Jump to content

New OEM Hardtop Rule G 2


dans2k

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 468
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • dans2k

    84

  • kbrew8991

    66

  • wlfpkrcn1

    49

  • TurboShortBus

    30

  • National Staff

Yep, the car that Honda Challenge did their testing on to allow the S2000 into H2 had a Mugen or Mugen knockoff hardtop on it. That is how they were able to approve it for H2. They never tested with the top off, or with an OEM top for comparison. They just went to the faster option from the start, and decided what they would and would not allow to make the car legal in H2. The Spoon top is not legal. PT and TT obviously work differently. We start from base models, and when you add a part that has an advantage over a competitor without that part, you take points. Or, NASA decides that it is just too much of a problem to approve the mod, AND it is NOT a NECESSARY MOD due to other options available (OEM top, OEM knock-off top, no top).

 

And, to answer Dan's question above, yes, we did get complaints that there were S2000 drivers using non-OEM tops. We also got questions from drivers whether they could cut their top off and add some aero features like the Mugen and Spoon, and we had others that were concerned when they heard that there were both Miata and S2000 drivers that were planning on purchasing and/or bringing out those cars with the fastback tops under the existing rules in 2010. When we have a rule that is the same for years, and we decide to make a change, it isn't because we have nothing better to do than fiddle with something that isn't broken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To what class? Its also illegal in PT...

 

Honda Challenge..

 

Is the top allowed there?

 

I wouldn't because I'm not a Toyo fan but that certainly beats ST or SU

 

 

Hey watch it Ken Brewer!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
FormulaRedline

I don't feel like going into a diatribe that people aren't good to read anyway because they've made up their minds, but I did want to put in my two cents to support Dan's point. This is a reactive rule justified to penalize a few taking advantage but hurting a lot of loyal NASA customers abiding by the spirit of the rules and looking for affordable alternatives.

 

The Mugen-style tops do not have a clear advantage over the OEM style ones. I wouldn't yet say it's none, but it's certainly not worth a ban and no where near the points penalty of the existing aero mods (wing, splitter, or even proper canards). I have a degree in aerospace engineering from MIT and currently work for Boeing. If you want to hear a more detailed analysis, I'd be willing and qualified to give it, but I fear that my current ownership of a Mugen top would color the judgment of those reading it.

 

Alternatively, I'm sure I could perform an experiment where I borrow an OEM top and test it back to back with the Mugen, logging acceleration data with a DL-1. However, this would ideally be done at a controlled track to reach meaningful speeds, so it might not be in time for the start of the season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really want to hear the detailed analysis but I'd like to hear the premise for your experiment. My feeling is that the way an aero modification affects a car on a race track can't be measured with a simple acceleration experiment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't feel like going into a diatribe that people aren't good to read anyway because they've made up their minds, but I did want to put in my two cents to support Dan's point. This is a reactive rule justified to penalize a few taking advantage but hurting a lot of loyal NASA customers abiding by the spirit of the rules and looking for affordable alternatives.

 

The Mugen-style tops do not have a clear advantage over the OEM style ones. I wouldn't yet say it's none, but it's certainly not worth a ban and no where near the points penalty of the existing aero mods (wing, splitter, or even proper canards). I have a degree in aerospace engineering from MIT and currently work for Boeing. If you want to hear a more detailed analysis, I'd be willing and qualified to give it, but I fear that my current ownership of a Mugen top would color the judgment of those reading it.

 

Alternatively, I'm sure I could perform an experiment where I borrow an OEM top and test it back to back with the Mugen, logging acceleration data with a DL-1. However, this would ideally be done at a controlled track to reach meaningful speeds, so it might not be in time for the start of the season.

 

Some is more than none. Therefore it is worth points or banning.

Actually what you need is a wind tunnel to measure the effects of the top change. It's not just acceleration that is the issue. It is downforce, drag etc..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its pretty clear the mugen style is not going to be a significant benefit over OEM

 

I guess some people complained about the spoon style hardtops so they decided the easiest thing was to ban everything not OEM

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't feel like going into a diatribe that people aren't good to read anyway because they've made up their minds, but I did want to put in my two cents to support Dan's point. This is a reactive rule justified to penalize a few taking advantage but hurting a lot of loyal NASA customers abiding by the spirit of the rules and looking for affordable alternatives.

 

The Mugen-style tops do not have a clear advantage over the OEM style ones. I wouldn't yet say it's none, but it's certainly not worth a ban and no where near the points penalty of the existing aero mods (wing, splitter, or even proper canards). I have a degree in aerospace engineering from MIT and currently work for Boeing. If you want to hear a more detailed analysis, I'd be willing and qualified to give it, but I fear that my current ownership of a Mugen top would color the judgment of those reading it.

