Adventures in PTE/TTE - Page 33 - Miata Turbo Forum -Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Race Prep Miata race-only chat. 949 Racing - Rim & tires

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-29-2016, 08:34 PM   #641
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 1,900
Total Cats: 14
Default

I bitched about this rule on the PTE FB a bit, but this seems like a slap in the face.... again... to NAs/NBs in PT/TT. Ensuring taller or larger drivers can't race in a competitive NA/NB is one way of reducing the entry count of miatas.

Probably like some others, I had no idea this rule existed until tonight. Thankfully it doesn't effect me, I'm 5 11" and don't need to modify the floor pan.

EErock, I can't completely tell in your picture, but did you cut the rear humps where the rear of the seat mounts? If so, is that included as modifying the floor pan? Not trying to make you paranoid, because a mod like yours should by all means be legal and I don't think cutting 1/2lb of metal and drilling new holes has hardly any performance gain. Even considering your *** is adding a better CG.
flier129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2016, 10:13 PM   #642
Newb
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Mt. Prospect, IL
Posts: 16
Total Cats: 0
Default

How is this directed at Miatas? ALL other PT/TT can not lower the floor pan at all. This new bulletin is allowing the floor pan to be lowered almost two inches on a Miata only. It is actually discriminating against any other small car that is not allowed to do it at all.

As it has already been said, this has been in the PT rules for years.
16) The transmission tunnel may be modified for the purpose of installing a competition driver
seat. The floor pan must remain in its original position.

Removing the humps on the floor is not lowering the floor pan or changing it's original position, so it does not apply to that.
mweber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2016, 11:47 AM   #643
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 369
Total Cats: 13
Default

A lot of this comes down to terrible rule writing by NASA. There are a lot of words in the rule book to allow SM/PTE crossover. Section 5.2.1 exists, why not use it for SMs? SMs run in PTE, end of story. If SCCA SMs are too fast, use Appendix B to slow them down with weight/tires.

Also, why not make a Miata non-performance effecting specific allowance? There is a non-points allowance for strut tower reinforcement (Does this apply to anything other than E36s?), non-OEM hardtops (Originally for S2000s since their OEM hardtops make ours look cheap), E46s have a big section for subframe reinforcement. I don't see the downside from NASA's perspective to making it easier for people to race one of the most common chassis in their racing series. Especially in a few years when Miatas with modified floorpans become available as used race cars.

Last edited by FatKao; 01-31-2016 at 12:02 PM.
FatKao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2016, 07:12 AM   #644
Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mount Prospect, IL
Posts: 673
Total Cats: 3
Default

Since many of you probably don't look at the NASA Forums, here is a cut n paste of what GregG had said yesterday about the seat pan:

"We added the designation to TTB-TTF, as it was assumed that these modifications at the higher level classes would kick in the Non-Production Vehicle Mod Factor since there was no assessment listed for those classes. But, this should clear that up for you. We have a fair amount of crossover and Supersize competitors from SM to TT and PT, and although we (TT/PT officials) don't agree that this new SM rule was necessary or that it is "only for seat position", we don't want to automatically exclude these vehicles from PT and lower TT classes because the driver chose to make what is now a legal SM modification.

In regard to who decided on the amount of weight assessed in this Technical Bulletin, it was the NASA National Chairman with agreement by the NASA National TT/PT/ST Director, and the NASA National Competition Director. It was also decided not to open this modification up to all vehicles, and that the 100 lbs. was enough for the large majority of competitors to agree that this modification would not be worth adding another 100 lbs. to their non-Miata vehicle."

and then he went on to say this:

"

Look guys, there is SM and there is PT/TT. They have different rules. If you want the top podium car in SM, then you better do every possible modification that is allowed--which may include dropping the seat even if you are 5'3" tall. If you want a top podium PT or TT car, then you better build to those rules, and do everything that you can that is allowed, and don't make modifications that cost points or extra weight that are not worth those assessments for your vehicle."
chris101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2016, 03:49 PM   #645
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 369
Total Cats: 13
Default

NASA-MA is charging $50 for a reserved number now. Someone please fire up some SPM action out here.
FatKao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2016, 03:59 PM   #646
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 615
Total Cats: 76
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FatKao View Post
NASA-MA is charging $50 for a reserved number now. Someone please fire up some SPM action out here.
Apparently NASA SE does this as well? What a ripoff. Hoping bullshit fees like this don't spread to the west coast.
Arca_ex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2016, 06:47 PM   #647
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 1,900
Total Cats: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arca_ex View Post
Apparently NASA SE does this as well? What a ripoff. Hoping bullshit fees like this don't spread to the west coast.
I wasn't told about this and no mention of it from the first event down at Roebling. SE is pretty relaxed too.

