chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

Well, it looks like TeamRX8 has breathed some new life in the sccaforums thread. Hopefully, with the move to concrete there'll be a bigger gap in cumulative times between BS and DSP this year @ Nats.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

I can understand why the non-RX8 guys aren't so informed, but there are a few RX-8 people spewing uninformed commentary that aren't helping. I ran three BMWs in this same stock class prior to the RX-8; 1996 E36 M3, 1999 Z3 coupe, 2004 Z4 3.0. The Renesis is a pretty amazing engine for being only 1.3L, but it simply can't compare to those engines, even fully modded like the way I had it setup in STU to what they are Stock.

chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

^ Understood Mark. I'm trying to get that point across as well, as was Isely during his input in that thread. On paper, the RX-8 "fits" into DSP very well.

They are those who feel another "30hp" will be found in the motor during the next 5 years of development!

Cromus

newb question: which class is the rx8 going to be the most competitive in this year? I'll keep an eye on the boards for more info. thanks

ChopsMcgraw

Not sure who Mark is referring to as uninformed, hopefully it's not me .

And yes, the Rx8 loses on HP/TQ/acceleration numbers.

It loses no where else.

chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

I don't *think* he's talking about you Elliot. Without a doubt, the main purveyor of mis-information in that thread is "Mr. White".

I'm an easy going guy, but there's only so much I can take of that guy's comments before I tell myself to wait a day before I respond. I mean, I show him hard evidence about the RX-8's lack of power, and he comes back with a response that the car could gain a lot from light-weight parts that can make it "spin up faster"???? WTF?!!!!

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

I thought the RX-8's handling, low CG, etc. etc. would help it to overcome in STU too

where I was uninformed I now can see ...

murph1379

Well the power differential between the RX-8 and STU competitors is orders of magnitude larger than between it and the DSP competition. STU folks are hitting 360 to the *wheels*. That's nearly double an RX-8. DSP has what, 40hp on the RX-8? But only in a car that weighs 400lbs more, otherwise it's essentially even power wise.

DSP had .9 over BS over two days at Nats last year. Think you can't find half a second with SP mods? riiiiight.

"it's not a sports car! It's a sedan, reallly! It has a back seat!" riiiight... Just like the Porsches. STAC may buy that, but **** isn't trying to class cars based on silly things like # of seats. CSP seems much more appropriate to me. Lightweight, good suspension, but gutless sportscars. Perfect fit. Yes it's bigger and heavier than a miata, but it also has more power.

Mazda didn't design the RX-8 to be slower than the miata, and IMO, it's not.

chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

Just to keep things factual, STU tuned STi's make around 310-330whp & wtq depending on whether they get a pump gas or race gas tune. Evo's make similar whp numbers, but they're down a bit on wtq.

I wouldn't be so sure about the RX-8 being made to be faster than the miata. CS/BS times have always been close, and the '07 MSR gave the miatas another edge. With *SP mods, the 13B-MSP just can't compete power-wise with the 2.0L engine in the MX-5.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

Your opinion is irrelevant compared to the actual facts. How many times do you need to see a "faster" car get beat by a "slower" car to realize that there's more to it than this, not to mention rules like CSP Miatas being allowed to remove their convertible tops and frames completely from the car, which have no bearing on the factory's intention. Never mind that the Miata is smaller and lighter to begin with.

Ultimately the issue is that nobody wants to have their class change or make way for newer cars, but it's inevitable.

always.anthony

mazda should give all rx8club forum members turbos. then we'd be set. sucks we don't take well to aftermarket performance what not, or as well to other cars.

murph1379

Again, it wasn't my Evo that I'm quoting, but 360 was a real number, at the wheels, on a real Evo, that was *not* cheating.

Do you have any idea how silly that sounds to people who've driven both? I've driven both, but only for a few runs, I'd recommend consulting Ivan, who's owned and autocrossed both pretty successfully, but I know he doesn't want any part of this discussion.

PS - the MSR adds absolutely nothing that you can't add in SP. (except maybe the oil cooler)

chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

I've never heard of any Evo with an STU "legal tune" hit a whp number that high, but if you know of such an Evo then so be it. Either way, we digress...
Matt,

What are you talking about here? Are you comparing the cars in stock class or after *SP mods?

