TurboShortBus Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 As a follow-up to this discussion, per my conversation with an experienced Spec Miata driver (who I believe may have already posted in this thread), removing the OEM Miata hardtop and running without one (folding top down) costs approximately 4 mph in the 100 mph neighborhood. Another experienced Spec Miata driver claimed a lap time difference of nearly 2 seconds around Sebring between having and not having a hardtop (with the hardtop being quicker than having the folding top down). Additionally, per my conversation with a CMC driver about his convertible Mustang, the lack of any roof started to restrict his top-end speed starting at 100 mph. I see an advantage for convertible cars that run removable hardtops. In light of the above statements, I would consider lobbying for modification points if any hardtop, OEM or otherwise, was installed on any vehicle whose base configuration is as a convertible (S2000, Miata, etc.). I'm not saying that I will, but I'm saying that convertible drivers should be thankful to have the "no-points" OEM hardtop option that they currently do. Mark The TT rules give a fixed-roof mustang and a convertible mustang the same base class. Why would the convertible mustang need to take points for a modification that basically does nothing other than even it out with the fixed-roof mustang? The hardtop'd vert mustang has an advantage over the non-hardtop'd one, but where's the proof that it has an advantage over a non-convertible, fixed roof mustang? OK, so you missed my point in the second paragraph: I would consider lobbying for modification points if any hardtop, OEM or otherwise, was installed on any vehicle whose base configuration is as a convertible (S2000, Miata, etc.).I actually originally wrote that sentence to exclude cars like Mustangs and Camaros that were offered as coupes and convertibles, but I thought nah, I don't need to clarify things to that extent. Oops. My other point about mentioning conversations with 2 Spec Miata drivers and 1 CMC driver is that a convertible car, with the top down, will not be as fast as the same car with some sort of roof over the driver's head. Note that the CMC class is comprised of Mustangs and Camaros at equal power and weight levels, so if this particular topless Mustang is getting smoked down a long straight at VIR or Road Atlanta by a nearly identical (but with a roof) Mustang, then having a roof is an advantage. Who would like to have an additional 4 mph around 100 mph? And who wants it for free? I sure would. That's quite an equivalent increase in horsepower, if the aero was a constant. Back in my drag racing days, the rule of thumb for street cars was that every extra MPH at the end of the quarter mile was about another 10 hp. Now, if you chose to compete with a Mustang, and you chose a convertible (which is at a disadvantage with the top down, compared to a hardtop Mustang), then you are the one who shot yourself in the foot, and you now must live with your frog's warts. But, if you want to install a removable OEM hardtop on a 1994-1998 Mustang (which were made in very limited numbers), then it would only make you identical to an OEM Mustang coupe. But, modify the shape of that hardtop, and you no longer have a true Mustang roofline, and there could be further aerodynamic advantages (just as with a modified, non-OEM top on an S2000, Miata, etc.). The more you all make me think about it, the more I think that having a points assessment for S2000s, Miatas, MR Spyders, etc. that have an optional hardtop installed (because the base models didn't come with one) makes more sense because of the aerodynamic benefits. Be thankful for the no-points modification option that you currently have. Or, keep opening that can of worms and risk digging a deeper hole... Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Miata and S2000 are in the same boat. S2000 with soft top up is about as fast as one with an OEM hardtop, ditto the Miata. As you have all seen, there are plenty of both running with soft tops up. I'm not sure about other regions, but down here in Florida, all convertible cars must run with the tops down. Based on previous comments from S2000 drivers being afraid of sun and/or rain, it sounds like convertible cars in other regions must run with the tops down as well. With that being said, this is the basis of my discussion about convertible tops down vs hardtops installed (not convertible tops up vs hardtops installed). Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I'm trying to figure out how it has come to be that 3-5 TT Directors have decided to stick it to the convertible sports car guys? OK, take the tinfoil hat off already! There is no conspiracy here. I get plenty of things stuck to me with my 1978 Fairmont (er, 2004 Mustang), but you won't hear me complaining. Maybe grumbling under my breath, but not verbally complaining. Hell, I don't even notice many of my frog's warts anymore, as I have learned to live with them. FWIW, I would love to compete in a convertible (as my other Mustang is a 'vert), but I won't do it due to the aerodynamic disadvantage of having the top down. I'll stick to my hardtop Mustang for now. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob300zx Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 If you really want the Mugen top. Ask Greg to make it legal for 5 points as he stated he would. Do you really think 5 pts is appropriate for a modification that has arguably zero aerodynamic benefit over an OEM top? Or do you not care? I think on a street car without a rear wing, you are correct. It is not worth 5 points. As soon as that wing is added it is a whole different story. You have to look at ultimate potential and not what someone in a street car will gain. Remember these rules are the same for the race group. If you think that a racer won't find every little advantage you are mistaken. Someone that is serious has absolutely zero problems cutting off the top and redesigning it. The problem with this thread is that is about the cost of the top for someone in a street car and not what the ultimate performance/ advantage the top has What are you so afraid of? There is no voodoo going on here. You get the benifit of a stiffer chassis and we have several top options with hopefully several different point classes. FYI, there is more to gain with wing design/diffusers/etc design than anything you can dream up in hardtop land. Use some of your points for something else. No one is aurguing about the benifit of a hardtop vs fastback. We are saying that a hardtop any shape with no molded in aero is not worth 5 points, let alone 5 points for a fastback with no molded aero. I'll just build a custom bikini fastback soft top I guess. Its not some conspiracy against you and your NorCal PT group. There are sooo many things that are open to interpretation in the rules that it just comes off plain silly that you would agree with banning non oe shape hardtops or just blanket it with a 5 point jab. I'd like you to design a magic hardtop that works on an S2000 or Miata, drastically lowers the roof line, gains a major 5 point benefit, and passes the 2" to roll hoop rule. Going flat out drops way more time...fyi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
949Racing Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think on a street car without a rear wing, you are correct. It is not worth 5 points. As soon as that wing is added it is a whole different story. Are you saying that the slight deviance from OEM of the Mugen top is worth 5 pts over and OEM top only when a wing is being used? Is there any data or empirical evidence to support that? My guess is that any gain would be negligible. As neither of us has proof either way, it remains theoretical. I propose that no one in NASA will have this data either. That allowing a non OEM shape may be advantage is not being argued. What your customers are asking is to recognize that this modification needs to be tiered just like tires. So we want to keep the rules as they are so we don't have to spend another $3K chasing down parts to stay exactly where we are? Of course we do! To me, it makes sense to allow any hard top, just draft a few rules to create maybe 3 tiers of modification just as NASA now does with virtually everything else in PT. OEM - not OEM - fastback Stuff that's already tiered: Tire compounds (are all the tires in one tier exactly the same potential?) Compression ratio Weight Shock absorber features (are all dampers created equal?) Engine Displacement Tire width The difficulty comes in drafting a rule set that is easily interpreted and scrutineered. That, I will not argue, having had some experience drafting rules sets OEM unmodified is easy, it either is or isn't Fastback is easy, it either covers the trunk or doesn't Vortex inducer, wing or vertical fence, easy The sticky one is near OEM shape. Again, it makes no sense to simply ban them so NASA should face the creative challenge of drafting something instead of running away from the issue. Perhaps my proposal of the 1/2" of OEM thing doesn't work but don't give up there. Let us run our funky hardtops, just like you'll let me run a V10 M5 engine, auto trans, 5.5" wheels and bias plys in my Miata with active aero. Wait 'til you see it! The problem with this thread is that is about the cost of the top for someone in a street car and not what the ultimate performance/ advantage the top has Not sure I understand what you are saying here either. The issue at hand is very much the cost of the top and is precisely why the OP began the discussion. NASA's representatives have focused on the potential for gain with a slight deviance from OEM shape, not the cost. There is very real reason fro NASA to address this by drafting an appropriate rule and not just throwing in the towel with a unilateral ban. If PT was tightly regulated with a thick rule book and near stock cars, it would make sense. It is not however, we can run some pretty crazy combinations and a value priced Mugen top or cheap fake carbon ebay Miata top fit right into the spirit of what NASA is and why we aren't racing with those other guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2bars Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Wow, why is this so hard? What's wrong with the rule as 949 guy wrote it? Why are guys with zero involved so hell bent on losing tt competitors? TX region has already lost 2 competitors for 2011. One that was set to run ttc this year but sold his soft top to buy his hardtop. He's in college and money is tight. Another came in third in ttb last year and was given 14 points this year