December Fastrack is out!

I agree, should be a separate spec line.

Not a significant difference in weight (60 lbs), but enough. Plus the line is just wrong.

James, write the letter and we will try to correct.
 
JoshS said:
For those who are wondering, the '97-'98 Z3 2.8 used the E36 328i motor (189hp)
Click to expand...

Minor yes, but the early 2.8 liter engine is lsted at 190hp from the factory. The later aluminum block, double VANOS is listed at 193 stock. The original ITR proposal listed the stock power as 189, but back-calculating it appears the input was 191.
 
GKR_17 said:
Minor yes, but the early 2.8 liter engine is lsted at 190hp from the factory. The later aluminum block, double VANOS is listed at 193 stock. The original ITR proposal listed the stock power as 189, but back-calculating it appears the input was 191.
Click to expand...
Grafton,

You went for the iron block hp rating not the aluminum block introduced in 1997 not 1995.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M52 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Z3

Josh and I have discussed this in the past. I guess what changed is the relization that the car is classed based on the motor not the VIN, and if the motor "is" different enought that you can tell by an open hood then the weight should be too. (I always thought the 50lb on the e-36 and 100lbs on the e-46 328 was because of the trailing arm/multi-link rear suspensions.:shrug:) So then the max my car should weight is at least the 2765 (that's still 35lbs less lead than I'd have to put in it) that the 325 weights.
 
James is right. I should have mentioned that the '97-'98 Z3 wasn't exactly the same as the E36 328i ... the Z3 has an aluminum block version of the same motor (same internals, same head, same intake, etc.) but was rated 1hp less than the iron block version.
 
Good luck with that James.

I'd love to get some more ITR cars out there. I need someone to race against. Even if it's Mustangs and Camaros:happy204:
 
My bad, that motor is rated at 189.
Per the process the early Z3 should match the 325 weight as you say, while the later should be around 2820 lbs. Could run either motor with the VIN rule, or the 3.0 for that matter, though I doubt many would want to run that heavy.

Grafton
 
Here's another question since some of our ITAC are on this thread. About a month ago I sent in a request to the CRB for proper weight specs for my 968 running in STU - never heard a word. What's the best way to get feedback on that question?
 
benspeed said:
Here's another question since some of our ITAC are on this thread. About a month ago I sent in a request to the CRB for proper weight specs for my 968 running in STU - never heard a word. What's the best way to get feedback on that question?
Click to expand...

Looks like the GCR says 3300lbs Ben. But we wouldn't be the ones responding to your letter on that anyway. Not sure if there is a STAC.
 
benspeed said:
...I sent in a request to the CRB for proper weight specs for my 968 running in STU...
Click to expand...
Am I missing something here? The STU weights specs are a displacement-to-weight calculation, not specific to any vehicle (unlike STO). Alternatively, you can run under IT prep rules, meaning your already-defined IT weight...
 
I like Greg's answer better :-)

I found the weight to displacement grid in the GCR - 3300 lbs it is. Better to race STU in IT trim.

Seriously thinking about crashing the Runoffs in my Hillbilly RV.
 
Last edited:
For those of you who don't frequent that other popluar watering hole, just wanted to mention that it has been confirmed that there will be a requirement for a H&N restraint for SCCA Club Racing beginning in 2012, and that all devices will be required to carry either a SFI or FIA certification.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt
Tristan,

Your weight is based on 235ish whp in IT trim for a full build. If you think it can make that number, it's weighted correctly for ITR.

S2000 needs to make 225ish, RX-8 = 215ish, 968 = 223ish.


Andy, what is that based on? Just stock horsepower with the usual 15 percent improvement?


Hey Andy, I know i am digging up an old thread but..
after doing some leg work, and speaking with Jeff about that 235 WHP that was used to class that car, I need to ask for a clarification. Was only one dyno test used?

My discussion with Z1 motorsports, one of the leading Z shops in the country, puts that power of a basic IT build in the 200 hp range at the wheels.


Here is also a link to the 300zxclub website where people put up their dyno numbers with, again basic IT mods. It again supports the 195 - 205 hp at the wheels, numbers.

http://www.300zxclub.com/showthread.php?t=78732

So how would I go about trying disprove the one dyno sheet (that I know of) that was used to classify the car weight?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top