A points system would be awesome. But I acknowledge then that we would be in a situation of having to do a fair bit of enforcement and car checking to make sure nobody was stretching the friendship on points. I do agree that it needs to be easy - that is a big benefit with time based classes, but at the cost of competitive motivation.
Right now, the only thing that sets the Cup apart from Super TT is the time based classes, and the limitation on entries to Mazda-piston-engined MX5s.
Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Moderators: timk, Stu, zombie, Andrew, -alex, miata
-
zossy1
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 1979
- Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:48 am
- Vehicle: NA8
- Location: Southern Highlands, NSW
- Contact:
-
plohl
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 1922
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:13 am
- Vehicle: NA8
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
The time based classed used at the PSCRAQ MX5 race at lakeside a few Saturdays ago worked pretty well. The classes were:
<59s
59<62s
62<65s
>65s
Out of the 26 competitors, there were 2 in the <59, and >65 classes. The rest were almost split evenly between the middle two groups. The cars competing would, mostly, fall into the 2B and 2F classes.
The risks of the time based classes is, as zossy has mentioned, the ability for someone to run in a class where they can easily meet the minimum time, and ensure they don’t fall into the next category. It really must be asked, if someone is doing this, are they really in it for the racing, or the cheap trophy?
I agree with this:
But have some feedback with the proposed classes, which I have outlined below. This feedback relates to a one make/model series, specifically mx5s... if that wasn't already obvious.
OEM ECU’s don’t last long in NA/NB mx5’s, especially amongst sprinters/time attackers, which are probably a sure bet to want to make the move to racing. From the lakeside event, there were about 6 of us, myself included that generally do the sprint events, 4 of us had aftermarket ecus. I think it’s safe to assume the rest of the field of legit race cars were running aftermarket, or modified/ tuned ecus (in case of the NCs). Restricting this would push relatively basic cars needlessly into the next group.
Control tyres – I don’t like the idea of control tyres for a grassroots motorsport. This is an issue for all classes. AO50’s aren’t cheap. Someone wanting to race shouldn’t be forced to spend $300+ per tyre. The aim is to encourage people to race, not make it harder or more expensive than it needs to be.
I think making the entry level class require a control tyre, regardless of what it is, would definitely make it less easy for someone to move into the race series, as they would be up for a new set of tyres (or even wheels) should they have been running something else. This is another hurdle that could delay, or turn off, someone joining the competition.
The entry level class would probably benefit from a limit on the tyre treadwear rating, like they do with some of the time attack classes. For example, the Time Attack series ran here in QLD limits tyres to those for a tread wear limit of 140. This still allows competitors to run NT01’s, AD08r’s, and RS3’s, plus a heap of other relatively cheap and accessible tyres. Those who want to go fastest/ win will buy the “best” tyre available, but it doesn’t restrict new comers, or those that don't give sh*t if they're competitive or not, they just want to race someone or similar level to their own.
Overall, I think you’re missing a group for those who want to race on a budget. Class C is too restrictive. But it would be ideal to have something for those who can’t justify the crazy built race engines, or aero (the 2b rules are pretty limited anyway), but want to go faster/ do more sh*t to their car, than the lowest class. Under the three class proposed you basically have a stock car then the next evolution is a 2b equivalent car. Going from a sprint level car to 6k+ built engines (excluding itbs, etc), 1-2k+ ECUs, $300+/tyre, $2k+ worth of aero… pretty big jump just to be in the ball park.
Maybe if you remove the aero, limit it to standard intake/throttle body, similar to 2f, but without limiting the bottom end? Might be something that could work with. Or have the same/similar rules for class B and C, again, no aero, but limit it with fast street tyres as suggested above. Doesn't matter how fast your car is, you can't brake more than the tyres will let you, or corner any faster.
It’s hard to know where to draw the line. I have thought about it quite a lot, how to make something not too restrictive, but enough to have some clear difference between the classes. For myself, I just want to be racing someone – I don’t really care what their car has done to it. It is slightly frustrating being stuck behind a 2b car that is stupidly slow in the corners for some reason, but pulls enough of a gap between them to remain out of grasp. That’s racing though. It doesn’t matter what class it’s in, if it’s in front of you, you’ll try/hope to overtake it, and chase it down to the best of your ability. I suppose this is where time based classes work well.
