What is a "touring car?"

[Knestis]

I stand corrected re: inclusion of 2-seaters in the initial design of STL. I may be confusing the explanations I've heard, between that and the allowance for rotaries. That's a bad thing, too, I think - but it's a different conversation. It would still be interesting to see what Keane et al. ENVISIONED when they penned the first rule set, though. I'd love to ask him. Was it an oversight, allowed, or intended?

K

[JeffYoung]

I ask this because I truly don't know.

What evidence is there that Miatas dominant STL (other than easy crossover and a few top SM guys not surprisingly run up front in STL)?

What data supports the %age weight adder for rear wheel drive STL cars?

[Greg Amy]

- We put data acq boxes in many front-running cars during the Majors season and at the Runoffs;
- Experienced observations;
- Race results.

Majors classifications are held to a different standard than Improved Touring; while we may start with hard numbers and a general formula, it's a guideline; we are not beholden to it. The CRB's goal is to ensure reasonably equitable competition among a wide breadth of participants within any Majors class. If something sticks out, it gets whacked; if something is seriously being prepared and driven and it sucks, it gets a break.

Read my sig. And think about the above paragraph next time you want to go National/Majors racing with Improved Touring.

Now read my sig again.

GA

[Chip42]

and in response to tGA's post I would like to resubmit my belief that overachieving chassis in ST be speclined with weight modifiers, just as over achieving, perceived overachieving, alternate prep, and non USDM motors not made by VW are given modifiers to or wholly unique base weights. THAT WAY the "miata" can be "dealt with" while not sticking a similar penalty on a 86 fiero, which is a far lesser platform that HAPPENS to share drive wheels and general suspension design designators with the mazda.

[JeffYoung]

- We put data acq boxes in many front-running cars during the Majors season and at the Runoffs;
- Experienced observations;
- Race results.

Majors classifications are held to a different standard than Improved Touring; while we may start with hard numbers and a general formula, it's a guideline; we are not beholden to it. The CRB's goal is to ensure reasonably equitable competition among a wide breadth of participants within any Majors class. If something sticks out, it gets whacked; if something is seriously being prepared and driven and it sucks, it gets a break.

Read my sig. And think about the above paragraph next time you want to go National/Majors racing with Improved Touring.

Now read my sig again.

GA

Damn -- I feel for you, and I mean that. I know you tried to setup STL as purely objective based on displacement to avoid some of the subjectivity in the IT process, and it looks like there is actually MORE subjectivity now in STL.

I still think it is a good class, and a key to our future. If you are going to be putting weight on RWD cars and such, glad you are using actual data to do it rather than what we did with LapSim.

But I think Chip and Andy are right. I think the Miata may be poisoning the well for all RWD cars, which is a shame.

Anyway, I'll continue to watch the class closely and see where it goes. I have some interest in it, and yes, I'm one of those guys you'd have to worry about buliding a FrankenNSX.

[Chip42]

FWIW, I think ST in general and STL in particular are the most objective class in SCCA. IT has gain numbers, classing, tq and other adders ... STL at least just has displacement, valve count, drive wheels, and strut or no. STU adds some other variables but still, pretty damned objective. Really, that's the whole problem being discussed here with the Miata.

Benevolent dictator, ala prod, is super subjective. Which works great, except when it doesn't. it's a lot easier to cause bad feelings towards the club in a subjective system, its a lot harder to offer something for everyone in an objective one. No easy answers.

[Greg Amy]

Damn -- I feel for you, and I mean that. I know you tried to setup STL as purely objective...

Yeah, well, everyone's vision of Utopia eventually meets Reality...ours just happened sooner (welcome to Majors/National racing). On the other hand, its attraction was quite evident -- it pulled me right in immediately -- so I'm not that surprised. We/I resisted spec lines and tables for a bit, but once that cherry was popped it was apparent that's the direction we're heading. For now, we'll continue to adjust based on general characteristics and use those tables to address the highs and lows; I abhor the idea of having to spec-line everything and deal with letters and consistent argumentation about comp adjustments so I'll continue to resist it as long as it makes sense.

