SM protests of late

[Bill Miller]

***Over on the Prod board, there was a well known individual selling an SM from their shop w/ admittedly cheated-up shocks.***

Bill, give it a rest. All your doing by posting this stuff here is laying bait for those folks to slam this site.
[/b]

David,

I'm not sure how I'm doing that. That's one of the reasons why we have rules creap and the whole 'wink, wink' thing, people don't like light being shined on what they're doing, and they try and shout down those that call them on it. Go back and look at the progression of that thread again. my initial response was simply a roll eyes at the cheated up shocks. He escalated it from there

[Andy Bettencourt]

I like the claimer rule...If the motor is cheated up and someone spent 10k on it...haha to them and the motor is in your truck. Why not the claimer from the beginning? [/b]

Because the way things work in reality is that the guy who owns the cheater motor pulls you aside and says that he knows of 3 little things that are illegal in his motor that you will never find - and if he sees you running it, he will protest each one individually at the next 3 races, making your life miserable. Dick move yes - but that is the way it works. Plus, do you call a "no claim-back" rule? Claimer rules just don't net you a motor, you have to either pay the owner for a new one or swap your for theirs...why would you want to PAY $3000 to have someones illegal motor on your doorstep (or in your car for that matter if you were really worried about the rules) when you can have them DQ'd and penalized for next to nothing via the protest process?

Protests, teardowns, humiliation, distrust and penalties are the way we work it - and if we are worried about the legality of another car, we have the means to do it.

[Tom Blaney]

"Bottom line? I have to look at Greg's effort, the MSN cars, Blaney's stuff - and I have to decide how much they push the envelope (as do they of me) on the rules. It's not about sportsmanship when a group gets together and wants a teardown of a suspicious car, it is about sportsmanship when a guy protests one or two guys continually."

Andy:

I"m not going to go on a major rant on this one (yea I am!), but it implies that we (collectivly) are bending the rules. Unfortunatly you (and many others) miss the point here. Greg, Anthony, and I are SEASONED SKILLED FOCUSED DRIVERS WITH TALENT AND EXPERIENCE. I am sure it will be the case with Greg when he sells his car, but both my CRX, and Anthony's Integra have been sold exactly as raced to less experienced (but eventually as capable) drivers who are not running the same consistant times that we ran.

Why is that? It is because we don't bend the rules or "cheat", we will spend the time and money to prepare both the equipment and ourselves to put out a maximum effort time and time again. That means that we really understand what a small spring or shock change will do, or that paying extra for the best brake pads makes a difference. We spend the extra time to rent track time on a Tuesday to fiddle with settings or our driving style, I have been to more Tuesdays than I want to count, and who is there ONLY THE FAST GUYS, what's up with that don't they have a life????

As I have mentioned on this site time and again that far too many of you assume that if somebody is more skilled and therefore faster than you then the friggen bast***rd must be cheating.

Our collective protest of Shane was obvious because we talked to each other before the protest, we discussed his driving skill, and the history of the car. We gave the guy a chance to fess up and to fix the problems. He didn't and therefore he paid the price (albeit far too light) and has lost a lot of credibity with his competiors. The same should apply to Windell and perhaps one or two others.

Learn from the experience, and take the time to study faster drivers, you will find that most are just putting out a better effort, and then the cheaters won't have to be pondered as much and a protest when warrented won't be a weapon, but a collective club because he didn't accept the sportsmanlike warnings in the past.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Tom,

You missed my point completely. It was simply that everyone needs to take a long hard look at the cars at the pointy end of the field (like yours, MSN's, Greg's, mine, etc) and determine WHAT, WHY and HOW these cars are there before they go and assume wrong-doing. But when or if they do assume such a thing, there is a proper way to find out.

The majority of the people in an IT field have NO IDEA what kind of prep (both driver and car) make up a typical podium in a large field.

[Greg Amy]

...I agree, mechanical changes should not be made mid-season.[/b]

To be accurate, "mechanical changes" were not made mid-season.