I don’t think there should be limitations on switching and swapping of parts between the NA/NBs as there is with the 2F/2B rules. If you want a 6 speed or one of the later model engines in your NA, go nuts. The cars are so similar it seems silly to limit this.
Which brings me to engine swaps…
Engine swaps are just another way to make a car faster, but can be cheaper, and produce more desirable results then built engine. Not sure if it really justifies moving the car to another, faster class. I just put a vvt engine in my NA (and took it back out again, but that’s another story) – in the current 2f/2b rules, this isn’t allowed (IIRC) – would this force me into the top class? Definitely something that would need to be clarified. I assume this rule is aimed specifically at the 2.5 NC’s, and the very odd Honda or Nissan conversions. I would take a std k24 engine over a built BP engine any day. Would it be as competitive as a built BP race engine? I don’t think so.
Anyway, just some rambling thoughts vomited haphazardly into words.
TL;DR
Control tyres are sh*t
Class C is probably too restrictive/ Need something in between class B and C
<59s
59<62s
62<65s
>65s
Out of the 26 competitors, there were 2 in the <59, and >65 classes. The rest were almost split evenly between the middle two groups. The cars competing would, mostly, fall into the 2B and 2F classes.
The risks of the time based classes is, as zossy has mentioned, the ability for someone to run in a class where they can easily meet the minimum time, and ensure they don’t fall into the next category. It really must be asked, if someone is doing this, are they really in it for the racing, or the cheap trophy?
I agree with this:
Something relatively easy to enforce, but fair to the competitors in different equipment. You can't have too many classes, and we'd still be all on the track together…
But have some feedback with the proposed classes, which I have outlined below. This feedback relates to a one make/model series, specifically mx5s... if that wasn't already obvious.
Class C:
Entry level class - OEM ECU and control semi slicks (something cheap like the NT01)
Very limited mods (similar to Supersprint Class 2).
OEM ECU’s don’t last long in NA/NB mx5’s, especially amongst sprinters/time attackers, which are probably a sure bet to want to make the move to racing. From the lakeside event, there were about 6 of us, myself included that generally do the sprint events, 4 of us had aftermarket ecus. I think it’s safe to assume the rest of the field of legit race cars were running aftermarket, or modified/ tuned ecus (in case of the NCs). Restricting this would push relatively basic cars needlessly into the next group.
Control tyres – I don’t like the idea of control tyres for a grassroots motorsport. This is an issue for all classes. AO50’s aren’t cheap. Someone wanting to race shouldn’t be forced to spend $300+ per tyre. The aim is to encourage people to race, not make it harder or more expensive than it needs to be.
I think making the entry level class require a control tyre, regardless of what it is, would definitely make it less easy for someone to move into the race series, as they would be up for a new set of tyres (or even wheels) should they have been running something else. This is another hurdle that could delay, or turn off, someone joining the competition.
The entry level class would probably benefit from a limit on the tyre treadwear rating, like they do with some of the time attack classes. For example, the Time Attack series ran here in QLD limits tyres to those for a tread wear limit of 140. This still allows competitors to run NT01’s, AD08r’s, and RS3’s, plus a heap of other relatively cheap and accessible tyres. Those who want to go fastest/ win will buy the “best” tyre available, but it doesn’t restrict new comers, or those that don't give sh*t if they're competitive or not, they just want to race someone or similar level to their own.
Class A (Outright Class):
Engine swaps
Turbo/Supercharged
Open aero (up to, say, 3D or 2A rules)
Open engine/drivetrain/suspension
Turbo cars limited to semi slicks
Under 3L engine swaps (incl. 2.5L NCs) can run slicks or whatever they want
Class B:
Aspirated cars only
Under 2L only
Engine/drivetrain/suspension/aero as per 2B rules
Semi Slicks only (driver's choice or perhaps a control tyre like the A050?)
