Any interest in a new class - ST-M?

[nateh]

a spec miata is WAY LESS prepared than a full-blown ST prepped miata) FF

Absolutely! And do you hear me whining? Real Men drive AROUND lack of power and soft suspension and yada yada.

[jeffw]

An ST-M "miata" class could be created to run in parallel with ST3/ST4 and SPC, the "ST-M" class would allow all Street Touring mods plus all current SCCA- (or NASA) allowed Spec Miata mods, entrants would need a current SCCA or NASA log book for a Spec Miata with no "mix and match" allowed (e.g., an SCCA SM car cannot run headers or swap motors, an ST miata cannot gut the interior).

An extra TT fee ($10? $25?) would enable an entrant to run in both classes in parallel. The competitors would be eligible for event and year end class trophies for both classes.

Fwiw, I think if COM is to try to accommodate Miatas (or any other cars) prepped to other sanctioning body standards (SCCA , NASA, PCA, BMWCCA, FCA, etc), COM can simply "recognize" such classes and allow participants to compete in a manner similar to ST-M -- i.e., cars would fall into a COM class and also an approved sanctioning body class (w/ an extra TT fee). Entrants would still need to meet minimum COM safety rules no matter what.

This is not a new idea, racing organizations have been doing this in recent years to attract/poach members from other clubs, as well as revising their class rules (e.g., ITR, SM2) to be more inclusive. It is WAY easier than overhauling or incorporating someone else's car classification scheme and rule set.
FF

I like this!

[nateh]

A scrutineer's nightmare.

[boltonite]

Now I hear whining

[nateh]

Touche'.

[paultg]

I'm glad I don't hit traffic on my commute north.

[dinoracer]

OK, pot stirred!

I in no way want to create more work for the scrutineers. I see what Fred's saying, but I don't see a huge untapped market of Spec Miata guys that would come running to us to burn up 2 days of tires for a shot at the $10 time trial trophy. I do think we could spread the word in the racing community a bit more about the almost 2 hours of track ( practice) time for only $ 225 a day, with the side benefit of much lower probability of sheet metal damage.

In a quick look at TT results, it looks like the ST NA Miata,ST NB Miata and Spec-Miatas in SPC ( Hine and MacPherson) seem to run at least in spitting distance of each other. Would a ST-M class of these three groups of Miatas be worthwhile? Maybe the winner of this new class gets the Driver's Supply cup in January?

Having a Miata that fits this new class wouldn't require you to run in it; you can stay in ST-4, ST-3 or SPC if you like. I don't think running in both both classes would be fair-even if you pay a little extra to TT in both classes, the extra run groups that would be required would take open track time away from all. I think you need to pick one or the other.

Maybe this is splitting the pie needlessly?

let's keep talking

[WillM]

...This is not a new idea, racing organizations have been doing this in recent years to attract/poach members from other clubs, as well as revising their class rules (e.g., ITR, SM2) to be more inclusive. It is WAY easier than overhauling or incorporating someone else's car classification scheme and rule set.
FF

Also not a new idea to COM...from a post in January 2010...Miata Challenge

The 1.6 / 1.8 Miata topic went around and around. Like anyone that has tracked a 1.6 and 1.8 Miata, I knew the differences then and still recognize them now. A few years ago I was opposed to a sweeping rule change that 'made room' for higher-hp cars by lumping lower-hp cars into the same group. Basically, SSB cars were mixed with SSC cars, SSA moved to SSB, and so forth. This obviously changed how cars got promoted up to ST.

As part of the rule change I bargained for the 1.6 -> 1.8 Miata motor swap. At the time my proposal was much more inclusive, allowing motor swaps within any chassis that came with more than one motor. For example, Nissan Sentras (1.6, 1.8, 2.0 engines, I believe). The rule stated that the car would move to the class of the motor, which is to say, for example, if a car with a 1.6 motor was in ST4, and the exact chassis was in ST3 with a 2.0L motor, that the 1.6 could be swapped out and a 2.0 swapped in, and the car would then be classed in the 2.0L class, ST3. The BoD went around for a while on this and the final rule was specific to the 1.6 -> 1.8 Miata swap.

Note that the SCCA's rules often come under fire by competitors that feel the rulebook is outdated, that the cars & modifications do not represent what younger drivers (newer racers) are familiar with. Also note that the SCCA kicked off a new class last year, STL, which they deem to be the "engine swap" class, which appears to be a class geared toward the import crowd, where engine swaps in daily drivers are relatively common.

All that said, I do kind of like the idea of the Miata Challenge. My original intent of that was for this to be a concurrent class, and for it to be self-teched by the participants.

To the rules in the linked post I would gladly add "No Whining".

Having a car-specific type class, in my opinion, is neither a good or bad thing, it just is.

