Preliminary Car Classifications [Archive] - CASC Ontario Region Message Forums

tanney

02-21-2006, 05:19 PM

MrHeavyFoot

02-21-2006, 05:34 PM

This is the national car classifications.... the Type R was in DSS/SP last year and the STI in ESS/SP for the nationals. Ontario will follow ALL national car classifications this year, regardless of whether we feel they are fair changes. If SCCA says this car is classified as such, who am I to argue...... There is bound to be someone that will complain that I am being biased, if I make these types of decisions on my own.......
Hi Wes,
SCCA has reclassified the STi to BSP this year, so unless CAC is deciding not to have SS/SP classifications follow SCCA SP, then they've missed the STi change.

And for clarity sake, I would suggest that the "non-stock eligible pre-amble" specify which years of the JCW Mini are not stock eligible (although it is mentioned in the BS listings).

Thanx.

tanney

02-21-2006, 05:37 PM

Thanks Pat, I will follow up on those

tanney

02-21-2006, 05:39 PM

Rob

02-21-2006, 05:41 PM

Thanks Wes

Another random thought (I'm not complaining, just commenting!):

Strange that the 06 miata (sorry I'll never refer to it as the MX5) and the solstice/sky are in C stock while the 04/05 mazdaspeed miata is in stock B.

06 miata: 170 hp / 140 ft lbs
04/05 mazdaspeed miata: 178 hp / 166 ft lbs
solstice/sky: 177 hp / 166 ft lbs
98-05 normally aspirated miata: 142 hp / 125 ft lbs

(BTW the General's product is about 400 lbs heavier than the mazdas).

That 06 miata should kick butt in C stock. Thought the 06 miata and the solstice/sky would have been in B stock. Any idea whether anyone will bring one of these out to play?

Piotrov

02-21-2006, 05:44 PM

The 00+ celica gt-s was moved to Stock Class G from Stock Class D what would this mean to me being in DSP? Do I stay in DSP?

MrHeavyFoot

02-21-2006, 05:46 PM

According to the SCCA car classifications list on SCCA's web site, the WRX STi is still in ESP. I remember reading something that the move to BSP was proposed. If someone can point me to something that states it did indeed get changed, I will change it.

http://www.scca.com/_filelibrary/File/2006_solo_rules.pdf

Says the STi is in BSP. Are you sure you're not looking at the 2005 rules?

As for the Mazdaspeed Miata, SCCA has moved it to CS for 2006. (See above link)

AlienDNA

02-21-2006, 05:50 PM

or "What I Learned At Autocross Today While Reading The Car Classifications":

1. The 4 cyl Z3 is back in CS - yay!
2. All non-turbo RX7s are in ES - yikes!
3. GS could get interesting with the new Civic Si and VW GTi.
4. I think an E30 M3 would be a killer CSS car.
5. Skodas continue to get no respect.
6. Someone, apparently, at one time attempted to autocross a stock Mercury Bobcat, bless their misguided soul.

AlienDNA

02-21-2006, 05:52 PM

That 06 miata should kick butt in C stock. Thought the 06 miata and the solstice/sky would have been in B stock. Any idea whether anyone will bring one of these out to play?

Actually, initial reports out of the U.S. indicate the MX5 is going to have it's butt kicked (even by NB Miatae) and the Solstice (esp. with the FE3 package) is an overdog right out of the box.

tanney

02-21-2006, 05:56 PM

Rob

02-21-2006, 06:04 PM

Actually, initial reports out of the U.S. indicate the MX5 is going to have it's butt kicked (even by NB Miatae) and the Solstice (esp. with the FE3 package) is an overdog right out of the box.

Huh - surprising - apparently I made the right decision picking up that 05 mazdaspeed - never did test drive the 06 because as soon as I saw it, it was obvious that you can't put a rollbar in without a LOT of work.

