NC Miata, BRZ/FR-S, and RX8 Should be Allowed in TT6

[rherold9]

And, if you think that if those models were eligible, that someone wouldn't still build a fully race-prepped version that would make all other vehicles obsolete (including your street car), you are mistaken. That will happen whether they are eligible for ST5/TT5 or ST6/TT6.

With all of that said, we are still looking at the eligibility rule currently, and should come to a consensus on whether to make any changes to the provisional rule soon.

 

If this is how the rules are intended then leave the hp cap as in provisional rules for TT/ST6 and let the cars run. Remove specific bans. Let a newer street Miata get killed by a race prepped older Miata... If the newer Miata is fully race prepped it's forced into 5?

If we want to get specific then keep hp and that stops 06-08 Miata's but let's 09+ run. I know lowering hp cap to 166 implicitly bans the 325 e30 but also does to all NC Miata's. Still let's the ND Miata in but it would be very very hard to make that fit based on the current rules and would have to be relatively stock so the race prepped cars should kill the car accordingly to what you have said?

If the new rule set for each class is meant to just cap full race cars/limit the upper end that's cool. Then those are the rules. Each org has different rules for different reasons. Rules will always inhibit or prohibit certain people or cars. I just know the current rules and the way they are prepared will prevent others as well as me from fitting in do to needing a fully prepped race car to be fully competitive. This of course requires a lot more money (in my case and others) and sacrifices for the 'streetable' cars (I don't mind this but for others it matters). Can't please everyone

 

In my experience in NASA NE and ME, I see cars that are street driven and trailer queens. My car is trailered because it has a full cage even though it retain carpet, a/c, cruise, heat, etc (why strip when I need all the extra weight in TT5 anyway). It's rare to see a street driven TT car win at any competitive event. To win in most competitive events it requires driving hard, which a lot of drivers are not willing to do at 10/10 without a full cage. Most of the winning TT cars in every class are not street driven.

 

I don't think this is all true but I can see the logic of why you would think that. We have a couple of TTD cars in the MA region that are moving pretty good (RX8 and FRS with good drivers, Matthew Huffman and Ahmad Lutfeali) that are street driven. They've broken track records at tracks in the area.

[hufflepuff]

As a full disclaimer, i run a full interior/radio/AC/heat RX-8 that is comfortable and quiet. I do not want a truck and trailer, nor do i have the budget or place to put them since i live in apartment. Therefore, i drive my car to-and-from events on the street. It's not my daily driver, but it could be. I think many other TT'ers might fit in this boat: have fun competing without ruining the enjoyment or comfort of a car on the street. I have been fairly successful with this formula in TTD. That was the beauty of TTD for me: have an enjoyable, streetable car that you can compete with.

1) Regarding "street car" versus "racecar", we're making a fallacy comparing an under-developed street car to a fully-developed racecar. "street car" should not imply that it is any more or less "developed" than a gutted "racecar". To me, "development" is how well your suspension maximizes your tires, how easy the car is to push to the limit, how reliable it is, and how close you are to the PWR limit and the class limitations regarding modifications. Whether you gutted or not isn't a factor of "development" when PWR is restricted.

I don't think we expect an under-developed street car to be able to compete with a fully-developed racecar; that's a silly notion. HOWEVER, a FULLY-DEVELOPED street car should have practically no performance difference from a FULLY-DEVELOPED "race" car outside of some ballasting options and perhaps cage rigidity advantages. If they are both at the same PWR on the same tires, and given that we have aero and brake and suspension modifiers, we should see comparable performance if both are well dialed-in. A quieter exhaust may weigh a little more (accounted for in the PWR), lower spring rates may marginally reduce responsiveness, but the performance potential should be nearly equivalent.

If we don't think NASA TT should be intended as a "street car" class, i vote we change the way it's currently being marketed. The current moniker as displayed on this forum is "NASA's new timed events for street cars", and NASA TT is neither new nor (it seems) intended for street cars.

