STR: S2000 vrs MX-5 thoughts?

[Steve Lepper]

...The one thing I do feel strongly about is wheels...9" width should be allowed screw those .5 sizes, there are a million *x9" wheels out there.

ABSOLUTELY!!! Finding half-size wheels is a pain in the a$$.

[Brian Peters]

I'm well aware of the shifting....El Toro Divisional last year had 13 shifts per run. ;)

[Jason Uyeda]

I don't have extensive experience in S2k's however I know they lack area under the curve when it comes to power on most solo courses. I'd personally go with the 6spd NC (seem to be in the minority) as I'd expect it to maintain an average acceleration advantage over the S2k. I'm curious how the S2k responds to throwing more wheel and tire under it though. My gut would be that it could hit diminishing returns quicker than the NC just from a gearing standpoint. What's the general consensus in AS, stuff as much Hoosier under as possible, or are there some running more conservative widths to maintain acceleration and gearing?

Given unlimited tire/wheel for an STR S2k I'd be running 285s on 10.5" wheels, which will fit with the ST rules... 10" wheels would require very little effort.

[Steve Ekstrand]

I'm well aware of the shifting....El Toro Divisional last year had 13 shifts per run. ;)

[Steve Lepper]

What ruleset would most benefit my (Shauna's) 99 10AE Miata , and could it be competitive?

CSP... Yes...

Only if you want it to end up looking like Bill's car...

If someone made a 245/40-15 tire I think the NB would be a possibility for STR: it's a few inches narrower and 250 pounds lighter than an NC.

Are there any decent 245/40-16's out there? Everything I deal with runs 15, 17, or 18's.

[Steve Lepper]

I don't have extensive experience in S2k's however I know they lack area under the curve when it comes to power on most solo courses. I'd personally go with the 6spd NC (seem to be in the minority) as I'd expect it to maintain an average acceleration advantage over the S2k. I'm curious how the S2k responds to throwing more wheel and tire under it though. My gut would be that it could hit diminishing returns quicker than the NC just from a gearing standpoint. What's the general consensus in AS, stuff as much Hoosier under as possible, or are there some running more conservative widths to maintain acceleration and gearing?

Given unlimited tire/wheel for an STR S2k I'd be running 285s on 10.5" wheels, which will fit with the ST rules... 10" wheels would require very little effort.

If tire/wheel were unlimited, I could get 285 or 295's on an MX-5... just have to jack it up a bit on mega-stiff springs (like the CSP cars do) to keep them off the fenders.

[Mike Simanyi]

ST fender rolling doesn't allow aggression. 14.2.E specifically states:

Fenders may not be cut or flared but the inside lip may be rolled to gain additional tire clearance... No other changes to the stock fenders or wheel wells are permitted.

This topic always comes up in the BMW discussions. Some people "hope" that rolling really means "move things anywhere you want" since the rule also says the intent is to permit the maximum allowable tire size. That, however, is overshadowed by the opening statement that fenders may not be flared.

If I'm consulted by the P.C. at Nationals and you flared your ST car even slightly, you're probably not going to like the outcome.

Mike

[Jason Uyeda]

I don't have extensive experience in S2k's however I know they lack area under the curve when it comes to power on most solo courses. I'd personally go with the 6spd NC (seem to be in the minority) as I'd expect it to maintain an average acceleration advantage over the S2k. I'm curious how the S2k responds to throwing more wheel and tire under it though. My gut would be that it could hit diminishing returns quicker than the NC just from a gearing standpoint. What's the general consensus in AS, stuff as much Hoosier under as possible, or are there some running more conservative widths to maintain acceleration and gearing?

Given unlimited tire/wheel for an STR S2k I'd be running 285s on 10.5" wheels, which will fit with the ST rules... 10" wheels would require very little effort.

If tire/wheel were unlimited, I could get 285 or 295's on an MX-5... just have to jack it up a bit on mega-stiff springs (like the CSP cars do) to keep them off the fenders.

Just to be clear, I'm saying that all other things being equal/optimized (spring rates/ride height/alignment), I'd run 285/10.5" on an STR S2000... S2k's have lots of room under the fenders and will go faster on more tire (245 v. 285) IMHO.