MrHeavyFoot

02-21-2006, 06:19 PM

Pat I was reading this..... Street Prepared Category Classifications by Make.pdf (http://www.scca.com/_Filelibrary/File/streetpreparedcategoryclassificationsbymake.pdf). I will indeed read through the rule book then and not rely on the secondary documents (like the link listed and the Fastrack news letters)
Weird. I found the corresponding Stock listing and it seems to have at least some of the '06 updates, but the SP document doesn't seem to have been updated at all.

Looking under the document properties for each, the Stock doc is dated Feb 9, 2006, while the SP doc is dated April 21, 2005.

h-bomb

02-21-2006, 06:49 PM

Nice to see the ITR back where it belongs, in DSS/DSP (not highlighted for some reason)

Hmmm... :P

Slowpoke

02-21-2006, 07:05 PM

According to the SCCA car classifications list on SCCA's web site, the WRX STi is still in ESP. I remember reading something that the move to BSP was proposed. If someone can point me to something that states it did indeed get changed, I will change it.
Although I would LOVE to keep the STi in ESP...

... From J.C.'s results on the weekend, looks like they're scoring the STi in BSP.

http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/File/SCCA-FtMyers-Saturday.pdf

tanney

02-21-2006, 07:26 PM

Just goes to show that even the SCCA make mistakes sometimes.... :) Bad me for actually thinking that documents on their webpage were actually correct..... I should know better.

Weird. I found the corresponding Stock listing and it seems to have at least some of the '06 updates, but the SP document doesn't seem to have been updated at all.

Looking under the document properties for each, the Stock doc is dated Feb 9, 2006, while the SP doc is dated April 21, 2005.

SE-R Racer

02-21-2006, 07:53 PM

Hehe Sentra '59- '99....man, thats older models than I thought :D

Marsh

02-21-2006, 09:01 PM

The question is whether or not we'll be using the stock rim rule this year? If so then alot of the screwy SCCA classes will make sense because American companies usually use wider tires. Japaneese companies are all obsessed with .5 rim widths (I can't speak for german companies).

For the record I hate this rule because it favours big budgets. Now many people argue that it favours small budgets because it forces you to use stock rims. This is crap. It punishes small budgets because it makes cheap cars uncompetitive. The only cars that can fit big tires are the expensive ones, that come on wider wheels from the factory.

Slowpoke

02-21-2006, 09:15 PM

Wow... '04 Audi S4 with a V8... in F-Stock?

I'm either afraid for PAX or Audi should be ashamed at the price that they're charging...

Doug Phillips

02-21-2006, 10:58 PM

According to the 2006 SCCA rulebook:

BMW M5 (04+) is A Stock not F Stock

Subaru WRX STi is BSS/BSP not ESS/ESP

There may be other errors also if the intent is that the CAC rules are the same as the SCCA rules.

Does the CAC publish the rules somewhere along with their intent? Where would you find them?

When are the CASC-OR preparation rules expected to be released?

Will these be modified from last year or will they also follow the SCCA rules?

tanney

02-21-2006, 11:22 PM

Updated pdf uploaded....

tanney

02-21-2006, 11:25 PM

The intent is to have the rules released in the next couple of weeks....

Check the Technical Bulletins on the new class of the M5

According to the 2006 SCCA rulebook:

BMW M5 (04+) is A Stock not F Stock

Subaru WRX STi is BSS/BSP not ESS/ESP

There may be other errors also if the intent is that the CAC rules are the same as the SCCA rules.

Does the CAC publish the rules somewhere along with their intent? Where would you find them?

When are the CASC-OR preparation rules expected to be released?

Will these be modified from last year or will they also follow the SCCA rules?

MrHeavyFoot

02-21-2006, 11:27 PM

Pat I was reading this..... Street Prepared Category Classifications by Make.pdf (http://www.scca.com/_Filelibrary/File/streetpreparedcategoryclassificationsbymake.pdf). I will indeed read through the rule book then and not rely on the secondary documents (like the link listed and the Fastrack news letters)
Sigh.....
I was just reading through the March Fastrack, and it would appear they have moved/added the Mazdaspeed Miata to BSP. (Probably due to boost modifications now being allowed in SCCA SP classes.) That's just what I saw in the March Fastrack. Haven't checked Jan/Feb yet.