Edit: Oh, found out its been this way for many years *shrug*

Last edited by flier129; 02-03-2016 at 07:23 PM.
flier129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 12:11 PM   #648
Newb
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 7
Total Cats: 0
Default

Trying to figure out a simple but fast E build... Let me know if I'm on the right track. Leaning toward an NB1, but NA8 is 2nd choice.

ENGINE:
+7 points build (intake, catback, ecu) or PTE* reclass

I was thinking I'd probably start with a PTE* reclass with the stock engine to run less than "base" weight. I'm guessing with enough $$ into a blueprinted block the points build would probably work out to a better P:W ratio. Can you run E85 on an NB1 with stock fuel pump, pressure, & injectors? (to avoid +2 fuel system).

You could probably make 140hp with the points build, right? So that would net 2400lb/140hp=17.14lb/hp instead of the E* reclasses that seem to come in around 17.5.


The next big question is tires. I'd like to do Maxxis, Hoosier, or possibly Toyo since you can win stuff...

205 R7 - this should be the fastest "low" point tire, right? +10 -7 = +3

Which leaves 9 points for everything else, although 10 would be ideal since BGK & LSD are +10. So without sway bars it would be +8 leaving 1 point for something...

205 SM7 would leave enough points to do the sway bars as well, but it sounds like the SM7 is more than 1 point slower than the R7 so probably not the best choice.

205 Maxxis RC1 is -1 which leaves 13 points. 10 for BGK & LSD, with 3 left for weight reduction, brakes, aero, header, etc.

205 Toyo RR is 0


The 205 R7 with stock sways will probably be best, right? How much slower do you think the 205 maxxis will be with upgraded sways and a little less weight (compared to R7)?
HAZE33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 12:25 PM   #649
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 1,900
Total Cats: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HAZE33 View Post
Trying to figure out a simple but fast E build... Let me know if I'm on the right track. Leaning toward an NB1, but NA8 is 2nd choice.

ENGINE:
+7 points build (intake, catback, ecu) or PTE* reclass

I was thinking I'd probably start with a PTE* reclass with the stock engine to run less than "base" weight. I'm guessing with enough $$ into a blueprinted block the points build would probably work out to a better P:W ratio. Can you run E85 on an NB1 with stock fuel pump, pressure, & injectors? (to avoid +2 fuel system).

You could probably make 140hp with the points build, right? So that would net 2400lb/140hp=17.14lb/hp instead of the E* reclasses that seem to come in around 17.5.


The next big question is tires. I'd like to do Maxxis, Hoosier, or possibly Toyo since you can win stuff...

205 R7 - this should be the fastest "low" point tire, right? +10 -7 = +3

Which leaves 9 points for everything else, although 10 would be ideal since BGK & LSD are +10. So without sway bars it would be +8 leaving 1 point for something...

205 SM7 would leave enough points to do the sway bars as well, but it sounds like the SM7 is more than 1 point slower than the R7 so probably not the best choice.

205 Maxxis RC1 is -1 which leaves 13 points. 10 for BGK & LSD, with 3 left for weight reduction, brakes, aero, header, etc.

205 Toyo RR is 0


The 205 R7 with stock sways will probably be best, right? How much slower do you think the 205 maxxis will be with upgraded sways and a little less weight (compared to R7)?
If you read back several pages you'll see multiple nationally competitive drivers say..... NB1 points car, 205 R7s, stock brakes, stock sways, 0 points engine build, ECU, stock sways, OSG LSD, shocks/springs. Kohler was selling this exact setup(the national champ car) a few weeks back, it's likely sold now though.