I also do have a fair amount of experience with my BSP car on 265 RE-01R's and I certainly wouldn't say it was over-tired.

[Ken Lord]

How many cats come stock with an MX-5? Is it two? Isn't there one integrated into the exhaust manifold? How much of a difference does eliminating this single cat make? Probably more significant than the second one. At this point I'm assuming there's two cats? Who makes the most efficient exhaust manifolds (how much power gain?) for the MX-5s and do they all do away with the integrated cat? Ken

As far as I am aware nobody makes a header for the MX-5 with the first cat integrated. I am guessing that the HP difference might be around 5 to 10 difference but I don't know for sure. The Sniper Tune might be able to bring some of it back.

Brian Peters indidcated that he had his car down under 2400 pounds. I'm not sure how he did that, considering he still has most of the same things I have in my car. Battery and flywheel can't be over 100 pounds. Maybe bad scale adjustment in Farmington.

Stock MX-5 run 245 tires now and they don't ahve the roll allowance. Stiffer springs have kept my rear wheels off of the fenders, but I find the spring too stiff for the skinny (235 currently) street tires.

[Jason Rhoades]

ST fender rolling doesn't allow aggression. 14.2.E specifically states:

Fenders may not be cut or flared but the inside lip may be rolled to gain additional tire clearance... No other changes to the stock fenders or wheel wells are permitted.

This topic always comes up in the BMW discussions. Some people "hope" that rolling really means "move things anywhere you want" since the rule also says the intent is to permit the maximum allowable tire size. That, however, is overshadowed by the opening statement that fenders may not be flared.

If I'm consulted by the P.C. at Nationals and you flared your ST car even slightly, you're probably not going to like the outcome.

It is preposterous to think an innner fender lip can be rolled using any of the normal methods, without in *some* way affecting the outward curvature of the fender.

It is equally preposterous to believe one can draw a clear line between a fender that has been "flared" and one that has simply been subjected to the forces of a fender lip rolling effort.

That rule is stupid and threatening one might not "like the outcome" if you were asked, is lame. What horrible slippery slope are you single-handedly protecting the entire future of ST from? Somebody could show up with a virgin Civic (or E36) fender and DQ every car in grid if what you're saying is actually correct.

You're in a position now to fix things like this instead of perpetuating them. The rule is wrong anyway, since (thanks in no small part to myself) ST competitors are allowed to modify their fender liners to the extent needed to fit their tires; "No other changes to... wheel wells..." isn't exactly true any more.

Sorry if this sounds mean but your post comes across as a bucket of lame. The last thing ST needs is more protests over lame nitpicky crap.

[Aaron Goldsmith]

Sorry if this sounds mean but your post comes across as a bucket of lame. The last thing ST needs is more protests over lame nitpicky crap.

Hey, it could go the way of STU and no one would ever protest anyone else because everyone is illigal...

[Ken Motonishi]

Mike's just giving us a friendly reminder not to try anything "heroic" (like a CASOC interpretation of a rule) in order to fit tires that wouldn't ordinarily fit "perfectly". I can certainly appreciate the allowance to roll the inside lip in order to alleviate the occasional tire to fenderliner rubbing action. At some point though one has to make a line (or at least feign an attempt) between what you can or cannot do. I'm just glad that we don't need to have perfect fenderliners without holes in them due to self-clearance.

[Sebastian Rios]

I've recently "modified" my fender liner in order to permit fitting the maximum allowable tire size.... }:)

[Mike Simanyi]

Sorry if this sounds mean but your post comes across as a bucket of lame. The last thing ST needs is more protests over lame nitpicky crap.

Jason, I'd be happy to open a position for you on the STAC so we can work on this together. }:)

[Steve Lepper]

A simple fact: rolled fenders (especially welded sections like the rears on most cars) will flare slightly when rolled.

The solution to this would be to mandate a max tire size, a deviation from OEM wheel offset (say +/- 15mm) and no cutting: there's only so much you can do with a lip roller (or baseball bat.)