Wes,
I would suggest starting with the 2006 SCCA rule set, and then adding any changes found in the subsequent Fastracks. (Good luck with that.)

MrHeavyFoot

02-21-2006, 11:43 PM

Sigh.....
I was just reading through the March Fastrack, and it would appear they have moved/added the Mazdaspeed Miata to BSP. (Probably due to boost modifications now being allowed in SCCA SP classes.) That's just what I saw in the March Fastrack. Haven't checked Jan/Feb yet.

Never mind. I see you caught it with the latest revision. You da man.

Doug Phillips

02-22-2006, 12:35 AM

The intent is to have the rules released in the next couple of weeks....

Check the Technical Bulletins on the new class of the M5

Did not see any Technical Bulletins. Where are they? I looked through the Fasttracks and it still showed it as I posted.

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 08:50 AM

Huh - surprising - apparently I made the right decision picking up that 05 mazdaspeed - never did test drive the 06 because as soon as I saw it, it was obvious that you can't put a rollbar in without a LOT of work.

The Mazdaspeed doesn't get a lot of respect in the U.S. because of the six speed and the 17" rims. I think in Ontario, however, our smaller lots make the six speed an advantage rather than a hindrance. If we still allow unlimited wheel changes in stock, your Mazdaspeed should be fairly dominant in CS, barring somone showing up with a Club Sport Solstice. ;)
;)

tanney

02-22-2006, 09:20 AM

Did not see any Technical Bulletins. Where are they? I looked through the Fasttracks and it still showed it as I posted. Doug, I apologize, the 04+ M5 is indeed in AS. The 00-03 moved to FS as per December 05's Technical Bulletin. The previous listing was for '00+ and I missed the addition of the -'03.

tanney

02-22-2006, 09:24 AM

Pat, I started with last years CAC classifications, sifted through SCCA class list documents (which you have pointed out are incorrect, incomplete and out of date), Fastrack articles and various other source found on and associated with SCCA's web site. Then there are the Canadian only models........

It turns out that last years CAC car classifications had a bunch of duplicate listings (some in the same class....) that have now hopefully all been cleaned up.

An update will be posted shortly.

Sigh.....
I was just reading through the March Fastrack, and it would appear they have moved/added the Mazdaspeed Miata to BSP. (Probably due to boost modifications now being allowed in SCCA SP classes.) That's just what I saw in the March Fastrack. Haven't checked Jan/Feb yet.

Wes,
I would suggest starting with the 2006 SCCA rule set, and then adding any changes found in the subsequent Fastracks. (Good luck with that.)

tanney

02-22-2006, 09:25 AM

The question is whether or not we'll be using the stock rim rule this year? Marshall, this was basically shot down by the CAC TAC. Assume it will remain the same as last year, for now.

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 09:27 AM

The following is a link to the preliminary Car Classification Schedule for the 2006 season.

The additions are highlighted in yellow and the changes are highlighted in green.

There are some substantial and surprising changes.....

Updated....

I notice the preamble states "For Stock Category vehicles, the manufacturer's specifications shall be used for specific wheel diameter
and maximum rim width specifications."

Are we to interpret this to mean that we will also be adopting SCCA stock class wheel rules, with no deviation in diameter or width excepting wierd-ass metric rims?

gatherer

02-22-2006, 09:35 AM

I think that was just left over from the SCCA book it was copied out of ...

as Wes stated above a proposal to use Stock wheel size was shot down when taken to the CAC TAC

Doug Phillips

02-22-2006, 09:39 AM

Doug, I apologize, the 04+ M5 is indeed in AS. The 00-03 moved to FS as per December 05's Technical Bulletin. The previous listing was for '00+ and I missed the addition of the -'03.