Overall, I think you’re missing a group for those who want to race on a budget. Class C is too restrictive. But it would be ideal to have something for those who can’t justify the crazy built race engines, or aero (the 2b rules are pretty limited anyway), but want to go faster/ do more sh*t to their car, than the lowest class. Under the three class proposed you basically have a stock car then the next evolution is a 2b equivalent car. Going from a sprint level car to 6k+ built engines (excluding itbs, etc), 1-2k+ ECUs, $300+/tyre, $2k+ worth of aero… pretty big jump just to be in the ball park.
Maybe if you remove the aero, limit it to standard intake/throttle body, similar to 2f, but without limiting the bottom end? Might be something that could work with. Or have the same/similar rules for class B and C, again, no aero, but limit it with fast street tyres as suggested above. Doesn't matter how fast your car is, you can't brake more than the tyres will let you, or corner any faster.
It’s hard to know where to draw the line. I have thought about it quite a lot, how to make something not too restrictive, but enough to have some clear difference between the classes. For myself, I just want to be racing someone – I don’t really care what their car has done to it. It is slightly frustrating being stuck behind a 2b car that is stupidly slow in the corners for some reason, but pulls enough of a gap between them to remain out of grasp. That’s racing though. It doesn’t matter what class it’s in, if it’s in front of you, you’ll try/hope to overtake it, and chase it down to the best of your ability. I suppose this is where time based classes work well.
I don’t think there should be limitations on switching and swapping of parts between the NA/NBs as there is with the 2F/2B rules. If you want a 6 speed or one of the later model engines in your NA, go nuts. The cars are so similar it seems silly to limit this.
Which brings me to engine swaps…
Engine swaps are just another way to make a car faster, but can be cheaper, and produce more desirable results then built engine. Not sure if it really justifies moving the car to another, faster class. I just put a vvt engine in my NA (and took it back out again, but that’s another story) – in the current 2f/2b rules, this isn’t allowed (IIRC) – would this force me into the top class? Definitely something that would need to be clarified. I assume this rule is aimed specifically at the 2.5 NC’s, and the very odd Honda or Nissan conversions. I would take a std k24 engine over a built BP engine any day. Would it be as competitive as a built BP race engine? I don’t think so.
Anyway, just some rambling thoughts vomited haphazardly into words.
TL;DR
Control tyres are sh*t
Class C is probably too restrictive/ Need something in between class B and C
Cheers,
plohl
plohl
-
forcedfive
- Fast Driver
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:55 am
- Vehicle: 10AE - Turbo
- Location: Sydney
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Interesting thoughts. I think one thing that is paramount to focus on at the moment is to try and get more cars on the track and if this takes some changes to the current system for next year then maybe that needs to be carefully considered and discussed. If we don't get more cars back into the field I would expect we are at risk of losing a great series which would be a great loss of what is a great way to start door to door for beginners like myself.
Having just completed my second round, I would be surprised if people holding back to win in a lower class but I could be very wrong. I could have held off yesterday to win class B but on the track I want to drive as quickly and consistently as I can so in the final race Andy and I both broke out into class A and the winner of class B got a nice surprise.
I personally am chasing a more powerful, well dríven car running on slicks while running on Semi's. This obviously makes it harder for me, but with three second places yesterday we still managed some close racing which was great. Next time out Andy will be in the mix (got pushed back in the field after having to visit the pits in race 1) and quicker again I would expect which will make it very interesting and even more so if some of the other regulars make it back next round. The top three card in the final race yesterday while somewhat different ran incredibly close in terms of their quickest lap time for the race (which gives me some hope if one day getting one up on Chops):
1st Place 1:06.5636
2nd Place 1:06.5756
3rd Place 1:06.5957
A great series and hopefully it can continue for some time to come in whatever format makes it attractive form maximum competitors (as long as the rules don't rule out my car that is).
Get those entries in early for Round 4 so we have a better chance of a stand alone race.
Cheers
Verne
Having just completed my second round, I would be surprised if people holding back to win in a lower class but I could be very wrong. I could have held off yesterday to win class B but on the track I want to drive as quickly and consistently as I can so in the final race Andy and I both broke out into class A and the winner of class B got a nice surprise.
