SS Reclassifications for 2007

Questions, comments, and discussions concerning COMSCC rules.

Moderators: Boondocker850, blindsidefive0

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Re: Car class

Post by nateh » Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:50 pm

WillM wrote:
nateh wrote:
grovefromnh wrote:The Soltice N/A and Sky N/A in SSA? 170 hp @ 2800lbs.
Having checked my figures, I tend to agree. Also the Mazdaspeed Protege. So, unless something else comes up, I'll move these three into SSB.

Thanks, Grove!
If this is done, then we should move the 2006 MX-5 Miata into SSB as well. The Solstice, Sky, and 2006 MX-5 Miata are all very similar. In test comparisons, while the Miata is usually the one chosen as most fun to drive, the Solstice and/or Sky turn faster lap times.

At this point, we now have these cars running up against the 1999-2005 Miatas, which are in SSB. So should the 1999-2005 move to SSC? Where do we draw the line?
The 2006 MX-5 has significantly better power-to-weight ratio (and similar torque-weight) than the other cars we are discussing. I don't think we need to move it.

Why is it slower??

- Nate
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

RyanC
Speed Setter
Speed Setter
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:56 pm

Re: Car class

Post by RyanC » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:57 pm

nateh wrote:
WillM wrote:
nateh wrote: Having checked my figures, I tend to agree. Also the Mazdaspeed Protege. So, unless something else comes up, I'll move these three into SSB.

Thanks, Grove!
If this is done, then we should move the 2006 MX-5 Miata into SSB as well. The Solstice, Sky, and 2006 MX-5 Miata are all very similar. In test comparisons, while the Miata is usually the one chosen as most fun to drive, the Solstice and/or Sky turn faster lap times.

At this point, we now have these cars running up against the 1999-2005 Miatas, which are in SSB. So should the 1999-2005 move to SSC? Where do we draw the line?
The 2006 MX-5 has significantly better power-to-weight ratio (and similar torque-weight) than the other cars we are discussing. I don't think we need to move it.

Why is it slower??

- Nate
Duh! The driver can't focus on the correct line when he's applying blush!

:lol:

WillM
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1453
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:14 pm

Re: Car class

Post by WillM » Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:58 pm

nateh wrote:The 2006 MX-5 has significantly better power-to-weight ratio (and similar torque-weight) than the other cars we are discussing. I don't think we need to move it.

Why is it slower??

- Nate
Torque, suspension, gearing, & wider tires?

Code: Select all

                            tire     1/4 mile
Model    Weight  HP    TQ   width  Time @ Speed          Link
=================================================================================
MX-5      2498   170   140   205   15.3 @ 90.2  http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/mazda/mx5miata/100563877/specs.html

Solstice  2860   177   166   245   15.5 @ 88.3  http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/pontiac/solstice/100529859/specs.html

Sky       2933   177   166   245                http://www.edmunds.com/new/2007/saturn/sky/100681571/specs.html
From Car & Driver:
Mazda MX-5 vs. Pontiac Solstice
Ride: On rough roads, the MX-5 feels as if it has softer springs and more wheel travel than the Solstice. The MX-5 feels wispy and light on its feet, but the Solstice's stiffer suspension still manages to sop up the bumps while feeling more planted. Advantage: Solstice.

Handling: Both have handling limits that are substantial yet easy to probe. Approach the limits in the MX-5, and the softer suspension never quite settles down. The light-footed ride gives the MX-5 a delicate character. The Solstice trades that featheriness for a secure, buttoned-down feel at the limit. Comparatively narrow summer tires on the MX-5 stick and then break away; the Solstice's wider all-season rubber loses grip more gradually. Advantage: Solstice.

It takes a lot to get either roadster to shake, but the heavier Solstice feels a little stiffer. Advantage: Solstice.

Primary controls: The shifter in the MX-5 doesn't go easily into gear when cold; once warm, its short throws and directness are superior to the Solstice's good but unremarkable gearbox. Brake-pedal feel is similar in both cars: no lost motion and easy to modulate. We preferred the turn-in feel of the Solstice's steering-nicely weighted and precise. The MX-5's gets you close to the contact patches, but excessive kickback over bad roads gets annoying. Advantage: Draw.