In other news...... AST is offering contingency for TT regional events this year. My day is made!!! https://nasa-assets.s3.amazonaws.com...gency_2016.pdf
flier129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 12:29 PM   #650
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 615
Total Cats: 76
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flier129 View Post
In other news...... AST is offering contingency for TT regional events this year. My day is made!!! https://nasa-assets.s3.amazonaws.com...gency_2016.pdf
To be eligible you have to be already using AST shocks so pretty much only good for sending in your shocks for rebuilds... meh...
Arca_ex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 12:41 PM   #651
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 1,900
Total Cats: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arca_ex View Post
To be eligible you have to be already using AST shocks so pretty much only good for sending in your shocks for rebuilds... meh...
Rebuilds or upgrades, wouldn't mind going to DAs Works great for me because I could use the credit to get some ASTs for my Z
flier129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 12:51 PM   #652
Newb
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 7
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flier129 View Post
If you read back several pages you'll see multiple nationally competitive drivers say..... NB1 points car, 205 R7s, stock brakes, stock sways, 0 points engine build, ECU, stock sways, OSG LSD, shocks/springs. Kohler was selling this exact setup(the national champ car) a few weeks back, it's likely sold now though.


In other news...... AST is offering contingency for TT regional events this year. My day is made!!! https://nasa-assets.s3.amazonaws.com...gency_2016.pdf
Thanks for the info, I'll look for the recipe that was posted earlier.

0 points engine build? Or is that a typo? You'd need at least intake to take advantage of ECU (MAF delete) right?

205 R7 +3
ECU +3
LSD +3
Coils +5

That leaves 5 points for engine (intake & catback = 4)
HAZE33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 01:18 PM   #653
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 250
Total Cats: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HAZE33 View Post
Thanks for the info, I'll look for the recipe that was posted earlier.

0 points engine build? Or is that a typo? You'd need at least intake to take advantage of ECU (MAF delete) right?

205 R7 +3
ECU +3
LSD +3
Coils +5

That leaves 5 points for engine (intake & catback = 4)
Refers to long block build. 0 points on everything up to the ports, starting from inside the motor.
dasting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 01:24 PM   #654
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 1,900
Total Cats: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HAZE33 View Post
Thanks for the info, I'll look for the recipe that was posted earlier.

0 points engine build? Or is that a typo? You'd need at least intake to take advantage of ECU (MAF delete) right?

205 R7 +3
ECU +3
LSD +3
Coils +5

That leaves 5 points for engine (intake & catback = 4)

Here ya go:

Quote:
Originally Posted by emilio700 View Post
This was originally posted Nov 13, 2013 just after 2013 nationals in our thread : "Team 949 Racing @ NASA Nationals Sept 5-8, 2013". I took it back down after some of the team still using the formula asked me to to ah, shut up . Since we have long since left NASA PT and I still have many friends and customers in PT, I thought it was time to share the info. Not really secret sauce now as most creative racers have since figured out how we did it.

Edited Jan 2, 2015:


The rules will likely change as a result of Sonny's annihilating the D lap records and our E car beating all the other D's.. but I'll let everyone know what we did and why. In short, over the last 10 years we have learned how to make more power with fewer mods. These configurations are the culmination of that team knowledge.

For D & E, we figured out the NB has an advantage on the NA because it's OEM fuel system has enough capacity to run E85 with only a reflash or ECU. Zero mods otherwise. This means a 5% bump without any points. The NA doesn't quite have enough injector/pump/pressure for D, but it is close for E.

The premise is that dyno classed cars always get at least a 1lb penalty in lbs/hp. We were always getting beat at the start by worse handling cars with better lbs/hp because they were points classed. So we started looking at what other pts mods we could delete to free up enough points to hit the power cap and still run the best tire at the time, 205/50/15 SM6 on 15x9's.

delete our 7pts aero
delete swaybars/end links 2pts

To get the cars to balance with stock 22/11mm say bars we ran 1000# front springs and either 400 or 450# rears, same basic alignment as our website page. Trickier to drive at the limit and a bit harder on the tires but fast. The 800/500 with 1.125"/14mm bar set up in our BGK is better all around but we had to compromise to fit the rules. If you try this, make sure you have brand new OEM end links. Old NB links like to come apart. Be patient when setting up as the optimum tune is a narrower window.

