Whats happening to the MX5 racing??

[pressure pack]

I have never heard of a minimum lap time in racing until the MX5 cup at WP. If the class wants to survive it will have to accept the faster cars. The minimum lap time now being 1.05 is already fast. The slower cars, say 1.15 already get lapped. A car going faster than 1.05 will overtake them even easier. The 1.05 limit just stops a 1.05 car from being beaten. Technology always catches up.

[forcedfive]

I don't think there' are many 400whp / tonne mx5's running around and if so don't think they would be looking to an mx5 series and probably not the cars that are really relevant here
An na6 turbo is well included in the current nsw time based category structure as they will just race with similar paced cars. If they mod further or improve they move up a class.
What is happening now in nsw seems to be a good basis and I feel all inclusive. Points system would be very difficult to police in a series like mx5 cup and would likely not put a stop to people fudging mods to meet a lower class which at the end of the day is probably worse than having a fringe car holding back a little to win a lower class here and there if that in fact happens.
I believe most racers don't frequent this forum so maybe a first step would be to come up with some way of including many of those who have an interest, or maybe would like to return to racing, included in the conversation as their voice may well be the most relevant.

[zossy1]

When I get back from the states, I'm going to try and get some folks together to talk this out. I'll be doing my best to extend the olive branch to everyone who has raced a cup round over the last couple of years, as well as some others with a genuine interest who aren't seen much around cup pits.

Obviously I'll be trying to arrange this through the committee, as they're the ones who have their hands on the levers.

BTW, I'm off to the SCCA Midwest meeting at Brainerd Raceway in Minnesota this weekend. Another chance to see the points system in action.

Dann, I love points - but you still haven't explained how we would police the system in Australia. I've seen how it works here in the states - in short, it requires massive logistical support to function. That is one thing the current cup rules do acknowledge - the KISS principle.

Setting up the spreadsheet is the easy part.

[NitroDann]

Which part is hard to police in your opinion?

Just the power?

[forcedfive]

[1600Dave]

If you want everyone to show up, youve got to let every car race, AND youve got to let all sorts of builds compete with each other.

One potential issue with this theory is that if you let every car race, the guys that get trounced week after week by the faster guys will possibly go elsewhere.

Personally, before suggesting all these changes, as zossy suggests, I feel a bit of research needs to be done. No point changing stuff if you don't know why you are changing them or whether the changes will be welcome by the wider community of racers.

1. People that have left MX5 Cup :
Have they stopped racing completely ?
Have they gone to another series ?
If either of the above - why ?

2. What do people want out of the series ?
Winning trophies (even if it is for the fastest driver who can lap between 1:18 and 1:20, regardless of talent or car prep ) ?
Simply get on the track, don't care for winning or trophies ?
Be the best driver ?
Be the best at car preparation ?

3. People who have thought about competing but decided not to :
Why not ?
Cost ?
No class for their car ?
Differing rules / classes between Cup and other race series ?

A few other random thoughts :

Don't neglect the guy who wants to race on a budget - witness the success of Pulsar (and to a lesser extent, Excel) racing. Not the fastest cars, but great competition to see who is the better driver in similar cars.

Set the rules, and people build cars to suit. If you try to create a category for everyone, you will get nowhere.

Don't make the rules / categories such that the car will only suit MX5 Cup. Many people want to compete elsewhere (basically, consider aligning as closely as possible to 2B / 2F)

Once set, keep the rules as static as possible (I mention this because I am currently building a car for historic prod sports and have been affected, potentially detrimentally, by a change in capacity classes. Grrr......)

[1600Dave]

I have never heard of a minimum lap time in racing until the MX5.

Not so much a minimum time as such, but plenty of classes (right up to F1 !!) impose a maximum variance between fastest and slowest qualifying times. The issue then becomes at which end of the field do you make the cutoff if the majority of cars sit at the "slow" end of the field ? ? Allow one very fast car to compete, then exclude all the slow guys ? Or limit the fast guy ?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it is an easy task and n easy answers to setting up a "one make" race category where all cars aren't identical / in the same class.

[SKYHI]

Don't neglect the guy who wants to race on a budget - witness the success of Pulsar (and to a lesser extent, Excel) racing. Not the fastest cars, but great competition to see who is the better driver in similar cars.

Set the rules, and people build cars to suit. If you try to create a category for everyone, you will get nowhere.

Don't make the rules / categories such that the car will only suit MX5 Cup. Many people want to compete elsewhere (basically, consider aligning as closely as possible to 2B / 2F.

Agreed. Plenty of 2F and 2B cars already out there, so setup an additional 2F Restricted class for the budget racers, and a couple of extra classes for NA and FI cars that don't comply with 2F and 2B regs. I also think you're better off restricting the couple of faster FI cars to keep the speed difference in check. So either look at maximum tyre width and/or keep aero to 2B specs for anyone running.

That way anyone wanting to step up or down to either class doesn't have to make wholesale changes to compete in a CAMS event, whether it be NSW or interstate.

[pressure pack]

the record for mx5s around WP is a 2f car. Nick Cancian 1.03.0198. this makes the fastest 2f cars to fast for the 105 cut off. seems a shame not to allow the fast ones to run.

[zossy1]

Which part is hard to police in your opinion?

Just the power?

I discussed this in my earlier posts.

Internal engine mods are the toughest
Fuel
ECU
Gearbox / Diff internals
Suspension (performance parts disguised as OEM)
Etc

It can all be policed. With resources. Which at present, we do not have.

Do we have drivers policing each other's cars? That's dangerous of course... For many reasons...