Engine: The MX-5 sounds wimpy at idle but builds revs quickly and sounds happier as the revs increase. The Solstice idles better and barks louder, but the engine feels as if it has a heavier flywheel, and it buzzes more than we like. Nevertheless, the growling Solstice sounds better. Advantage: Draw.

THE VERDICT
The frenetic and lightweight MX-5 is a single-minded sports car. The heavier Solstice has two personalities: cruiser and sports car—it excels at both. In this purely subjective evaluation, the Solstice scores higher. When we do a formal and objective comparison, the result might change. But we'd say the General has won this skirmish.
96 Miata #72 SC
PRA 4 :sunny:

WillM
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1453
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:14 pm

Re: Car class

Post by WillM » Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:06 pm

RyanC wrote:
Duh! The driver can't focus on the correct line when he's applying blush!

:lol:
The blush is easy, it is the eye liner that's tough! :oops:

At least that is what Lee told me. :D :joker:
96 Miata #72 SC
PRA 4 :sunny:

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Post by nateh » Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:09 pm

What's the sound of a thousand worms crawling out of a can?

Or how about the sound of a frustrated and baffled so-called "chief steward" throwing up his hands?

:roll:
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

kfoote
Speed Setter
Speed Setter
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 11:38 am

Post by kfoote » Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:19 pm

JackFFR1846 wrote:How will the new classifications affect previous track records?

If we continue without any consideration, we should probably just wipe out all previous SS records as they're going to be blown out of the water by the upgraded performance of the new classes.

jack
The classes were set up so that all existing track records can remain in place. All SS and ST classes with the exception of SSU and STGT should theoretically be faster than they are now, so there is no reason to eliminate the track records until they are actually broken. Yes, they will likely be broken, but I think a few may stick around for a while. This was a major point of my initial proposal last year.
Kevin Foote
#64 SB Nissan 350Z
1998-2003 Chief of Tech
1998-2002 BOD member
SSB Track Record Holder at LRP

xstar
Speed Setter
Speed Setter
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:32 pm

Post by xstar » Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:52 pm

nateh wrote:What's the sound of a thousand worms crawling out of a can?

Or how about the sound of a frustrated and baffled so-called "chief steward" throwing up his hands?

:roll:
Put them all in SSB. Should make for a fun class of convertibles.

Personally, I think people are biased to having their cars at the top of their class, which makes sense. It might be time to start bringing the older Miatas and Sentras down from the top of the class. Then again, I wonder when we'll see the new MX-5, Sky, or Solstice show up at COM events. The old-timers, including myself, might not have anything to worry about. :)
#423 ST3 1996 Sumazdaru Miata STi

User avatar
Crusin
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 3:21 pm

Post by Crusin » Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:33 am

nateh wrote:What's the sound of a thousand worms crawling out of a can?

Or how about the sound of a frustrated and baffled so-called "chief steward" throwing up his hands?

:roll:
If a chief steward screams out in frustration, and no one hears him,,,did he make a sound? :tweety:

WillM
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1453
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:14 pm

Post by WillM » Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:01 pm

Quick! Stuff the worms back in!

I've re-read my post above and realize that it could have been interpreted as a dig. Sorry about that. I just wanted to throw in my $0.02 that the 2006 Miata, Solstice, and Sky should in the same class. Probably SSB.

I know Nate has been working very hard on this proposal and has been doing a great job keeping the BoD and stewards up-to-date. A lot of hard work has gone into this! :thumbleft:
96 Miata #72 SC
PRA 4 :sunny:

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Post by nateh » Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:34 pm

I'll accept the idea of putting the MX-5 in SSB, which makes technical sense based on the tire size.

I will draw the line at moving the 199-2005 cars to SSC. That would create a lot more problems!

