How does 7hp=220lbs??

Come on Rob, FOCUS. I never said you went there. I said James brought it up as EVIDENCE that the process was bogus. Here is his quote in post 48:

If Rob and his car is getting lapped at NHIS, then something is wrong with how the car is classed. If he's loosing 3 seconds per lap at LRP to Andy, then something's not right. [/b]
Click to expand...

I used my post to show him how USELESS on track data is. I never used the on-track to prove anything - on the contrary, I used it to show how stupid it is to use it.
 
I'm sorry Andy, I'll reread all of this tomorrow out of fairness. I'm pretty drained. I'm signing off. I really enjoyed your company this evening and I appreciate you honoring me with your time. We'll continue this tomorrow. Joe, thanks for all of your input, I always listen very closely to what you've got to say, but I've got to say goodnight for now...


R
 
I'm sorry Andy, I'll reread all of this tomorrow out of fairness. I'm pretty drained. I'm signing off. I really enjoyed your company this evening and I appreciate you honoring me with your time. We'll continue this tomorrow. Joe, thanks for all of your input, I always listen very closely to what you've got to say, but I've got to say goodnight for now...


R [/b]
Click to expand...

Make sure you brush your teeth... :P
 
Andy, if the car were a new classification (which it actually was given the model change) you would have based the weight off of the 133hp number.......There is no simple logic to how you claim that all the other classifcations were based on a standard and then not use the same standard on the miata?

I look at the 240sx 140 x 125% = 175 X 14.5 =2537 + 50 for rear suspension 2587 Old weight was 2530 new weight 2630 where did we get the additional if not on track history?

Z3 138HP x 125%=172.5 = 14.5 = 2501 + 50 IRS 2551+ 50 for good brakes 2601.....

Miata 133hp x 125%= 166.2 * 14.5 =2410 + 50 for IRS 2460 + 10 for good package 2470

Not sure you can justify it any other way than to say the cars did not have enough cage to put all the weight on them that they should have gotten if the process was followed....Sorry my friend but facts is facts
 
Joe, I have explained it 1000 different ways. Like Rob, I am done. He and I will share a beer at a race and talk it through. This interweb stuff ain't cuttin it.
 
Joe, I have explained it 1000 different ways. Like Rob, I am done. He and I will share a beer at a race and talk it through. This interweb stuff ain't cuttin it.
[/b]
Click to expand...


find me something to drive and I will join you but it has to be a non alcohol beer....:) but 1000 times don't changes the facts...;)
 
Mitch Wright was a frontrunner 20+ years ago when he ran the Renault Cup, and ran head-to-head with guys who went on to pro careers and club racing championships. A couple years ago, as series manager for WCTouring, he was getting pressured to give the VW Jettas a weight break because "they were just never going to be competitive."

So, out comes the Nomex and Wright makes the car in question go a chunk faster than its regular driver ever had, in his first session on the track. Denied.

I'm just sayin'...

The problem here is that, whether the lap times are trotted out directly in discussion or not, they are fundamental to the thinking behind ANY argument that ANY car is mis-classed or mis-specified. Just like, if the car in question were running up front, it would be presumed to be correctly spec'd. Both are faulty positions if the greater issues are paramount. And the greater issue here is the longterm health of the IT category, which trumps any individual driver's or car's "right" to be competitive. Club Racing doesn't owe you that, can't guarantee that, and can fark up entire programs by trying to achieve it.

As for, "If 75# is nothing, just give it to me." That's (put bluntly) crapola. What I said was that if the process is run and we get repeatability within 75#, that's pretty damned good - good enough, in fact.

I guess it's just a good mood - getting caught up with life - that's got me back into this conversation but the earlier point that maybe the Production wars (in the meeting room, not on track) would be a better place for anyone who believes that they have a fundamental right to lobby for their own competitiveness, or for weight to be stacked on the competition, based on on-track evidence.

Another way to look at this situation? If in fact the M44 engine gains nothing from an IT build, leave it untouched freeing up a huge chunk of dough to do other things that will likely make the package faster - suspension engineering, engine management, dyno time, driver coaching, tires, and testing.

K
 
Come on Rob, FOCUS. I never said you went there. I said James brought it up as EVIDENCE that the process was bogus. Here is his quote in post 48:
I used my post to show him how USELESS on track data is. I never used the on-track to prove anything - on the contrary, I used it to show how stupid it is to use it.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I still stand by my statement. Even God driving this car on the right track couldn't make it competitive at it's current weight.