To that end...put in your 2c on the "sports car" proposal.

And read my sig again.

GA

[Ron Earp]

Those are for ITS bodies. Second gen RX7 etc.

[Matt93SE]

OK, thx. just curious. I'm sure the Camaro bodies over the years have had quite the change in cd...

[Ron Earp]

Some data I had handy in a spreadsheet:

Car	Cd	Area (sq ft)	CdA
RX7	0.31	19.19	5.95
Integra	0.33	19.50	6.44
Camaro	0.34	22.00	7.44
Mustang	0.36	22.50	8.10
280zx	0.39	21.00	8.09
TR8	0.42	20.70	8.69
240Z	0.44	21.00	9.24

[Matt93SE]

That's nifty info. Do you have the years those numbers apply as well? i.e. RX7 had 3 body styles and various bumpers and whatnot across its life. Same with Integra, Camaro, Mustang...

[jdrago1]

- We put data acq boxes in many front-running cars during the Majors season and at the Runoffs;
- Experienced observations;
- Race results.

GA

This is my opinion as a Miata driver in STL, not a CRB member.

1)data boxes...
Have you seen this data? How do you distinguish cornering advantage from "because miata" versus "better Driver"?

2)Experienced Observations.. Often very biased.. Especially when coming from those who race in the class, even with the best intentions, it is human nature. In the past, 2011 and 2012 my observations were directly responsible in adding weight to my miata as I felt it was the right thing to do. This year, I mentioned to you and others on STAC that I felt the plate was a bit too small on the civic, to my knowledge,nothing was done with that info? What I have seen in 2013 is two similar quality FWD Honda drivers run similar cornering speeds to mine, similar lap times to mine and some good races. I have seen Integras with significant straight line speed advantage but seconds off the pace in terms of lap time. Still confused why it is OK for FWD Civics to run "miata" STL times and no one complains, but when the same times are run by 'miatas", most say "because Miata.

3)Race results..
If the best driver is a properly classed car wins every race? Is there a problem? If a car at a slight disadvantage is driven
by a pro wins every race, do we handicap the car? Or we put a wanker in a car that everyone else would win in, but he
doesnt, do we speed that car up? Race results are rewards weights, nothing more.

IMO it has gotten to the point where many feel that all good results are 95% "because miata", which is just ridiculous. I have a spare SM, prepared identical to mine. Greg and Kirk are welcome to come and race it in SM no charge at any race I attend, just let me know a few weeks out and I will have the car set up and scaled to your weight and liking. We can do a test day, a race weekend, whatever you like. The ARRC may be a good weekend? That will tell you where you really are in terms of pace. With all due respect, the over/under will be 3 seconds from pole. You guys are simply putting way too much on car and I am willing to prove my point. When you are seconds off the pace, it is more than 'frontal area", "Sports car' and "double wish bone'.

Huffmaster is one of the best drivers in the SCCA. His RX8 WAS NOT at an advantage IMO. It was driven exceptionally well and the car was very well sorted. The RX8 was the best prepped car in the Runoffs the last two years and the best driven this year, period. I have not once complained about that car. I did not win because I did not put enough time and effort into my car, it had nothing to do with the RX8 being an over dog. Gilsinger could have also won last year had he entered in an equally prepared civic. They showed up with a SS car that they basically de cammed.

Jim

[Greg Amy]

Have you seen this data? How do you distinguish cornering advantage from "because miata" versus "better Driver"?

Of course I have; haven't you? And I can distinguish that easily, because I know what I'm doing with data.

Experienced Observations.. Often very biased.

Of course it is, by definition. But then again, so is racing against a guy one(?) time and deciding he needs a bigger hole to breathe through.

This year, I mentioned to you and others on STAC that I felt the plate was a bit too small on the civic, to my knowledge,nothing was done with that info?

I'm sure you recall that the restrictor plates on the 2L engines after the 2013 Runoffs came directly from the CRB, not the STAC. The STAC does not have the information that the CRB has/had when it did that. If the CRB believes that situation has changed, then by all means it should be addressed.

