CMP, BMW, Cams, and 944
- Thread starter Ron Earp
- Start date
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Ed,
Are you are inferring that the RX-7 is dominant? Let's remind everyone that looking at REGIONAL results is VERY dangerous. There are NO 10/10th prepared E36's in the Northeast. Ed and Chet have the best prepared cars, with the best equipment - all driven at that level. Same with Nick's RX-7. Head down to the ARRC and get pulled by 5 car lengths on the back straight like our RX-7...
Bottom line? The evaluation is still being done. It looks to be a good thing but don't anyone expect to run with the 100% cars without one yourself. You can try, but when drivers are equal, you have to have equal equipment.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Ron Earp
Administrator
Andy, more concise version what I said eariler. Some of the BMW's down here are top flight from what I can tell and it appears there are some folks that feel there is hanky panky going on, hence the head and cams on the table I suppose.
It has been a good learning experience for me to see some of these things happening at various tracks and how different people approach different situations. I'm pleased that people are paying attention to legality of cars and it is a concern in IT. As for these cars in question, I don't know enough to know one way or another how they are setup etc. I've just been investigating various ITS cars over the last few months (hence my BMW post in the tech section with that car for sale) and it is clear to me there are different levels of prep depending on the region. The SE seems to have a lot of racing and a lot of top prepped IT cars, as does the NE.
I really like seeing "different" fast cars and hope to see more fast cars than just BMWs - I've seen a fast 240sx, RX7 2nd gen, and recently that grey 944s - hope to see more like them.
Ron
------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
White Jensen-Healey ITS
Silver "Skull" 260Z ITS
G
Guest
Guest
I still see the solution as a simple one.
Just as an example, if one or two E-36's in particular are leaving the rest of the ITS class in the dust, while the rest of the pack is a mixture of E-36's, RX-7's, 240Z's, Integra's, etc that are having a real battle on their hands for their finishing positions, and those one or two dominant cars are using Motec while the rest of the E-36's aren't, then ban the Motec. Very simple.
It's odd how the class has gone from one dominant car to another, yet, at least in the DC Region, it wasn't always so much a particular dominant make, but the driver behind the wheel. In the early to mid 80's, the class was mostly 240Z's, which at that time were the dominant model, but, usually there were 3-4 drivers sharing wins.
Then, a lone TR-8 showed up and took everyone by surprise, then the rules were changed and the coil over suspensions evened out the field once again.
In the early 90's when I competed the class was still dominated by 240Z's and a few well prepped First Gen RX-7's. But, the wins were still being swapped between the 4-5 best drivers, not one overly dominant car. Then along came a well driven, well prepped E-30 that totally dominated for a year or so.
The 240's eventually caught up, but by then, the 2nd Gen Rx-7's and a few 944's showed up on the scene and it was once again anyone's race to win or lose.
Then, along comes the E-36, and now it has been only one or two totally dominant cars that have won nearly every MARRS race in the past 4-5 years. Integra shows up, still 2-3 seconds slower lap times, best the rest of the E-36's can do is about the same, as well as the die-hard 240, RX-7 and 944 drivers, as well as a couple 190E's. While one or two E-36's are turning high 1:24's and 1:25's, the rest of the class is in the 1:27 to 1:30 range.
At the same time, a couple of the top ITA 240SX's are running at or near the front of the "rest of the ITS class" and turning times nearly equal to the best 240's, RX7's, the balance of the E-36 field,and the Integra, while one or two lone E-36's are winning by 30+ seconds on the field.
These are just my opinions and observations of the MARRS series over the past 15-20 years, I know they don't speak for any other region, but it should give those of you an idea of why some regions are complaining more than others. I'd be surprised if other regions haven't seen nearly the same progression over the years.
[This message has been edited by 2Many Z's (edited June 01, 2005).]
Just as an example, if one or two E-36's in particular are leaving the rest of the ITS class in the dust, while the rest of the pack is a mixture of E-36's, RX-7's, 240Z's, Integra's, etc that are having a real battle on their hands for their finishing positions, and those one or two dominant cars are using Motec while the rest of the E-36's aren't, then ban the Motec. Very simple.
It's odd how the class has gone from one dominant car to another, yet, at least in the DC Region, it wasn't always so much a particular dominant make, but the driver behind the wheel. In the early to mid 80's, the class was mostly 240Z's, which at that time were the dominant model, but, usually there were 3-4 drivers sharing wins.
Then, a lone TR-8 showed up and took everyone by surprise, then the rules were changed and the coil over suspensions evened out the field once again.
In the early 90's when I competed the class was still dominated by 240Z's and a few well prepped First Gen RX-7's. But, the wins were still being swapped between the 4-5 best drivers, not one overly dominant car. Then along came a well driven, well prepped E-30 that totally dominated for a year or so.
The 240's eventually caught up, but by then, the 2nd Gen Rx-7's and a few 944's showed up on the scene and it was once again anyone's race to win or lose.
Then, along comes the E-36, and now it has been only one or two totally dominant cars that have won nearly every MARRS race in the past 4-5 years. Integra shows up, still 2-3 seconds slower lap times, best the rest of the E-36's can do is about the same, as well as the die-hard 240, RX-7 and 944 drivers, as well as a couple 190E's. While one or two E-36's are turning high 1:24's and 1:25's, the rest of the class is in the 1:27 to 1:30 range.
At the same time, a couple of the top ITA 240SX's are running at or near the front of the "rest of the ITS class" and turning times nearly equal to the best 240's, RX7's, the balance of the E-36 field,and the Integra, while one or two lone E-36's are winning by 30+ seconds on the field.
These are just my opinions and observations of the MARRS series over the past 15-20 years, I know they don't speak for any other region, but it should give those of you an idea of why some regions are complaining more than others. I'd be surprised if other regions haven't seen nearly the same progression over the years.
[This message has been edited by 2Many Z's (edited June 01, 2005).]
ed325its
New member
Yes we are in agreement, the situation should be monitored. All cars need to be monitored. However, decisions should not be made prematurely. Your comment was clear that your mind may already be made. ("no one is surprised..." instead of no one would be surprised.
Yes, under any definition holding and then smashing track records is domination.
This is never a comparison between my car and a fully prepared car. I know that my car is not 100%, but failing to spend $5k for engine and head work, $8k for MOTEC, and $5k for Motons, it is as developed as it is going to get. The escalation of cost is the greater problem. It should not cost $40k+ to be competitive in ITS. How does the ITAC, with all our help, propose to lower costs and rules creep in IT.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
Yes, under any definition holding and then smashing track records is domination.
This is never a comparison between my car and a fully prepared car. I know that my car is not 100%, but failing to spend $5k for engine and head work, $8k for MOTEC, and $5k for Motons, it is as developed as it is going to get. The escalation of cost is the greater problem. It should not cost $40k+ to be competitive in ITS. How does the ITAC, with all our help, propose to lower costs and rules creep in IT.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
This is topic creep - rather than rules creep - but there is NO way to legislate costs downward.
If I had thou$sand$ to spend and an all-but-Motons-and-Motec e36 in the garage, I'd spend the money on coaching, tires, and test days, rather than hardware, and probably be faster than the racer who made the other choice.
If rules outlawed those fancy pieces, I'd do the same thing.
K
If I had thou$sand$ to spend and an all-but-Motons-and-Motec e36 in the garage, I'd spend the money on coaching, tires, and test days, rather than hardware, and probably be faster than the racer who made the other choice.
If rules outlawed those fancy pieces, I'd do the same thing.
K
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Comment 1. We are in full agreement. I have not seen any hard evidence that the restricted E36's need more restriction. Conversely, I have not seen any hard evidence that they are OVER-restricted. Time will tell.
Comment 2. What is happening in your area is simple. The 04 RX-7 is now almost fully developed. The engine/ecu program has been at 100%, the development has been there and now the shocks are at 100%...oh ya, the driver NEVER settles. How often do you know of a driver making changes inbetween qualifying and the race...WHEN THEY ARE ON POLE? Happens 90% of the time in his world. 5 track records right now. How many would he have if someone decided to build a York-level E36 - and then drove it like him? Who knows...but there are just no apples to compare with right now.
Comment 3. GREAT QUESTION - and this is the real issue. I personally would love to try and shove some genies back in the bottle but it just doesn't seem possible. I think doing some of that for 2007 would be fine...but what do we owe the members who invested and the businesses who designed products for a set of rules? Can everyone count on SOME SORT of rule stability? I would hope so but it is a fine line between that and reversing a 'mistake'...and who is to say it really was a mistake?
I am on the Spec Miata Advisory Board as well. I just voted yes to clarify a rule that will contain costs. Guess what? It's gonna cost me about $500. I will have to remove a trick piece that I bought that was legal, that now won't be. Am I happy about it? Nope, but I feel it is for the good of the class and it needed to be done.
The ITAC wants to control costs and creep, but there is only so much that can be done. Having said that, if 500 letters came in requesting that the CPU rule be tightened up, I would think somebody would have to take a serious look at that.
Sorry for the ramble!
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
lateapex911
Super Moderator
With all due respect, no, it is not "very simple"
How do you know:
What heat cycle these fast guys are on?
What their suspension set up is?
Shocks?
Springs?
What the build of the motor is?
What the tune of the motor is?
What cam?
What compession?
What flywheel?
What gears?
What crankshaft?
What valves?
And on and on and on...
You simply can NOT look at one car, see it has an item that you suspect is making the car fast, and ban that part!
Without knowing ALL the variables, and without knowing the cars legality (sorry if anybody takes offense, I am not implying anything) you simply can't draw such sweeping conclusions, and ban a product that a lot of guys spent huge sums of cash and time on!
If you want to know what the Motec is worth, you need to research it with builders, or build it yourself. Then build one without. I am sure that Motec might allow the optimization of certain parameters, so a controlled back to back flywheel HP test is the only way to really know.
And......this is the REAL crux of the matter...if you ban Motec to slow down the fast guys.....won't banning Motec ALSO slow down the other guys?????
And isn't the point to bring the big dogs back into the pack??
Banning Motec aint the answer....
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Bill Miller
New member
Ed,
I can't ever recall anyone on the ITAC speaking about lowering costs in IT. In fact, I don't think it's part of their charge. As Kirk, and many others, have pointed out, there is no way to control how much someone spends. Back before threaded-body shocks were allowed, people were having the threads turned off Penskes/Ohlins/Konis/etc. and running them. There was talk here, not too long ago, about not allowing AWD cars, because someone would build a 'wet' car and a 'dry' car, and bring them both to the track.
One large part of this problem, was not having defined and documented performance parameters for each of the classes. And then a token effort is made to slow the car down (and from what Darin has said, one that no one on the ITAC thought was enough). It apparently wasn't enough, and now, it's going to be 'monitored' (probably for another year or two, as we all know how fast things happen). So, how many more IT folks will say "Hey, I can spend the same (or less), and run a SM, and at least have a chance."
I'm a little confused by your some of your comments though. You talk about how the 2nd gen RX7 holds track records in the NE, and is setting 'blistering' records this year. And then you go on to say that being able to do this qualifies as domination. So, I understand you to say that 2nd gen RX7's dominate ITS (at least in the NE).
And to admit that your car is not as developed as some of the big name cars, and then talk about how it's not as competitive due to the restrictor plate, is really disingenuous. You want a car that you don't have to develop and drive at the limit, yet you want to be competitive? You'll probably be happier w/ some kind of spec class then.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
ed325its
New member
I am not being disingenous. Please reread the post. I did not say that my specific car was not competitive with the front running cars due to the restrictor plate. I only related real world experience, as opposed to opinion and inuendo, that the restrictor plate has had an effect to reduce the torque of my E36. I was very clear that I was not trying to compare the performace of the #04 car to the performance of mine. They are clearly not prepared to the same level.
I am not aware the ITAC has specific a charge other than to advise the CRB on behalf of the IT community and promote the best interests of IT racers and the class. If the ITAC has been charged with specific goals perhaps they could be listed here so all will know how to help them meet their goals.
------------------Edited for spelling...
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
[This message has been edited by ed325its (edited June 01, 2005).]
I am not aware the ITAC has specific a charge other than to advise the CRB on behalf of the IT community and promote the best interests of IT racers and the class. If the ITAC has been charged with specific goals perhaps they could be listed here so all will know how to help them meet their goals.
------------------Edited for spelling...
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
[This message has been edited by ed325its (edited June 01, 2005).]
ed325its
New member
Andy,
Comment 1 - Agreed, my only point is that I believe other cars also need to be monitored, in all classes.
Comment 2 - I understand your point, but can't say that I agree with your conclusion.
Comment 3 - With the newer cars having programmable ECU's I do not know how one would control, ban, or police the use on non-stock ECU's and programs. However, I do agree that this genie should be put back in the bottle.
Thank you for acknowledging that rules creep and cost control are an important issue in IT. This thread has really been hijacked and I will not contribute further to it's demise. See you at NHIS in June.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
Comment 1 - Agreed, my only point is that I believe other cars also need to be monitored, in all classes.
Comment 2 - I understand your point, but can't say that I agree with your conclusion.
Comment 3 - With the newer cars having programmable ECU's I do not know how one would control, ban, or police the use on non-stock ECU's and programs. However, I do agree that this genie should be put back in the bottle.
Thank you for acknowledging that rules creep and cost control are an important issue in IT. This thread has really been hijacked and I will not contribute further to it's demise. See you at NHIS in June.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
Banzai240
New member
The ITAC has formed a close working relationship with the CRB. We have earned their trust, and they ours. Through this relationship, we are working to make IT better in the future.
If adjustments need to be made, I don't think you'll see it taking "1-2 years"... We all went through the exercise of arguing about the performance of the BMW here many months ago, so it makes no sense to rehash it now... The ITAC and the CRB agreed to give the restrictors a try and to monitor the performance of the class... That's where we stand today... We'll just have to see how things go over the season to decide if anything further needs to be done...
Again, the ITAC's position is to advise, but the CRB has entrusted us with giving them GOOD advice... advice that they can work with... If they don't like what we've suggested, we discuss it and come to an agreement and a plan of action... That's how the restrictors got in place as opposed to weight... To this point, the CRB has accepted the majority of our "advice", and they continue to support the direction the committee has been taking...
It is our hope that the majority of you are satisfied with that direction as well. We can't make everyone happy, but we are trying to make the majority of you feel that this is the best class to race in...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
robits325is
New member
What about making competitive adjustments by region? After all, we are making National adjustments to fix Regional problems. Different tracks favor different cars.
Rob Driscoll
Ron Earp
Administrator
National and Regional Adjustments?
That sounds extremely complicated and destined to fail. What happens with I take my Jensen Wheezy out of the SE, where in the SE I had a performance adjustment to reign in or give my car a chance? What happens when I get it up to LRP - can I lose my adjustment?
Or, even worse, if you were a MARS racer with extra weight to slow down your ThingAMyBob GT because you are whomping all over the field and you go race the SAARC in Atlanta? Can you ditch your weight? And in doing so you smoke the field and win the SAARC? Boy, that might get you run out of town with torches and pitchforks.
Who would keep track of indivdual adjustments per region? What if I made one up? "Yeah, in the Southeast they said I could run the factory superceeded R cam on the GTs running down there based on a factory TSB printed in 1987 that I don't have to have on my person because it was mandated by the SCCA" Zoom, off I go.
Farfetched? Yeah, well I thought people advertising IT cars with lightened flywheels, illegal braces from convertibles, large throttle bodies, and illegal subframe connectors was farfetched too but truth is stranger than fiction.
That process you suggested sounds like a nightmare. The current system seems to work pretty well, albeit slowly but slowly is safe so things don't get crazy in a hurry. Now, was that ECU rule a slow change?
------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
White Jensen-Healey ITS
Silver "Skull" 260Z ITS
[Edited to reflect current events]
[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited June 02, 2005).]
That sounds extremely complicated and destined to fail. What happens with I take my Jensen Wheezy out of the SE, where in the SE I had a performance adjustment to reign in or give my car a chance? What happens when I get it up to LRP - can I lose my adjustment?
Or, even worse, if you were a MARS racer with extra weight to slow down your ThingAMyBob GT because you are whomping all over the field and you go race the SAARC in Atlanta? Can you ditch your weight? And in doing so you smoke the field and win the SAARC? Boy, that might get you run out of town with torches and pitchforks.
Who would keep track of indivdual adjustments per region? What if I made one up? "Yeah, in the Southeast they said I could run the factory superceeded R cam on the GTs running down there based on a factory TSB printed in 1987 that I don't have to have on my person because it was mandated by the SCCA" Zoom, off I go.
Farfetched? Yeah, well I thought people advertising IT cars with lightened flywheels, illegal braces from convertibles, large throttle bodies, and illegal subframe connectors was farfetched too but truth is stranger than fiction.
That process you suggested sounds like a nightmare. The current system seems to work pretty well, albeit slowly but slowly is safe so things don't get crazy in a hurry. Now, was that ECU rule a slow change?
------------------
Ron Earp
NC Region
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
White Jensen-Healey ITS
Silver "Skull" 260Z ITS
[Edited to reflect current events]
[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited June 02, 2005).]
mlytle
New member
i am not in favor of regional adjustments, but they can work. the sailboat racing community has been doing it for years. it is call "phrf". different boats rate different time allowances based on how well they do in a particular region. ratings are reviewed regularly. more effort required to make it work? oh yeah, but it does work.
i am obviously not in favor of regional adjustments because i race a bmw in marrs, and am not the bmw that kick's everyone elses butt. an adjustment to accomodate the winning bmw would kill the rest of us.
i am obviously not in favor of regional adjustments because i race a bmw in marrs, and am not the bmw that kick's everyone elses butt. an adjustment to accomodate the winning bmw would kill the rest of us.
G
Guest
Guest
Well, I'd offer my ideas, but it seems as though a few people think I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.
Just one more reason that I'll most likely never run in IT again.
Just one more reason that I'll most likely never run in IT again.
This weekend at CMP was our first IT race in a VW B car!!!
Now we will have to go to the ARRC championship to have more fun. This group is a blast, lots of cars, a chance to win in any type of car and pit stops!
With a front drive car, rain, and a good team even a B car can qualify up with the BMW and RX-7 cars??
But don't go out on slicks with a wet track and HOPE it dries out.
Thankfuly my teamate peddeled the car during his stint to save a good finish after I messed up the first hr.
See Yall @ the RA ECR!!!!
Now we will have to go to the ARRC championship to have more fun. This group is a blast, lots of cars, a chance to win in any type of car and pit stops!
With a front drive car, rain, and a good team even a B car can qualify up with the BMW and RX-7 cars??
But don't go out on slicks with a wet track and HOPE it dries out.
Thankfuly my teamate peddeled the car during his stint to save a good finish after I messed up the first hr.
See Yall @ the RA ECR!!!!