Yesterday Mazdaspeed made an announcement regarding the use of modified cylinder heads based on the outcome of results from the Runoffs where many competitors were deemed illegal due to modified cylinder heads beyond what is allowed, thus DQ'ing the event. As a result, for 2016 or 17 ALL competitors MUST use a OEM unmodified cylinder head. Until then, those that are using modified heads will have to run with added weight until these heads can be phased out. Some competitors here were/are using modified cylinder heads and may fall under this new rule.

SCCA will post these new rules soon and we will all have to adjust to conform. I guess we will have to wait and see what the final ruleset will be.


Dear Bruce,

TO: Spec Miata Participants
FR: SCCA, NASA and Mazda Spec Miata Leadership Team
RE: Class Intent, Direction and Regulations
DT: November 5, 2014

Spec Miata purpose and intent (SCCA General Competition Rules):

The Spec Miata (SM) class is intended to provide the membership with the opportunity to compete in low cost, production-based cars with limited modifications, suitable for racing competition. The rules are intentionally designed to be more open than the Showroom Stock class but more restricted than the Improved Touring class.

Less than 15 years ago, the concept of Spec Miata was born. The essence of the class focused on a low cost, fun, competitive environment that was relatively easy to enter. If a participant found a good donor car, added safety equipment, a hardtop and a bolt-on kit of performance parts purchased through Mazdaspeed Motorsports Development, they would have equipment capable of racing at the front of the field.

Throughout the years, the class veered from the original intent and direction. The scope of the class has crept into something beyond its original intent. While the essence of the class may remain the same, in some respects, it has lost its way, pushing the definition of "limited modifications" and the notion of "low cost." Mazda, SCCA and NASA all agree that changes must be made for the long-term health of the class, regardless of which sanctioning body operates the races.

The 2014 SCCA National Championship Runoffs was a watershed moment in the history of the Spec Miata class. With so many cars found out of compliance at the front of the field, a working group was established by Mazda, SCCA and NASA leadership to evaluate not just cylinder head rules, but the purpose and long-term goal of the class overall. The group, established by SCCA President Lisa Noble, also includes John Doonan, Steve Sanders and Mike Allen (Mazdaspeed Motorsports Development), John Mueller (NASA), Tony Ave (SCCA Club Racing Board) and Robert Clarke (SCCA Pro Racing/SCCA Inc.).

The group met face-to-face at SCCA's offices in Topeka, Kansas October 30, 2014. Also attending in consultation were: Eric Prill (SCCA), John Bauer (SCCA), Jim Wheeler (SCCA Club Racing Board), Steve Knapp (Elite Engines) and Jim Stewart (Stewart Engines).

Long-term Goal of the working group:

For Spec Miata to be a healthy, growing and economical class across organizations, where a racer can be competitive utilizing a stock Mazda Miata that is enhanced with bolt-on performance parts acquired through Mazdaspeed Motorsports Development. In achieving that goal, it is important that current participants not be disenfranchised and unreasonably burdened while still making the class attractive to individuals that have either left the class or not engaged in the class due to scope creep away from stock.

The most critical issue in conflict with the long-term goal is with regard to rules that permit modifications to the stock cylinder head and the method with which these are being modified. Current SM rules permit cylinder head modifications beyond the level of more "radical" categories, including, but not limited to, SCCA Production and Super Touring® Lite. It needs to be stated that the heads examined at the Runoffs were modified on varying levels, but each head found out of compliance was in violation of the rules as they are written. Additionally, this is not simply an issue with de-burring, but rather actual smoothing, blending and porting on the sharp edge from the plunge cut.

To achieve the long-term goal, the class must ultimately return to stock cylinder heads with a permitted industry-standard valve job.
Recognizing the number of modified (both compliant and non-compliant per the current rules) cylinder heads in the community, the expense to replace these and potential parts availability concerns, the group agrees to the following path, with details to be finalized no later than the December 14 SCCA Board of Directors meeting:

- Permit plunge cuts and unshrouding per the current rules, but with clarification of concentricity, as well as some level of blending of the plunge cut (language TBA). These modifications may require that additional weight be added to the car.