Andy, if the car were a new classification (which it actually was given the model change) you would have based the weight off of the 133hp number.......There is no simple logic to how you claim that all the other classifcations were based on a standard and then not use the same standard on the miata?

I look at the 240sx 140 x 125% = 175 X 14.5 =2537 + 50 for rear suspension 2587 Old weight was 2530 new weight 2630 where did we get the additional if not on track history?

Z3 138HP x 125%=172.5 = 14.5 = 2501 + 50 IRS 2551+ 50 for good brakes 2601.....

Miata 133hp x 125%= 166.2 * 14.5 =2410 + 50 for IRS 2460 + 10 for good package 2470

Not sure you can justify it any other way than to say the cars did not have enough cage to put all the weight on them that they should have gotten if the process was followed....Sorry my friend but facts is facts
[/b]
Click to expand...

Joe,

Those numbers should be reversed. Andy has clearly shown that his car went from 128hp at the crank to 171 at the crank for a gain of over 33%. If his car were to maintain the p/w ratio you'd have to start with 2480+ 50lbs+10lbs for a total of 2540lbs.

The Z3 on the other hand has demonstrated a crank hp of 165hp then to maintain the p/w ratio you have to start with 2392lbs + 100lbs = 2500lbs.

So you see the Miata needs to gain 150lbs and the Z3 needs to loose 100lbs. and this isn't even based on the lack of torque gain. If we took that into account we'd see that the Z3 could probably stand to loose at least another 50lbs.



....Another way to look at this situation? If in fact the M44 engine gains nothing from an IT build, leave it untouched freeing up a huge chunk of dough to do other things that will likely make the package faster - suspension engineering, engine management, dyno time, driver coaching, tires, and testing.

K
[/b]
Click to expand...

Sure Kirk,

What do you suggest for suspention engineering? Moton Club Sports? Fabricated Arms? Reengineered goemetry? Rob's already got the coil-overs, sway bars, and the bushings? These cars don't like a lot of spring, unlike the sedans. The suspension setup is well know to us who race them and there's not a lot we can do with it. The simple fact is the car's over weight because it just doesn't respond to the IT build.

James
 
James,

When you work with an imperfect system that limits the granularity of the microscope, you will end up with cars that make slightly more and cars that make slightly less. IT is NOT the class that will ever correct for that, at least not without a strong NO vote from me.

I also stand by my statement that Rob's power levels are not 100% developed without PFI. Maybe Kessler can convince me over a hamburger at Lime Rock on the 4th of July. AND PLEASE REMEMBER - his numbers are from a DynaPak. Add 10% to get DynoJet numbers, easy.

The process has been shown and the cars are what they are. Understanding the limitations of IT and the process is key to being happy in the car we all chose. Would I like to have Greg's power? You bet. Would he like to have my handling? Bet he would. Do the cars provide good racing action against one another - you bet. The Z3 has more power than my Miata but not as much handling - and less power then the NX but more handling. A decent compromise car I would think.

As far as your speculation on competitiveness, that's all it is. Speculation. We all speculate when we think about building cars.
 
Andy,

Rob and I've shown, pretty conclusively, that not only does the Z3 not have the handeling on the Miata, it doesn't have the power either. At a minimum they should be the same weight, and the Z3 should probably even be lighter.

James
 
Andy,

Rob and I've shown, pretty conclusively, that not only does the Z3 not have the handeling on the Miata, it doesn't have the power either. At a minimum they should be the same weight, and the Z3 should probably even be lighter.

James
[/b]
Click to expand...


James, How many laps do you have in an ITA Z3? I don't believe you have proved anything conclusive. Fact is with the math the car belongs at the weight it is and if the miata was run through the same process it woul get weight. Thats the argument and nothing more. Once a fully developed Z3 shows up and gets spanked I will listen but IT still makes no promise of the competitive ability of any car so your constant whining is a waste of time at this point. I provided math reverse engineered from what ANDY posted and the deal is the Miata got special treatment. I don't car that a car may make a little more than the target number from time to time as long as the process is correctly applied to the base unit. IN the case of the Z3 it has been, In the case of the Miata it has not been. Andy still has not responded to the question of what other adders were put ont the 240sx to put 100 extra pounds on it? But even with the 100 extra pounds on the 240sx I am ok with it.
 
Andy,

Rob and I've shown, pretty conclusively, that not only does the Z3 not have the handeling on the Miata, it doesn't have the power either. At a minimum they should be the same weight, and the Z3 should probably even be lighter.