due to the reclass/base weight increase on his Miata. I tried to get him to come out anyway to play but is truly pissed. we won't be seeing him this year. This is just the tip of the iceberg if something like a hardtop is "outlawed" like someone already stated, is there a compression tester at all the events? How do you know I have stock pistons? I'll tell you how, because I filled out my classification sheet honestly and if something seems out of order my competitors will file a complaint. Why would a hardtop be any different? And the s2k people are crying and griping? You bet your ass. As they should with an unfair and IMO a lazy rule call. Funny thing is even those not affected either way are crying and griping! Why is that? Lastly, to the gentleman that said he doesn't like things but doesn't say anything about it or does so "under his breath". To you sir I say its that kind of attitude that allowed men to be slaves. Allowed nazi's to kill Jews. Allowed innocent men to be put to death. A little extreme? Sure, but it's that type of complacency that has led to many an injustice, large and small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shawn M. Posted February 22, 2011 Members Share Posted February 22, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Lastly, to the gentleman that said he doesn't like things but doesn't say anything about it or does so "under his breath". To you sir I say its that kind of attitude that allowed men to be slaves. Allowed nazi's to kill Jews. Allowed innocent men to be put to death. A little extreme? Sure, but it's that type of complacency that has led to many an injustice, large and small. With that statement, we just crossed the line into sheer lunacy. I think I'm done here. Have fun, boys. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) That's the way to win 'em over, call 'em Nazis!! Guess what - you currently CAN'T run an non-OEM shape below TTS class AT ALL period end of discussion. Guess what - I've been pushing this whole thread for it to have SOME form of points assessment so it can be included in TTA and below since it won't be 100% points-free. And I'm the close minded Nazi that is trying to run everyone off and raise costs for those that do stick around? Please People like you make me wonder why I spend so much time on this stuff, it certainly isn't for the "pay".... Edited February 22, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Locked thread in 3.....2....1...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 per section 1244.35.6 nasty threads in the TT section can only be locked after they reach 20 pages. Keep firing!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Damn it Ken, I was hoping to keep them on their toes with our oppression! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Sparkle Nazi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Damn it Ken, I was hoping to keep them on their toes with our oppression! oops, I used my super secret director decoder ring of oppression improperly when reading your message. I'll get it right next time!! Sparkle Nazi you jerk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think all the S2k guys should band together. Fly to SoCal with their Mugen tops and stand in Gregs front yard. That my friends is how you change the regime. Ofcourse I don't know Gregs stand on military force Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shawn M. Posted February 22, 2011 Members Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think all the S2k guys should band together. Fly to SoCal with their Mugen tops and stand in Gregs front yard. That my friends is how you change the regime. Ofcourse I don't know Gregs stand on military force Haha!! They will never find his yard. Now back to my buttery... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob300zx Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Its pretty obvious thatspoolin2bars was half joking. You can petition for your customers thread to get locked all you want. You've heard from your customers. We want to run ebay hardtops. You said 5 points. We said no. We now decide where to run our cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Its pretty obvious thatspoolin2bars was half joking. You can petition for your customers thread to get locked all you want. You've heard from your customers. They want to run ebay hardtops. You said 5 points. We said no. We now decide where to run our cars. so he was half serious too then... Even if it was 100% a joke its still really really stupid to say things like that period. I get the expense angle - you're talking to a guy that ran in 2 National TT events (2006 and 2007) as a college and just out of college student on a budget so cheap that he drove the car over 700 miles one way to the track with tires and all the other supplies stuffed in it (the only competitor there that did so btw) and camped or slept on hotel room floors because that's all I could afford and still be able to get out there. Managed to podium both years too. Don't let the used Tundra, borrowed trailer, and $2300 MR2 race car that you see now fool you You're going to have to comprimise here. +5 still lets you run lower than TTS with your inexpensive Mugen knockoff top while you wait for another knockoff company to step up to the plate with an inexpensive OEM profile top. You