2) I think the TT5 PWR of 14:1 is creating adversity for a lot of popular platforms (NC, RX8, FRS/BRZ) who really struggle to get there without gutting or serious engine investment, while being a very good fit for some platforms that require minimal investment to get to that PWR limit even with full interior. I would recommend considering increasing the PWR because it's easier and cheaper for folks to de-tune (restrictor plate, ECU reflash) and/or add ballast than for the "slow guys" (thanks to the TT5 PWR) to make huge investments in engine technology or to gut their car.

The sizeable gap that TT5 occupies between TT4 and TT6 right now seems biased towards TT4. a 15:1 would open the door for many more folks to get to the PWR without creating significant hardship. I still can't get there at 15:1, but it gives me a more fair fight against people for whom the rules handed them a huge acceleration and top speed advantage. To anyone who complains that they'll no longer have an advantage if we go to 15:1, it seems to me that detuning will likely just give them a fatter power band anyways...

Again, in my case, i was a good fit for TTD in a well-prepped street car, and i've done an admirable job going from a ~2940 curb weight down to ~2730 without any huge change in street comfort, but i'm at the limit of what's left without gutting. and my engine is already fully uncorked. it's a similar story for NC, BRZ/FRS... we're solidly between TT6 and TT5 without cost-effective means of getting there.

[cabowabo]

If this is how the rules are intended then leave the hp cap as in provisional rules for TT/ST6 and let the cars run. Remove specific bans. Let a newer street Miata get killed by a race prepped older Miata... If the newer Miata is fully race prepped it's forced into 5?

 

That's the opposite of what the problem would be. Digging through NASA Timing and Scoring / Youtube I see you ran 1 second faster than Steyn (Top SM driver) at VIR on the same day, on Maxxis. At Champs I ran 1.7 seconds faster than SM on Hoosier SM7s in what's basically a very nearly fully developed daily driver TTE* NA Miata (previously mentioned NB motor swap and intake cam for an 11whp pickup, e85, Xidas with 1000f/400r springs and aluminum seat for the ultimate in plush ride /s, yada yada). The problem isn't that the NC would get killed, it's that it would very likely be an overdog in the class. Maybe not a mild prep NC on Maxxis, but a built to class limits NC on Hoosiers (2-3 seconds faster than RC1 on 2 min lap) with its significantly better chassis, aero, less weight modifier, more tire, etc would romp on existing TTE cars. That's what Greg has to be careful of and why the most extravagant build must be considered. Keep in mind the car that won PTE/TTE at champs was a full racecar, caged, seam welded, ballast placed where needed, fuel cell and so on. So you'd only have to detune a little or add some ballast, run hoosiers, and boom, you're as fast/faster than the most well developed PTE/TTE car in the country and destroying your run of the mill regional TTE/TT6 car.

It does look like the NC is going to have to do some work to hit TT5 limits in street trim as it'll need more power (cams, 2.5 swap, etc), but that's not a good reason to bump it down to TT6 and make existing fully developed / competitive TTE cars obsolete in TT6. Nevermind the many who are far from fully developed. Doing some more bench racing let's take a look at UTCC Hyperfest. Hufflepuff would have podiumed both days (having nearly won Day 1) in TT5 and that's in full TTD trim. Not sure what tires he runs, but will assume hoosiers. With wing and/or splitter he'd obviously pick up even more time and close in on that 2:09.5 of the s2000. If ya'll want to run the BTM aero mod b/c street car then that falls under one of my previous posts of being unable / unwilling to fully develop, because developed TT5 cars aren't running without aero. For those unable to make any more power / lose any more weight (NA/NB Miatas for instance) it seems taking the hit for splitter also helps.

At the end of the day the rules may need adjusting, but asking for a sweeping change like bumping these three cars down to TT6, where they would dominate and render existing competitive TT/PT/ST builds on popular chassis obsolete isn't the answer.

[rherold9]

For the most part I do not think you are wrong saying a NC would do well in 6. I'm also a pretty new driver with not much experience so an even faster driver could probably drive my car harder and drop a second plus... 2:14 is close to do-able as it sits (12 points away from TTD max) on a cooler morning with ideal track conditions from what I've seen.