I personally am chasing a more powerful, well dríven car running on slicks while running on Semi's. This obviously makes it harder for me, but with three second places yesterday we still managed some close racing which was great. Next time out Andy will be in the mix (got pushed back in the field after having to visit the pits in race 1) and quicker again I would expect which will make it very interesting and even more so if some of the other regulars make it back next round. The top three card in the final race yesterday while somewhat different ran incredibly close in terms of their quickest lap time for the race (which gives me some hope if one day getting one up on Chops):
1st Place 1:06.5636
2nd Place 1:06.5756
3rd Place 1:06.5957
A great series and hopefully it can continue for some time to come in whatever format makes it attractive form maximum competitors (as long as the rules don't rule out my car that is).
Get those entries in early for Round 4 so we have a better chance of a stand alone race.
Cheers
Verne
10AE
WP 1:04.7 SMSP GP 1:43.0 South 1:00.8 North 1:09.8
WP 1:04.7 SMSP GP 1:43.0 South 1:00.8 North 1:09.8
-
gslender
- Speed Racer
- Posts: 2330
- Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:49 pm
- Vehicle: NA6
- Location: Brisbane, QLD
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
plohl wrote:Out of the 26 competitors, there were 2 in the <59, and >65 classes. The rest were almost split evenly between the middle two groups. The cars competing would, mostly, fall into the 2B and 2F classes.
Actually, accordingly to NatSoft, I think there were 4 competitors in the >65 class (at least) and in qualifying at least 8 were 65 seconds or slower ....??
MX5 91 NA6 LE completely stock and loving it!
MX5 92 NA8/ITBs Silver "aka Track Beeotch"
MX5 92 NA8/ITBs Silver "aka Track Beeotch"
-
plohl
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 1922
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:13 am
- Vehicle: NA8
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Right you are, should have checked not gone off my very wrong memory.
Cheers,
plohl
plohl
-
zossy1
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 1979
- Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:48 am
- Vehicle: NA8
- Location: Southern Highlands, NSW
- Contact:
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Some good thoughts there, friends. I'm fine without control tyres, as long as everyone else is - but the delineation between Semis and slicks is obviously key.
I also understand the concern with OEM ECUs, but it is a great way to ensure performance parity. Without tuning, it is fairly difficult to pull decent numbers out of a BP - even with significant engine work. I would be happy to look at a fourth class, but we begin to run the risk of diluting the classes down in numbers (like in sprints). Ideally, it should be possible for people to take what they have now in the garage, and fairly easily mod it up or down to meet one of the classes. Take my car - I could switch from slicks and fit Class 2. Even if you removed 2B aero from Class 2, that would be fine - I could choose to either keep my aero and slicks and run open class, or remove aero, go back to semis, and contest class 2.
We really need to have this discussion. Like Verne, I don't want to see this series fade away.
I also understand the concern with OEM ECUs, but it is a great way to ensure performance parity. Without tuning, it is fairly difficult to pull decent numbers out of a BP - even with significant engine work. I would be happy to look at a fourth class, but we begin to run the risk of diluting the classes down in numbers (like in sprints). Ideally, it should be possible for people to take what they have now in the garage, and fairly easily mod it up or down to meet one of the classes. Take my car - I could switch from slicks and fit Class 2. Even if you removed 2B aero from Class 2, that would be fine - I could choose to either keep my aero and slicks and run open class, or remove aero, go back to semis, and contest class 2.
We really need to have this discussion. Like Verne, I don't want to see this series fade away.
-
neilh
- Driver
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:10 pm
- Vehicle: NB8B
- Location: Sydney
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Some interesting discussion and I am following this with great interest. I have raced MX5s for about 6 years, including competing in the original MX5 challenge, Wakefield 300, Modern sportscars and Prodsports. The last 24 months have seen me take a brake form racing for a variety of reasons, but I am looking to start again
In regards to the current MX5 cup, what is the fundamental issue that needs to be resolved? Is it a need to improve the racing, or a need to attract more competitors? I appreciate the two are linked, but if we were looking to focus on one area which would it be?