If the best driver is a properly classed car wins every race? Is there a problem?

Of course not. But that's the crux of this discussion. Is the "best" driver actually winning races? How are you determining that? Are all cars "properly" classed? What's the basis for that position? What's the objective, unbiased, subjective definition of "best"? And of "proper"?

You could very well be right. In hindsight, were I to invest into building another car for this class it's not very likely that I'd spend money on anything different than what you did.

But in the end, if not "data acq, experienced observations, and race results" then what should the CRB use to consider competition adjustments? Should it consider competition adjustments at all? What does it use now for the basis of comp adjustments in other categories?

GA

[Knestis]

Color me intrigued about the idea of racing a competitive Spec Miata but luckily I'm old enough and smart enough to understand that there's exactly zero chance that I'm going to find all three of those seconds in one weekend, in a car that's so different from what I've raced almost exclusively since I last had any serious seat time in a rear-drive car (an SSA Mazda, by the way) in 1987.

I'll check my calendar though.

That mental masturbation out of the way, I would HOPE that everyone notices that at no point did I ever invoke relatively competitiveness between me in a particular Civic (or anyone/anything else) and "sports cars." Never. My argument is strictly about the physics of the two broad chassis options, and I've frankly not heard anyone make any substantive case that my principles are flawed...

Now, I did point out a few observations from the NJMP Majors weekend this spring. First, that I was still leaving at least a second on the table, relative to what my experience tells me I should be doing. Second, Farbman only went as fast as he needed to in order to win; which was 2 seconds off the pace he accidentally set in P1. In race 1, I did a 34, he did a 33. In race 2, I reeled him in, caught him, then he drove away from me. I did a 33, he did a faster 33. That is NOT about how fast the car or the driver really is; that's about managing the competition by sandbagging, which is only possible with a car that's substantially better than the competition.

I didn't just fall off of the sports car turnip truck. I KNOW that's how the National/Major (and especially "pro") programs work. I know that you know all of that but I just want to make sure it's in the record, because frankly, I think that's the game you're playing. I don't have any confidence that you can actually take your STL driver hat off when your making CRB decisions, and - if it's possible - I believe even less that you are operating in good faith with the STAC (a la the restrictor example that Greg shared). That's based on my firsthand experience watching you operate when I was on the ITAC. You're too hooked into the game to stop playing it. If nothing else, you might solemnly believe that you're' "doing what's right for the class" but from the outside looking in, it simply looks hinky.

But equally, I know that vehicle dynamics says that a car with the qualities of a Miata is going to be faster than a car with the qualities of a Civic, given the same power, level of preparation, and driver skill. NO QUESTION. Tell me I'm wrong if you dare, but do *not* play the results comparison game and tell me that I'm whining because I'm getting beat by any particular EXAMPLES of car/driver combinations. I'm not. Get over that. Further, arguing that's what I'm doing, without addressing my actual proposition, is disingenuous and only reinforces to me that you aren't willing - or able - to look objectively at the technical aspects of the issue at hand.

I also know that it's a fool's errand, trying to fix that problem with competition adjustments when someone moving the levers of the process - and more importantly, controlling the flow of information to the CRB - has an interest in, and the ability to manage, the outcome.

K

[adamjabaay]

I must comment that I'm really enjoying this thread, overall. I feel this class is headed In a positive direction, from the outside looking in. I can't wait to be in.


thoughts about wide variety of weight cars running all on the same tire? Do the 2700 lbs cars start having managment issues with tires 3/4 into race?

[dhrmx5]

Reply to Kurt: If you look at results around the country it will show that FP/STL/T3 are generally right on each other as far as lap times.

In looking at times from that NJMP weekend I see that Farbman managed a .31 which mirrored the T3/FP times so I would conclude he was on the mark.