But as mentioned there will always be an over dog. ie. once someone builds a well prepped e36 m3 or e46 330 with a good driver (oh, they did that at COTA champs) will sweep TT5 based on the rule set. That build would make any of the currently prepped TT5 S2000's, etc obsolete. So they should they be banned in 5 for being an over dog? Forced to be pushed into TT4?

I know most people will think I'm being biased because I own the car being banned but I'm trying to play devil's advocate and give real reasoning and thought here. Disclaimer: I do not believe BRZ/FRS, RX8 should be allowed into TT6 due to the fact of the HP ban. If the hp cap was 200hp for 6 and the BRZ/FRS/RX8 were banned it would be bad too. These classes are W:P based. If modifiers are written and adjusted properly shouldn't all cars be theoretically on the same page as Matthew Huffman said? I think that's another problem and there may need some discussion on increasing weight to power for 5 or some other measure to help some of these guys out who don't want to gut their car for TT.

The issue is banning cars outright even though they fit within the rule set. Mostly because they would be thought to be an "overdog" for the class. I think that's something that is a bit against the spirit no matter the ban on which car it is against.

Side note: If or when I do sell this NC Miata I do not want to get in to another car and be pushed into something like this that is currently happening. I have spent money getting the car half prepped, banking on the car fitting into 6, as I realized it would be hard as hell to fit into 5 when I saw the 5 rules last year. Little did I know I'd be banned in 6. I would also not like this to happen to anyone else trying to build in the future. It's not fun.

[hufflepuff]

If ya'll want to run the BTM aero mod b/c street car then that falls under one of my previous posts of being unable / unwilling to fully develop, because developed TT5 cars aren't running without aero. For those unable to make any more power / lose any more weight (NA/NB Miatas for instance) it seems taking the hit for splitter also helps.

 

Again, modifications have modifiers to the PWR to allow choices of HOW to optimize. If you take the BTM Aero Mod factor, the decreased PWR is SUPPOSED to equalize by allowing more power or less weight. It shouldn't matter the path you take to optimization. The PT classes were the same way... if you took points for aero, those are points you could have otherwise spent on power, weight redux, tires, suspension, etc.

If the fastest TT5 guys are all running aero, to me that means at least 4 possibilities:

1. it's coincidence, and running aero is neither advantage nor disadvantage over BTM aero credit

2. faster guys simply choose out of personal preference to run aero (cool looks, yo)

3. aero is more cost-effective or less headache path to getting to the PWR limit than adding power

4. the advantage of running basic aero is worth more than the BTM aero credit

If i was a betting man, i am betting very strongly on 4... 3 being a close contender for some.

Point is: fully optimized SHOULDN'T mean you have to run aero; the aero credit should be allowing optimization and therefore parity to be achieved by other means.

If all the "fast" TT5 guys are following a similar build / optimization pathway... namely, basic aero mods + Hoosier R7, that shouldn't mean everyone needs to "optimize" to that setup... it means the rules are favoring that combination of choices and that the modifiers probably aren't accurately reflecting the differential from BTM aero + 100TW tires, for instance.

[rherold9]

If there is data then add modifiers to newer chassis that are proven in competition next to each with equal weight to powers and modifications that one is faster. For now it's all a he said she said theoretical stuff that the newer cars will be faster. Theoretically my NC will win. But will it actually. If it does then add modifiers for it to equalize. I'd rather see that happen that way vs just ban it right away. I think the NA/NB, e30, NC could all share same classing with adjusted rules. If my NC really is dominating I will fairly take the hit until my vehicle actually comes uncompetitive then I'll complain again.

[patmickelson]

As a full disclaimer, i run a full interior/radio/AC/heat RX-8 that is comfortable and quiet. I do not want a truck and trailer, nor do i have the budget or place to put them since i live in apartment. Therefore, i drive my car to-and-from events on the street. It's not my daily driver, but it could be. I think many other TT'ers might fit in this boat: have fun competing without ruining the enjoyment or comfort of a car on the street. I have been fairly successful with this formula in TTD. That was the beauty of TTD for me: have an enjoyable, streetable car that you can compete with.

