PA or T100 for my street V8 RX-7, rules gripes...

[blindsidefive0]

Dan - I agree with everything you said except this:

It doesn't make sense to allow engine swaps in touring classes, and not in the supposedly more built-up and racerific "Street Prepared" classes.

VERY common motor swaps in perfectly legitimate Touring cars include the 1.6-1.8 NA Miata swap, several swaps within BMW's, and to be honest, I love the fact that your LS2RX7 fits into T100 (albeit a bit better once you buy some "real" tires).

[Jimmy Pet]

Just so I am clear,,, you put a 500 HP V8, into a ~2400lb chassis and are complaining about your classing being at the top of the classing scale?
Its remarkable that it still fits into T100 (which essentially confirms my bitch that these calculator rulesets are flawed).
If I tried to fit my car into the spreadsheet class thats probably where it would be,,, T100, and then potentially up against a 500HP V8 in a 2400lb chassis.

Flawed. Rules are flawed.

I'm going to make a bumper sticker and change my signature "Please dont F*ck up Prepared in 2014"

[DanB]

Dan - I agree with everything you said except this:

It doesn't make sense to allow engine swaps in touring classes, and not in the supposedly more built-up and racerific "Street Prepared" classes.

VERY common motor swaps in perfectly legitimate Touring cars include the 1.6-1.8 NA Miata swap, several swaps within BMW's, and to be honest, I love the fact that your LS2RX7 fits into T100 (albeit a bit better once you buy some "real" tires).

I wasn't trying to argue against swaps in Touring, just trying to amplify my position that they should be allowed in Street Prepared.

If SP is supposed to be something you get kicked into when you're too built-up for the Touring classes, why should it be MORE restrictive on engine swaps?

Hopefully we'll see how it goes with real tires later this year. Currently only fast enough for 2nd in T60 By one hundredth of a second!

[DanB]

Just so I am clear,,, you put a 500 HP V8, into a ~2400lb chassis

FTR, car weighed 2983 lb. with 3/4 tank (20 gal. tank), should be ~2890 lb. empty. Or about 50-100 lb. more than a stock '94 RX-7.

and are complaining about your classing being at the top of the classing scale?

I'm not complaining about being in T100. I just think it's odd that I don't have the option to run Street Prepared because of the engine swap, while tube-frame replicas can run whatever engine they want in Street Prepared.

In my opinion, "Prepared" is for RACE cars (or fully-prepped-to-the-extent-of-non-streetability track cars), and there should always be a place for legitimate street cars in STREET Prepared.

Its remarkable that it still fits into T100 (which essentially confirms my bitch that these calculator rulesets are flawed).
If I tried to fit my car into the spreadsheet class thats probably where it would be,,, T100, and then potentially up against a 500HP V8 in a 2400lb chassis.

Where are you getting 2400 lb for an FD chassis?
I guess if it were totally gutted. Mine has full interior, A/C, sound deadening, etc. So far, it is no faster than my old 240Z with half the power. Even with a decent driver, it's almost certainly slower around NHMS than your M3.

Flawed. Rules are flawed.

Always will be, that is understood.

I'm going to make a bumper sticker and change my signature "Please dont F*ck up Prepared in 2014"

We're not talking about "Prepared", but anyway, in Street Prepared, allowing V8 swaps doesn't affect SPC one iota. V8 cars would be SPA. "Prepared" already allows engine swaps, which makes me PA.

If they do lose the SP and P classes and you're forced into t100, I can assure you that your biggest problem isn't going to be V8 RX-7s, but rather another 4cyl. n/a E30 M3! Unless Fred's is in a "slower" Touring class...

[blindsidefive0]

I wasn't trying to argue against swaps in Touring, just trying to amplify my position that they should be allowed in Street Prepared.

If SP is supposed to be something you get kicked into when you're too built-up for the Touring classes, why should it be MORE restrictive on engine swaps?

Hopefully we'll see how it goes with real tires later this year. Currently only fast enough for 2nd in T60 By one hundredth of a second!

Got it...totally agree then, I must have misunderstood your prior post.

[Jimmy Pet]

FTR, car weighed 2983 lb. with 3/4 tank (20 gal. tank), should be ~2890 lb. empty. Or about 50-100 lb. more than a stock '94 RX-7.
Where are you getting 2400 lb for an FD chassis? I guess if it were totally gutted. Mine has full interior, A/C, sound deadening, etc. So far, it is no faster than my old 240Z with half the power. Even with a decent driver, it's almost certainly slower around NHMS than your M3.