- Independent testing will be conducted to determine the effect of the individual and collective modifications. Only once this scientific data is collected and evaluated will weight levels be determined.

- Weight additions will compensate for the power gains from the head modifications, while also encouraging the behavior of changing back to an unmodified head as soon as possible.

- The allowance of these modifications will have a sunset period of one to two years, based on parts availability. The intention is for this to happen sooner than later, but with appropriate competitor notification.

- Only un-modified heads would be permitted for competition at the 2015 SCCA National Championship Runoffs.

Additionally, the group unanimously desires greater resources and efforts with regard to season-long compliance checks. Collectively, it is developing an enhanced compliance program to address this. The group will also evaluate class parity and additional concepts to ensure parity and compliance moving forward.

Timing: The working group welcomes input, which can be submitted through SCCA's http://www.clubracingboard.com site or NASA's John Mueller at john@weekend-racer.com. A final recommendation of the group, with the support of all involved parties, will be presented to the SCCA Board of Directors and NASA leadership for approval in December.

At its October meeting, the SCCA Board of Directors unanimously passed the following motion: SCCA Board of Directors directs SCCA Staff and CRB to jointly develop with Mazda and NASA a rule set and timeline to address the Miata engine preparation. This may include recommendations around protest, appeals and teardown in the GCR for Spec Miata.

Summary: The working group believes that this structure achieves the long-term goal, while addressing short-term concerns. Drivers with modified components that need time to perform the necessary changes will be able to compete at a reasonable level in the short term, with the class as a whole driving together toward a better long-term goal.

For the sport,

Lisa Noble, SCCA President and CEO
John Doonan, Mazda Motorsports Director
John Mueller, NASA Spec Miata National Director
Robert Clarke, SCCA Pro Racing President/SCCA VP of Business Development
Tony Ave, SCCA Club Racing Board
Steve Sanders, MAZDASPEED Motorsports Development Manager
Mike Allen, MAZDASPEED Motorsports Development Specialist

_________________
GT1 - 88 Camaro 1LE/Nissan 200SX
GT2 - 90 CRX/Nissan 200SX
GT3 - 88 CRX/1975 Civic/1997 Acura Integra
GT4 - 93/2000 Mazda Miata
GT5 - 89 Suzuki Swift GTI
GT6 - 86 CRX
ITE - 88 Camaro 1LE
ITA - 89/90 CRX Si
ITB - 85 Civic 1500S/89 Suzuki Swift GTI
ITC - 85/86 Civic
SM - 93/2000 Mazda Miata
Targa NL - 88 CRX Si
Rally Sprint - 95 Del Sol VTEC
Unlimited - All of the above!

Makes sense but how will you police it locally?

_________________
Paul

Just give all the illegal heads to me.

You have an illegal head? (pun intended)

We are working on it, including compression ratio testing as well as a cam doctor.
Valve covers will come off in 2015.

_________________
GT1 - 88 Camaro 1LE/Nissan 200SX
GT2 - 90 CRX/Nissan 200SX
GT3 - 88 CRX/1975 Civic/1997 Acura Integra
GT4 - 93/2000 Mazda Miata
GT5 - 89 Suzuki Swift GTI
GT6 - 86 CRX
ITE - 88 Camaro 1LE
ITA - 89/90 CRX Si
ITB - 85 Civic 1500S/89 Suzuki Swift GTI
ITC - 85/86 Civic
SM - 93/2000 Mazda Miata
Targa NL - 88 CRX Si
Rally Sprint - 95 Del Sol VTEC
Unlimited - All of the above!

lol

How is compression ratio measured?

_________________
2004 Subaru WRX Rally car/ 2003 Impreza Rally Cross wagon
Slidewayz Rally Team
Sponsors:
Bond Design

I don't think it is, if you run GT4 instead!

Seriously, I could probably live with pulling a valve cover once in a while, but the first time someone (just on a whim) tells me to tear down the motor so that they can cc the head it is the last time you'll see me running as a Spec Miata. It's great and all that you guys are turning this into a high-intensity 'pro' series, but I only want to be an amateur club racer. I didn't like being involved in all that controversy last year, and I won't willingly sign up for any more of it.