[Jason Isley BS RX8]

Seems like a simple check to me.

[Steve Lepper]

Hey! Don't give Mike any ideas...

[Mike Simanyi]

Seems like a simple check to me.

Beta: "Beta Motorsports, this is John!"

Me: "Hi John, I'd like to request a quote for the new SCCA ST impound tools."

Beta: "Can do. Whatcha looking for?"

Me: "Stock profile guides for the full left and right sides of every car that ran, runs, or may run in ST."

Beta: <Eyes glazing with $$$$$$$$ symbols> "Uhhh..." <Drool falls on phone, shorting it out and call ends.>

That whole Car of Tomorrow thing really helps the Nascar impound boys.

Mike

[Jason Isley BS RX8]

Beta: "Beta Motorsports, this is John!"

Me: "Hi John, I'd like to request a quote for the new SCCA ST impound tools."

Beta: "Can do. Whatcha looking for?"

Me: "Stock profile guides for the full left and right sides of every car that ran, runs, or may run in ST."

Beta: <Eyes glazing with $$$$$$$$ symbols> "Uhhh..." <Drool falls on phone, shorting it out and call ends.>

That whole Car of Tomorrow thing really helps the Nascar impound boys.

Mike

You only need a set of 89' Civic Si templates. Does excess body filler count as a fender modifications?

[Curt Luther]

The S2000s can take way more advantage of the ST* I/H/E/ECU rules than the MX-5s can...and 8.5" wheels are available for both...although I wouldn't mind 9s...
...and 255s...and non-factory LSDs...

...not that I've been looking into this or anything...

[Jason Uyeda]

The S2000s can take way more advantage of the ST* I/H/E/ECU rules than the MX-5s can...and 8.5" wheels are available for both...although I wouldn't mind 9s...
...and 255s...and non-factory LSDs...

Beyond the VTEC drop what else is there that is that much better. Not disagreeing, just curious... For example I'm not aware of any big S2k autox intake gains that are ST legal and greater than what the NC can achieve. Also, a custom header appears to be the way to go either way and I've generally heard of greater gains for the NC, especially on a percentage basis...

[Mako Koiwai]

225/50/15 710's rub in our NB fender wheels ... yet TA ran 275 Hoosiers on his ?!

[James Yom]

The S2000s can take way more advantage of the ST* I/H/E/ECU rules than the MX-5s can...and 8.5" wheels are available for both...although I wouldn't mind 9s...
...and 255s...and non-factory LSDs...

...not that I've been looking into this or anything...

Where are you getting that I/H/E will get you a lot of gains in the S2000? Becuase in my 8 years of being an S2000 fanboi, I've found the opposite to be true. A lot of race teams and tuner shops use a modded factory airbox becuase you can't make gains with an aftermarket intake. As for the exhaust, same goes for AS, there are no gains from any of the exhausts. Actually, a large percent of aftermarket exhausts lose hp. Honda's is good, just heavy. Ditto goes for headers. Most S2k owners don't even bother with the header because of it. I/H/E may give you 3-5 hp realistically. Key would be the reflash on 06+ S2000s. Not so much smoothing out the VTEC hit (you could do that with a VFAC) but to bump up the rev limiter to 8500. With that, you've effectively nullified any advantage the AP1 has over the AP2, and made the CR the S2000 to have in the class. Next best would be the 06+ cars.

In terms of tires, I'm with Uyeda. You need 285s on some fat wheels for the S2000 to have a shot against an NC. Even if the STAC increased the tire size to 265, it won't help the S2000 as much as ppl think becuase you'd have to go to 18s to go from a 255 to a 265 (for most of the competitive tires anyway). That will add a minumum of 6lbs per wheel/tire. Dunno if that weight penalty is enough to justify going to 18s for just 10mm. If the tire allowance is 265s though, at least the option is there to use it should the NB and MR-S end up considerably faster than the S2k. At a 255/265 tire restriction, the NC will blow everything out of the water. I'm sure you guys have taken passengers/instructors on rides, and noticed a big difference in times with the extra weight. For the S2k vs NC, the 300 lb advantage on the same tire will have an even larger difference. Having driven some of the best ST cars in country, it's amazing what a light car can do on skinny tires. Imagine what a light car could do on the same tires.