What about the STi?

gatherer

02-22-2006, 09:41 AM

Doug,

look at the new file that was posted by Wes in his first post. you will see the STi was taken care of and is now in BSS/BSP

13inches

02-22-2006, 09:48 AM

I notice the preamble states "For Stock Category vehicles, the manufacturer's specifications shall be used for specific wheel diameter
and maximum rim width specifications."

Are we to interpret this to mean that we will also be adopting SCCA stock class wheel rules, with no deviation in diameter or width excepting wierd-ass metric rims?
In a way, we do use the SCCAs stock class wheel rules....the exception being that you take a prep point if you deviate from them. The statement is still valid for our region......

Doug Phillips

02-22-2006, 10:01 AM

I think that was just left over from the SCCA book it was copied out of ...

as Wes stated above a proposal to use Stock wheel size was shot down when taken to the CAC TAC

The text is the same as last years CAC document.

tanney

02-22-2006, 10:17 AM

The text is the same as last years CAC document.
As Ryan stated, the statement is valid in the CAC rule book. If you are not running stock diameter and width wheels, you are required to claim one point as per our rule book.

We are NOT using SCCA rules, but our car classifications are, if not the same, very similar to SCCA's.....

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 10:22 AM

In a way, we do use the SCCAs stock class wheel rules....the exception being that you take a prep point if you deviate from them.

Ryan, this is exactly the same as saying that we allow unlimited wheel changes. Given the other rule restrictions on stock class and two available prep points, there is effectively no limit on wheels in stock other than ensuring that the tread fits under the fender.

I find it unfathomable that we would unflinchingly adopt the SCCA classification system "regardless of whether we feel they are fair changes" (Wes' words, not mine) and then allow nearly unlimited changes in the aspect of stock car preparation that has the greatest influence on performance.

The SCCA classifications are derived from thousands of data points and within the framework of their car preparation rules. Allowing such fundamental changes as wheel width and diameter in the stock classes makes the validity of the stock car classes dubious at best. Assigning car classifications by pulling them out of a hat makes almost as much sense.

Jason or Wes, did the TAC offer a reason as to why the SCCA stock wheel rules were rejected in Canada?

Pete@Marcor

02-22-2006, 10:35 AM

13inches

02-22-2006, 10:46 AM

Ryan, this is exactly the same as saying that we allow unlimited wheel changes. Given the other rule restrictions on stock class and two available prep points, there is effectively no limit on wheels in stock other than ensuring that the tread fits under the fender.

I find it unfathomable that we would unflinchingly adopt the SCCA classification system "regardless of whether we feel they are fair changes" (Wes' words, not mine) and then allow nearly unlimited changes in the aspect of stock car preparation that has the greatest influence on performance.

The SCCA classifications are derived from thousands of data points and within the framework of their car preparation rules. Allowing such fundamental changes as wheel width and diameter in the stock classes makes the validity of the stock car classes dubious at best. Assigning car classifications by pulling them out of a hat makes almost as much sense.

Jason or Wes, did the TAC offer a reason as to why the SCCA stock wheel rules were rejected in Canada?
I hardly think that the SCCA classifications are scrutinized and analyzed to the point where the car's stock wheel width and diameter are determining factors in its classification. Given the numerous choices wheel choices that most cars have from the factory today, you can already choose the car you want with the most appropriate sized wheels.

Of course, we can move your Miata to AS or BS if you wish, since you'll be running 15x8s and 225 Hoosiers, right?

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 10:48 AM

Eric, I would have to disagree. If LSDs are still to be allowed in stock, then I would consider the 2 points to use would be an LSD addition and R-Compounds, on some cars.

Maybe on some cars, but off the top of my head I can't think of any car that would benefit more from an LSD than adding, say, two inches of wheel width. ;)

Also, speaking strictly from a CS Miata perspective, LSD was available as a line item option, so I could add it to my car and claim no points at all. I am sure there other similar cases in other classes.