Do we use an honour system? If so, it's bound to be cheated at some point.

Volunteering as a tech inspector Dann? We may be able to accomodate that!

[zossy1]

the record for mx5s around WP is a 2f car. Nick Cancian 1.03.0198. this makes the fastest 2f cars to fast for the 105 cut off. seems a shame not to allow the fast ones to run.

Nope - Cancian's car is 2B.

EDIT - and I'm no fan of the 1:05 cutoff. Matilda's car, a regular in cup fields, has run faster than that.

[MattR]

Time based classes is the easiest to police for compliance, basically set the requirements to the general CAMS Schedules A through to N, to cover pretty much everything, and the rest is go for your life.

If you want to build a car that complies with 2F/2B to run with prod sports, then you can, and generally the car will be worth a bit more in the market because it complies with a recognised category.

Build it how you want if you are mainly doing sprints and time attack but want to dabble in door to door, or only want to play in MX5 cup.

If you go down the route of points for modifications, the resources to effectively police compliance becomes horrendously time consuming for the volunteers who do this.

And then who pays for tear downs of motors to check internal compliance??? I wouldn't be happy to have to pay for my engine builder to take the head off at a time and location specified by someone else, have all the gaskets etc ready to go and be reinstalled after checking. i would be happy to have to pay for a few hours labour plus the parts for a partial tear down to show the motor was legal.

I did all of this type of stuff 25 years ago in street sedans. Motors were checked when being built for compliance to rules and sealed at various places to stop changes in cams, rods etc, as people got very clever in how work around the seals. In my case, the way the cam was sealed in the L18 I ran, so it could still work, you could change the camshaft without breaking the seal. You couldn't seal the rocker cover because you needed access to the rockers for adjustment, so there was the opportunity to cheat. The computer for the L18 was sealed, yes 180B's had fuel injection in Japan and were homolgated for racing with Bosch injection, but a dab of solder here, a resistor somewhere else and you could do a lot to get more fuel in to the engine, without breaking seals.

And there were plenty of others much smarter than me playing, so the bending of the rules was creative at time to say the least.

A time based class is the easiest way to level the playing field as fairly as possible as easy as possible. If you are sandbagging to stay in a particular class, then really you are only cheating yourself, and is a plastic dust collector really that important???

We are talking about grass roots motorsport here. Realistically, anyone playing in MX5 cup over 16 years old and not racing else where is not going to be racing V8's or F1 anytime soon.....

[NitroDann]

There needs to be no internals rules if you simply set the rules by power to weight.

None whatsoever.

Just need to agree on a reliable way to police that, which I think is a piece of piss just make the stats visible on the rear window.

[Deckspeed Racing]

In an ideal world we would simply run under 2F and 2B rules ,nearly all the cars are built to these regs ,but we tried this years ago and all that happened is everybody bitched about everybody else's car if they got beat, also it excluded orphan cars like NA turbos so the owners of those got upset because they couldn't run . hence the time brackets , the rules are written on a single A4 piece of paper and its inclusive for just about all mx5s , can't be any simpler and the racing has been pretty good lots of different winners and everybody has taken there cars home in one piece with the fastest lap time guide and the driving standards guide , it doesn't seem to be broken why are people trying to fix it?
PS as a guide power to weight
2B 1.8 non turbo 7.5 kg per kw
2b 2.5 NC 7.6kg per kw
2f 1.8 8.2 kg per kw
2f NC 8.3 kg per kw
2B 1.8 turbo 6.1 kg per kw
these are the approx power to weight I've seen on MX5s over the years
when you look at lap times these numbers prove to be pretty close
so a power to weight formula ain't going to give Chris his desired outcome.

[zossy1]

I agree that power to weight isn't the answer. It is too easy to manipulate and only tells a small part of the story.

Lots of different winners and (fairly) clean racing. Yes.

But who cares about the MX5 Cup? That is my concern. If nobody cares about it, because the time based rules mean you can run a regularity and win it, then where's the incentive?

I understand not everyone gives a stuff about winning. Personally, I kind of like winning and that is at least part of my motivation. I make no apologies for that. Taking a car that is fast, and making it faster - developing my driving and the car to a point where it can win races, and doing so against others who are keen on winning. That is what motivates me.

Right now, if I nominate at 1:08 or 1:09, and watch my predictive timer carefully, I'll win (provided my car holds together). I may be 3-4 seconds off the pace but whilst the winner might get their outright trophy, I win the cup. Is that fair?

On the flip side, if I bust my gut to get into the 1:05s (and I'm close to that now), racing against several others who are just as quick, I might finish second or third in class and overall at any given meeting (depending on who shows up). We punch on to the end of the year, and even if I am consistently finishing in the top 2 or 3, I might finish 4th or 5th in the cup. Again, that seems like a perverse outcome to me.

I have noticed for this reason that none of the fastest cars are running every round of the cup. Many of the fast guys focus on the Endurance series and will burn cup rounds in preparation for that. That's fine, but it devalues the cup. No disrespect to last year's winner (who did race every round and was always competitive in his class), but that's how last year's cup was won - by a car that was 3-4 seconds off the outright pace.

In Supersprints, you have an overall winner, then type winners, and class winners. It provides recognition for those who have beaten similar cars, and also provides a succession opportunity to graduate to higher classes (either by buying a new car or developing your current car to go faster). Except for the huge number of classes (there are too many), that seems to work well from a fairness perspective.

Maybe the cup isn't about who is fastest or the best racer. Maybe I'm the problem? If so, that's fine.