1) Regarding "street car" versus "racecar", we're making a fallacy comparing an under-developed street car to a fully-developed racecar. "street car" should not imply that it is any more or less "developed" than a gutted "racecar". To me, "development" is how well your suspension maximizes your tires, how easy the car is to push to the limit, how reliable it is, and how close you are to the PWR limit and the class limitations regarding modifications. Whether you gutted or not isn't a factor of "development" when PWR is restricted.

I don't think we expect an under-developed street car to be able to compete with a fully-developed racecar; that's a silly notion. HOWEVER, a FULLY-DEVELOPED street car should have practically no performance difference from a FULLY-DEVELOPED "race" car outside of some ballasting options and perhaps cage rigidity advantages. If they are both at the same PWR on the same tires, and given that we have aero and brake and suspension modifiers, we should see comparable performance if both are well dialed-in. A quieter exhaust may weigh a little more (accounted for in the PWR), lower spring rates may marginally reduce responsiveness, but the performance potential should be nearly equivalent.

If we don't think NASA TT should be intended as a "street car" class, i vote we change the way it's currently being marketed. The current moniker as displayed on this forum is "NASA's new timed events for street cars", and NASA TT is neither new nor (it seems) intended for street cars.

2) I think the TT5 PWR of 14:1 is creating adversity for a lot of popular platforms (NC, RX8, FRS/BRZ) who really struggle to get there without gutting or serious engine investment, while being a very good fit for some platforms that require minimal investment to get to that PWR limit even with full interior. I would recommend considering increasing the PWR because it's easier and cheaper for folks to de-tune (restrictor plate, ECU reflash) and/or add ballast than for the "slow guys" (thanks to the TT5 PWR) to make huge investments in engine technology or to gut their car.

The sizeable gap that TT5 occupies between TT4 and TT6 right now seems biased towards TT4. a 15:1 would open the door for many more folks to get to the PWR without creating significant hardship. I still can't get there at 15:1, but it gives me a more fair fight against people for whom the rules handed them a huge acceleration and top speed advantage. To anyone who complains that they'll no longer have an advantage if we go to 15:1, it seems to me that detuning will likely just give them a fatter power band anyways...

Again, in my case, i was a good fit for TTD in a well-prepped street car, and i've done an admirable job going from a ~2940 curb weight down to ~2730 without any huge change in street comfort, but i'm at the limit of what's left without gutting. and my engine is already fully uncorked. it's a similar story for NC, BRZ/FRS... we're solidly between TT6 and TT5 without cost-effective means of getting there.

 

Very well said. Thank you.

[cabowabo]

Point is: fully optimized SHOULDN'T mean you have to run aero; the aero credit should be allowing optimization and therefore parity to be achieved by other means.

If all the "fast" TT5 guys are following a similar build / optimization pathway... namely, basic aero mods + Hoosier R7, that shouldn't mean everyone needs to "optimize" to that setup... it means the rules are favoring that combination of choices and that the modifiers probably aren't accurately reflecting the differential from BTM aero + 100TW tires, for instance.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you and it'd be great in theory, but it's idealistic to think this is/was true for ST/PT. Looking at PTE Miatas (because that's what I know) there was only one optimized build. Everything else was a compromise. You were free to run aero, or start with an NA instead of NB1, or run RR's instead of R7s using those points elsewhere, but at the end of the day being optimized meant following a formula. With enough cost no object testing and development a formula will emerge as the best build per chassis per class. If you weight the BTM aero or 100TW mod factors too heavily I think you end up in a spot where you have track dependent setups. Such as running R7s / Aero for smaller tracks with no real digs out of slow corners and running BTM aero, ballast, full power tune, and the stickiest 100-200tw tire available (with less life than an R7) on horsepower tracks. If that happens then the cost to be optimized only increases, instead of creating a place where you can be competitive via multiple avenues.

