MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

[kdl17]

I’m starting to get tired of the innuendo coming from certain “camps” within the ice race community calling for the removal of the MR2 and all other rear engine cars from class 1, ss1 and s1 to a new class.

Lets look at some facts, the MR2 has been available for ice racing for 20 plus years, has been ice raced by myself and my brother for 5 seasons in rubber, 3 seasons in street studs and 1 season in studs. It was raced previously in studs by others (the orange one 4(?) years ago) and in rubber (Russ Bond’s blue one). Other rear engine RWD cars have been running previously Larry K and Tom P’s Skodas specifically and occasionly a Fiero has run. Why now, this season, is engine layout an issue in RWD? Is it because, the cars were never winners previously? Or is it because the concerned “camp” never ran in RWD and didn’t pay any attention?

Next lets look at car availability, please name a car made in the last 5 years which qualifies for RWD. Pretty damn difficult, maybe a Volvo, BMW. The pool of available candidates gets smaller every year, those already running in the class need to keep the class together as much as possible to maintain suitable car counts not break it up with insufficient car counts on either side of the break.

Lets look at this season’s car counts:
Class 1 14 drivers entered at least one day of which 7 ran 75% of the season, split up the class and it becomes 5 front engine and 2 rear engine
Class SS1 9 drivers entered of which 6 ran 75% of the season, split up the class and it becomes 4 and 2
Class S1 7 driversentered of which 5 ran 75% of the season, split up the class and it becomes 4 and 2 (the extra rear engine being our stud car which ran only the last 3 weekends)
It does not make sense to consciously reduce a class’s car count, particularly when the class is already struggling to make numbers.

So why all the fuss? I can not help but think this “camp” has a vested interest in removing the MR2 from class 1, why would that be? Last year they wanted to know when the car was coming back to run in order to maintain car count and keep the class intact and not lose maximum points scoring potential. Why has that changed this year? I can’t help but be skeptical and believe its because they were not able to win and have realized the “design brief” used for the building of their car was flawed. So to cover this up and justify themselves a rule change is the preferred solution.

Lets look further back into history, back in the eighties there was a Datsun 510 which for 3 years or so consistently won studs overall (and no stud counts were not biased to the RWD). So why is everyone surprised when a RWD does run up front with the FWD’s? Even further back, look at the names on the stud annual trophy you’ll see Bill Lefevre and Ernie Jakobowski (sp?) these were rear wheel drive cars.

Again I’ll ask why the fuss? This split certainly does nothing for rubber to ice, the car is no more competitive than the Volvo’s and Chevettes. In street studs the car responded better to the 409’s than the other RWD’s, 2007 was a constant battle every race every lap with Tom P, just because the spec tire is different this year is that cause to change the class rules? I don’t think so.

So again I can only conclude that this “camp” has not accepted the fact their car/engineering design brief is flawed and therefore changing the rules to improve their chance at a championship is the only solution.

Keith Lobban
#117 class 1 and SS1

p.s. Andrew V thanks for the kind words congratulations on your season and you showed your true sportsmanship in loaning us the coil from your All-Trac to try and get us running in the last stud race on Sunday

[Ponygal]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

I'm just a lowly co-pilot, but I really don't see anything wrong with MR2s racing with us. I think you guys are excellent drivers, and give the rest of us something to shoot for. You should hear the hootin' and hollerin' that goes on when we actually manage to pass one of you guys LOL

[herbie]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

I think that's just Bunk. If a Chevette can beat an MR2, perhaps it's got something to do with the driver.
I know none of the complaints about MR2's have come from our camp.
I say bring it on. 1/2 the time they don't run in the cold anyway! haha.

[uptownguy]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

This posting refers to cars racing in studded classes
MR2 and other rear engine cars run in the engine over class along with the front wheel drive in most Ice Racing series. The classes are Engine over (FWD and Rear Engine cars) Conventional (Engine Front drive rear) and all wheel drive.

If you think the MR2s currently running at Minden are too quick I hope you never run against a full house Alpine 310 or Porsche 911.