No hard feelings, just saying what I think.

Kevin, there are tools out there to check compression without tearing down anything. The Whistler comes to mind, we had our compression checked by this method in New Hampshire last year and they do it all the time for the ARRC @ Road Atlanta. All 3 of the Vantage cars passed the test!

_________________
Brian
VP, AMP
#51 Vantage Motorsports

Fellas do your homework on how compression ratio can be checked quickly and accurately in tech; no need to remove valve covers…

http://store.katechengines.com/whistler-compression-ratio-tester-p174.aspx

The whistler will read low with the vc in place by some small - but consistent and repeatable - fraction of a point (I think .3-.4) so if a 1.6 reads 9.0:1 (rule is max 9.4:1) than you would be legal, whistle 9.4:1 with the valve cover on you're a dirty cheat and will be tar and feathered…

The SCCA's decision is a an uninformed knee-jerk reaction to make it appear that they are serious about eradicating the dirty cheats from their esteemed club and to save some face following the Run-Offs SM debacle and it has a very real chance to do more harm than good. This decision was made by a committee with little knowledge of SM nor the historical perspective on the class required to make an informed ruling; I think there was one noted SM engine builder on the committee but that's it.

If the TTSMC and/or ARMS wants to stump up and buy an expensive whistler that's fantastic but no one lost a race this year because another competitor had .2 compression on them, or a deburred intake valve plunge cut for that matter, so let's not pull an SCCA on this and risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater… all IMO of course, except the whistler reading stuff - that has been proven repeatedly in the field.

You won't have to worry about anyone tearing your motor apart Andy. I was thinking about requesting that very thing in Aug. when I couldn't get by you. Then I came to the conclusion itwas because I can't drive. The illegal head comment is funny. I think. Not sure how to read it. Could you put some inflection identification on it so I understand the degree of funnyness? Going to need a lot of tequila to get through the meetings this weekend. All I can say is good luck to everyone and hope things work out for you guys next year. How does the saying go? See ya see ya wouldn't want to be ya.

Maybe we should just build one of these at the track and dyno the cars every morning
http://jalopnik.com/5807502/how-to-build-your-own-dyno-for-just-2000/

I suggest that the practises of the regions Stock Car tracks be looked at as there may be some that could be useful. Depending on the class, the level of pre- and post-race tech that occurs varies, but there is way more done that what I have observed at AMP in 2013 - 2014. A whistler is regularly used, car weights are always checked, and other items are randomly checked (fuel density, transmissions, rear ends, panhard bars...even engine position). Top five finishers are directed to Tech after every race and top three are checked for something. If any of them are DQ'd then the 4th and 5th place cars are checked, hopefully resulting in an official top three finisher result. One race I was at (as a crew member) even had the top five DQ'd. That was a fun race event for sure! My team ended up placing first as a result. Yes, that means we had finished 6th prior to post-race tech!

Some ideas to consider.

BUT...remember the amount of hard rules that are put into place and the magnitude of enforcement are inversely proportional to the FUN Factor and Participation Rate of the racers (teams).

Personally, I race for FUN. Period.

_________________
Kevin Sibley
1984 Pontiac Fiero Custom 355 SBC V8

Just to be a Devil's advocate, while their practices in theory work great there are ways around most all of them. There were a couple engines running down there that I built...as far as I know there wan't a legal engine in competition.

They did focus their investigation at the top of the pack, but IMO the system they use just doesn't work... Not so say it can't be done, but a LOT of effort and money goes into checking competitors with a very minute amount of "equality" found in the end. A dyno (and the large investment involved with its introduction) is the only fair way to do it in my opinion. Then you can just pick a max HP figure and anything over that gets sand bagged.

_________________
#20 Scion FR-S 6MT Powered by:
Great North Performance, Morine's Towing Performance & Off Road, Jani-King Canada and Blue Buzzard Performance Parts.

2013+14+15 Atlantic Sports Car Club Overall Autocross Champion
2013+14+15 Atlantic Region Motor Sports Overall Autocross Champion
2017-18 BAC Overall Rallycross Champion