Ok, who is making changes in ST4?

[WillM]

Troy,

A little history on your car.
I bought the car from Leos at Expolines. The car is a '93 "LE". The car had been through some work, but the chassis was straight. The frame/chassis was solid, but the supporting bits (subframes & suspension bits) were a bit rusty. The brakes were super rusty. I immediately replaced all of the brake components and installed a bolt-in rollbar. Anytime the car was worked on, it would leave little piles of rust on the ground. Hence the name "Rusty".

Since the car was an LE, I removed all of the unique & rare red & aluminum interior pieces, including the dash. The plan is/was to sell those bits. Someday I'll actually get around to doing that! The VIN on the dash doesn't match, but all of the others should (firewall/chassis, doors, etc). If they popped the hood, they would have found that the large VIN stamped onto the cowl behind/above the engine is correct for the chassis.

By the time I sold you the car, every bit of rust had been removed or replaced (subframes, suspension arms, etc.).

The original motor got tired and was eventually replaced, as was the transmission. The 'new' motor is from Don Pierce's old (1990 1.6) car, which he removed to install a '99 engine. Richard Murphy owns that car now!

That car was very well balanced. Don't mess with it too much. You turned endless laps this year. For reference, my "new" car turned more miles on the dyno than it did at all of this year's events combined. As absurd as that sounds, that is not even an exaggeration. The amount of laps I turned at most events could be counted on one or two hands. For example, the first 3 laps I turned at Tremblant were during the time trial. Not fun.

Bottom line? Don't mess too much with success. That said, I fought for a long time to make the 1.6 -> 1.8 swap legal in ST, and finally won that battle after I had already moved on and spent a couple of years in SPC! Go for the swap, and fulfill Rusty's destiny!

I'm not sure which if any of my ST4 records still hold, but I expect at least an honorable mention at future events, should you best the record.

[Stynger]

what if I want to change rear end ratios, go with a progressive diff,

As I read it, you can do that.

Mazda has many ratios that fit the Miata housings, and three diffent lsd's (viscous, Torsen, Clutch pack). There are also aftermarket diff's made for the Miata.

7F. Updating and backdating of differentials is allowed within the same manufacturer. Any aftermarket limited-slip
differential may be used provided ratios are among those available on OEM differentials. No welded or locking diffs

As far as flywheels and clutches, how do you police it?

You are on your own with the starter.

[WillM]

If we approve the flywheel change, we're opening the drivetrain to change, logically. Torsen rear ends were stock on Miatae, so they are allowed, but what if I want to change rear end ratios, go with a progressive diff, switch a flywheel, install a lighter starter....might as well open up a new SP class.

Wait a second. Your starter is part of your drivetrain? Is this part of a new hybrid system? Have you installed the McLaren/F1 KERS system? COOL!

As Les said, most of those changes are already allowed.

I would support clutch & pressure plate. Actually, when I was autocrossing, I argued for flywheels in ST too, as I used my track car for auto-x. I believe that any real "power" benefit of the flywheel is gone by the time the car shifts into 3rd gear. After that, the lighter flywheel helps for heel/toe shifting, which I happen to be a big proponent of.

I would think flywheels in ST would be perfectly fitting with the rules of the class. The fun factor of light flywheels is the biggest part. Not much to be gained there power-wise.

[chaos4NH]

As I recall, ST was usually referred to as the "suspension" class. Looks like were are now opening up too many loop holes. The fact that a particular car is used for auto croses, hill climbs, mud derby, etc. should have no effect on the COM ST classes. There is enough latitude (engine swaps? Jeez) in the rules. We don't garauntee the competiveness of any single car in any single class, as published in our rule book.

Same goes for allowing Rousch part in Mustangs. Sure you can buy them from the dealer with those parts "installed", but you can also buy a Mazdaspeed 3 from the dealer with CAI, Coilovers, and exhaust installed, all made and marketed by Mazda. When is this "creep" going to end? I am sure there are lots of other cars that will have similar issues, if not today, but as the market progresses. When do we stop with the changes. My vote is now!

[paultg]

I was thinking that for ST4 the following in terms of drivetrain is allowed for my year miata:

The original engine (or direct replacement) that was manufactured with the car must be used with the following exception: the NA series Miata (1990-1997) may use
any 1.6 or 1.8 motor – must however be out of the same chassis type (1990-1997) – motor must be stock and to ST rules.

and

Updating and backdating of differentials is allowed within the same manufacturer. Any aftermarket limited-slip
differential may be used provided ratios are among those available on OEM differentials. WELDED OR LOCKING
DIFFERENTIALS ARE PROHIBITED.