If the priority is to increase numbers, there are heaps of top spec purpose built race cars in NSW sitting in sheds not being raced (I can think of at least 5-10). Maybe before looking to make wholesale rule changes it might be worthwhile understanding what both the current competitors want, as well as reaching out to the owners of the cars not currently being raced (a while ago there was a contact list of all the MX5 competitors) to understand what they would like to see changed and how we get these people racing again. A lot of these owners do not visit this site. We might find the main issues could be things like a lack of variety in the tracks the MX5 cup currently races at or event style etc, and not necessarily the current rules.
I guess my point is that instead of trying to re-invent the wheel, maybe we should focus on getting the best bang for our buck and try and get the people who are already in a position to go racing back at the track
In regards to the current MX5 cup, what is the fundamental issue that needs to be resolved? Is it a need to improve the racing, or a need to attract more competitors? I appreciate the two are linked, but if we were looking to focus on one area which would it be?
If the priority is to increase numbers, there are heaps of top spec purpose built race cars in NSW sitting in sheds not being raced (I can think of at least 5-10). Maybe before looking to make wholesale rule changes it might be worthwhile understanding what both the current competitors want, as well as reaching out to the owners of the cars not currently being raced (a while ago there was a contact list of all the MX5 competitors) to understand what they would like to see changed and how we get these people racing again. A lot of these owners do not visit this site. We might find the main issues could be things like a lack of variety in the tracks the MX5 cup currently races at or event style etc, and not necessarily the current rules.
I guess my point is that instead of trying to re-invent the wheel, maybe we should focus on getting the best bang for our buck and try and get the people who are already in a position to go racing back at the track
-
NitroDann
- Forum sponsor
- Posts: 10280
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:10 pm
- Vehicle: NA6
- Location: Newcastle NSW
- Contact:
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Why the hell dont we just do points per mod, and points for power to weight again?
Can even do multiple classes, 50pts 75 pts and 100 pts to allow everyone to have a run.
Dann
Can even do multiple classes, 50pts 75 pts and 100 pts to allow everyone to have a run.
Dann
http://www.NitroDann.com
speed wrote:If I was to do it again, I wouldn't even consider the supercharger.
-
MattR
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 1305
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:26 pm
- Vehicle: NA6
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Power to weight opens up a huge can of worms for those that really want to win a bit of plastic.
Hell, even not cheating, i can get very different power readings for the same car on a dyno just by changing from slicks to wets to semi slicks which i all use depending on the event, or even just pumping the tyres up will change that, let alone using different maps in the ECU to get the result i want. Or i just put a more restrictive air filter in the car, or a different exhaust tip for "noise" to lose a bit of power for the dyno.
As one dyno operator asked me, and most good ones would be able to do this, what power would you like to see today for your car.......
Time based classes are generally the easiest and cheapest to manage if you want to go down that path. yes people may sandbag, but as soon as they break out they go up a class and the results can be retrospectively applied for any race that weekend.
Hell, even not cheating, i can get very different power readings for the same car on a dyno just by changing from slicks to wets to semi slicks which i all use depending on the event, or even just pumping the tyres up will change that, let alone using different maps in the ECU to get the result i want. Or i just put a more restrictive air filter in the car, or a different exhaust tip for "noise" to lose a bit of power for the dyno.
As one dyno operator asked me, and most good ones would be able to do this, what power would you like to see today for your car.......
Time based classes are generally the easiest and cheapest to manage if you want to go down that path. yes people may sandbag, but as soon as they break out they go up a class and the results can be retrospectively applied for any race that weekend.
-
NitroDann
- Forum sponsor
- Posts: 10280
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:10 pm
- Vehicle: NA6
- Location: Newcastle NSW
- Contact:
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
MattR wrote:Power to weight opens up a huge can of worms for those that really want to win a bit of plastic.
Hell, even not cheating, i can get very different power readings for the same car on a dyno just by changing from slicks to wets to semi slicks which i all use depending on the event, or even just pumping the tyres up will change that, let alone using different maps in the ECU to get the result i want. Or i just put a more restrictive air filter in the car, or a different exhaust tip for "noise" to lose a bit of power for the dyno.
As one dyno operator asked me, and most good ones would be able to do this, what power would you like to see today for your car.......
But thats immediately fixed if everyone displays it visibly on the car.
