Roof or no roof...weight v Aero. - Page 2 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Race Prep Miata race-only chat.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-12-2016, 12:47 PM   #21
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,862
Total Cats: 484
Default

They look similar... but the top one is 25 lbs and the bottom one is 4 lbs. I later added poly window and some gaskets, I believe it's still under 10 lbs. Dry carbon so thin it would flex at speed, had to add some reinforcing ribs to the underside so it held shape at speed.



As it was before the reinforcements, it was fine up to 100mph. I think the 4 lbs was worth it in autox in that form:



On the track, even 40 lbs for a full top is unquestionably worth the weight.
Attached Thumbnails
Roof or no roof...weight v Aero.-img_1752_zps3a5263b9.jpg  
ThePass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 03:22 AM   #22
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chattanooga, Tn
Posts: 1,038
Total Cats: 157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
Only a couple do. It's not worth the weight, like cool though. WE don't go fast enough for drag to matter and if you can't drastically over power your front aero with your rear then your wing sucks

The only 2 SSM Miatas in the trophies at Nationals were the only 2 SSM Miatas running hardtops.

Jusy saying. Pretty positive it's worth it.
TNTUBA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 05:13 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hollywood, FL
Posts: 523
Total Cats: 18
Default

You guys are allowed to run aftermarket hardtops? Pretty positive you're not.

Edit: 2015 16.1N says you can. Never read that far. Was thinking 16.1I which says hatch with glass can't be replaced plus SP rules that carry over but 16.1N supersedes either way.

Last edited by hector; 02-13-2016 at 06:58 PM.
hector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 02:38 PM   #24
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,091
Total Cats: 90
Default

Yeah, but a non-OE top doesnt count as a roll bar so if you are also running a roll bar with a non-OE top so that you can have a harness legally it makes more sense to just run the OE top and no roll bar.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 03:25 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hollywood, FL
Posts: 523
Total Cats: 18
Default

The way I see it is the weight that high could be bad/negligible when you are on a slalom/quick transition intensive course. In a long sweeper type course it would be worth the weight of even a factory type top.
hector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 07:06 PM   #26
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chattanooga, Tn
Posts: 1,038
Total Cats: 157
Default

Yea. Guess Bob and I just did it wrong #shrug
TNTUBA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 07:27 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hollywood, FL
Posts: 523
Total Cats: 18
Default

I was agreeing with you. A lightweight top should always be better than no top even at autox speeds. But 42 lbs all above the drivers shoulders in a constant switchback type course may not be, IMO. It would still represent an aerodynamic improvement of course but I would argue that much weight up high would counter the effect on handling that the roof provides. On a sweeper intensive course, or road course, not the same effect.

Plus I *think* there may have been other factors contributing to your cars performance other than just the roof.
hector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2016, 01:01 AM   #28
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,476
Total Cats: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hector View Post
I was agreeing with you. A lightweight top should always be better than no top even at autox speeds. But 42 lbs all above the drivers shoulders in a constant switchback type course may not be, IMO. It would still represent an aerodynamic improvement of course but I would argue that much weight up high would counter the effect on handling that the roof provides. On a sweeper intensive course, or road course, not the same effect.

Plus I *think* there may have been other factors contributing to your cars performance other than just the roof.
Yea the stock top is not faster at autocross speeds its too heavy and high. cut its weight in half or down to 1/4 the weight of stock and its worth it.
bbundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2016, 04:59 PM   #29
Newb
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 14
Total Cats: -2
Default

what about the consideration of the roof stiffing up the chassis?
gtiracer06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2016, 05:01 PM   #30
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 782
Total Cats: 23
Default

Most cars (here in race prep anyway) will have a roll cage so it wouldn't be a factor.
mx5-kiwi is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
95m goes kinda fast for kinda cheap Forrest95M Build Threads 241 09-02-2017 02:44 PM
BFG Rival-S Special Sale !! 200 UTQG - while they last. philstireservice Wheels and Tires 2 03-26-2016 12:52 AM
small track video ReallyRottenTurbo General Miata Chat 1 02-09-2016 02:18 PM
track experiential video ReallyRottenTurbo Media 0 02-09-2016 01:20 PM
OG Racing! Just in: The Sparco Lunargrid Suit and more! Feb news letter. OGRacing OG Racing 0 02-08-2016 02:57 PM


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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:51 AM.