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 10:58 AM

I hardly think that the SCCA classifications are scrutinized and analyzed to the point where the car's stock wheel width and diameter are determining factors in its classification.

I think you're being disingenuous, if not naive...

Given the numerous choices wheel choices that most cars have from the factory today, you can already choose the car you want with the most appropriate sized wheels.

I'd disagree with that statement as wheel size and option packages are too often tied together. It also completely ignores older cars.

Of course, we can move your Miata to AS or BS if you wish, since you'll be running 15x8s and 225 Hoosiers, right?

Hey, you're the one that started the Lenso group buy. :D

Don't misunderstand me, I'm quite happy to be able to run 13x7.5's in CS if the rules allow it. I just think the rules are wrong. I'll play either way, I just wish we could get a definitive ruling. :)

gatherer

02-22-2006, 11:09 AM

what is so hard about this? we've run the same rules for the past 2 years in regards to wheel size and stock class..

the rule is you use the stock Diameter, Stock Width and Stock Offset.

change any one of those three by more then is allowed in the rule book (there is some tolerance given) then you have to use 1 preparation point for it.

and you have 2 preparation points to use in the stock class...

or maybe I have mis-interpreted what the question is?

anyways for the record I am not on the CAC TAC, nor do I ever speak for them. any of my posts are interpretations of the information I have been given.

13inches

02-22-2006, 11:16 AM

I think you're being disingenuous, if not naive...
Not at all. If the SCCA were to actively consider these datapoints in their classification decisions, the result would be vehicles that are classed differently based on wheel size. Unelss of course the data didn't show a noticeable difference and all of the wheels sizes of a given vehicle would still fall under the same class ..... ;)

I'd disagree with that statement as wheel size and option packages are too often tied together. It also completely ignores older cars.I'm not sure how this is a detractor? I can't think of an example where the option package that would give you the most performance (ie: sport suspension, LSD, etc) wouldn't be accompanied with wheels that would do the same.

Hey, you're the one that started the Lenso group buy. :D

Don't misunderstand me, I'm quite happy to be able to run 13x7.5's in CS if the rules allow it. I just think the rules are wrong. I'll play either way, I just wish we could get a definitive ruling. :)
You can send your request to the solo2 director, as per the rule book :)

Pete@Marcor

02-22-2006, 11:21 AM

Maybe on some cars, but off the top of my head I can't think of any car that would benefit more from an LSD than adding, say, two inches of wheel width. ;)

Also, speaking strictly from a CS Miata perspective, LSD was available as a line item option, so I could add it to my car and claim no points at all. I am sure there other similar cases in other classes.

Well, since most FWD cars can only take a 7" wheel, and some come with a 6.5" from the factory, can you honestly tell me that the .5" increase in wheel width will have more of a benefit than an LSD?

Aftermarket LSDs are usually more effective and stronger than OE LSDs. Also, the ONLY way you would be able to get an LSD into your car is if it were available as a stand-alone option. If it came in a package, all of the items in that package would need to be on the car.

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 11:21 AM

what is so hard about this? we've run the same rules for the past 2 years in regards to wheel size and stock class..

the rule is you use the stock Diameter, Stock Width and Stock Offset.

change any one of those three by more then is allowed in the rule book (there is some tolerance given) then you have to use 1 preparation point for it.

and you have 2 preparation points to use in the stock class...

or maybe I have mis-interpreted what the question is?

Yes, you have misinterpreted it. :D

I fully understand what the rules were. I just want to know what the rules are. Its unsettling to essentially see the SCCA car classifications adopted and not know for sure what other SCCA rules are or are not being adopted. And "Assume....for now" is not at all reassuring when you're trying to plan wheel and tire purchases for the year.