No mention of flywheel, clutch, or transmission though that I can see. In terms of the motor swap I would think to stay within the rules a 1.6L transmission, flywheel and clutch must be used, however this would act as a lightened flywheel on the 1.8L motor (I believe the 1.6L flywheel is lighter than a 1.8L), which could be considered a slight advantage against the 94-97 models?

Has anyone submitted a rules clarification on this?

I would think that with the rules allowing so much update/backdating for other drivetrain components in general (and specific miata motor swap), and also allowing ECU upgrades that opening up the flywheel/clutch options and also transmission update/backdating should be considered as well? I know I tend to think of this as "miata only" as that is what I drive, so maybe it is left out because they need to cover so many other models as well.


{opps, didn't see page 3 before I posted} , I leave this as food for thought though.

Paul G.

[nateh]

Ooh, this slope is really slippery, isn't it?

[Neptune441]

Nate what is your definitive take on these rule changes and thought process behind them, Make the stipulations now and keep them because like many others have said already " when is this creeping going to end..."

[paultg]

When is this "creep" going to end? I am sure there are lots of other cars that will have similar issues, if not today, but as the market progresses. When do we stop with the changes. My vote is now!

Well, I don't know if the changes should stop. The very sentence you just wrote (which I made stand out) suggests that the club is going to have to adapt and come up with a reasonable and fair means of dealing with these types of situations. In my eyes ST4 is a place where cars with typically street friendly modifications, yet remain streetable cars, can be classed. As the performance market changes and more modifications can be completed (and still be streetable), or purchased from dealers, etc. the rules need to be reviewed, discussed, and adjusted accordingly.

Stopping with the changes is more of an issue for the future of the club in my opinion.

Paul G.

[nateh]

I don't have a definitive take. There are lots of ways to think about this set of questions, as the thread demonstrates.

I am a bit concerned that cumulative small changes can take the ST class away from its original intent, and end up making it less affordable than it's supposed to be.

[Neptune441]

When is this "creep" going to end? I am sure there are lots of other cars that will have similar issues, if not today, but as the market progresses. When do we stop with the changes. My vote is now!

Well, I don't know if the changes should stop. The very sentence you just wrote (which I made stand out) suggests that the club is going to have to adapt and come up with a reasonable and fair means of dealing with these types of situations. In my eyes ST4 is a place where cars with typically street friendly modifications, yet remain streetable cars, can be classed. As the performance market changes and more modifications can be completed (and still be streetable), or purchased from dealers, etc. the rules need to be reviewed, discussed, and adjusted accordingly.

Stopping with the changes is more of an issue for the future of the club in my opinion.

Paul G.

We have street cars and then we have street cars with modifications, i know several years back i ran in ST2, "Streetable, to me means the interior of the car isn't stripped and that the car has a few modifications done to it IE suspension, sway bars ect . I have an issue with the wording of the class , because if you want a class based solely on the term street car then make it that way, otherwise you might as well get rid of ST bracket altogether and jump right to SPB ect ect. This can be "The slippery slope, when does it stop for the sake of driver safety which should be the utmost concern for COMSCC and the future of the organization. I believe the original set of ST rules had some safety built in.

Nate whether or not it's affordable or not people aren't going to like these changes due to the fact that there's a lot more content to mull over regarding the re-classification of each group. You have to drive these cars Nate and not base these classes solely on power to weight ratio. All I'm asking i guess is that you consider everyone's input for the sake of the club. I'll be watching this thread intently.

[betelgeuse]

I didn't voice my opnion at the time but I always thought engine updating/backdating for any car in ST was a bad idea.

Greg

[betelgeuse]

..... and not base these classes solely on power to weight ratio.....

But that's the excuse everbody uses (including me) when they get beat.

Greg

[nateh]

If you're interested in the re-classification question (as opposed to clutches and flywheels in ST4), you're watching the wrong thread. Try: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3038

[Dave_G]

In my eyes ST4 is a place where cars with typically street friendly modifications, yet remain streetable cars, can be classed.

I agree wholeheartedly. IMHO the guiding principle of ST should be the "streetable" part.

[Grippy]

Streetable is a relative term, everyone has a different opinion as what that means.

I support the flywheel/clutch swap in ST, it doesn't add any power, doesn't touch the engine, and is a popular bolt-on street mod.
ST class is supposed to be for the guy who wants to make their car a bit faster WITHOUT opening the engine. So that only leaves bolt-on mods. I really don't see a downside and it is impossible to police. if it were legal I would have one. But I don't want one bad enough to get bumped to SP, at least not yet.