If convention cars don't have a separate class or traction advantage (more studs or larger studs) they usually disappear as a class.

Where they run non-Menard studded tires they usually regulate extra studs or screws for conventional and less studs or screws for AWD cars to improve the show.

Peter Austin
Montréal

The reason the Datsun 510s cleaned up was the independent rear suspension and available two hundred-horse power, racing against 100 hp front wheel drive cars.

All things being equal, where not traction limited a rear drive car (BMW MR2 Porsche) will outperform a front wheel drive car where the front wheels have to handle steering and traction inputs.

On ice, the rear or mid engine car has a traction advantage over both conventional and FWD cars, as was seen when mid engine cars cleaned up on rallies, before the advent of the all conquering four wheel drive cars.

[Allan Craighead]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

As a fellow MR2 driver, let me say the car does have its advantages, but driver talent still a key ingredient. Last year I was regularly involved in a fun, but intense battle with a Corrolla, BMW, Nissan and Volvo in street studs. This past year as I continued to figure out what driving style works best in the various conditions, I had some great battles with pretty much the same group of cars. It was only in the closing stages of the season when we had some really slick conditions and I made some changes to my driving style was I able to consistently pull away from this battle and run second, still well back of Lobban. In conclusion the MR2 does make for a good ice racer, it does not guarantee you will races.

Cheers,

[FatAndy181]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

You know, I'm sure that this topic would have died on the vine, had it not been brought onto the forum. Now EVERYBODY can give their opinion on the subject, and drag it out for a couple more months before moving on to a different topic of debate, like turbocharging NA motors (looking your way Mr. Martin).

And Keith, I'm not really that sportsmanlike. In SS on Sunday, my goal wasn't so much to win as it was to make sure that I put you down a lap .

[max attack]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

Keith I'm not really sure who's whining but I know for sure it wasn't me ,it never occured to me that rwd is anything other than rwd.Just like in all other drivetrain configurations there will always be one chassis better suited for a certain motorsports than another.
I do dissagree with the comment that the mr2 responded better than the other cars,the tires are the equalizer its the chassis and the driver than make the difference.I made quite a few set-up changes to my car in the off season not including the big azz wing,and played with ballast from 0 to over 400lbs and there was still no chance in hell I could keep your car in sight at corner exit no matter how little/much throttle was used.
Having said that,there's no reason to essentially penalize a well prepped car driven very well from a class it conforms to.

[Chevettes4ever]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

The MR2's are not THAT fast.. It is the drivers who make them fast.. im sure i'd be mad slow in an mr2.. everyone has seen it for themselves, a chevette infront of an mr2, and a volvo infront of an mr2.. the rubber to ice cars are all fairly equal this year! stop complaining and everyone else get faster!

[Hosehead]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

Some of the highlights of this season for me was putting the hammer down in my....ummm....shall we say slightly obese racecar and passing an MR2 and holding it for 1/2 a lap! I can only speak for rubber to ice but as far as i'm concerned we need as many competitors as we can in the class regardless of the cars they drive.

[tony mcgrath]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

I’m starting to get tired of the innuendo coming from certain “camps” within the ice race community calling for the removal of the MR2 and all other rear engine cars from class 1, ss1 and s1 to a new class.

Keith - no innuendo here bud- If i have something to say i say it- i brought the topic up at the Sunday drivers meeting and asked that no decision be made until the Lobbans had a chance to give their input. I'm glad you've taken the time to respond.

Lets look at some facts, the MR2 has been available for ice racing for 20 plus years, has been ice raced by myself and my brother for 5 seasons in rubber, 3 seasons in street studs and 1 season in studs. Why now, this season, is engine layout an issue in RWD?