I looked quickly through some RX7 message Boards, I must have found some other model, I used your year and seemed to be getting cars in the 2600 range, I then "ass"umed take out engine and trans and you have a 2400-ish lb roller. Sorry to post misinformation. I did "try" to educate myself.

If they do lose the SP and P classes and you're forced into t100, I can assure you that your biggest problem isn't going to be V8 RX-7s, but rather another 4cyl. n/a E30 M3! Unless Fred's is in a "slower" Touring class...

I'm fine with that, I'll take that fight every day,,, a N/A 4 Cyl vs. N/A 4 cyl. That all I ever ask for. I know thats not the point of you post though.
I think the point I was trying to make was that the fact that your car and mine (or Freds) are so different, you with about 3 times the torque we have and yet they would possibly end up in the same class. That was my poorly made point.

[DanB]

I looked quickly through some RX7 message Boards, I must have found some other model, I used your year and seemed to be getting cars in the 2600 range, I then "ass"umed take out engine and trans and you have a 2400-ish lb roller. Sorry to post misinformation. I did "try" to educate myself.

Oh, minus engine/trans I guess it is ~2400 lb.

If they do lose the SP and P classes and you're forced into t100, I can assure you that your biggest problem isn't going to be V8 RX-7s, but rather another 4cyl. n/a E30 M3! Unless Fred's is in a "slower" Touring class...

I'm fine with that, I'll take that fight every day,,, a N/A 4 Cyl vs. N/A 4 cyl. That all I ever ask for.[/quote]
I guess the point of the new Touring classing system is to have similar performance potential cars be in the same class and not to put like cars vs. like cars.
I could go either way there.

I know thats not the point of you post though.

Yeah, I just don't think legitimate street cars should be forced into a straight "Prepared" class, which to my mind is more for pure track cars.

I think the point I was trying to make was that the fact that your car and mine (or Freds) are so different, you with about 3 times the torque we have and yet they would possibly end up in the same class. That was my poorly made point.

Again, it seems like the Touring rules intent is more to put similar lap time potential cars together than to have similar cars in the same classes.
Arguments could be made either way. The "Prepared" classes of course have 4s vs. 4s, 6s vs 6s and turbo 4s, and 8s vs 8s and turbo6s, irrespective of the fact that some 4s run with 8s (like yours and Fred's!).

I'm fine with keeping the Street Prepared/Prepared classes, just think I should be in SPA and not PA.

[Jimmy Pet]

I'm fine with keeping the Street Prepared/Prepared classes, just think I should be in SPA and not PA.

I completely missed that point of your post,,, and now reading it in context my brain grasped,,, I would agree with you.
If SPA is V8 "street prepared" cars, and yours is a V8 "street prepared" car, yep, I cant see why it wouldn't fit in there.
If your car was completely gutted and caged corner to corner with lexan I'd say yeah, PA,,, but if its still got its street appointments why isnt it SPA?

[DanB]

I completely missed that point of your post,,, and now reading it in context my brain grasped,,,

Multiple misunderstandings => I didn't state my point clearly (doh).

I would agree with you.
If SPA is V8 "street prepared" cars, and yours is a V8 "street prepared" car, yep, I cant see why it wouldn't fit in there.
If your car was completely gutted and caged corner to corner with lexan I'd say yeah, PA,,, but if its still got its street appointments why isnt it SPA?

Because while engine swaps from any manufacturer are allowed in SP, they must have the same cylinder count. Rotaries count as 4 cylinders, so V8 ist strictly verboten! Unless your car is a tube-framed kit car, in which case run what you want! No logic...

[Jimmy Pet]

Because while engine swaps from any manufacturer are allowed in SP, they must have the same cylinder count. Rotaries count as 4 cylinders, so V8 ist strictly verboten! Unless your car is a tube-framed kit car, in which case run what you want! No logic...

I have not read the SP rules in ages, but that doesnt make alot of sense "if" they do allow it for tube cars.
I can see how that SPA could be exploited by stuffing a LS6 into a Miata,,, but it would seem to have left a loophole for the tube frame cars.