13inches

02-22-2006, 11:24 AM

or maybe I have mis-interpreted what the question is?
The question at hand is why are we using SCCA classifications without using SCCA preparation guidelines. One school of thought is that if we are allowed more modifications in stock class than the SCCA, than our stock classifications should reflect the most prepped cars allowed by our guidelines. This may not be the same as the SCCA classifications.

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 11:29 AM

Well, since most FWD cars can only take a 7" wheel, and some come with a 6.5" from the factory, can you honestly tell me that the .5" increase in wheel width will have more of a benefit than an LSD?

Nope, I'd agree with the LSD in those cases. But I stand by my statement that two inches of wheel width would be more valuable than an LSD. :D

Also, the ONLY way you would be able to get an LSD into your car is if it were available as a stand-alone option.

That's exactly what I meant by a "line item option".

gatherer

02-22-2006, 11:31 AM

yes I understand that.. thats why I wait for the rule book before making any purchases...

for all know they will require tires with a treadwear rating of 500 or more to be used... :p

CharlesK

02-22-2006, 11:32 AM

Maybe on some cars, but off the top of my head I can't think of any car that would benefit more from an LSD than adding, say, two inches of wheel width. ;)

Also, speaking strictly from a CS Miata perspective, LSD was available as a line item option, so I could add it to my car and claim no points at all. I am sure there other similar cases in other classes.

sigh

I just went through this with my local ASN solosport rep. In 1999 and 2000 you had to buy the whole leather package to get a LSD in Canada. Therefore, since the LSD option has been removed from the stock allowed mods list, I have to do a complete leather package conversion or go to C-SS if I want to add a LSD to my 1999 base.

I was also told that if I imported a US sport package I would have to take prep points to make it equivalent to a modified Canadian package (LSD, strut bar, different steering wheel).

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 11:34 AM

for all know they will require tires with a treadwear rating of 500 or more to be used... :p

LOL! You're not proposing a spec tire class, are you? [/kidding!] ;)

gatherer

02-22-2006, 11:38 AM

The question at hand is why are we using SCCA classifications without using SCCA preparation guidelines. One school of thought is that if we are allowed more modifications in stock class than the SCCA, than our stock classifications should reflect the most prepped cars allowed by our guidelines. This may not be the same as the SCCA classifications.

well hell if you really want to get into it Canadian models of some cars are not the same as the american models of those cars... now there's a can of worms

gatherer

02-22-2006, 11:39 AM

LOL! You're not proposing a spec tire class, are you? [/kidding!] ;)

I ain't proposing anything... although if you want a proposal how about a no rubber allowed class... vehicles must not use any rubber components or rubber based components...

(this post belongs in the silly season thread)

AlienDNA

02-22-2006, 11:41 AM

sigh

I just went through this with my local ASN solosport rep. In 1999 and 2000 you had to buy the whole leather package to get a LSD in Canada. Therefore, since the LSD option has been removed from the stock allowed mods list, I have to do a complete leather package conversion or go to C-SS if I want to add a LSD to my 1999 base.

I was also told that if I imported a US sport package I would have to take prep points to make it equivalent to a modified Canadian package (LSD, strut bar, different steering wheel).

That sounds about right. I'm not sure about the '99-'00 model years. I think Rob T. might have done some investigation on those years. I've got an '01 and had some Mazda documentation around here somewhere showing the LSD as a stand alone option.

EDIT: Wait...what? LSDs are no longer allowed as a mod in Stock, even with a prep point?

13inches

02-22-2006, 11:54 AM

well hell if you really want to get into it Canadian models of some cars are not the same as the american models of those cars... now there's a can of worms
No doubt.

Are you sure your car is FSS legal? :p

13inches

02-22-2006, 12:10 PM

EDIT: Wait...what? LSDs are no longer allowed as a mod in Stock, even with a prep point?Workshop notes, page 5. Guess we have to wait for the rulebook.....