What happened, to the best of my knowledge, is that the specs for camshafts in the Miati were somewhat sparse (lift only, I think, was specified). In addition, note that SM also has an "aftermarket replacement parts" rule. To take advantage of this grey area some engine builders were buying camshaft billets from Mazda - with all the regular Mazda markings and stampings on them - and grinding camshafts to maximize performance within this spec (changing overlap and duration, as I understand it).

SCCA got wind of this and decided to publish more-detailed camshaft specs via Fastrack. Immediately thereafter this person started dropping coin on camshaft checks and one particular engine builder got dinged a couple of times (rumor has it the other engine builders got wind of the change sooner and got the word out to their customers. PURELY speculation).

So therein lies the "tree falls in the forest" argument: given that these aftermarket camshafts met the published specs were they therefore legal up to the point of the Fastrack clarification, or is it because they did not meet all specs of the original stock camshaft (or any alternative camshafts, for that matter) were they illegal to begin with? Said differently, if they could have passed Tech the old way were they legal, or because they did not meet the true intent of the rules were they illegal?

Rules Nerd Greg says they were never legal camshafts; Competitor Greg says they were legal until the point that SCCA published more-detailed restrictions. It's neither here nor there, as the more-detailed specs have been published and competitors must abide by them.

Now, about that funny word "material"...

[Bill Miller]

Because the way things work in reality is that the guy who owns the cheater motor pulls you aside and says that he knows of 3 little things that are illegal in his motor that you will never find - and if he sees you running it, he will protest each one individually at the next 3 races, making your life miserable. Dick move yes - but that is the way it works. Plus, do you call a "no claim-back" rule? Claimer rules just don't net you a motor, you have to either pay the owner for a new one or swap your for theirs...why would you want to PAY $3000 to have someones illegal motor on your doorstep (or in your car for that matter if you were really worried about the rules) when you can have them DQ'd and penalized for next to nothing via the protest process?

Protests, teardowns, humiliation, distrust and penalties are the way we work it - and if we are worried about the legality of another car, we have the means to do it.
[/b]

Andy,

I hear what you're saying. I know claim rules aren't perfect, but something's got to be done to stop things like this. I'd love to see a sealed motor program (as well as all the other parts), but I realize you've got guys out there running the motor the car came w/ when new, or some other j/y motor, and you can't penalize them because someone else is cheating (they're probably not running at the front anyway).

That's one of the reasons why I think penalties for cheating need to be harsher. And don't think that they guy that you mentioned won't find some other way to retaliate against you if you protest him, have him torn down, and he loses a $6k motor and gets nothing for it, not to mention penalty points on his license. Someone that would do what you described would also find other ways to retaliate against someone.

BTW, you can out fox the guy above by not running his motor. He gets you torn down and then pays for your rebuild!

To be accurate, "mechanical changes" were not made mid-season.

What happened, to the best of my knowledge, is that the specs for camshafts in the Miati were somewhat sparse (lift only, I think, was specified). In addition, note that SM also has an "aftermarket replacement parts" rule. To take advantage of this grey area some engine builders were buying camshaft billets from Mazda - with all the regular Mazda markings and stampings on them - and grinding camshafts to maximize performance within this spec (changing overlap and duration, as I understand it).

SCCA got wind of this and decided to publish more-detailed camshaft specs via Fastrack. Immediately thereafter this person started dropping coin on camshaft checks and one particular engine builder got dinged a couple of times (rumor has it the other engine builders got wind of the change sooner and got the word out to their customers. PURELY speculation).

So therein lies the "tree falls in the forest" argument: given that these aftermarket camshafts met the published specs were they therefore legal up to the point of the Fastrack clarification, or is it because they did not meet all specs of the original stock camshaft (or any alternative camshafts, for that matter) were they illegal to begin with? Said differently, if they could have passed Tech the old way were they legal, or because they did not meet the true intent of the rules were they illegal?

Rules Nerd Greg says they were never legal camshafts; Competitor Greg says they were legal until the point that SCCA published more-detailed restrictions. It's neither here nor there, as the more-detailed specs have been published and competitors must abide by them.

Now, about that funny word "material"...
[/b]

Thanks Greg, that certainly clears things up for me.

