Cal Club Autocross Forums

Bill Schenker wrote: Also, Steve, have to go w/Jason here: no bending, cutting, etc. is allowed in SP.

Except for the driver....

Bill Schenker wrote: Also, Steve, have to go w/Jason here: no bending, cutting, etc. is allowed in SP.

I may have that wrong, as I've had my nose buried in the SM regs a lot recently.

Although, if there is no cutting/bending/etc, that makes it even more interesting. I'll use your car as an example: your intake duct goes under the radiator, right? How did you get around the factory foam seal that goes between the lower radiator tank and plastic undertray? Seems a lot of Miata folks conveinently forget this part ever existed... yet I see a lot of stock cars (mine included) that still have it.

On a related note, now that they have allowed replacement radiators, it will be interesting to see how things like the Miata seal get handled. If my Miata didn't have a foam seal across the bottom of the radiator, I could build a big cold air duct in the space: think 1 1/2" high by 24" wide would have some effect? Betcha it would. I can think of a few other cars out there where this same kind of advantage could be applied.

Steve Lepper wrote:

Bill Schenker wrote: Also, Steve, have to go w/Jason here: no bending, cutting, etc. is allowed in SP.

I may have that wrong, as I've had my nose buried in the SM regs a lot recently.

Although, if there is no cutting/bending/etc, that makes it even more interesting. I'll use your car as an example: your intake duct goes under the radiator, right? How did you get around the factory foam seal that goes between the lower radiator tank and plastic undertray? Seems a lot of Miata folks conveinently forget this part ever existed... yet I see a lot of stock cars (mine included) that still have it.

On a related note, now that they have allowed replacement radiators, it will be interesting to see how things like the Miata seal get handled. If my Miata didn't have a foam seal across the bottom of the radiator, I could build a big cold air duct in the space: think 1 1/2" high by 24" wide would have some effect? Betcha it would. I can think of a few other cars out there where this same kind of advantage could be applied.

You must have not looked close enough: the foam is still there as my rad. is oem- nothing cut, bent or left out.

Steve Lepper wrote:This seems to set the precedent that it's not legal to slightly trim/bend parts to facilitate the installation of other parts.

In SP, this isn't allowed.

Jay W

Mike Simanyi wrote: The only problem with ST classes following the category name occurs after STC...

Not much worse than Ladies in STU...

Mari Clements wrote: Not much worse than Ladies in STU...

Steve Lepper wrote: I may have that wrong, as I've had my nose buried in the SM regs a lot recently.

Although, if there is no cutting/bending/etc, that makes it even more interesting. I'll use your car as an example: your intake duct goes under the radiator, right? How did you get around the factory foam seal that goes between the lower radiator tank and plastic undertray? Seems a lot of Miata folks conveinently forget this part ever existed... yet I see a lot of stock cars (mine included) that still have it.

On a related note, now that they have allowed replacement radiators, it will be interesting to see how things like the Miata seal get handled. If my Miata didn't have a foam seal across the bottom of the radiator, I could build a big cold air duct in the space: think 1 1/2" high by 24" wide would have some effect? Betcha it would. I can think of a few other cars out there where this same kind of advantage could be applied.

What is with these socal "Miata Tuners"? They claim this and that, sell parts to customers assuring them they are class legal, and then have to back pedal because the never looked at the rules.

Here is another prime example... Read the proposed rule about radiators in SP, and then edit your post to save yourself further embarrassment.

Steve Lepper wrote:

Bill Schenker wrote: Also, Steve, have to go w/Jason here: no bending, cutting, etc. is allowed in SP.

I may have that wrong, as I've had my nose buried in the SM regs a lot recently.

Although, if there is no cutting/bending/etc, that makes it even more interesting. I'll use your car as an example: your intake duct goes under the radiator, right? How did you get around the factory foam seal that goes between the lower radiator tank and plastic undertray? Seems a lot of Miata folks conveinently forget this part ever existed... yet I see a lot of stock cars (mine included) that still have it.

