Stock. Or at least boring SCCA Spec. This is a continual challenge for me, as fellow FT86’ers tease me with cool purchases and part installs. In addition, the classification of the ND Miata into C-Street with the FR-S, makes this a less meaningful Solo car than it was for its first years of existence. I have however, decided that I take great satisfaction from not being that guy who shows up for dinner with a GT wing and no back seat… especially when I can run in front of that guy on event day.
So for the near future, the car exists largely as Mr. Tada created it, and in my opinion he created it well. Now 27 months into ownership, there is only one other car that I have ever owned for longer. And while most of my car life relationships are love-hate, this one is all love. The car is certainly the slowest car that I’ve owned in a very very long time, but it reminds me constantly of all the great things about those other cars, while steering clear of the common pitfalls.
I continue to dream of a car that will always clearly be a ハチロク: naturally aspirated, minimalistic and highly floggable. For now I am just going to live with one that is a bit soft around the edges.
Specifications of the Machine
 |
FOOTWORK
POWER-UP
INTERIOR
OTHER
SHOES
|
TRD springs are stock legal?
Geez… I feel like it shouldn’t be. But whatever. I’m not the rulemaker.
I’ve heard someone say before that SCCA SOLO rules play favourites. Whether on purpose or inadvertently, I don’t know. But, I agree – there just seem to be cars that become so favoured in a class all because the silly rules benefit them the most. For instance, for the longest time in stock, you are only allowed a front swaybar. Perhaps a throwback from back in the day when only RWD sportscars that lean so much and practically fall over on their sidewalls the moment any transient maneuver is introduced. So you then had S2000’s and Miatas dominating their respective stock classes. Now, whether there was an FF car that could have challenged them with only a rear swaybar is beside the point – I am merely commenting on how some cars seemingly end up being favourites.
Hey now, your talking like a BRZ owner. I don’t think the SCCA is pleased about it, but that’s the way it is for a year at least.
The parts are clearly offered as options at time of purchase.
Next time I see your car, I’d like to push down on the fender to see how stiff it is.
Hopefully I’ll dent it enough that you’ll see it in certain light and angles. You know, just like what happened with the Evo.
only people who have ever owned a stock ae86 do that…
Those TRD parts for the FRS seems similar to the MS-R package on the 2007 Mazda MX5
http://www.automotive.com/news/mazda-mx-5-miata-gets-sportier-with-ms-r-packaging-2045/#__federated=1
Which was also approved for Stock…
http://www.sccaforums.com/forums/aft/29868
Is that clear film on the hood as noticeable in person as it is on the photo? Considering you’re standing on the same distance and same lighting condition?
Very similar to that yes. GM has offered packages that included spring upgrades as well. It’s not entirely unusual, but the topic has raised a gigantic stink over on FT86club, with people daily replying in disbelief, and speculating the parts legality. The SCCA has openly acknowledged it now though, and is reportedly planning to move the RS1.0 back into C to join all in response.
The 3M is pretty stupid. Not always as obvious as in the picture, but definitely visible. It also looks like hell through my polarized sunglasses, confusing my eyes into thinking there are dents around the headlight areas.
Definitely not recommended, and I’m going to be hate it even more the first time I knock the car and have to fight it while repairing body panels.