You, on the other hand did a .33 with a car that you admitted was 200 lbs overweight in your first time driving it. If you got rid of the 200 lbs and found that second you felt you left on the table I would guess .31s aren't out of the question for your civic (although that chassis is too heavy for a 1.6 engine to make weight)

Sounds like parity to me. The real question is why neither of you are going as fast as the ITS track record?

[jdrago1]

I didn't just fall off of the sports car turnip truck. I KNOW that's how the National/Major (and especially "pro") programs work. I know that you know all of that but I just want to make sure it's in the record, because frankly, I think that's the game you're playing. I don't have any confidence that you can actually take your STL driver hat off when your making CRB decisions, and - if it's possible - I believe even less that you are operating in good faith with the STAC (a la the restrictor example that Greg shared). That's based on my firsthand experience watching you operate when I was on the ITAC. You're too hooked into the game to stop playing it. If nothing else, you might solemnly believe that you're' "doing what's right for the class" but from the outside looking in, it simply looks hinky.


K

Lets be completely frank.. You don't know me at all.. Nor do I know you at all. I couldn't even point you out in a crowd of three people. I think it is fair to say that what you "think" you know about me you don't like and I can say the same. I never had any iron in the fire with the ITAC deal, I was new on the CRB and was genuinely trying to find a happy medium between the two committees as a non IT involved CRB member. I think we can agree that there was a lot of tension at the time between the two boards and not a very good position to be put in. I did not know IT at all at the time, was not and is still is not my thing. It was almost five years ago now? Maybe it is time to let the past go and start living in the present? I think most are tired of hearing about it already. I am willing to bury the hatchet if you are.

As far as any game I am playing...
I must not be too good at it. It is VERY clear that I was DIRECTLY responsible for the weight put on the Miata. If you search this forum, I wrote up a detailed write up after the first Runoffs that recommended adding weight to my car as it was the right thing to do for the class. Two years in a row I suggested my car get weight. How often does that happen? I was directly responsible for taking my car from 2485? to 2635. Since being on the SMAC and now CRB, NO CAR I HAVE EVER DRIVEN HAS BEEN HELPED, ONLY SLOWED DOWN BY weight or speeding up the other cars. For two years I said my car had an advantage and I had not brought properly prepared car to compete. My opinion now is that the cars are very close. I am not playing any game. I have been clear to all that ask, STL is NOT my main focus even though it is a far better chance to win. The "game" I am playing , so we are clear. I run take off SM tires whenever possible so I can save my stickers for the Runoffs. But never race a tire more than three sessions old. I race every race to win. I run as fast as I possibly can every lap.

[jdrago1]

But equally, I know that vehicle dynamics says that a car with the qualities of a Miata is going to be faster than a car with the qualities of a Civic, given the same power, level of preparation, and driver skill. NO QUESTION. Tell me I'm wrong if you dare, but do *not* play the results comparison game and tell me that I'm whining because I'm getting beat by any particular EXAMPLES of car/driver combinations. I'm not. Get over that. Further, arguing that's what I'm doing, without addressing my actual proposition, is disingenuous and only reinforces to me that you aren't willing - or able - to look objectively at the technical aspects of the issue at hand.

I also know that it's a fool's errand, trying to fix that problem with competition adjustments when someone moving the levers of the process - and more importantly, controlling the flow of information to the CRB - has an interest in, and the ability to manage, the outcome.

K

I think I agreed with you some where along the road on this already? Also in two posts up I commented that results are nothing more than rewards weights IMO.. So I think we are in violent agreement here..

Where we disagree or maybe you didn't lay this option out above.. We ARE NOT in a place where "Miata is going to be faster than a car with the qualities of a Civic, given the same power, level of preparation, and driver skill."

It is my opinion..

"most" of the moderately prepped Hondas make more HP and weigh less than the miata in STL. I think we can agree that it is FACT that an equally built Honda 1.8 engine will make substantially more HP than a 1.8 Miata engine. So IMO, the debate is how much more power does the FWD integra/Honda need to make to be "competitive" with all else being equal. It is my opinion that none of those things are close to "equal" in the small comparison sample we have in STL. This is where personal agendas, different opinions and drama come in.