[tnord]

bill -

without even looking over at the prod board i'm 90% certain i know who you're talking about. I know a couple members of that family personally as I race in the same division. these are good people, and their reputation both on and off the track shows it.

"cheated up shocks" in SM are not cheated up at all, and i think you are wrong for referring to them as such. call the guy at bilstein (i can get you his number if you want) and ask what their range of specs is for the shock being used in SM. then ask him how many of them he gets a week. the answer to both questions is A LOT.

people aren't rebuilding shocks that are out of spec, they are just rebuilding them within spec to the end of the allowance that gives them the best performance. if they aren't out of range for the specs bilstein provides, how are they illegal? how can you prove they are illegal?

[Andy Bettencourt]

bill -

"cheated up shocks" in SM are not cheated up at all, and i think you are wrong for referring to them as such. call the guy at bilstein (i can get you his number if you want) and ask what their range of specs is for the shock being used in SM. then ask him how many of them he gets a week. the answer to both questions is A LOT.

people aren't rebuilding shocks that are out of spec, they are just rebuilding them within spec to the end of the allowance that gives them the best performance. if they aren't out of range for the specs bilstein provides, how are they illegal? how can you prove they are illegal? [/b]

Trav, you are wrong my friend. The spec is VERY tight from Bilstein and will be published pre-runoffs. What people are doing is revalving to the spring rates in the SM package. Yes, there is no published spec but the valving is such that it will be VERY easy to determine a cheated up shock. The tech guys at teh runoffs will have a test for this. Just because there is no spec doesn't make it free.

[JIgou]

Trav, you are wrong my friend. The spec is VERY tight from Bilstein and will be published pre-runoffs. What people are doing is revalving to the spring rates in the SM package. Yes, there is no published spec but the valving is such that it will be VERY easy to determine a cheated up shock. The tech guys at teh runoffs will have a test for this. Just because there is no spec doesn't make it free.
[/b]

(continuing the minor hijack....)

Andy, do you happen to have any insight to the timing on the release of those specs? I'm considering sending my 5+ year old shocks in for a freshening before the Runoffs, and would love to know the official specs (and range :P ) before I do so....

Jarrod

[Andy Bettencourt]

(continuing the minor hijack....)

Andy, do you happen to have any insight to the timing on the release of those specs? I'm considering sending my 5+ year old shocks in for a freshening before the Runoffs, and would love to know the official specs (and range :P ) before I do so....

Jarrod [/b]

I don't but from what I understand of the testing and valving, you just ask for them to be redone at Spec Miata spec. Nothing custom, just as delivered in the SM package.

[tnord]

to toss out some numbers.....

jarrod our short friend was told by the bilstein guy that the "pointy end shock rebuild" ends up being 40% stiffer.

if that's not the case, then i retract my previous statement. but according to that specific person at bilstein, there are more than a couple shocks coming across his desk.

[Andy Bettencourt]

to toss out some numbers.....

jarrod our short friend was told by the bilstein guy that the "pointy end shock rebuild" ends up being 40% stiffer.

if that's not the case, then i retract my previous statement. but according to that specific person at bilstein, there are more than a couple shocks coming across his desk. [/b]

And you are probably right - about some of it. Here are some facts:

The revalve Bilstein does is JUST TO rebound. They have indeed done tons of them. They will do what you ask. Revalving to 'work' with 700lb springs may be a 40% increase in rebound, I don't know...but what we are missing is that the 'pointy end' isn't the as-shipped spec, it's the 'what people are doing' spec.

[MMiskoe]

To take advantage of this grey area some engine builders were buying camshaft billets from Mazda - with all the regular Mazda markings and stampings on them - and grinding camshafts to maximize performance within this spec (changing overlap and duration, as I understand it).[/b]

And probably changing the cam TDC points relative to each cam and/or the crank.

Andy - this is what I was trying to describe in July when you were going to swap heads.

The fact that people are doing this is no big surprise. The fact that people are protesting the hell out of each other comes when people are stretching what's legal.

Back to Jakes original question - it seems that if someone were to start doing this, the collective run group might start finding ways of making that person's life hard. I remember a post asking how to deal w/ a guy that no one wanted to race w/ because he was rough & stupid. Many of the suggestions included stuff like locking him in the porta-crapper and knocking it over. This is a prime example of the difference between a regional & national class I believe.

