SCCAForums.com

Breezed through it this morning and almost got giddy with reading tires less than 275 can be 200 pounds lighter.  I will do the math later when I can spend more time.

 

OK 2.0L displacement,  Mid engine, 275/35-15 tires.  comes out to 1850 pounds ?????

---

Want to go faster, please send money.

Street Mod gets to weigh less than D-Prepared! Geeez...

---

Aut tace aut loquere meliora silentio.

I looked at DP when finding a place to run the 914 (aka. rolling tin can).   2200 + pounds was 200 lbs more than the car weighed with a factory window sticker.

Hence going to XP 2 years ago.

I think the 275 tire width is pure genious.

---

Want to go faster, please send money.

I like the concept but am concerned about the execution given that there seems to be no reliable corelation between the nominal width and the actual width of any given tire. 

---

Once you go Mac, you never go back!

Not an issue as far as I am concerned. Hoosier makes a 275/35-15.  molded right on the sidewall.  might be a bit shallow of me but  WOOT!!!!!!!

---

Want to go faster, please send money.

make to write your letters too let the SEB know that you are OFFICIALLY for the new proposal.

---

Vic Sias
650-704-0771

Since the 275 is already out, why not 275 OR under ? Allows the fast CSP cars to move up for less.

 

siastuning:

make to write your letters too let the SEB know that you are OFFICIALLY for the new proposal.

 

I'll have to do that.  Thanks Vic.

---

Want to go faster, please send money.

What do you mean Chris?  The proposal is....

Add to 16.2: “Cars running tires with a rated width of 275 or less on all four wheels may compete at a minimum

weight 200 pounds less than their calculated weight per Appendix A. “

So any car with 275 or smaller tires can take the weight break.  If I did my math right, that would mean Schenker could turbo his car and still only have to weigh 2040lbs.   Personally, I think the weight break is on the generous side, but I'm in the minority there.  In any event, the hope is that this will ease some perception issues and drive up participation in the class.  Don't forget to write your letters!

-Andy M. 

 

 

I am as much "for" this as I was opposed to what happened a few years ago.

Looking up where and how to send my letter.

 

Not that I have a fighting chance against the RX-7's but Locally I am pretty sure I can crush em.

---

Want to go faster, please send money.

boxboy:

What do you mean Chris?  The proposal is....

Add to 16.2: “Cars running tires with a rated width of 275 or less on all four wheels may compete at a minimum

weight 200 pounds less than their calculated weight per Appendix A. “

So any car with 275 or smaller tires can take the weight break.  If I did my math right, that would mean Schenker could turbo his car and still only have to weigh 2040lbs.   Personally, I think the weight break is on the generous side, but I'm in the minority there.  In any event, the hope is that this will ease some perception issues and drive up participation in the class.  Don't forget to write your letters!

-Andy M. 

 

 

I read the post from joe_914 at the top of the subject and it said smaller than 275. I didn't read the proposal .

Lighten up dude.! 

CHRISFP78:

I read the post from joe_914 at the top of the subject and it said smaller than 275. I didn't read the proposal .

Lighten up dude.! 

Chris, 

All he said was "What do you mean.....", and you want him to lighten up?

Typical P-car driver

 Personally, I am just happy the ruling SM2 RX7 powers have allowed a small concession for a change.
 

 

---

Gary T

BSPC5:

 Personally, I am just happy the ruling SM2 RX7 powers have allowed a small concession for a change.

Time to sell that beater you've been driving and prep a Miata, eh Gary?

---

Randy Noll

BSPC5:

CHRISFP78:

I read the post from joe_914 at the top of the subject and it said smaller than 275. I didn't read the proposal .

Lighten up dude.! 

Chris, 

All he said was "What do you mean.....", and you want him to lighten up?

Typical P-car driver

 Personally, I am just happy the ruling SM2 RX7 powers have allowed a small concession for a change.
 

 

I can say that to a Maazda driver. Plus he's a closet P-car owner. He has a Boxster in the Geerage.

It's in the P-car hand book right after the Im right everyone else is wrong rule. 

Hmmm, that would put my minimum weight down around 2050 lbs, I need to hit up the scales again and see where I can take some more weight out. While I'm not sure this is the best solution, but this is good enough for now and it is better than nothing. Thanks to the board for reviewing and presenting the proposal, I hope this is enough to pull some more Miatas and Civics into the game. I'll send off a letter

---

Logan Murray
SM2 NA Miata

BSPC5:

 Personally, I am just happy the ruling SM2 RX7 powers have allowed a small concession for a change.
 

 

And did anyone not see the RX7 per rotor adder change that will add 180lbs to the 3-rotor RX7.  Can you believe a former "ruling SM2 RX7 powers" actually proposed this rule?

This one probably won't pass as there are bound to be a ton of letters against this silly idea.

 

---

Erik Strelnieks
93 3-ROTOR RX7
01 Honda S2000
05 SLK 350 AMG
08 BMW 135i

I hope it doesn't get shot down...

Aren't you a few hundred pounds over your minimum weight already? And I doubt many are going to think you will be dethroned by a miata with this rule change alone.

---

Logan Murray
SM2 NA Miata

ErikZ06:

BSPC5:

 Personally, I am just happy the ruling SM2 RX7 powers have allowed a small concession for a change.
 

 

And did anyone not see the RX7 per rotor adder change that will add 180lbs to the 3-rotor RX7.  Can you believe a former "ruling SM2 RX7 powers" actually proposed this rule?

This one probably won't pass as there are bound to be a ton of letters against this silly idea.

 

 

iirc isn't the old rule for wankel displacement 0.8L + advertised displacement.  That's a neat trick considering advertised displacement is half of what it actually is.  How's that 3.9L turbo treating you? :)

 

would it be insane to just have flat minimum weights?

SM:

fwd: 2000lbs

rwd: 2800lbs

awd: 3200lbs

SM2

fwd: 1600lbs

rwd 2150lbs

awd: 2750lbs

(I pulled these numbers out of thin air so don't get mad if you disagree with what they should exactly be).  Theoretically any well prepped SM car should be able to smoke the tires through 70mph, why do we care how big of a motor it takes to spin the tires?

---

Jim Reyenga
-Certified National Hack and Car-Whore Extra-ordinare

A 3-rotor turbo would be 2.0  + 1.4 (FI) + 2.7 (.9 per rotor) = 6.1 effective displacement and 2820lbs.   Erik would have to add about 100lbs. 

-Andy M.

boxboy:

A 3-rotor turbo would be 2.0  + 1.4 (FI) + 2.7 (.9 per rotor) = 6.1 effective displacement and 2820lbs.   Erik would have to add about 100lbs. 

-Andy M.

Sorry Erik, I misunderstood that you were referring to the proposed Per Rotor allocation, thanks for posting that Andy. I'm a little indifferent to that proposal, I would definitely like to see AWD have a minimum of 2800-2900 lbs, but what AWD cars would classify for SM2? They'll need to do something about the EVOs, as those become more developed they'll be unstoppable.

---

Logan Murray
SM2 NA Miata