Keith: over 30 years ago brighter minds than ours determined that engine layout was an issue and came up with 6 classes. At least one of those classes was for "Engine over drive wheels" layout which at the time included a bunch of VW Beetles, Renault Gordini's and the like. These cars had enough of a design advantage over the conventional drive cars of the day that they had to be split away into their own class.
As the Beetles rusted away and didnt show up at Minden anymore so to the need for the class went away, but I'm pretty sure that when i won my first jacket in 1994 - in a VW rabbit- it was still in class 6- which means that the Engine over drive class was still in place. So we've actually Had the class for more years than we haven't had it.

Next lets look at car availability, please name a car made in the last 5 years which qualifies for RWD. Pretty damn difficult, maybe a Volvo, BMW. The pool of available candidates gets smaller every year, those already running in the class need to keep the class together as much as possible to maintain suitable car counts not break it up with insufficient car counts on either side of the break.

Keith - youre looking at the wrong end of the year range for ice racing contenders- the cars that come into ice racing usually come from the 20 years and older category. So theres still lots of volvos, mustangs, chevettes, 240sx's, corollas, BMW's etc, that are becoming affordable to ice race every day now , and this will continue for another 10 years. After that car counts in RWD may have to be addressed- but this is the boom time for RWD competitors in terms of affordable cars coming on to the market.

Lets look at this season’s car counts:
It does not make sense to consciously reduce a class’s car count, particularly when the class is already struggling to make numbers.

Keith- by entering a car in RWD that really belongs in Engine Over Drive you may contributing to the class demise. MR2's won handily in all RWD classes- Stud, street stud and rubber. When other RWD competitors realize they don't have a chance against an Engine over Drive car, some of them will go to a class where the competition is perceived to be more equal. Also, newcomers will see you need an MR2 or other EOD car to win and they wont enter, and the class dwindles away.

So why all the fuss?

Just trying to correct a classification issue that should never really have come up. The Engine over drive existed years ago, and its time to correctly classify the current EOD cars now, so that everyone can participate on a level playing field.

Lets look further back into history, back in the eighties there was a Datsun 510 which for 3 years or so consistently won studs overall (and no stud counts were not biased to the RWD). So why is everyone surprised when a RWD does run up front with the FWD’s? Even further back, look at the names on the stud annual trophy you’ll see Bill Lefevre and Ernie Jakobowski (sp?) these were rear wheel drive cars.

Keith when you look back into history make sure you do it with open eyes. Back in the eighties rear drive cars were still the dominant platform and front drive cars were just carving a niche for themselves.

As Uptown Guy put it:
"The reason the Datsun 510s cleaned up was the independent rear suspension and available two hundred-horse power, racing against 100 hp front wheel drive cars."

The Datsun 510 of that time was like the current Honda Civic with a 2.0 liter swap now.

The first time i ever drove a stud car was in 1989 and it was Ahmad Khodkars spare Datsun 510. He was driving his "legendary" Nissan 240z with the radiator moved to the back and plenty of HP. Back in that year nothing could touch those two cars- and that weekend was the reason i eventually ended up in the stud class years later. That car was magic.
But the FWD cars were coming, and Jim Morton from London proved it in his 78 Civic a year or two earlier winning overall Stud.
Another thing to recall is that there were different stud tire building methods back in that time. Mac Calder developed a better build method for stud tires around that time and it soon became apparent if you werent on a "Mac" built stud tire you were chasing not leading...

And Keith when you go even further back you are really out of your depth...

In 1976 Overall stud class winner Ernie Jakubowski drove a stadium-cross buggy: open wheels, open cockpit, 1200 lbs, 160 hp VW built up engine. He ran 10" wide rear tires and had 300 studs per tire in each. His fellow stadium racer Bill LeFevre ran what was called a mini-stock Beetle at the time. and it was a full bodied beetle weighing 1600 lbs with a 120 hp engine. They used to start the two of them at the rear of the field just to see if they could get past everyone by corner 1.
In 1976 these 2 were the fast guys, there were no FWD cars to speak of, and the average ice racer came from the 60's- Different world.

So Keith while your points are well taken, try not to let your emotion cloud your judgment on this issue. There are other competitors in conventional RWD cars who also feel that the MR2 is misclassed and should be slotted back into Engine over drive. Not everyone is on these forums and they voiced their opinions at the drivers meeting.