James
[/b]
Click to expand...

No, he has not. He is working feverishly to develop the car but as far as I know has yet to land on anything close to a 'final' set-up. He can comment on this year but it has been a real tester for his patience.
 
Joe,

I'm talking about a variance of 16% in the final output of a IT built motors. Andy's has shown that his gain was 33% thats 8% above your estimate and 5hp more than you predicted.

Rob's on the other hand only gained 17% that's 8% less than estimated and 7hp under predicted. Rob's motor is fully built to the maximum of IT rules. So in the end the numbers tell ME that were talking of the relative weight differential between these two cars is 12hp or 12x14.5 = 175 lbs to start with before the adders, before we even take the torque gains or lack there of into account. These numbers are much larger than what you'd expect from the granularity of the classification "formula." If you want to trot out the old "Doesn't garentee competitiveness" fine, then let's just take another 100lbs off the Miata and declare it the ITA overdog, and be done with it.

James
 
Rob's on the other hand only gained 17% that's 8% less than estimated and 7hp under predicted. Rob's motor is fully built to the maximum of IT rules. So in the end the numbers tell ME that were talking of the relative weight differential between these two cars is 12hp or 12x14.5 = 175 lbs to start with before the adders, before we even take the torque gains or lack there of into account. These numbers are much larger than what you'd expect from the granularity of the classification "formula." If you want to trot out the old "Doesn't garentee competitiveness" fine, then let's just take another 100lbs off the Miata and declare it the ITA overdog, and be done with it.

James
[/b]
Click to expand...

James,

Without Rob hitting a DynoJet, you can NOT throw around these numbers (which is why we all need to hit the same dyno the same day which I am ALL for). You continue to ignore that his numbers are from a DynaPak which has been said to read 10-13% LOWER than a Jet. Run your numbers again at 149whp. That is about 179 crank - OVER the predicted amount of 175....hmmmm. Also, why you even say that his power program is built to the maximum without a programmable computer is just beyond me. Until you see what one can do, you can't discount their potential. The Miata does not respond 'typically' to bolt ons, overbores, port matching and B&B. It DOES respond well to correcting a horrible A/F ratio (again supporting the 5hp gain from 95 to 96 was ECU related). Rob and Matt may be able to prove to us that the 1.9 doesn't need any A/F help but it would be a rarity.

No offense to Rob here. He is busting his nuts to get this thing going. Without any type of aftermarket support or knowledge base to run with. I would never had started with a platform like that (or the SE-R or NX2000 because I don't have the patience) I will talk with Matt in a couple weeks and get his thoughts.

Miata's must be winning all over the country because apperantly you can just jump in one and hit the cruise control. HA! Borrow one or build one, please.
 
James you are missing the point that i am making. If a 25% gain is what is expected and all piston engine 4 vlave cars are run through that process then the no promise of comptetive applys even if its a nissan product I am fine with that. But the formula has to be run from the highest claimed number available. Fact is the later car should have been used and the early car could have had weight based on the higher based number. That would be the proper approach. I am done talking about the BMW because as I have said I don't think anyone has done the deal 100% on this car yet. Also having been on the Dynojet many times and comparing it to a superflow I will take the super flow numbers anyday. The Dynapac is a great unit but you have to take the 3rd pass and then let it cool for a short period of time to stay consistant in the readings. 1st pass numbers on the dynapac are always low.

Rather than complaining that the Z3 is an underdog i would be way more concerned that current and future cars are being run correctly through the process.
Nobody has answered why the 240sx is 100 lbs heavier than its process weight. I can guess and I would be OK with my guess as long as it is stated.
 
Wow...a guy actually goes to work, and misses 4 pages of...

A couple points.

one- I'm really sorry, but you can't trot out one guys lap times and his power results and call the deal done. No offense to Rob, but he's only one guy. And Kessler? Ditto. One of his motors won the ARRC? Umm, so what? I don't know the NX2000 motor history by serial number, but I'm willing to bet that that motor wasn't his first crack at a NX2000 motor, and we all know I'm right. Do we all think we should base this sort of discussion on ONE driver, ONE car, and ONE motor builder??

(Especially when we consider that the development isn't complete! In talks with Rob, (and correct me please Rob, if I am mistating) he told me of his ECU woes, and how that particular ECu uses a number of variables to dial back the timing...and that he can't acheive correct spark timing. Seems to me there might be some ponies there....)