That's why I voted to exclude the NC from STR. It will become a spec NC class, and we don't need another miata-dominated class. Let the S2k/NB/MR-S duke it out.

Hope you're all doing well in Cali.

James
missing my s2k...

[Curt Luther]

I'll backpeddle a bit and say my statement above is more geared to the rules as written. With the "stock" cat rule, the S2000, especially the AP2's, will have some of their shortcomings improved with off the shelf parts and tuning. The MX-5s will make some more power but without that custom header, the cat rule screws them a bit. I get nervous for some reason when I hear the words "custom header" and "stock cats" in the same sentence...

If the MX-5 is let in under the rules as written, it will be a good car for the class, but I don't think it will be an overdog. There is a big difference between SP rules and what is proposed for STR. I think that's where some people are getting, for lack of a better word, confused. They see the car Brian built doing better than the car Jason built and seeing that Brian's car looked more stock and they say, "See, it's gotta be faster in ST trim too". An NA Miata is way faster in CSP trim than a Civic or CRX in the same trim. By the same arguement for the MX-5 and S2000 above, the Miata should be faster than the CRX in STS, but, at this point, it's not...

Yes, the lighter car on street tires does have the advantage, theoretically. That being said Rhoades did quite well a couple of years ago bucking this trend. So there is precident that it can be done...

I'm a S2000 fanboi as well so I'm happy that they are getting a place to play in ST* classes. That being said, I have a build sheet as well for the MX-5. I wanna see where the rules shake out on this. Nothing is in stone yet so I'm not buying anything...

Hey. These MR-S Spyders are pretty cheap...

;)

[Darren Cole]

The S2000s can take way more advantage of the ST* I/H/E/ECU rules than the MX-5s can...and 8.5" wheels are available for both...although I wouldn't mind 9s...
...and 255s...and non-factory LSDs...

...not that I've been looking into this or anything...

Where are you getting that I/H/E will get you a lot of gains in the S2000? Becuase in my 8 years of being an S2000 fanboi, I've found the opposite to be true. A lot of race teams and tuner shops use a modded factory airbox becuase you can't make gains with an aftermarket intake. As for the exhaust, same goes for AS, there are no gains from any of the exhausts. Actually, a large percent of aftermarket exhausts lose hp. Honda's is good, just heavy. Ditto goes for headers. Most S2k owners don't even bother with the header because of it. I/H/E may give you 3-5 hp realistically. Key would be the reflash on 06+ S2000s. Not so much smoothing out the VTEC hit (you could do that with a VFAC) but to bump up the rev limiter to 8500. With that, you've effectively nullified any advantage the AP1 has over the AP2, and made the CR the S2000 to have in the class. Next best would be the 06+ cars.

In terms of tires, I'm with Uyeda. You need 285s on some fat wheels for the S2000 to have a shot against an NC. Even if the STAC increased the tire size to 265, it won't help the S2000 as much as ppl think becuase you'd have to go to 18s to go from a 255 to a 265 (for most of the competitive tires anyway). That will add a minumum of 6lbs per wheel/tire. Dunno if that weight penalty is enough to justify going to 18s for just 10mm. If the tire allowance is 265s though, at least the option is there to use it should the NB and MR-S end up considerably faster than the S2k. At a 255/265 tire restriction, the NC will blow everything out of the water. I'm sure you guys have taken passengers/instructors on rides, and noticed a big difference in times with the extra weight. For the S2k vs NC, the 300 lb advantage on the same tire will have an even larger difference. Having driven some of the best ST cars in country, it's amazing what a light car can do on skinny tires. Imagine what a light car could do on the same tires.

That's why I voted to exclude the NC from STR. It will become a spec NC class, and we don't need another miata-dominated class. Let the S2k/NB/MR-S duke it out.

Hope you're all doing well in Cali.

James
missing my s2k...

James,
What benefits do the 2006+ S2000 have over the 2004 and 2005?

Where you been? did you move again? S2000 crowd is getting bigger than ever!