have to see our side of things too however. Every mod out there is set with the best-case gain assumed so +5 might be right for that best-case car, and thus the right assessment for the modification. If your car/setup/whatever can't realize the full gain of a particular modification it isn't the series' problem, it isn't the regional director's problem, it isn't even Greg's problem... and no amount of proper lobbying (or even improper lobbying with Nazi and other names thrown about) is going to change that particular cornerstone that this series is founded on. Yes you have a TON of choice in how to mod your car, but to do well you still must be smart and only select parts that give your car the performance boost that is worth the points. You're asking for a wholesale change of the founding philosophy of the class by rejecting the +5 assessment and asking for a car-and-part specific allowance. That might retain you as customers but run everyone else off that can't curry their own car-and-part specific favors. Your best bet to be able to run these kind of parts in classes lower than TTS is to keep pushing for that +5 or whatever line item and just deal with running a part that isn't worth the full points until you can find an inexpensive OEM profile hardtop or you find a hardtop that does produce gains worth that full +5 or whatever assessment. I would bet for 2012 and beyond it could very well go down in points since these things are usually set on the conservative side initially as to not upset the status-quo too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hustler Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think all the S2k guys should band together. Fly to SoCal with their Mugen tops and stand in Gregs front yard. That my friends is how you change the regime. Ofcourse I don't know Gregs stand on military force If they could get to SoCal they'd run S2k Challenge, MotoIQ TT, or even RLTA rather than run with NASATT. That's the beauty of the free market of course. I read section G of the Time Trial Classification form and it looks to me like a 2-3 point assessment for the fancy-top makes sense. I've only been through this stuff for about 6-months so I'm naive and ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 There is always the option of HPDE 4 and you can run whatever you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Its pretty obvious thatspoolin2bars was half joking. You can petition for your customers thread to get locked all you want. You've heard from your customers. We want to run ebay hardtops. You said 5 points. We said no. We now decide where to run our cars. From my experience is when the thread takes on personal attack like reference to nazis. The thread gets locked. You guys can continue arguing this. What you don't seem to grasp is there is a whole other level of prep than your street car. You need to think about it from the full prep side. What can a top like that offer in ultimate performance? If the rule is written as a +3 who has the resources to design a top that meets the +3 rule yet is way more efficient then the Mugen top. You need to look past this one top and look at what you are asking for overall. I think If someone was smart and designed their own top it could be a 4 or 5 point mod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I read section G of the Time Trial Classification form and it looks to me like a 2-3 point assessment for the fancy-top makes sense. I've only been through this stuff for about 6-months so I'm naive and ignorant. It very well could end up that few points, but, these assesments are generally set on the conservative side initially and lowered over the course of a few seasons. Pretty wise to do it that way imho. You let the part in, you get it dialed in right eventually, but you also don't upset the applecart immediatley by going too low with a points assesment either. Stability is something that has been begged for and rightly so, esp after the massive amount of changes that came about in 2005, 2006 and 2007. You guys were probably still in high school then (I kid, I kid!) Stability is important for long term growth of the series, but with it you'll have a bit of pain every now and then with cases like this one where a part might start out at too high amt of points at first. It sucks for you guys, but as a whole its much better than the alternatives we have availible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think wolfpack is saying even the stock top should be assigned pts since it's such an advantage over soft tops or top down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) I think wolfpack is saying even the stock top should be assigned pts since it's such an advantage over soft tops or top down. that's what Mark McKay was saying too... I don't agree with charging them pts for any hardtop though. I do agree with charging them points for a top that isn't OEM shape and to only charge them the amt that makes sense when looking at the best possible case scenario car & top - aligns perfectly with the founding philosophies of the class, allows the part in if they wish, but also assesses the right amt of points - all is well in the world. Edited February 22, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Certainly reasonable for PT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.