On a related note, now that they have allowed replacement radiators, it will be interesting to see how things like the Miata seal get handled. If my Miata didn't have a foam seal across the bottom of the radiator, I could build a big cold air duct in the space: think 1 1/2" high by 24" wide would have some effect? Betcha it would. I can think of a few other cars out there where this same kind of advantage could be applied.

Too bad the dimensions have to be the same:

3) Fluid capacity /_and dry weight_/ of radiator must be no less than that of the standard part. Alternate
radiators may serve no other purpose (e.g. to allow a cold air intake passage).”

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:[
Too bad the dimensions have to be the same:
]

No they don't! They just can't be smaller.

Eric Clements wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:[
Too bad the dimensions have to be the same:
]

No they don't! They just can't be smaller.

Oh, yeah. But the part about the size requirement as it relates to routing an intake is the key issue. Bigger? Might as well be the same.

Bill Schenker wrote: You must have not looked close enough: the foam is still there as my rad. is oem- nothing cut, bent or left out.

Thanks Bill... I figured if anyone here would know about that it would be you. I'll look more closely next time: I was remembering it passed under the radiator, but if you have the OEM seal in there then it must take a different route.

Jason Isley BS RX8 wrote:What is with these socal "Miata Tuners"? They claim this and that, sell parts to customers assuring them they are class legal, and then have to back pedal because the never looked at the rules.

Here is another prime example... Read the proposed rule about radiators in SP, and then edit your post to save yourself further embarrassment.

And, you would know what I sell... how? Mazda dealers are typically the ones selling their intake kit. You might want to get a clue before you attempt such foolish generalizations.

Go back and read the part where I said I don't use this kit. I can understand why a lot of folks would be annoyed by this: when a manufacturer sells an emissions and warranty legal accessory, you would think it should be legal in a class where intake systems are pretty much free. There's an easy way for Mazda to play along and eliminate the issue, (the topic is already on it's way to an interested party there) so it will be interesting to see if they decide to do anything about it.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:

Eric Clements wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:[
Too bad the dimensions have to be the same:
]

No they don't! They just can't be smaller.

Oh, yeah. But the part about the size requirement as it relates to routing an intake is the key issue. Bigger? Might as well be the same.

I saw they shot that down right away before anyone could buld one with a big hole in the center. I wonder how long it will take before someone shows up with a radiator with brackets that move the entire part slightly up/down/back/whatever helps their car.... hey, it's the same size and bolts to the stock mounts... ;)

Steve Lepper wrote:

Bill Schenker wrote: You must have not looked close enough: the foam is still there as my rad. is oem- nothing cut, bent or left out.

Thanks Bill... I figured if anyone here would know about that it would be you. I'll look more closely next time: I was remembering it passed under the radiator, but if you have the OEM seal in there then it must take a different route.

But it does go under the rad. - but the foam is still there - not removed.

Bill Schenker wrote:

Steve Lepper wrote:

Bill Schenker wrote: You must have not looked close enough: the foam is still there as my rad. is oem- nothing cut, bent or left out.

Thanks Bill... I figured if anyone here would know about that it would be you. I'll look more closely next time: I was remembering it passed under the radiator, but if you have the OEM seal in there then it must take a different route.

But it does go under the rad. - but the foam is still there - not removed.

The stock foam should be contacting both the bottom of the rad and the lower splash pan almost all the way across with the exception of short open sections near each corner. To go under the center would mean bending the foam out of the way, and the rules state No Bending. Does it come through the lower right corner? I seem to remember the flex hose being on that side. I will definitely have to take a closer look next time I see your car.

I think you'd be hard put to say that with the foam in place I'm illegally "bending" the foam out of place.

You will not find the word "bending" in the rules until the SM section. You are not allowed to cut holes in the hood for carburetors or in the firewall for cowl intakes. The rules are silent about pushing something flexible out of the way. This setup is on a couple of cars, Bill's and George Doganis'.

As for creative bracketery to tilt the radiator, that would be protest bait.

I would have been happier with a rule that allowed smaller physical dimension but required same capacity, there by opening a path for intake routing.