So i would conclude that for the further growth potential of the RWD class it would be better to put all EOD cars into their own class as it was years ago, and this will allow the conventional drive cars in the RWD class to compete with each other fairly and allow for the class to grow.

tony

[rubber2ice]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

Very interesting views Tony, thanks for the insight.
Terry

[robin]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

It's amazing what years of hindsight can do to the output of a car (and the makeup of the fields).

The 1988 OA stud class-winning 510 had a bone-stock, no bolt-ons, 100,000 mile junkyard L16 in it - shell significantly lightened by way of oxidation. It had to contend with quite a number of Rabbits and Civics (and a Fiat 128 Coupe :-) ) as I recall.

Robin

[reluctant_honda]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

OK, so at what point did they decide to lump the EOD cars in with RWD and why?

[kdl17]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

Tony, thanks for taking the time to discuss my comments, please let me elaborate further

so to the need for the class went away

but what you have not mentioned is the degeneration of the RWD classes as a whole, 35 years ago there were 5 RWD classes and 1 FWD due to the high availability of cars in RWD. As the availability of RWD has declined the classes were slowly combined (or eliminated as the case for the "land yacht" class, North American full size sedans) in order to maintain suitable car counts, and nothing has changed in terms of car availability.

but this is the boom time for RWD competitors in terms of affordable cars coming on to the market

I'm not sure how you can consider this to be a boom time, a check of a site such as Craigslist lists 6 RWD cars suitable for ice racing (manual trans and less than $1000) and 43 for FWD, people will race what is more easily attained, particularly if they are coming into the sport.

MR2's won handily in all RWD classes

This definitely is not the case in rubber to ice this year where Rodney and Eric were on any given day equal to the task; nor was it the case last year where Terry was the yardstick against which all class 1 cars were measured and I know if he had run this year he still would have been the yardstick. In street studs the car did perform very well this year but lets look at the previous season where the other RWD competitors were even up, I would suggest the spec tire has more to do with the competitive imbalance than drivetrain layout. As for studs, I'm going to put this bluntly you guys need to go back and review your sums because you didn't get it right this year (and I'm sure you'll get it figured out for next!) as evidenced by some very uncharacteristically ragged driving.

As Uptown Guy put it:
"The reason the Datsun 510s cleaned up was the independent rear suspension and available two hundred-horse power, racing against 100 hp front wheel drive cars."

So by your rationale, 510's should have been placed in a different class because their suspension gave them an unfair advantage.

you need an MR2 or other EOD car to win

certainly not the case in rubber to ice where the majority of RWD competitors reside, far too many fender to fender battles with Volvo's and Chevettes to make this a true statement.

and the class dwindles away.

I can not see how removing cars from a class that is fighting decline will make it develop, plus create a new class which does not have enough cars to support itself. Typically a class is created due to a demand through participation, there are insufficient particiaption numbers to back up the creation of a new class.

Keith Lobban

[tony mcgrath]

Re: MR2’s -2 fast to ice race?

It's amazing what years of hindsight can do to the output of a car (and the makeup of the fields).

The 1988 OA stud class-winning 510 had a bone-stock, no bolt-ons, 100,000 mile junkyard L16 in it - shell significantly lightened by way of oxidation. It had to contend with quite a number of Rabbits and Civics (and a Fiat 128 Coupe :-) ) as I recall.

Robin

Robin-thanks for chiming in. When topics start heading back into 20plus years of history lots can get lost in the recollection.

The 510- would that be Tim's Fleguel's old car? And did he end up selling it to Ahmad K. or did Ahmad have another one? You were driving the Fiat 128?

And to keep the thread on topic- what are your thoughts on re-instating the Engine Over Drive class?

When an EOD car wins "Overall" in Studs, street studs and rubber classes against other conventional drive cars. Is it time to consider that they be scored with other engine over drive cars, as in years past, so as not to kill the rear wheel drive class?


tony