Quote:
Originally Posted by racepar1
Showroom stock racing is the only thing applicable to this argument.
|
Then the Z31 does have the edge in championships and race wins in showroom stock.
Can't change history...........It's already happened.
In improved touring, the roles are reversed but there is a bit of deviation from the stock setup but that's not where your original quip about the Z31 being shit came from.
Your quip applied to the car as delivered from the factory in regard to whether it was a good starting point for a build-up.........hence my mention of the Z31 having more success on the track in stock form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepar1
Why? I don't have a problem telling the truth about the s-13 chasis. The front suspension sucks BAD, the rear suspension has an assload too much anti-squat (as does the z-32), and the rear suspension also gains too much toe under compression. The rear suspension can be somewhat fixed by using an s-14 or s-15 rear subframe, they have much less anti-squat and less toe gain, but there isn't much you can do with the front suspension.
|
Fitting the S14 rear subframe was illegal in showroom stock and is currently illegal in a S13 raced in Improved Touring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepar1
What's your point? Are you supposed to have more racing related experience then me or something? Hell when I was 11 I was travelling all over the southwest with my dad to work on his formula atlantic car at SCCA events. I have seen what cars are competitive and what cars arent. Neither the s-13 or the z-31 were very competitive from what I have seen. To tell you the truth I really didn't see very many s-30's out there winning races either. Now those damn CRX's on the other hand.......
|
Well.......now that you opened the subject......yes.
I raced margay panther karts in the mid 70s with a Mccullough MC91 engine when I was 11 and have spent time crewing porsche 935s in the imsa series in the 80s as well as IMSA GTU RX-7s on top of prepping mazda RX2s in the early 80s, RX7s and 240z in the late 80s....etc.
You mention not seeing many S30s out there during the timeframe when you were crewing around with dad.
Here's a link to race results for improved touring cars showing s30s crowding the front of the field.
http://www.wdcr-scca.org/LinkClick.a...1004&tabid=498
The S30 ruled ITS from it's inception until the e30 bmw 325IS and the second generation RX-7 got developed by compaines such as speedsource and the ecu rules were relaxed. Of course spending 100 grand to develop an IT car has been a huge detriment to the spirit of the class but the rich boys want to win at all costs.
If you compare ITA results from the same time frame, you won't find many S13s or CRX because they had not yet been fully developed and you could only race cars 5 years old.....and the ecu rule was not opened up at that time.
FINAL RESULTS FOR - Race # 9- ITA SSB
Contrast that with decade later and you find 240sx, 325IS, integras, and CRX at the front of the field.........but wait..........a S30 still comes in second and you still see them picking up race wins here and there.
I guess you were busy wrenching a Ralt or Van Diemen to watch the races.
http://www.wdcr-scca.org/LinkClick.a...=1051&mid=1908
Not bad for a 39 year old car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepar1
I disagree with this assessment. I do not see camber change as much of a problem and toe change can be worked around (or you can throw a cheater s-14 rear subframe into it). From my experience with the s-13 chasis you want softer rear springs, not stiffer. You simply run little static camber and toe to compensate. An s-13 with 800lb rear springs would be borderline un-driveable. I have heard of the datsun 510's and the FC rx-7's needing un-godly stiff rear springs, but this is the first I have heard of the s-chasis.
|
I never specified 800 pound springs but said "up to 800 pounds" when mentioning springs in nissan race cars.
Back in the IMSA RS days, 800 pounds (rear) was the ticket on a car as small as a 510 and any 300zx or S130 that wants to be competitive in Improved Touring will need close to that or else the camber change will reduce the contact patch to a small line because of it's trailing arm suspension.
This is especially true with the Z31 as the spring does not act at the end of the arm but rather forward which reduces the spring rate as measured at the wheel.
You do know that current front running hondas in improved touring run as high as 1200 rates in the rear.
ITS Integra - setup help? - IT.com Forums
Why the high rates........because contact patch number one and if you are limited in your class to a suspension that lacks the proper articulation to keep the contact patch as big as possible, then you must make either the spring rate hard to the point of very little movement or keep the springs at a lower rate and limit suspension travel.
Old school was high spring rates and still applies in some cars but many can get away with softer springs now if they limit the travel.
Why nissan went from the superior A-arm rear suspension of the s30 to the trailing arms of the S130 and Z31 is beyond me but it probably has something to do with comfort.