[rherold9]

I'm not disagreeing with you and it'd be great in theory, but it's idealistic to think this is/was true for ST/PT. Looking at PTE Miatas (because that's what I know) there was only one optimized build. Everything else was a compromise. You were free to run aero, or start with an NA instead of NB1, or run RR's instead of R7s using those points elsewhere, but at the end of the day being optimized meant following a formula. With enough cost no object testing and development a formula will emerge as the best build per chassis per class. If you weight the BTM aero or 100TW mod factors too heavily I think you end up in a spot where you have track dependent setups. Such as running R7s / Aero for smaller tracks with no real digs out of slow corners and running BTM aero, ballast, full power tune, and the stickiest 100-200tw tire available (with less life than an R7) on horsepower tracks. If that happens then the cost to be optimized only increases, instead of creating a place where you can be competitive via multiple avenues.

 

"Theoretically" that will happen with almost any rule set. If we are building to the fullest extent of the rules then there is no jack of all trades. One setup will be faster at a track compared to another. It will always be a cost optimized race in a theoretical world. Someone who has the most money can build to the best build for any track.

[Roman V.]

On 9/21/2018 at 11:39 AM, cabowabo said:

 

This is a ridiculous claim imo. These cars all slot perfectly into TT5 with typical bolt-ons and pulling minimal amounts of weight. Some of these figures are VERY conservative. A guy in our region runs an NC and it was 2400 without driver before removing interior and so on for cage, can clearly also make more than 135whp pretty easily, which is what my NA with BP4W makes. Also have a friend running a BRZ in TTD that makes 172whp avg and is 2600lbs having done nothing fancy and will have no issues slotting right into TT5.

 

Letting them into TT6 means showing up with true "poverty" class cars like a NA Miata or the Saturn that was at champs this past weekend is completely pointless. Obviously I have what seems to be a little bit of a dog in the fight having a TTE Miata that slots right into TT6, but regardless of that my tentative plan is to head to ST5/TT5 regardless, because we have a ton of people moving that direction in Texas Region vs getting discouraged.

5

@cabowabo embrace the intergalactic spacecraft  

On the side note, Saturns are fun little cars that require little maintenance and are easy to drive. 

[cabowabo]

2 minutes ago, Roman V. said:

On the side note, Saturns are fun little cars that require little maintenance and are easy to drive. 

Before signing up for champs and seeing the entry list I never knew anyone ran one, pretty cool to see you getting after it in a Saturn! 

[Roman V.]

Just now, cabowabo said:

Before signing up for champs and seeing the entry list I never knew anyone ran one, pretty cool to see you getting after it in a Saturn! 

We have been running it since 2009 in NASA. Started in HPDE then racing. We even ran 25 hours of Thunderhill in it in 2012. So much fun. 

[mcolangelo2005]

Bringing this thread back up from the dead.

It's been over two years since this thread was started.  Do we have any new data points as to the competitiveness of the NC Miata, BRZ/GT86/FR-S, and RX-8 in TT5? 

I ask as I'm planning on building a street-legal (or at least registered) TT5 car and I'm exploring my options.  Right now, it seems the most competitive cars in this class are Honda S2000s and BMW E46 M3.

Edited February 16, 2021 by mcolangelo2005

[Tansar_Motorsports]

An RX-8 has won the great lakes championship the last couple of years, and was 2nd place at 2019 Mid Ohio nationals.

If built properly, all of the cars you listed are pretty much equivalently competitive.  They are all excellent handling / aero builds, that excel at more technical tracks.

Obviously, the longer wheelbase of the rx-8 will be an advantage in some corners, and a disadvantage in others, compared to the otherwise almost identical NC miata.

 

The BMWs get a small advantage from not taking the A-arm penalty.  But an e46m3 would not fit in TT5.  I assume that was a typo, and you meant e36m3.

 

For fast tracks (like Daytona this year), its gonna be all about max power builds.  So no-aero, no a-arm penalty, FWD cars.  My money is on a modern turbo civic (which was also first place at 2019 mid ohio nationals).

 

Lots of very good options for this class with the current rules.