The +0 point long block blueprinted BP6D engines ended up likes this
83.5mm 320g Wiseco, trimmed to get to 10.4:1
Chinese 540g forged rods, Manley in this case
Supertech double valve springs
Supertech 1208 IN and 1204 EX stock size SS valves

E
+3 MS3 pro
+2 exhaust (Borla XR-1)
+1 cat delete
+1 intake
+1 USDM NB1 intake manifold (on NB2 engine so itís not free because it's not BTM on that engine assembly)
__
8 pts

+10 205 SM6
-7 235-205mm
+3 Xida
+2 springs
+3 custom tuned OS Giken with 4.875 R&P
___
19 pts
Made about 152whp detuned to 144whp for nationals on E85. 2400#
16.55 lbs/hp. Very broad powerband, never below about 137whp at any RPM.
Our PTE configs from the previous year were between 17.4 to 18.1 lbs hp dyno classed

D. Base classed E so 39 pts available, base tire 235mm
+3 MS3pro ECU
+2 Racing Beat 56008 header
+2 header back Racing Beat midpipe and exhaust
+1 cat delete
+1 Edelbrock Performer-X manifold grafted onto CNC flange
+2 Skunk2 Alpha TB from Integra
+2 DIY intake and AEM filter
_____
13 pts

Adjusted lbs/hp allowed us 167whp but we only made 162whp
For the TT and PT records, Sonny added some weight and used the points for A6's. We also brought SM6's and made our last minute decision based on the weather.


There you have it. With the rules changes for 2014, the NB1 set up like this becomes the best NA/NB combination. Slightly less torque than NB2 but pretty much just as fast. At Miller in 2013, our best PTE car was capable of running almost 4s under the SM record. Combination of real shocks (and perfect balance), another 16whp and that fabulous 4.875g OS Giken mainly.
A few changes for a NB1 E build in 2016 would be:
no points for intake manifold, -1.
R7s instead of SM7s, +1

The exhaust/intake points needs to be moved around.... Seems like two common options:
+5 for full exhaust, but stock intake.
or
+1 intake, +1 intake manifold, +3 for cat modification & cat-back exhaust, but stock header.
flier129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 01:32 PM   #655
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
emilio700's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,535
Total Cats: 838
Default

Just an FYI, the OEM downpipe is considered part of the exhaust, not the header. So if you take exhaust points, you can include a nice mandrel bent 2.5" DP. If building a full custom exhaust then you can ignore the OEM flange locations and just build your midpipe directly to the header with a slip fit at the rear subframe. We left NASA before we could do A/B dynos with the custom DP but I would be surprised if it wasn't worth a few whp.
emilio700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 01:49 PM   #656
Newb
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 7
Total Cats: 0
Default

Thanks for spoon-feeding. You guys are too sweet! I think I'm starting to get it now.

PTE NB1 Points classing

3 - 205 R7
5 - Coilovers
3- Catback exhaust
3 - ECU
1- Intake
3 - LSD
0 - blueprinted engine, E85 on stock fuel system (limit of 145hp for 16.5:1)

18 points total

What to use that last point on? Rear bumper delete? Vortex generator? Weight reduction?

Is there any scenario where it would be faster to trade the LSD for sway bars?
HAZE33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 01:53 PM   #657
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
emilio700's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,535
Total Cats: 838
Default

I'd use the one point for bumpsteer correction.
emilio700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 02:05 PM   #658
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 13,371
Total Cats: 815
Default

Bumpsteer is +2
Savington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 02:07 PM   #659
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 615
Total Cats: 76
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by emilio700 View Post
I'd use the one point for bumpsteer correction.
Tie rods and steering rack shims are +2. Is there another modification that I'm overlooking that fixes bump steer?

I've been wondering what to put my last point towards as well.
Arca_ex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 02:08 PM   #660
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
emilio700's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,535
Total Cats: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Bumpsteer is +2
Bummer. We usually raise the rack about .250~.375" if we can.

I should shut up. My PT is rusty
emilio700 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
elesjuan's mediocre 95 Miata adventure (google fiber edition) elesjuan Build Threads 8 02-16-2016 09:36 PM
Noob Supercharger Build Blog zazzy Supercharger Discussion 7 10-01-2015 02:09 PM
Annoying little leaks AlwaysBroken Engine Performance 5 09-06-2015 01:53 AM
Who is into adventure games? Reverant Insert BS here 15 10-27-2010 08:58 AM


Tags
nasa, pte, tte

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:13 AM.