RX-8 to DSP???
#26
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
#27
Registered
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.
#28
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ 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!
They are those who feel another "30hp" will be found in the motor during the next 5 years of development!
#31
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?!!!!
Last edited by chiketkd; 05-15-2009 at 10:08 AM.
#33
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
#34
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
#35
Registered
iTrader: (25)
Ultimately the issue is that nobody wants to have their class change or make way for newer cars, but it's inevitable.
Last edited by TeamRX8; 05-25-2009 at 02:16 PM.
#37
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS - the MSR adds absolutely nothing that you can't add in SP. (except maybe the oil cooler)
Last edited by murph1379; 05-25-2009 at 04:03 PM.
#38
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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)
PS - the MSR adds absolutely nothing that you can't add in SP. (except maybe the oil cooler)
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.
#39
Registered
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 ...
#40
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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...
#42
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
I still think it belongs in CSP if it's so outmatched in BSP. DSP is full of real sedans.
#43
Row faster, I hear banjos
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
I still think it belongs in CSP if it's so outmatched in BSP. DSP is full of real sedans.
#44
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".
#46
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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)
This is why objective classing doesn't work. (especially based partly on something as meaningless as engine displacement)
#48
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Maybe you want to check your rulebook, my friend.
#49
Registered
iTrader: (25)
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.
Maybe you want to check your rulebook, my friend.
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.
Last edited by TeamRX8; 06-13-2009 at 02:31 PM.
#50
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.
Last edited by mwood; 06-13-2009 at 02:28 PM.