ITB - what a bunch of crap

[Catch22]

I hate to do this, because it will tangent it even more. But...

I've seen, with mine own eyes, dynojet dyno graphs for a fully built and legal CRX and a fully built and legal 1.6 Miata. Same dyno, same tuner but unfortunately not the same day (nothing is ever perfect).

The results for those two cars are so close on the dyno graph that you could call it statistical noise. Both right at 130whp (don't start racing dynos here and tell me a Miata only gets 124whp on a mustang, thats not the point of this post... Stay focused).

Now... Take into account that the miata was rated at 116 stock and the CRX at 108 (which most people agree is an undercut from the factory and is actually more like ~115).
Now take into account that the CRX gets a weight break for FWD.
Now take into account that they both get weight added for A arm suspension.

Do that math.
Tell us what you get.
Anyone??? Bueeeellller???

Hint: The cars have the same output in IT trim, the same displacement, and the same suspension type.
The difference is FWD vs. RWD, meaning the CRX should come up damned close to 50lbs lighter if the numbers are "right."
Right?
UNLESS... The Miata gets a 50lb break for aero. Then the weight specs should be the same.
Right?

And for the record, these 2 cars are a couple that I personally think should be left alone as-is because they are currently "reasonable and close."

Just a little exercise in taking what we know and working backwards, which is why I don't think this is so hard or apple cart dangerous.

[Xian]

1.6 liter Miata in ITA
116*1.3*14.5=2186.6+50 A-Arms=2236.6

1.8 liter Miata in ITA
128*1.3*14.5= 2412.5+ 50 A-Arms= 2462.5

SNIP

Spec weight for the 1.6 in ITA is 2255 and the 1.8 is 2380

Looks like a case of the 1.6 car being close but the 1.8 car needing weight... this is ASSuming that these cars are only making 30% gains and not closer to 35%. This is also with Zero adjustment for their 50/50 mid-engine like weight bias.

Wheeee!!! This is fun!

I hate to do this, because it will tangent it even more. But...

I've seen, with mine own eyes, dynojet dyno graphs for a fully built and legal CRX and a fully built and legal 1.6 Miata. Same dyno, same tuner but unfortunately not the same day (nothing is ever perfect).

The results for those two cars are so close on the dyno graph that you could call it statistical noise. Both right at 130whp (don't start racing dynos here and tell me a Miata only gets 124whp on a mustang, thats not the point of this post... Stay focused).

Now... Take into account that the miata was rated at 116 stock and the CRX at 108 (which most people agree is an undercut from the factory and is actually more like ~115).
Now take into account that the CRX gets a weight break for FWD.
Now take into account that they both get weight added for A arm suspension.

Do that math.
Tell us what you get.
Anyone??? Bueeeellller???

Hint: The cars have the same output in IT trim, the same displacement, and the same suspension type.
The difference is FWD vs. RWD, meaning the CRX should come up damned close to 50lbs lighter if the numbers are "right."
Right?
UNLESS... The Miata gets a 50lb break for aero. Then the weight specs should be the same.
Right?

And for the record, these 2 cars are a couple that I personally think should be left alone as-is because they are currently "reasonable and close."

Just a little exercise in taking what we know and working backwards, which is why I don't think this is so hard or apple cart dangerous.

Agreed that the 1.6 liter car is classed "close" or "close enough", IMO. The issue here is with the 1.8 liter car... or maybe that's where you were going in a round about way?