Time based classes are generally the easiest and cheapest to manage if you want to go down that path. yes people may sandbag, but as soon as they break out they go up a class and the results can be retrospectively applied for any race that weekend.
time based makes it a regularity. bleh
http://www.NitroDann.com
speed wrote:If I was to do it again, I wouldn't even consider the supercharger.
-
forcedfive
- Fast Driver
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:55 am
- Vehicle: 10AE - Turbo
- Location: Sydney
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
Policing mods and power to weight I believe would be difficult in a small series like the cup. From my very limited experience the time based categories seem to working well but I am unsure if people are holding back, however, I would be surprised if they would bother turning up to do hold back and run a "regularity". We are racing for fun and to beat those who can compete with a combination of our car and skill level. The guys I speak to at the track are trying to go as quickly as they can and try and better their previous times.
10AE
WP 1:04.7 SMSP GP 1:43.0 South 1:00.8 North 1:09.8
WP 1:04.7 SMSP GP 1:43.0 South 1:00.8 North 1:09.8
-
ja9
- Fast Driver
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 6:10 pm
- Vehicle: NB8A
- Location: Kirrawee, Sydney
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
I'm probably one of those people who would love to come racing but don't as often as I'd like. As neilh suggested I don't care about the rules or what class my car falls into. I make changes to my car to satisfy my goals and let the rules take care of where I'll be placed. As long as I'm racing with others and being part of the day I'm really not that fussed. Yes I've mellowed out over the years but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy my racing.
What keeps me away is very simple, it's the dollars. Whether some think the entry cost is reasonable, that's not the issue. For me, spending entry fee $240 + garage + accommodation + fuel +++ makes for an unaffordable weekend. Yes I've spent that sort of money in the past but I'm not prepared to do so every race meeting. I started racing with FOSC because I don't need to spend for accommodation (Sydney based), entry fee was well under $200 and I could afford it.
If you are serious about getting more people to the races then it needs to be more affordable. For me, it's as simple as that. How about our sponsors save on trophies and subsidise the series to make entry fees cheaper. Obviously more needs to be done but I'm confident racers would rather have people to race against than collect a third place trophy with only a 3 car grid.
What keeps me away is very simple, it's the dollars. Whether some think the entry cost is reasonable, that's not the issue. For me, spending entry fee $240 + garage + accommodation + fuel +++ makes for an unaffordable weekend. Yes I've spent that sort of money in the past but I'm not prepared to do so every race meeting. I started racing with FOSC because I don't need to spend for accommodation (Sydney based), entry fee was well under $200 and I could afford it.
If you are serious about getting more people to the races then it needs to be more affordable. For me, it's as simple as that. How about our sponsors save on trophies and subsidise the series to make entry fees cheaper. Obviously more needs to be done but I'm confident racers would rather have people to race against than collect a third place trophy with only a 3 car grid.
UNDERSTEER is when you hit the wall with the front of the car. OVERSTEER is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car.
-
forcedfive
- Fast Driver
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:55 am
- Vehicle: 10AE - Turbo
- Location: Sydney
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
The last round car ports were free and personally I would be happy to share a twin room to save some money as I have on club track days if that helps make it more reasonable. Let's see if we can gat a few more cars back to the next round I June.
10AE
WP 1:04.7 SMSP GP 1:43.0 South 1:00.8 North 1:09.8
WP 1:04.7 SMSP GP 1:43.0 South 1:00.8 North 1:09.8
-
zossy1
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 1979
- Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:48 am
- Vehicle: NA8
- Location: Southern Highlands, NSW
- Contact:
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
What is the problem we are trying to solve?
There are a few:
1. Flagging numbers - some rounds recently have seen 10 or less cars. It would be nice to have 15+ at every round... The heady days of 20+ cars per round is possible, and makes for a great spectacle. As was said earlier, it would be nice to see the series grow to the point where it could attract a bigger following and some serious sponsorshIp or promotional interest.