Slowpoke

02-22-2006, 12:14 PM

well hell if you really want to get into it Canadian models of some cars are not the same as the american models of those cars... now there's a can of worms
'04 Canadian STi's came with the following, though the US models did not:

-an AM/FM 6-disc CD player and six speaker system (6lb radio + ~10 lbs wiring and speakers)
-rear seat pass-through vs. solid rear seat (less chassis rigidity)
-STi monogrammed floormats (Remove these for competition anyway)

So, with the extra 16lbs in Canada, and less chassis rigidity, I think the STi should be moved from AS to CS.

"Silly Season" thread? How about a "Silly Series" thread?

Pete@Marcor

02-22-2006, 02:45 PM

Workshop notes, page 5. Guess we have to wait for the rulebook.....

Unfortunately, we have to wait for them every year.

Just so everyone knows, since we use the National book as the basis for our rules, Wes has to wait until that comes out, so that it may be modified, and then he can publish the Ontario version. So, we will always be a little later than ideal when it comes to having the rules in our hands.

Doug Phillips

02-22-2006, 03:01 PM

Unfortunately, we have to wait for them every year.

Just so everyone knows, since we use the National book as the basis for our rules, Wes has to wait until that comes out, so that it may be modified, and then he can publish the Ontario version. So, we will always be a little later than ideal when it comes to having the rules in our hands.

I don't understand the process for the National rulebook. I understand that Wes is our rep un this but there does not seem to be any visiblility of the planned changes of input available until the rules are released. Am I wrong on this or am I missing a website somewhere?

tanney

02-22-2006, 03:54 PM

The file has been updated once again.......

TOYSRUS

02-24-2006, 11:10 AM

Nope, I'd agree with the LSD in those cases. But I stand by my statement that two inches of wheel width would be more valuable than an LSD. :D

It has been well documented that a LSD is worth 1.5 - 2 seconds on a typical 60 second Autox course. I find it hard to believe you could find this kind of time from 2" of wheel width. (IMHO)

slai

02-24-2006, 12:31 PM

Cool! G35 in F stock! :D

13inches

02-24-2006, 12:39 PM

Cool! G35 in F stock! :D
"Just another pony car"...

:D

slai

02-24-2006, 12:55 PM

I just picked up Curtis' FC but now I'm thinking F stock may be fun to compete in. (cos I might be the only one!)

andrew1984

02-27-2006, 01:58 PM

hmmm maybe i can get away with running the scirocco in Hstock?

:D :D :D

gatherer

02-27-2006, 02:31 PM

I just picked up Curtis' FC but now I'm thinking F stock may be fun to compete in. (cos I might be the only one!)

well I think your car would be competitive in F-Stock.. I wonder how it would faire against the new mustangs as those seem to be really good F-Stock cars.. (from what I've seen)

AlienDNA

03-06-2006, 01:07 PM

Where does the Pontiac Solstice go once it graduates from Stock? BSS (following the similarly powerful Mazdaspeed Miata) or CSS (following the other naturally aspirated Miatae)?

Doug Phillips

03-06-2006, 04:04 PM

Where does the Pontiac Solstice go once it graduates from Stock? BSS (following the similarly powerful Mazdaspeed Miata) or CSS (following the other naturally aspirated Miatae)?

Trading yours in??

Plan on buying your lunch at all the events. No trunk space whatsoever.

AlienDNA

03-07-2006, 08:53 AM

Trading yours in??

Plan on buying your lunch at all the events. No trunk space whatsoever.

Bah! Tons of space! You just have to put the top up and leave, um, the fuel tank at home. ;)

Rob

03-07-2006, 09:42 PM

Bah! Tons of space! You just have to put the top up and leave, um, the fuel tank at home. ;)

Hard to believe someone could design a car that weighs 400 lbs more than a Miata but has about 10% of the trunk space.... oh wait a minute... I'm talking about GM.... :rolleyes:

AlienDNA

03-07-2006, 10:13 PM

Hard to believe someone could design a car that weighs 400 lbs more than a Miata but has about 10% of the trunk space.... oh wait a minute... I'm talking about GM.... :rolleyes:

I spent a fair bit of time going over the Solstice at the auto show, and not just because the Pontiac rep attending to the car was hot.