Thanks for all the thoughtful contributions - and I'll try to stay calm...
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

rnoonan
Rookie Racer
Rookie Racer
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Belmont, MA

Post by rnoonan » Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:28 pm

Good work, Nate - I like the new classes, but there's something I don't understand: under SSA you list Chrysler Omni GLH and GLHS, but under SSB you list Dodge Omni GLH. I'm not an expert on those cars by any means, but I didn't realize that Chrysler made an Omni, much less a GLH or GLHS. Assuming that they did, how does the Chrysler GLH differ from the Dodge?

(My mother once owned a car that said Dodge Omni on one side and Plymouth Horizon on the other, but it didn't have a Chrysler badge!)

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Post by nateh » Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:03 pm

I think the original distinction was between normally aspirated GLH (110 HP - SSB), GLH turbo (145 - SSA), and Shelby GLHS (175 - SSA)

Looking into it now, I think the following:

- the GLH NA is so little different from the base Omnirizon (in today's terms) that it ought to drop down to SSC
- the GLH turbo should be in SSB
- the GLHS should stay in SSA

I'll modify the proposal to this effect.

Rick, thanks for the contribution!
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

User avatar
StephanAlfa
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 1646
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:01 am
Location: Merrimack, NH

Post by StephanAlfa » Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:00 am

JackFFR1846 wrote:
How will the new classifications affect previous track records?

If we continue without any consideration, we should probably just wipe out all previous SS records as they're going to be blown out of the water by the upgraded performance of the new classes.

jack


The classes were set up so that all existing track records can remain in place. All SS and ST classes with the exception of SSU and STGT should theoretically be faster than they are now, so there is no reason to eliminate the track records until they are actually broken. Yes, they will likely be broken, but I think a few may stick around for a while. This was a major point of my initial proposal last year.
_________________
Kevin Foote

Just take a look at last Sunday race in SSB. Five (5) out of the 9 drivers were experienced drivers. Track record WAS 1:28.5. I personally took about one second of my best time (compared to April event and I had new tires) and STILL wound up in 5th place! New track record is now 1:27.3. Clearly technology on new cars made the difference.
I am happy this class remains over the years one of the most competitive (look at all other classes, the championship is done, SSB is still neck and neck...) and I agree with Kevin on track records.
Wonder what it would be like if this was instituted last year instead... hummm...

Seven

Post by Seven » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:50 am

StephanAlfa wrote: Just take a look at last Sunday race in SSB. Five (5) out of the 9 drivers were experienced drivers. Track record WAS 1:28.5. I personally took about one second of my best time (compared to April event and I had new tires) and STILL wound up in 5th place! New track record is now 1:27.3. Clearly technology on new cars made the difference.
I am happy this class remains over the years one of the most competitive (look at all other classes, the championship is done, SSB is still neck and neck...) and I agree with Kevin on track records.
Wonder what it would be like if this was instituted last year instead... hummm...
I can't agree on this one... John Bradshaw set the new track record in his 1993? BMW 318ti w/ ~230k miles on the odometer!...not exactly what I would consider representative of "technology on (a) new car".

Not to say that the point isn't valid on some levels, just wanted to clarify...and to give props to John! :)

ncc1701
Rookie Driver
Rookie Driver
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:55 pm

Wondering why?

Post by ncc1701 » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:51 pm

Can someone please tell me why the 350Z has been moved to SSU?
If your response is because it has similar statistics to the 300ZX-TT then I submit that the 300ZX-TT should be moved back to SSGT not move the 350Z to SSU.

In an analysis of Weight, Horsepower, Torque, Skidpad, and breaking distance the 350Z had similar numbers, mostly not as good, to the following cars:
Lotus Exige and Elise
Audi S6 and S4 (PS. S4 should not be in SSA)
Porsche Boxter S
Acura NSX

All of the above would be SSGT Cars in the new rules.

Most of the SSU cars have considerably higher numbers than all of the cars above, including the 350Z.

I know many will claim that I just want to slide through with out any competition. I would very much like competition. There is no doubt that the 350Z falls near the top of performance in the SSGT Class but no more so than any of the cars listed above.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest