April SIR ruling

2005-09-26---www_dontfeedthetroll_de---50x50.gif

[/b]
Click to expand...

:happy204: :happy204:
I was growing tired of the periodical table stuff anyway...too many college memories
 
:o AB and JAKE

Quit refferring to what is going on at the BMW Forum. The SCCA is made up of members and alot of those members are spouting off on that forum. You should be happy it's mostly over there now. People have the right to bitch, yes it has gotton crazy. Being a E36 owner I am very diappointed with the decision. The main reason I bought my car is that it fit great into many clubs....BMWCCA,NASA(GTS),EMRA,and SCCA. My choice will be not to paticipate with the SIR due to the fact my car will be uncompetitve in all the other clubs,...not worth it. It is not a threat, but just a choice I am making. I fortunately own a spec miata and I plan on running it with the SCCA. I am very luck to have both. This direction is due to the CRB's decision solely. I know I am not alone. I applaud people like DJ for going through the process and hitting the dyno to figuire the SIR out for 2006 racing. This BMW guy is cheering for DJ.

Greg
 
And another thing;

HB if you want to be taken seriously clean up your image.

HB (as a screen name) is very disrespectful to our female members and my folks who also visit this site. This is a public forum. I for one personally find it offensive! Racing and family go hand in hand.

You points may get you further if you came from an angle of integrity.....which all starts with a name IMO.

Sorry, I just had to say it.

R
[/b]
Click to expand...


Agreed 100%

I have no problem saying that I Reported the user to the webmaster. Would like to see the account frozen and allow him to open a new account with a more respectful name... Although if I were him (40 years of learning how to be respectful and mature) noticing that a few people have mentioned something maybe he will be respectful enough to do that on his own???

Raymond "My employees often ask me why I babysit them... then one of them will do something that spoils it for everyone and proves that they need to be" Blethen
 
HarryB,

It is you that has something to hide when you won't tell us who you are on BF.com? I bet it is. Nobody is preoccupied with it, it is just a data point that would be useful to further understand who we are dealing with. The fact you won't answer the question is amusing.

Just to understand, how many times does anyone have to type that the SIR decision was made in haste and just plain stunk given what we know now?

Move on and work with what we know. You say start over. OK, lets do that. What should we do? The comments on BF.com quoted above prove 100% that some people just don't get it. PERIOD.

I will tell you who I am on all the BBS's I check out - "Andy Bettencourt". No cloak, no daggar.

AB
 
Agreed 100%

....... Although if I were him (40 years of learning how to be respectful and mature) noticing that a few people have mentioned something maybe he will be respectful enough to do that on his own???

[/b]
Click to expand...

Methinks that Mr Balsack actually enjoys this to the nth degree, and gets a huge charge everytime somebody objects to his 'funny' name. I doubt you will see any such action from him.
 
HarryB,

It is you that has something to hide when you won't tell us who you are on BF.com? I bet it is. Nobody is preoccupied with it, it is just a data point that would be useful to further understand who we are dealing with. The fact you won't answer the question is amusing.

Just to understand, how many times does anyone have to type that the SIR decision was made in haste and just plain stunk given what we know now?

Move on and work with what we know. You say start over. OK, lets do that. What should we do? The comments on BF.com quoted above prove 100% that some people just don't get it. PERIOD.

I will tell you who I am on all the BBS's I check out - "Andy Bettencourt". No cloak, no daggar.

AB
[/b]
Click to expand...


Andy, that is the biggest load of crap I have seen yet in this thread. Let me see if I have this right: You boys had a hissy fit when you didn't know my real name. I gave it to you willingly.

Then you or one of your cronies felt compelled to dig up AND POST my occupation, my face, and disparaging sexual innuendos about my state of residence.

But that is not enough, I see. Now, it is IMPERATIVE that you also know what user name I have on BF.com?

Andy...do you read your posts before you post them?

Do you have ANY idea how this makes you look? Seriously, do you??

And why would I give 2 turds about your user name(s)?

Here is a hint, Andy: my user name on BF.com has 5 letters and 1 number.

Happy now?

Now, scurry off and find even more irrelevant crap about me that you can focus on while smokescreening the real issue. Why not ask my wife's name? What city in Texas I live in? How many children I have? My ATM password?

Seriously, Andy....you need to seek help. Look a few posts above & reread Dave Dillehay's post. And reread it again. And again.

Focus on THAT, and not on what additional personal info on me that is none of your Goddamned business.

Andy...your behavior has become very alarming. I am cut & pasting this entire message, and yours above, into a letter to the SCCA board of directors. You need to find something else to do with your time besides being part of Club Racing leadership.

Lateapex, no I don't. Sorry, but my user name is 100% irrelevant. And your maniacal focus on it says a lot.
 
Bill --

Could you elaborate on this a bit? Are you concerned that it's creating a situation that's unique to the E36? If so, I'd completely agree with you -- but no more than having an SIR spec'd created a unique situation. I like the idea that there exists a way for the shoestring guy to run without big expenditure. The SIR might be a gift to the BMW community afterall, but the implementation headaches and unknowns certainly aren't.

tom
[/b]
Click to expand...

Tom,

I thought I explained why I didn't like the either / or option, but maybe I didn't do that well at it. I definately don't like E/O now, w/ only one of the options in the not too distant future. Even if that's not the case, monitoring the E/O just ads something else for tech to do. Not that they can't, but we've all heard about putting anything else on the plate (no pun intended).

I totally agree that the SIR sets a bad precedent in IT. If you've got cars that need SIRs, because the spec weight would be too high, they should be in a higher class. You guys have to remember, the ITAC didn't put restrictors in their PCA proposal, that one was on the CRB. Oh, if there's no higher class, either the car doesn't belong in IT, or you need a higher class (I think I've made my preference rather obvious).
 
:o AB and JAKE

Quit refferring to what is going on at the BMW Forum. The SCCA is made up of members and alot of those members are spouting off on that forum. You should be happy it's mostly over there now. People have the right to bitch, yes it has gotton crazy. [/b]
Click to expand...

Well, it's in the public domain. I bent over backwards trying to make this happen correctly. It hasn't been easy, but then I read stuff like this, from a guy in Northern California, who owns a variety of cars, all from 1978, including a Mazda RX3Sp, who says:

(from BF, same thread as re earlier.)This is exactly how "racers" keep themselves in the back of the pack. These ITAC guys, are exactly that: Losers. Not because of any decision they made, but their processes are so flawed, that it is very obvious why they have not been successful in life or racing.[/b]
Click to expand...

Yea, thanks for that. Glad I tried to help.

This BMW guy is cheering for DJ.

Greg
[/b]
Click to expand...

This Mazda guy is too.

(but don't expect me to buy the M3 I have always wanted to and run over to BF to chat about it......I'll stick to my 911.)
 
These ITAC guys, are exactly that: Losers. Not because of any decision they made, but their processes are so flawed, that it is very obvious why they have not been successful in life or racing.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Simply frickin' amazing. Talk about not showing a group in the best light. :unsure:
 
:018:
Can you guys please discuss cars instead of personal gripes?
I said please. I'm not interested in who is right or wrong... at all.
You're wasting my bandwidth. Go start an SCCAFight.com site for this.

Warning #1
 
Thank you...

Now...about that SIR dyno testing info/results/charts/WHATEVER...??? :rolleyes:

:018:
Can you guys please discuss cars instead of personal gripes?
I said please. I'm not interested in who is right or wrong... at all.
You're wasting my bandwidth. Go start an SCCAFight.com site for this.

Warning #1
[/b]
Click to expand...
 
Right on, Mark, and thanks, Admins. THAT is all I have been asking for from my first post in this thread. [/b]
Click to expand...

Actually, your first post mistakingly told us that Bill never took shots at me - which were summarily shot down by example.

But seriously folks...

The ITAC wants the data to be released like everyone else. We are taking the heat for it afterall! Point your poison arrows at them if it doesn't come out.

If anyone would care to debate a different solution, using what we now know as a baseline, why don't we let this one die and start a new thread?

AB
 
I would really be curious to hear, from the BMW guys ONLY, what alternatives they would consider viable to bring the power of their cars down to the desired maximum hp figure (which was, I believe, 180 rwhp? - correct me if I'm wrong). Assume the alternative is 300 lbs. of extra weight. I really don't care about whether you believe the hp figure is fair, or whether the weight is fair, but let's just for the sake of argument assume that we have two choices: the stated weight or the stated max hp. What would you guys do?

Please, please, please can we keep the responses civil?

Thanks
Earl
 
I would really be curious to hear, from the BMW guys ONLY, what alternatives they would consider viable to bring the power of their cars down to the desired maximum hp figure (which was, I believe, 180 rwhp? - correct me if I'm wrong). Assume the alternative is 300 lbs. of extra weight. I really don't care about whether you believe the hp figure is fair, or whether the weight is fair, but let's just for the sake of argument assume that we have two choices: the stated weight or the stated max hp. What would you guys do?

Please, please, please can we keep the responses civil?

Thanks
Earl
[/b]
Click to expand...


If it were JUST those 2 choices? A 29mm SIR that does not work as advertised OR a 300lb chunk of lead?

I would do neither, and run in BMWCCA and NASA instead.
 
Earl, not a BMW guy, and not really weighing in on this, but some rough numbers:

1. Mazda RX7 power to weight: 2680/175 rwhp - 15.3

2. Porsche 944 power to weight: 2535 (is that right)/155 rwhp - 16.3

3. BMW unrestricted: 2850/195 rwhp - 14.6 OR 2850/210 (depending on who you believe) - 13.5

4. BMW "restricted": 2850/180rwhp - 15.8

5. BMW "weighted": 3150/195rwhp - 16.1 OR 3150/210 - 15

6. GSR: 2750/175 - 15.5

7. For laughs, my car; 2560/160 - 16
 
Earl, not a BMW guy, and not really weighing in on this, but some rough numbers:

1. Mazda RX7 power to weight: 2680/175 rwhp - 15.3

2. Porsche 944 power to weight: 2535 (is that right)/155 rwhp - 16.3

3. BMW unrestricted: 2850/195 rwhp - 14.6 OR 2850/210 (depending on who you believe) - 13.5

4. BMW "restricted": 2850/180rwhp - 15.8

5. BMW "weighted": 3150/195rwhp - 16.1 OR 3150/210 - 15

6. GSR: 2750/175 - 15.5

7. For laughs, my car; 2560/160 - 16

[/b]
Click to expand...

GSR is 2690 for a 15.3 figure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top