I have a reminder of another strange rule in my car. I have a bar in my cage I call the COM bar.
Somewhere along when I started with COM there was some rule that I couldn't understand the logic behind that said you had to have a passenger seat I think it was ST, maybe SP?,,, unless you had a cage bar that didnt allow it.
It was cheaper, easier for me to add a Petty bar to my cage than it was to buy a seat and base and mounts so I did. It at least had some benefit rather than a passenger seat I didnt need or want.
I still call it a COM bar.

[chaos4NH]

yawn. I was not a strong proponent of the Touring class, but let's leave it be. the yawn was for the loooong discussions we face this fall it setting up the proposed "super" classes.

[McMahonRacing]

Seems to me that it would be much easier to just eliminate all the "Kit" cars, the "tinkerers" ( highly modified cars ) period, that way there is no confusion, might also work out better for all them as well too, they can go buy cars that better fit ( Miata's ) & maximize all the rules for a specific class ( say a Porsche / Vette / Viper or some other super duper production car ) ....... What ever happened to the run what ya brung & let's all simply have fun in a safe environment !! Really want "Competition & Rules" then move up the ladder ... Clubs are suppose to accessible & FUN !!!

[paultg]

Clubs are suppose to accessible & FUN !!!

This club, and the board of directors are incredibly accessible, very fun, and have done what a majority of its members have requested. In my opinion they have done it with extreme caution and input from members in a effort to not upset the majority, more so than any type of club or association I have ever been a part of.

I suggest anyone worried about the potential rule changes to the prepared classes or whatever they are called (I'm in touring), pay very close attention to the results this season in touring with the those new rules in place, try to be open minded about the potential change, and also try to be part of the process. The folks that worked out all the touring stuff really spent a great deal of time hearing input from the touring class members, and I think the results of the first few events reflect that.

Paul G.

[cuda6666]

Guess I missed something. Is the club considering moving all classes to a points based system for 2014? From what I've seen so far this year, the current "mixed" system seems to be working out well. The members who don't like working on cars can run in one of the points based classes, and those of us who enjoy "tinkering" (as someone above called it) can run in the traditional classes. As you can tell be my tone, I think going all the way to points based classes would be a mistake. The next step would be "You can run anything you want as long as it's a Miata."

[PaddyMcP]

Guess I missed something. Is the club considering moving all classes to a points based system for 2014? From what I've seen so far this year, the current "mixed" system seems to be working out well. The members who don't like working on cars can run in one of the points based classes, and those of us who enjoy "tinkering" (as someone above called it) can run in the traditional classes. As you can tell be my tone, I think going all the way to points based classes would be a mistake. The next step would be "You can run anything you want as long as it's a Miata."

Frank ,
Nope that's not what's proposed for 2014. Or what was proposed for 2013.

Power to weight classing structure with a few tire and driveline adjustments. Basically run any car, any chassis, any engine from any manufacturer and do any mods you like including aero, carbon bits, sequential gearboxes, you name it. A truly unlimited class for the tinkerers.

This compliments the "points" based classes very nicely. But so does PA PB and PC. The current prepared classes are more open to different performance levels. Current prepared cars are not weight restricted or balanced according to weight in any way. In the proposed structure for 2014 - we care about power and weight.

In the end of the day - the members will decide the fate of the club. If the prepared guys get together and want it a certain way - we'll make it that way. It's their party. We proposed a system that would more accurately balance the performance in those classes in a "unlimited" class atmosphere. If they don't want it - no problem. We just want to be sure that all of the prepared members get a voice and are not drowned out by a 2 or 3 very outspoken members.

It's important to understand it's not an engine technology race in the proposed 2014 super classes. Take the engine for example. 2 cars with the same weight, same slick tires, rear wheel drive. One has a v6 judd engine making 400hp and costs $25K. One has a 400hp chevy crate motor and costs $4k. Should they be in different classes if the performance is the same? I think no. Others think yes.

If you like the to win by developing engines based on a cylinder restriction only - vote to keep P classes. If you like closer racing and don't want to be forced to spend booka bucks on engine development to keep up - vote for the new power to weight super classes.

I know exactly why Jimmy and Brendan and Fred like p classes. They have $10K 4 cylinder engines making huge 4 cylinder power. That's a hell of a combo for winning p classes. It sucks to have a car with a nice advantage and strip it away after a rule change. I think we've all gone through that at least once in some context. Some of us more than once - (fred!)

This certainly wasn't the right place for this post... but who cares.

-Paddy