anything else? 5 lbs difference seems pretty miniscule at first glance, but maybe I'm missing something.

This is the car that the ITAC didn't want to give more weight because of the cage size, right? Something about wanting to make it easier for SM cars to cross-over (which I'm not sure is happening). So what is the resolution IF the car is too fast? You've now got people who have built cars with the lighter cage at the current weight. Are you gonna give the car more weight and tell them they have to re-do their entire cage? I hope it turns out the car isn't too fast cause I think it's gonna be a cluster if it is.

Anybody with a 1.8 Miata coming to Road Atlanta in July? You coming with the Integra in July, Evan? That would be a good comparison.

David

[Andy Bettencourt]

12hp/9ft lbs and 5# is the difference between an ITS and ITA Miata...oh yea and that horrible 1994 miata suspension... [/b]

Did I say that the M1 had a bad set-up? Just that the M2 was BETTER. Trying to define the difference between the S and A versions.

Wow! I didn't realize the numbers for the S and A cars were so close. Those are crank numbers, right? What're the target hp/weight ratios for A and S? The Miatas get the rear-wheel adder. Anything else? 5 lbs difference seems pretty miniscule at first glance, but maybe I'm missing something.

David [/b]

I think the issue is that the 99+ looks initially on paper to be an A car (tons of other cars at those power levels in A) - and would have to weigh over 2600lbs based on the car config. This car weighs 2150 without driver! It was decided to run it in S at a lower weight - knowing it would have some strengths and weeknesses as compared to other cars in the class.

This is the car that the ITAC didn't want to give more weight because of the cage size, right? Something about wanting to make it easier for SM cars to cross-over (which I'm not sure is happening). So what is the resolution IF the car is too fast? You've now got people who have built cars with the lighter cage at the current weight. Are you gonna give the car more weight and tell them they have to re-do their entire cage? I hope it turns out the car isn't too fast cause I think it's gonna be a cluster if it is.

David [/b]

The cage size was/is a consideration in all classes. I have written a letter to the CRB asking this same question. My car is on the dyno TODAY and I told the CRB that if it seems out of whack (re: more gains in IT trim than the process estimates - 25%) then what is teh process to have it get some lead. They told me that there is precedent to make the change and grandfather the cage. Don't know the details on that but it is good news IMHO.

Let's also be careful on comparing these two cars. Only ISC has made an ITS version go fast on the twisty stuff. I think we need to see data on that car at a place like Daytona against the Teg's, RX-7's and E36's.

Besides, lap times from an Enduro are almost useless unless all the info is known - even more so than a Sprint. That Miata could have been as much as 70lbs under minimum during that lap while getting towed out on the fast stuff by a more powerful car from another class....coulda-woulda-shoulda.

AB

[charrbq]

.Besides, lap times from an Enduro are almost useless unless all the info is known - even more so than a Sprint. That Miata could have been as much as 70lbs under minimum during that lap while getting towed out on the fast stuff by a more powerful car from another class....coulda-woulda-shoulda.

AB
[/quote]
Heavier of the two drivers was in the car during the last half of the race and was weighed at impound. During his stint was when the lap record in the 20's was set...on worn tires.

[orlando_wrx]

Maybe start an ITA SIR uproar?

[zracre]

Let's also be careful on comparing these two cars. Only ISC has made an ITS version go fast on the twisty stuff. I think we need to see data on that car at a place like Daytona against the Teg's, RX-7's and E36's.

Besides, lap times from an Enduro are almost useless unless all the info is known - even more so than a Sprint. That Miata could have been as much as 70lbs under minimum during that lap while getting towed out on the fast stuff by a more powerful car from another class....coulda-woulda-shoulda.

AB
[/b]

The enduro lap times were all under track record...unless it was a bad traffic lap...a 1.5 hr race is a sprint race with these cars. If you saw MVS you would know he was at weight...he is not a little guy. Kip went across the scales and he is lighter. He was behind me the whole time for the 1st 20 min then got by when someone wrecked in the bus stop. I followed him around not able to gain on him anywhere. My fast lap was on lap 33 and his was late too. We were both working the draft just as everyone was (you have to to keep up there)...Dave, I am planning to be there in july for my ARRC practice!

[charrbq]

Sorry, my bad, I thought the big guy crossed the scales.

[ECR]

With all due respect,Andy,I think lap times from an enduro(at an aero friendly venue),when the driver is at his enduro pace/frame of mind,and the car in question blisters off a lap(succesion of them,actually)quicker than ever seen at a sprint or during qualifying,is not useless information,IMHO. BTW,iI don't see an ISC car being 7 much less 70 pounds light,and if you ask anybody there,the few tows he got only slowed him down. David Leira ITB GOLF ITA INTEGRA

[Andy Bettencourt]

The point is this: Laps during a race in an enduro CAN be from cars that are light due to lack of fuel. Teams that enduro a lot know exactly how much fuel to take to the scales. That may mean running heavy at first and at target with little fuel or that may mean running light at first and finishing with more fuel - or somewhere in between. We all know that the ISC cars are prepped to the N'th and driven just as well.

And we get data that all the cars were under track records. What does that tell us? Was Evan the previous record holder? If not, how far off?

Time will tell - trends will emerge. We have already had comments that the 99+ is too much for ITS based on Kip's results - AND requests to lighten it further because it can't compete!!!! Holy SMOKES!

Oh ya - and the letters from CRX drivers who SWEAR if they were going to do an ITA car from scratch - they would do it in an NX2000 because an undeveloped one did so well at the ARRC. 'Undeveloped'? HA!

The few 'tows' he got slowed him down? Then they were hardly tows.



AB

[orlando_wrx]

No real point arguing at this time guys
For a little while it will be an unsuccessfull attempt to hinder the 1.8 miatas. However, after total domination of the class becomes apparent, the club will do something. If they fit in, then they fit in...there's just not enough data to take a firm stance either way just yet. Now, the 1.6 miatas have fit well in the class, so I was just figuring:

1.6 miata fits in ITA
1.8 miata fits with 1.6 miata with restrictor used in Spec Miata
1.8 miata should fit in ITA with restrictor used in Spec Miata

This goes along with the thinking of the "easy" transition from spec to IT.

And thank god, weve reclaimed the thread from the SIR debate!!!