[Potomac-Greg]

I just heard that in the 48 car Spec Miata class (racing at Laguna Seca yesterday) the top SIX finishers were all disqualified in tech. What a cluster.

http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=52091

In Spec Racer Ford, they had the closest 1-2 finish (0.065 sec.) since transponders have been used. It was a great back-and-forth battle.
http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=52087

[Fairfax 944]

Wow! So many DQs in spec miata.

More details at:
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?p=448941

[Goldie]

Reading up on the discusion before, during and after the DQs is interesting as well

http://mazdaracers.com/topic/4768-ev...fs-2014/page-1

[good hands]

Incredible when you read the thread. So many people have cheater motors some think they should change the rule to accomodate the cheaters ?

[Potomac-Greg]

Originally Posted by good hands

Incredible when you read the thread. So many people have cheater motors some think they should change the rule to accommodate the cheaters ?

That's why some SCCA regions created SSM -- to try to get back to what SM used to be.

Maybe they need to institute a $30-40,000 "claiming" rule. Any SM can be bought and must be sold for $30,000 after the race. No doubt, there will be a LOT of discussion over the winter.

[Dr K]

Originally Posted by Potomac-Greg

That's why some SCCA regions created SSM -- to try to get back to what SM used to be.

Maybe they need to institute a $30-40,000 "claiming" rule. Any SM can be bought and must be sold for $30,000 after the race. No doubt, there will be a LOT of discussion over the winter.

As Greg knows but some of you may not, SSM ("Showroom" Spec Miata) is not a national class in SCCA. Different regions have different rules, and when I last checked about a year ago, the National Capital region was alone in their very strict rules of a sealed engine (97 HP!!) and spec suspension with no options. The other regions are all envious of the 40-car-in-class races in this region, but none of them have yet followed suit with the strict rules. It's still more flexible than the true SCCA spec cars (e.g. SRF) where the entire car is SPEC, but it's close and it's less expensive. And therefore, it's very popular.

I'm looking forward to trying a race next season--I would have raced the weekend before this past except for the religious holiday. The races apparently have less contact than SM, but considerably more than PCA. We'll see how tolerable that is after "gentleman racing" with our club. The cars sure are a blast to drive, and stick like rubber cement! But they make a 944 look fast on the straights...

I like the idea of the "claiming race" or "engine claiming race" in SM, or they could go back to their roots and seal the engines (perhaps at a more reasonable HP than 97). Sure, there's a cost to getting a dyno, but it would be a WHOLE LOT CHEAPER than the arms race that is currently occurring in SM, and the huge fields in SSM attest to that.

Peter

[Vicegrip]

Originally Posted by good hands

Incredible when you read the thread. So many people have cheater motors some think they should change the rule to accomodate the cheaters ?

If you read up on what happened and the rule in question it seems more a BS inforcement of a poorly written rule. Some of the cars torn down and DQed the only thing found was this one thing that is a side effect of some legal machining and within the depth and diameter confines of another part of the same rule.

Would suck to work your way through a year and get DQed on something that all the builders are doing and openly as it was no considered a cheat.

[Potomac-Greg]

Originally Posted by Vicegrip

If you read up on what happened and the rule in question it seems more a BS inforcement of a poorly written rule. Some of the cars torn down and DQed the only thing found was this one thing that is a side effect of some legal machining and within the depth and diameter confines of another part of the same rule.

Would suck to work your way through a year and get DQed on something that all the builders are doing and openly as it was no considered a cheat.

I saw a public apology by one builder (Jim Drago) where he eloquently states that his drivers asked for the strongest engines within the rules, and the rule in question was not very clear. He took full responsibility. So I withdraw my implication that the drivers were "cheating" (the drivers basically just bought the engine and the engine builders were just toeing a fuzzy line) but I double down on my view that a class with this kind of spend, and the potential for mass DQs needs to be revamped (or avoided).

[good hands]

I know you race SRF Greg. Is there any way to cheat with a sealed motor ? Maybe that is the only answer.

[Potomac-Greg]

Originally Posted by good hands

I know you race SRF Greg. Is there any way to cheat with a sealed motor ? Maybe that is the only answer.

There are lots of little cheats but they don't add up to much. People have polished out the intake boxes trying to smooth out airflow (stupid) tried exotic fuel mixtures, and tried to re-route intake hoses. You can have an illegal ride height, and even swap in non-spec springs. If you podium a Majors race, you'll get caught.

Most of the cheating is done at the regional races where scrutineering is weak at best. In four years, the most scrutiny I've suffered is a ride height check (and I passed). I have avoided Majors scrutiny by finishing strategically mid-pack.