2. Competitive racing - across the field. Unlike some others, I do care about this. If I can't be competitive (either outright or at the class level), I'll either develop my car to the point where I can be competitive, or I'll leave the series. This may not apply to others, but it is important to me. I know there are a couple of other racers in the same boat too. Right now, I can sandbag and win at 1:09, but the thought of taking a trophy off the fastest guy on the track by running a regularity at 1:09 leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
3. Simplicity - it must be easy to understand, and to police, whatever rule set we choose.
4. Cost - thanks for raising this one, John. Let's throw that into the mix... But I think we might be doing all we can there. We are somewhat bound by what FOSC / MRA charge for entry fees as the series can't hope to run independently. The idea of running races at club track days is an interesting one though... I suspect there may be some logistical challenges there but it may be worth investigating...
Pros and cons of points / Power to weight
I'm on holiday in the US right now. I had the good fortune of getting out to Road America last weekend for NASA Midwest. They run a points system. The cars are awesome, and the events are huge. The racing is fairly close but as you would expect, the cream rises to the top... Which is what you want. Points classes span different makes, models, and eras of car and it seems fairly fair.
The drawback is the policing. Every car has to undergo "annual tech" (which are more comprehensive than our log book inspections!), and even once the tech inspections are done, the logistics around daily scrutineering and post race checking is huge. They have dozens (not exaggerating) or tech people on hand and these guys know what to look for. They had scales, a mobile dyno, and fuel testing at the track.
Dann, I love the idea of points. It's great! But I doubt we can do it anything like as well as the Yanks. Displaying power / weight on a car won't work either. You know as well as anyone how cars can be tuned to make a meal of this. It is easy to detune a 2560R turbo car to make 220whp with a massive, flat ramp torque curve. That car will murder an aspirated BP making the same power, as the aspirated engine won't have any torque... And that 220whp aspirated engine is a five figure build.
Not only this, but good drivers with a great setup can make a 150whp car look like a 200whp car on track by getting the car off the corner better. I'm not sure that displaying these numbers in the car will have much effect.
Maybe this alone isn't an issue but it will kill the aspirated BP without a complex series of rules to level the field (like a points system).
-
StillIC
- Racing Driver
- Posts: 862
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:30 pm
- Vehicle: NA6
- Location: Newcastle
Re: Whats happening to the MX5 racing??
zossy1 wrote:What is the problem we are trying to solve?
There are a few:
1. Flagging numbers....
2. Competitive racing .....
3. Simplicity .....
4. Cost...
Chris, I think you have articulated the problems of the MX5 cup, and indeed other categories of Australian motorsport, quite well in your post. Thank you. (And thanks for the loan of your wooden ramps at Eastern Creek the weekend before last...ask your dad).
However, I believe there is a system that can solve each of the problems you have highlighted above, that I have edited for brevity. That is, self policing budget based classes. Yes, you may all get sick of me saying this.But...
1. Flagging numbers - I have no interest in running in a regularity series and cannot afford to build a car to win outright. As a result I am not in MX5 Cup racing, although I would love to graduate from Supersprints. A good class structure just might see me on the grid. And maybe others. Especially if I know that I can be competitive within a reasonable budget.
2. Yep, I certainly want competition, which means some constraints must apply equally to people/cars in your own class. The MX5 Cup has virtually no rules or constraints, other than a Mazda piston engine, and the stupid time based classes. Competing against cars of similar value should go a long way to providing constraints which provide close competition.
3. Simplicity is great. It means no scrutineers volunteering vast amounts of their time to police vehicles, or other competitors trying to sneak a look at the modifications other have done to see if they are cheating, no protests, no processing of protests, no constantly updating rules to close loop holes and grey areas etc. etc. By having a system that allows your competitor to buy your car at the class price means you run the risk that if you spend more than your class allows, you will lose the difference, or lose the championship. Easy.
4. Cost. Putting some caps on cost would be great, and if the richest want to go all out then they can have their own $100000 dollar class. But I suggest classes around the $10000 to $20000 dollar figures. Perhaps more, based on feedback from interested competitors.
If someone can come up with another system that solves all these problems, then that would be great. But the only one I can think of that seems to, is the one I am proposing. I will persist.
WP:1.12.492 SMPN:1.16.403 SMPS:1.05.473 SMPGP:1.53.256 SMPB:2.22.181
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 194 guests