 

Alternatively, I'm sure I could perform an experiment where I borrow an OEM top and test it back to back with the Mugen, logging acceleration data with a DL-1. However, this would ideally be done at a controlled track to reach meaningful speeds, so it might not be in time for the start of the season.

 

Some is more than none. Therefore it is worth points or banning.

Actually what you need is a wind tunnel to measure the effects of the top change. It's not just acceleration that is the issue. It is downforce, drag etc..

 

I think the issue is more not wanting to try and make a rule to ban aero tops so we'll ban all aftermarket tops

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some is more than none. Therefore it is worth points or banning.

Actually what you need is a wind tunnel to measure the effects of the top change. It's not just acceleration that is the issue. It is downforce, drag etc..

 

Quit stealing my thunder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the issue is more not wanting to try and make a rule to ban aero tops so we'll ban all aftermarket tops

 

This is where you are completely wrong. If the aftermarket is the same shape and dimensions as the stock. In other words if the after market top is an exact replica then it is legal. THE MUGEN TOP IS NOT A REPLICA OF THE STOCK HONDA TOP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • National Staff

OK, I'm starting to wonder if this will be one of the 30 page threads

 

Want more fuel?

 

The actual Mugen hardtops cost MUCH MORE than the OEM hardtop!!!!!

The cheaper ones are just that, cheaper knock-offs that copied the Mugen shape and size.

 

Mugen fiberglass hardtops go for about $3000 new

Mugen carbon fiber hardtops go for about $6500-$7000 new.

 

http://twincamtech.stores.yahoo.net/mugs2har.html

http://www.nengun.com/mugen/s2000-hard-top

 

Questions that could add a few more pages here:

1) If those making the Mugen knock-offs can make them and sell them cheaper, why can't they make a cheap OEM knock-off carbon-fiber or fiberglass top?

2) Why did they knock-off the Mugen top to begin with, instead of the OEM top? Could it possibly be that the Mugen "style" shape and size actually were wind tunnel tested and designed to offer superior aerodynamic performance, just as some of the vendors clearly state on their websites?

3) Would Mugen actually design and manufacture an expensive part like this without it having performance advantages? They aren't exactly known for building junk.

 

Have fun

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to through another log in the fire (this one soaked in gas). In my younger days I raced dirt track motorcycles and all the Honda guys would salivate over the Mugen parts. Mugen had a direct working relationship with Honda and I'm sure they still do. Thats a lot of resources available to Mugen. The Mugen Honda's were no match for an Ossa or a Bultaco.

We sort of went trough this a few years ago with the front fascia.

If you Honda competitors want to run this roof go to TTS where the aero mods are open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure someone knows the wind tunnel stats on this hard top. I would be willing to bet points could be assessed based on wind displacement figures from the company. I would bet they have done the research and have the answers. Just saying.

 

Its a popular car model with a variable hard top mod. Why not explore possible points instead of saying its not legal? All It takes is an email to the designers to get the info you need. Just saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, I'm starting to wonder if this will be one of the 30 page threads

 

Want more fuel?

 

The actual Mugen hardtops cost MUCH MORE than the OEM hardtop!!!!!

The cheaper ones are just that, cheaper knock-offs that copied the Mugen shape and size.

 

Mugen fiberglass hardtops go for about $3000 new

Mugen carbon fiber hardtops go for about $6500-$7000 new.

 

http://twincamtech.stores.yahoo.net/mugs2har.html

http://www.nengun.com/mugen/s2000-hard-top

 

Questions that could add a few more pages here:

1) If those making the Mugen knock-offs can make them and sell them cheaper, why can't they make a cheap OEM knock-off carbon-fiber or fiberglass top?

2) Why did they knock-off the Mugen top to begin with, instead of the OEM top? Could it possibly be that the Mugen "style" shape and size actually were wind tunnel tested and designed to offer superior aerodynamic performance, just as some of the vendors clearly state on their websites?

3) Would Mugen actually design and manufacture an expensive part like this without it having performance advantages? They aren't exactly known for building junk.

 

Have fun

 

hey why not I think we can get to 30!

 

I don't know why people copy mugen but I think most people think the mugen looks better.

It might be tricky to copy the glass on the OEM one I dunno, realy I wish they would knockoff some OEM copies...

 

but why speculate anymore, FormulaRedline offerred to test, why not let him test?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just let me know when it's legal to channel and change the slope of my roof. I have an awesome body guy ready to start

 

 

hey if you want to give your body guy money to pull your roofline back a few inches thats fine with me!

let us know how that works out for you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...