Matt

[Z3_GoCar]

Because the way things work in reality is that the guy who owns the cheater motor pulls you aside and says that he knows of 3 little things that are illegal in his motor that you will never find - and if he sees you running it, he will protest each one individually at the next 3 races, making your life miserable. Dick move yes - but that is the way it works. Plus, do you call a "no claim-back" rule? Claimer rules just don't net you a motor, you have to either pay the owner for a new one or swap your for theirs...why would you want to PAY $3000 to have someones illegal motor on your doorstep (or in your car for that matter if you were really worried about the rules) when you can have them DQ'd and penalized for next to nothing via the protest process?

Protests, teardowns, humiliation, distrust and penalties are the way we work it - and if we are worried about the legality of another car, we have the means to do it.
[/b]

There are two requirements for a susccessful claim rule. 1st, everyone runs the same basic motor, SM all run the same motor so check. 2nd, anything can be done to the engine. This is where the current rules won't work with a motor claim rule. How the claim rule works is to sets a dollar value on a slightly used race motor. In other words, how much does it cost to buy the Mazda blank's and grind out a set of cam's? How about a good blue print job? Set the value at the cost of buying a used junk-yard motor and I think you won't see anyone put a pro built motor in their car again. How can you build an illegal motor when anything goes? Make the long block open and claimable, the manifolds stay with the chassis and are protestable. Sure you can put in a custom ground cam set, forged pistons, titanium rods even, but be prepared to see it go for the cost of a junk-yard long block. Now where's the motivation to put that kind of money in only to see it go and run with someone else for so little? However, the RE motor, may become more popular than a boredello girl in a female starved mining town on pay day, and maybe as equally passed around

I'm glad to see that there's been effort to clean up all the rough driving, and now the gray areas are becomming black, , There were area's that did turn me off of SM when I was looking to purchase.

Now for the JD comment. Yes, I was trying to be funny, I was applying the "Brat Pack" motto to him after seeing how he dominated the last MX-5 cup race. BTW, if you have a Miata, you should at least start with JD's set up guide published on the specmiata forum.

[tnord]

And you are probably right - about some of it. Here are some facts:

The revalve Bilstein does is JUST TO rebound. They have indeed done tons of them. They will do what you ask. Revalving to 'work' with 700lb springs may be a 40% increase in rebound, I don't know...but what we are missing is that the 'pointy end' isn't the as-shipped spec, it's the 'what people are doing' spec.
[/b]

well, maybe you have a more intimate knowledge of exactly what the specs are.....but in regards to this particular part, i have faith that the front runners are rebuilding within spec.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy - this is what I was trying to describe in July when you were going to swap heads.


Matt [/b]

Luckily, the FSM is specific when you are putting a stock head back on!

[Andy Bettencourt]

New info on the LRP protests against Brunk and Boxer...they have been pulled by the protestor. No info as to why yet. Multiple rumors but we will let the people directly involved speak out.



AB

[lateapex911]

Interesting!! I haven't read Specmiata.com, but.....

If the protester wanted to clean the class upas he said...and he was sure enough that the potestees were out of compliance to come up with the $10K bond, why would he pull the protests?? Unless his motivations were different. Or am I being too introspective??

[dazzlesa]

i appreciate what the shops and car guru's have done to make fast cars.the down side for many is that it costs money to go fast.when i started in 99 a rx7 with the standard go fast goodies could get it done. not anymore. you either have the money or the knowledge, time and skills.the sm's started cheap but do you want to run upfront?

[zracre]

that goes away from everything that class is supposed to be. SM is *supposed* to be a fair competitive *spec* class. What part of custom reground cams, revalves struts and 1k clutches is spec? Or 7-10k rebuilds on a *spec* motor??? It should be simple...Mazdaspeed just needs to build a bunch of crate motors and sell them sealed and dynoed. everyone gets one (for a fair price). If the seal is tampered with or broken, you get DQ'ed and lose ALL your points. That will learn them! Oh and simply make everyone run a stock pressure plate...