Jump to content

Alchemy Autosport

Members
  • Content Count

    926
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Alchemy Autosport last won the day on December 9 2015

Alchemy Autosport had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

616

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    West Los Angeles/ OC

Recent Profile Visitors

3,511 profile views
  1. I totally agree. But to the earlier points, all of that rubber has to be removed to make room for a spring to have somewhere to sit. then its the same height as the NB hat. And since you had to remove that rubber, the damper shaft needs the NB style bushings so its not hard fixed to the body. So you did in fact change the mounting location of the CC plates in the body? Thus a performance gain in your moving of that location... I am not sure honestly, but I would imagine its doable but wasnt designed for it. The NB dampers have a shorter body and the spring seats higher in the hat. The real gain is the shortened damper body to reduce bottoming out. The physical shaft length is longer above the physical limit of the top hat but thats for the different attachment method and the actual hard limit point stays basically the same (see image). My modding the NA hat, you actually move the hard travel limit up in Z a good amount, hence extended top hats being popular.
  2. having an automotive engineering background, I would say the biggest reasons for the change were top hat component cost, durability and serviceability. The NB hats remove the vulcanized rubber between the spring seat and the chassis side mount and made it two little replaceable bushings instead. No geometry changes to the top hat other than the top hat spring seat being a little higher in Z. Agreed
  3. Ron, I know where you are going with this. Better flowing Aluminum heads vs Iron heads is not ever a close comparison to the top hats. For arguments sake, take a look at the picture I uploaded on the last page. The have the identical damper shaft mounting hieght, the identical shock tower mounting location, neither are adjustable and they are even the same material!! The only gain is that the NB top hat doesnt need to have the spring seat modified to work with a 2.5" diameter spring. So all of the M3, GT40 alum heads blah blah blah whining is not constructive to this actual discussion. I dont care either way personally bc we have already modded NA hats to work. HOWEVER, if you want to talk about an easy barrier to entry reduction, allowing NB tophats on NA cars is something that a team that may not have the means to mod the top hats can utilize without points, with no performance gain. The pictures show there there truly no advantage either way, it just allows teams to hit the hypothetical "easy button". And the NB hats are actually cheaper than NA last i checked. In the end, all I want is a consistent call. If the Penskes get them included as the kit, then the Billies or other dampers do as well. If they are points, then so be it.
  4. Jay said the same thing at Sonoma. So I started an email with Tech and Chisek bc CCES posted to the world that the Penske's fell under the 10pt/corner coilover kit value. The Penskes require the same NB top hat as the billies so for NA cars its an EXTRA 40pts/vehicle if you have the Billies, but if you have the Penskes they are saying its NOT an additional 40pts. Chisek was unaware that the penske kit was basically the same kit with the different damper and used the same tophat. So it was left with no resolution but my ask was this: Either the NB tophats are considered part of the coilover kit or the Penskes also have to take an additional 10pts/corner hit like the Billies SM coilover kit does. Whichever way they go, they just need to be consistent. Oh and to feed the @Huggy fire that values change, on a whim by tech or CCES leadership throughout the year, we have been running an SM coilover kit on our NA (using NB tophats) since 2017 and NEVER were charged for the tophats until it was brought up at Sonoma. We have always claimed, and I quote: "Spec Miata Coilover Kit - 10pts/corner" and "Bilstein Dampers - within 2x"
  5. OOOOOHHHHHHHHHH, now thats a different story. I have had a long email chain with tech and Chisek about this issue with still no official resolution to communicated to me. I would not be very happy if truly aftermarket top hats were allowed at no additional points. I do believe that the NB hats should be allowed however, as part of the "coilover kit" already being assessed the 10pts/corner. And agreed, the rubber part is the worst part. We let them sit in kerosene for a few weeks and that made life easier.
  6. This is the same as the Bilsteins. And they arent "aftermarket" they are just the NB top hats vs the NA top hats. NB hats are Nothing special, not adjustable, no camber advantage or anything different with mounting points vs the NA hat. The NA top hats would need to be ghetto modified to work with a 2.5" spring like the NB top hat so its honestly zero gain and the billies w/ coilovers have been accepted this way for years now.
  7. used crappy rattle can, got crappy results. As @the5 said, Hardener is important for sure.
  8. Thats what I would have to think, extra/unevenly distributed preload on already pissed off bearings is bad news bears
  9. Not sure if its nationwide, but in southern California I saw this deal:
  10. A while back when we were eating specifically RF hubs on the miata, we replaced the spindle thinking that it was somehow tweaked in a way that we didnt have the tools to measure. It helped a lot.
  11. Same argument as free heat exchangers... Now that I have more cooling capacity, I can more safely run the engine lean for more power/better fuel consumption... Now that I have more robust hubs that I am not worried about failing, I can run wider tires, more effective aero, hit all the kerbs... ... Wait, wait... I meant its for Safety! yea, def for safety and NOT to do with going faster AT ALL! How dare you accuse otherwise! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
  12. Which is literally the foundation of the series.
  13. noted, and corrected the post. Thanks for the quick clarification and sorry for the misread.
  14. well thats kinda my thought. i have never had a situation where access to fuses by the driver while strapped into the car wouldve done anything to help. I like the setup that @jakks has but i feel like its harder to work on in the pits if a driver is in the car
  15. To add fuel to the backroom lobbying conspiracy: So the discussion "started" right around when the Miatahubs billet hubs became available, and then assigned a low 2.5pt/ea value within days of series sponsor Wilwood releasing their version of the upgraded miata hubs? Remember when Wilwood brakes only were the cheapest option... Coincidence? For the record, since repacking our front wheel bearings with Amsoil Dominator Race Grease between each race weekend we havent failed a wheel bearing in 3+ years. thats also with big front/rear aero and 225 or 245 tires. Also have never failed a front wheel bearing flange. We find original from the factory used hubs, inspect and repack. - Now I am sure we will be failing bearings next race. My two cents: 2.5pts is too low since they really are not REQUIRED to be safe.
×
×
  • Create New...