You make the statement that Mazda didn't build the RX-8 to be slower than the miata, which inherently implies stock vs stock. You also bring Ivan's name into this discussion. Ivan used to drive a CS miata and is now in a BS RX-8. Again this implies stock vs stock.

So what would I choose stock vs stock??? On 50-60% of solo courses I'd pick a CS miata over a BS RX-8. I've driven several miatas, and they're just so diminutive in size and nimble. I've never driven an MSR, but put that into the equation (with its stiffer spring rates) and my stock class choice would be even clearer.

If you want to talk about SP, stop making "stock class" references.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

considering that the NC Miata in general has all but disappeared from CSP competition it would be really dumb to spend all that money on an MSR and take it there instead, the only exception might be pulling all the MSR parts off and selling them to someone else for a Stock conversion ...

chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

Added the data point from the Blytheville NT to the sccaforums thread (1st good concrete data point for 2009). It'll be interesting to see what direction the banter takes now...

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

It won't change anyone's mind, nobody wants a new threat in their class regardless of whether it belongs there or not

murph1379

It's not the SCCA's fault that the RX-8 is one of the only four seater sports cars ever made, and therefore difficult to fit into class philosophies that are connected to concepts like "sedans" and "sportscars" being in different classes because they're going to perform differently.

I still think it belongs in CSP if it's so outmatched in BSP. DSP is full of real sedans.

chiketkd

iTrader: (5)

I will give you that point Matt -- the RX-8 is definitely a difficult car to class as it's very unique. As an FYI, CSP has been outmatching BSP for many years.

mwood

Here's an idea: get the awd cars out of BSP (and ESP, for that matter, which is going to be the next SP class screwed up by the rally cars), create an "AWDSP" and see what happens with the '8 in BSP...I'm not saying the RX8 in SP trim can run with the S2K and old school C4, but it does seem a more reasonable solution than messing with DSP, which is one of the few SP classes with any numbers and semi reasonable "pay to play".

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

If the RX-8 is classified as a sportscar by the SEB, then please explain why it's classed in STX?

Fail .....


.

murph1379

exactly, "hey let's toss this car with double wishbones, low CG, and huge fenders into a class full of high-cg mcstrut sedans!"

This is why objective classing doesn't work. (especially based partly on something as meaningless as engine displacement)

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

The same as Stock and Street Touring

the fail is yours, friend ...

murph1379

Not at all, Street Touring classes cars by rules about # of seats and engine displacement, as if either one have much to do with autocross performance. Stock and SP use subjective performance and class philosophies to guide classing.

Maybe you want to check your rulebook, my friend.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

I only served on the SEB (and was a Liason for the ST Advisory Committee when STU was formed), served on the ST Advisory Committee after the SEB position, and serve as Protest Chair at many national events, not that this proves anything

you got one part right; class philosophies, of which one is no sports cars in ST, STX or STU. That's how STS came about (formerly STS2) as well as the push for a higher level ST sports car class

the same type of philosophy that generated the RX-8/DSP proposal, this came out of the SP Advisory Committee with SEB approval. Believe it or not there is a difference between a sports car and a sports sedan, not that four doors and four seats proves anything either.

like I said, nobody likes having their own class pot stirred, but unlike yourself I accept both the logic and need for class progression. You haven't seen me belating the proposed BS/CS merger even though I personally believe it kills the RX-8 for Stock participation. Like it or not, DSP is where the RX-8 fits.

The central issue here is, should DSP be the place where old cars go to live on forever or should new blood be allowed to participate? Having seen firsthand the FrankenVW in action, IMO you should worry less about the RX-8 and more about it.

mwood

More evidence of the point I made earlier, which has been ignored...awd cars don't fit in any of the existing classing system, simply because they bring a unique and advantageous dynamic capability to the table.

There's a very clear reason why awd has, in large part, been regulated out of existence in all forms of motorsport competition, except in those instances where awd competes against only awd...

The '8 in a BSP class populated with rwd cars makes enough sense to let it be, imho, but in the current BSP fuhgettaboutit. If the rally cars continue to be "the" car for BSP, then moving the RX8 to DSP is an interesting proposition.