What is a "touring car?"

[Jeremy Billiel]

We all know Miata's are a fantastic car where the sum of its parts create a supurb racing platform. Isn't it going to be true that ANY multi-marquee class racing the miata will win all things being equal?

Isn't the only way to handle this situation, regardless of class, to dis-advantage the miata in some means? (weight, restrictors, etc?)

I don't see STL being any different that ITA, etc...

[Andy Bettencourt]

We all know Miata's are a fantastic car where the sum of its parts create a supurb racing platform. Isn't it going to be true that ANY multi-marquee class racing the miata will win all things being equal?

Isn't the only way to handle this situation, regardless of class, to dis-advantage the miata in some means? (weight, restrictors, etc?)

I don't see STL being any different that ITA, etc...

Already happening, no? 5.5% more weight than a FWD car with double wishbones and 8% more weight than a FWD car with struts.

2731lbs for the 13B powered Miata
2635lbs for a BP powered 1.8 Miata
2430 for a 1.8L double wishbone FWDer
2370 for a 1.8 strut FWDer

All on the same 225 width tire.

The question is simple, are these weight differences sufficient given what we are seeing in the results? What do you think Jeremy?

[Jeremy Billiel]

Already happening, no? 5.5% more weight than a FWD car with double wishbones and 8% more weight than a FWD car with struts.

2731lbs for the 13B powered Miata
2635lbs for a BP powered 1.8 Miata
2430 for a 1.8L double wishbone FWDer
2370 for a 1.8 strut FWDer

All on the same 225 width tire.

The question is simple, are these weight differences sufficient given what we are seeing in the results? What do you think Jeremy?

I personally don't think 5.5% is enough difference between a FWD and RWD car with double wishbones.

I think we need a Miata multiplier! If Miata, then add an additional 3% to the calculation (or something....) Edit 1: I am just making up numbers and have ZERO data - Just throwing something against the wall

Edit 2: And I say that being out of racing for 4+ years and no longer having a dog in this fight or honestly caring.... I simply think that the car is a fantastic package and not sure how to equalize apprpriately...

Edit 3: 5.5% may be fine for double wishbone cars that are RWD and not a miata. Its the specific car (miata) that seems to be what breaks all the logic.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I personally don't think 5.5% is enough difference between a FWD and RWD car with double wishbones.

I think we need a Miata multiplier! If Miata, then add an additional 3% to the calculation (or something....) Edit 1: I am just making up numbers and have ZERO data - Just throwing something against the wall

Edit 2: And I say that being out of racing for 4+ years and no longer having a dog in this fight or honestly caring.... I simply think that the car is a fantastic package and not sure how to equalize apprpriately...

Edit 3: 5.5% may be fine for double wishbone cars that are RWD and not a miata. Its the specific car (miata) that seems to be what breaks all the logic.

There are plenty of cars that can handle as well as a Miata given the same weight. 3rd gen RX-7, Porsche 968 (and not DW's at 4 corners either).

I think 200-300lbs difference is a lot given the same size wheel/tire. The 13B car is almost 400lbs more than a strut FWDer. That's a bunch. Given the WGI results between the Miata and the Civic, I'd say it's dang close if not there for now.

[Greg Amy]

Given the WGI results between the Miata and the Civic, I'd say it's dang close if not there for now.

Even if we were to assume that's true - and it's absolutely not, simply because you were not there and all you have is a results sheet which doesn't tell the whole story - what about everybody else in the class...? Is the class to be limited solely to the best example of RWD sports car available versus the best example of FWD strut car available to use today*?

Given the evidence at hand, I suggest you've just offered excellent supporting anecdotal evidence for slowing down a couple of front-running cars.

GA

*As the Miata is to small 2-seater sports cars, the FG Civic is to FWD strut cars. When Honda decided to ditch the wishbone suspension for the Civic, they didn't just throw some crappy struts on the car as they did with the RSX; they really did that car right. The suspension geometry is as good as it gets for struts, to the point where many pro teams did not even bother moving pickup point and relocating ball joints as allowed by the rules; it just wasn't needed.

A lot of people think that car does well because of the very good ~200hp K20Z3 (which has to de-cam and run a restrictor for STL); that's certainly part of the equation. But that chassis is a super package all on its own. Bob Beede actively moved from a 1.8LGSR engine in a '99 DWB Civic in 2012, to a lightly-modded SSB FG Civic Si in 2013 and thought it was the better package.

The ongoing "Miata Penalty" will continue to vex all RWD cars. In the same vein, it's quite possible that FWD strut cars may eventually suffer the "Civic penalty" (unless we choose to slow down those specific examples instead...)

Regardless, the CRB will continue to adjust vehicles as needed to ensure reasonable parity within the Majors program. And since the class is based on general mechanical characteristics of the vehicles versus line-item classifications the CRB will, no doubt, continue to create and adjust these characteristics as needed to ensure that direction.

[Knestis]

It bothers me when we leap to "because Miata," particularly since that's not my argument here - it's just a case that illustrates my concern. There are separate variables involved:

** 2-seat vs. 4-seat (touring car) chassis layout - influencing frontal area, height (so windshield angle; thanks Lizard!), CG height, MMI, etc.

** Strut vs. DWB suspension architecture

** FWD vs. RWD

I personally don't think that we can accommodate everything that's included in the first with an adder, and (as admitted) have a theoretical/conceptual issue with a "touring car" class including sports cars. It might be, though, that an additional penalty for sports/GT cars would be appropriate, on top of penalties for suspension design and drive layout.

The net for the Miata stacks up but that's probably appropriate as its inherent advantages do, too.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Even if we were to assume that's true - and it's absolutely not, simply because you were not there and all you have is a results sheet which doesn't tell the whole story - what about everybody else in the class...? Is the class to be limited solely to the best example of RWD sports car available versus the best example of FWD strut car available to use today*?

Given the evidence at hand, I suggest you've just offered excellent supporting anecdotal evidence for slowing down a couple of front-running cars.

GA

Ugh. Just split them up now. FWD/RWD. This way you have a class with the numbers already there and you can have a class without fillers and Miata and RWD and everyone will be happy.

[Greg Amy]

Ugh. Just split them up now. FWD/RWD. This way you have a class with the numbers already there and you can have a class without fillers and Miata and RWD and everyone will be happy.

Already have it. It's called "Spec Miata".

[JS154]

I think we need a Miata multiplier! If Miata, then add an additional 3% to the calculation (or something....) Edit 1: I am just making up numbers and have ZERO data - Just throwing something against the wall


Edit 3: 5.5% may be fine for double wishbone cars that are RWD and not a miata. Its the specific car (miata) that seems to be what breaks all the logic.

Earthbreaking, ground shattering logic at work here, how come we've never heard that suggestion before [/SARCASM]

[Jeremy Billiel]

Clearly JS154 you know everything... So what is your recommendation?

[JS154]

Clearly JS154 you know everything... So what is your recommendation?

i"m agreeing with you and have been saying the same thing for a while now.

[Jeremy Billiel]

i"m agreeing with you and have been saying the same thing for a while now.

Got it... I missed your prior posts. Sorry about that.