I thought it was a pretty comfortable car, visibility was relatively good even with the top up, and the front fender creases made it easy to locate the corners of the car, even though there is a pronounced feeling of sitting in a bath tub.

On the other hand, the dash is rather bluff - it kind of reminded me of my trip to Devil's Tower. And the shift knob was a plasticky monstrosity that felt like it came out of a carnival claw machine.

But I almost lost it when the gal from Pontiac was demonstrating how the top folded down and pointed out the luggage space as if it were a good thing!!! I'm positive I couldn't control my wildly rolling eyes, but she was polite enough not to say anything. :)

Rob

03-08-2006, 01:05 AM

I spent a fair bit of time going over the Solstice at the auto show, and not just because the Pontiac rep attending to the car was hot.

I thought it was a pretty comfortable car, visibility was relatively good even with the top up, and the front fender creases made it easy to locate the corners of the car, even though there is a pronounced feeling of sitting in a bath tub.

On the other hand, the dash is rather bluff - it kind of reminded me of my trip to Devil's Tower. And the shift knob was a plasticky monstrosity that felt like it came out of a carnival claw machine.

But I almost lost it when the gal from Pontiac was demonstrating how the top folded down and pointed out the luggage space as if it were a good thing!!! I'm positive I couldn't control my wildly rolling eyes, but she was polite enough not to say anything. :)

Yeah, it's comfortable - certainly will suit people who are too tall or broad for a miata. I think the front and the rear of the new Sky are much more attractive than the Solstice - why GM decided to put that Gran Am grille on the nose of the Solstice is a mystery.

I did lose it when the Pontiac rep demonstrated how you put the top on the Solstice down - lets see if I can remember it:

1) unlatch top, pop trunk lid
2) get out of car
3) pull plug from corner of top out of hole in trunk lid on driver's side
4) walk around car
5) pull plug from corner of top out of hole in trunk lid on passenger's side
6) lift open trunk lid
7) fold top back into trunk
7a) stop, lift top back up, take out bag of product literature left in trunk by helpful child, inadvertently demostrating that there isn't even room for a bag of brochures!
8) fold top back into trunk
9) close trunk lid
10) walk back around car
11) get back in car

- reverse entire procedure to put top up.

I did drool over the GXE version set to come out next fall - GM claims the turbocharged ecotech 2L will put out 260 HP - sweet!

sjd

03-08-2006, 11:05 AM

I did drool over the GXE version set to come out next fall - GM claims the turbocharged ecotech 2L will put out 260 HP - sweet!

Mazdaspeed is working on a turbo version for the new MX-5.

Doug Phillips

03-08-2006, 03:04 PM

AlienDNA

03-13-2006, 10:31 AM

That sounds about right. I'm not sure about the '99-'00 model years. I think Rob T. might have done some investigation on those years. I've got an '01 and had some Mazda documentation around here somewhere showing the LSD as a stand alone option.

My apologies, ladies and gentlemen. It appears that I was in error when I made this statement. Because I could not find the documentation I was referring to, I put the question to Mazda Canada for an "official" ruling. As it turns out, the LSD was not available as a stand alone option on 2001 Miatae. It was only available as part of the Sport or Leather packages in 2001.

Slowpoke

03-16-2006, 12:57 AM

Hard to believe someone could design a car that weighs 400 lbs more than a Miata but has about 10% of the trunk space.... oh wait a minute... I'm talking about GM.... :rolleyes:

Yes, but GM also designed it so that an LT2 drops straight in with no firewall or fender cutting. There's one at GM's proving grounds.

They're going to try an LT7 soon. Try seeing what 500hp will do to your Mazdaspeed Miata chassis...