[breakaway500]

"Having a car specific class is neither a good or bad thing" So why not make all the classes model specific? Corvettes all in one class,Mustangs over here..911's in this one...M3's..Sti's..etc.. All the "rest" over there..segregation of brands and models.
You could even take it a step further and divide the ST-M class into individual colored cars... ST-Mr woud be red Miatas or ST-Mbu for blue...or maybe ST-Mbuht for those blue Miatas running hardtops...
I still don't understand the reasoning for an additional Miata specific class,even if it was run concurrent. Do the Miatas at COM really need an additional carrot to chase? Isn't there already a Miata Cup award?
I understand concurrent classes for ladies,juniors,novices,veterans etc..but not based on a specific car make and model.
If anything,maybe a concurrent Corvette class would make sense,seeing as COM is a Corvette club. I'd be against that as well,though...

Abolish all classes..and the fastest car wins..!... There would be a LOT less whining,and save money on trophies..

(nice pot stirring,Tom.. )

[WillM]

"Having a car specific class is neither a good or bad thing" So why not make all the classes model specific? Corvettes all in one class,Mustangs over here..911's in this one...M3's..Sti's..etc.. All the "rest" over there..segregation of brands and models.

How you get from "Having a car specific class is neither a good or bad thing" to "So why not make all the classes model specific?" is about as compelling an argument as "I was going to put some mayo on my turkey club sandwich, so I skipped the sandwich and just ate a jar of mayo instead."

It is true that our rules state that we do not guarantee the competitiveness of a car, but that isn't an excuse to not try. Our competition aspect is a very important and cherished part of what we do. The rules we have in place, while not perfect, are the result of a lot of input from our members, and I think that is great. If we have members that are looking for ways to make our rules more competitive, I'm all ears.

It would be great if all of our members thought that their car has a shot a being competitive in its class. In all the years that I have listened to these types of discussions the #1 take away I have is that most people just want a shot, and nobody wants a perfect attendance award. Which is the better way to get there? By discussing and vetting these ideas or trying to shut them down?

[breakaway500]

I guess I see fence sitting as an opportunity to..push..

I am all for competition,but not at the expense of alienating other makes or models. I resent clubs that only cater to one brand.

One of the great things about COM is the wide diversity of vehicles in attendance.


Not to mention their looney owners...

[WillM]

One of the great things about COM is the wide diversity of vehicles in attendance.
Not to mention their looney owners...

Alas, we agree. I knew there was common ground somewhere!

[chaos4NH]

SAYS WILL: It is true that our rules state that we do not guarantee the competitiveness of a car, but that isn't an excuse to not try. Our competition aspect is a very important and cherished part of what we do. The rules we have in place, while not perfect, are the result of a lot of input from our members, and I think that is great. If we have members that are looking for ways to make our rules more competitive, I'm all ears.

AND I SAY:
Classing cars merely by hp/wt ratio was adopted last year and totally shoots down your argument about trying to make cars competitive. If we want to try to even things out competitively, we would also consider, 2 wheel, 4 wheel, rear wheel, front wheel drives, engine location (Porsche Cayman and Boxster for instance), and a myriad of other things. So, why in hell do the Miatas become the ONLY cars which the BOD voted, by rule change, to try to have a level playing field? And still the Miata crowd is not content and want their own class.
Not to mention what we now allow in STREET Prepared classes. I support Bert's contention, at least as far as the car being street legal and registered. If not street legal and registered, the car should run in Prepared.

[dinoracer]

The annual "rules" meeting process continues tonight.

Just an FYI, I started this discussion about the ST-M class, but I've decided I'm not interested in proposing a rules change at this time to establish a new class. I think we've had a good discussion on it, but my position is that we don't need to split the pie any further. If someone else wants to move the idea further, have at it. I'm willing to listen.

As to Sam's point above, I agree that using ONLY hp/wt. as the determining factor is unfair to some cars, and that we should consider other factors in determining ultimate class assignment. However, it is the simplest way to at least get consistent in class assignments, which I think had gotten a bit derailed over the past years as more high performance "as delivered from the factory" cars became available.

We've kicked around the whole "points" method for a few years and I think it's been decided that it's just too much work to develop and police for our club to take on, so the current classing methodology looks like it's staying.

I've proposed some updates to the classifications for Mustangs and other Fords, that I did just because I'm a still a Ford guy and it looked like it needed doing, with the influx of newer Mustangs we're seeing. I'll suggest at tonight's meeting that our scrutineers (my self included) should maybe do the same with a couple other brands of car each, to try and update where cars should really be.

[betelgeuse]

Sam has a good point. The Miatas do seem to get the most attention as far as the rules go. It's the squeaky wheel thing I guess.
HP to weight may not fair for some of the older cars but it's the only practical way to class cars in Showroom Stock (and ST due to the limited engine mods permitted).
There is a rule proposal to let the Ariel Atom in SSU. I hope the board votes this down. I don't think the Ariel Atom or any kit car belongs in any of the street classes. Especially Showroom stock.

Greg