But, even if he DID have a different ECu, I'd stll be leery. One data sample is just that. And...the process is not a competition adjustment system.

Two- And as for trotting out lap times, like Rob being 3 seconds a lap slower here, or getting lapped there, well, thats not even pertinent, as I think those numbers are invalid to begin with, (IIRC, The fastest ITA cars at LRP recently ran 1:02s and Rob was in the 1:04s. and lets give poor Rob a break a well, he's not got a million miles of testing and racing under his, or the cars belt!) ....and again, that is just a single data sample without the required backgound to understand it..
 
...What do you suggest for suspention engineering? Moton Club Sports? Fabricated Arms? Reengineered goemetry? ...[/b]
Click to expand...
With respect, this is a window into the root of the problem in my opinion. "Engineering" is NOT buying parts. I'm going to suggest that the difference between being out there and being up front isn't writing checks and bolting on pieces.

Suspension engineering means instrumenting, testing, tweaking, gathering and analyzing data, making changes, and documenting the process to increase one's knowledge base.

Andy's alluded to this but the same thing goes for engines. I've got all of the right bits in my Conover Golf engine but I haven't followed through with the budget expenditures to optimize the AFR, with the requisite dyno time to support development. We have a nice safe tune on the chip. I am NOT going to blame the car for my being off the pace at sprint races.

The same goes for the driver. I'm not so impressed frankly with God's racing record. Do you REALLY think that a Randy Pobst quality shoe wouldn't make the car faster...?

This is where the real money gets spent and the real time gets found.

K
 
With respect, this is a window into the root of the problem in my opinion. "Engineering" is NOT buying parts. I'm going to suggest that the difference between being out there and being up front isn't writing checks and bolting on pieces.

Suspension engineering means instrumenting, testing, tweaking, gathering and analyzing data, making changes, and documenting the process to increase one's knowledge base.

Andy's alluded to this but the same thing goes for engines. I've got all of the right bits in my Conover Golf engine but I haven't followed through with the budget expenditures to optimize the AFR, with the requisite dyno time to support development. We have a nice safe tune on the chip. I am NOT going to blame the car for my being off the pace at sprint races.

The same goes for the driver. I'm not so impressed frankly with God's racing record. Do you REALLY think that a Randy Pobst quality shoe wouldn't make the car faster...?

This is where the real money gets spent and the real time gets found.

K [/b]
Click to expand...

Bingo.jpg
 
Go back and dig up Keith Thomas (Chet Whittel's crew chief on the ARRC winning ITS BMW and 240z) posts on finding horsepower in handling. He seemed to think it was more critical initially than a maxed out engine program (by the way, the finished 2nd at the ARRC in ITS with 170 crank hp, or about what Rob's Z is making) and my experience has been the same. Getting the power DOWN is as important as getting the power.

A couple years back I was in "my car sucks and is misclassed" mode and could dream up all kinds of reasons why that was the case. A lot of engine development, suspension work and TEST TEST TEST has gotten me and the car competitive. And STILL a long way to go.

Until you fully understand the testing and development that goes into winning IT programs in a competitive division, it's really difficult to have a conversation that focuses solely on the factors that you are bringing up.

Based on the raw numbers I see for the Z3, the car looks like it has a chance, but may not be "the" car to have in ITA. That doesn't mean it can't win if prepped and driven to the max. But I suspect that even if you got your weight break you wouldn't see the gains you expect.

My car is also viewed as, hell laughed at by some, a car that doesn't really have a chance in S. I'm getting to where I'm starting to prove people wrong. If I may make a suggestion, focus on the cars strengths and finding ways to maximize them. It seems you have quite a bit more torque than the Miatas and CRXs (and maybe the Integras?), plus what appear to be great brakes. Work on maximizing those advantages.
 
Alright, so YOU think these cars are properly classed. Then why doesn't anyone run one?? If they were truly competitve and right there you'd see just as many of the four cylinder BMW's as you'd see of any of the other cars. Don't tell me about suspension tweeking, the knowledge base is there from the six-cylinder cars that are raced all the time, the parts are there and the knowledge is there too, they're just not that different. The fact is that the four-cylinder BMW's have always been over weight and they continue to be over weight to this day. Plus the fact that now the sedans can't even make minimum weight as it is. Engine size wise it's only got 55cc on the 2380lb(sorry should be 2540lbs) Miata :D There just shouldn't be this 220lb difference, if anything the Z3 should be lighter than the Miata.

James
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top