E-36 Restrictor Plate/Andy Bettencourt

Originally posted by mlytle:
the line doesn't say anything about classes or envelopes. it says there is no guarantee your car will be competitive. if you bring a car to play and it gets trounced, oh well.
Click to expand...

What if you HAVE a car, you DID your homework, you developed the HECK out of it, and the board adds a car to the class that is clearly an overdog? Is that FAIR?

And the denial of the car being an overdog has already been shot down by ...none other than the E36 drivers themselves, with lines like jwsbmw325's "But it will force us to spend more time in the shop on development and as you know that means more $$ into the car, and no, I'm not happy about it."

So, a complaint that the change will force owners to develop the car to its full potential? Awwww, hand me a violin!
rolleyes.gif




------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Ok, is this a joke? Can anyone be so.....errr...ahhhh.... well, words (nice ones) fail me...let me make a few points...

Originally posted by jwsbmw325:
ANdy - I have heard for a while that for some reason you were on the warpath against us BMW's. THis makes little sense to me since you opted out of ITS to run your little Spex Maita. Maybe if Hendo or Rob or I had punted you at Limerock or NHIS, totaled your car, etc, I could understand.
Click to expand...


Dude...., first sign your friggen name. Slandering a guy is kinda sleazy, at least have the b@#ls to back it up with a name. Is that the way you work? Motives are only Ok if they're personal? Is it POSSIBLE Andy has a big picture view? That he (and the entire ITAC, BTW) think there was a real problem in ITS?


But I dont get it? What do you give a sh*t about what the guys do at Roebling or Atlanta?
Click to expand...


Because the world is bigger than your NE area?

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\"> Our AutoTechnic cars are all legal.  Fast, yes, exspensive, yes, but illegal? No.   </font>
Click to expand...

Well, I have known that your cars are NOT legal, as evidenced by the illegal modifications to the subframe pictured on your website. And I assure you, I was not alone in that knowledge. You should be very aware that when things like this are found, lots of folks will wonder, "Hmmm what ELSE is fishy here?" Nuff said on that one...

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\"> Face facts ANdy, times change, cars change, technology changes.  The BMW 2002tii used to be THE car for ITA.  ....(Serra) beat the SH*T OUT OF EVERYONE IN ITA, so it must have been.(illegal)  I mean, he ran 1:02's at Limerock.  5 years ago a good ITA time was 1:03-1:04.  Why are these Hondas, liek Anthony's so fast now??  Why? 1) Driver skill, 2) Car development. </font>
Click to expand...


Wrong again. he ran a 1:01.6. Actually, the CRB made a mistake with the CRX, it proved too fast for the class, and the solution was to add equivilent cars to the class. So the huge drop in times isn't only the result of superior development and driving, it is the result of classing mistakes. JUST like the E36 was PCAs didn't exist back then.


But I see you have led thaecharge and now you have helped spoil racing for all of us who chose, or could afford to choose, racing an E-36 BMW.
Click to expand...


Huh??? So, having a car that is even up is "ruining racing"??? A little spoiled are you??
..... But now your beolved rotary powered cars (who's technology by the way is about 5-6 years senior to the E-36's) are getting beat, and you cant seem to handle it.
Click to expand...

News flash dude...you forgot he races in "Spex Miata" ...except if you were REALLY paying attention, you'd see he's talking about ITA...he doesn't even OWN a rotary!

(And an aside: your comments regarding "old technology" are disturbing...Do you think old cars have no right to be competitive against newer more expensive cars? It seems so, and your bragging about being able to afford the E36 is very distasteful, and brands you as an elitist...not sure we need that in "club" racing...)



6) What do you do for a living other than spend time like a geeky hall monitor on this web board? Perhaps if you applied yourself to your method of gainful employment with the same passion you apply here, you would yourself be able to afford an E-36 with Motec. The fact is you would probably still run mid-pack. My sense is that guys who like to cry and whine about what otehrs are doing dont have potential to win races.
So Andy, let me just say that the next time I run into you, I hope I'm driving (my E-36 HAHAHAHAHAA!!!!!!)
Click to expand...

Nice! Check the results smartypants...I think Andy won the first time he drove his ITS 7,....not exactly "midpack".

And nice threat of violence.

As for me, I'm glad I don't run in ITS with characterless types like this....

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited December 06, 2004).]
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
What if you HAVE a car, you DID your homework, you developed the HECK out of it, and the board adds a car to the class that is clearly an overdog? Is that FAIR?
Click to expand...


Well, hopefully that doesn't happen too often. If I have had car "A" for a few years (probably so if I've developed the heck out of it) then I keep an eye on the new "overdog" with the intention on building one after the guinea pigs have done most of the development and it becomes a must have car to win. IF that happens every five years or so, I am okay with it. YMMV.

This is one reason that part of my homework includes researching where most of the new classifications end up and deciding if I can afford to play there.

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">And the denial of the car being an overdog has already been shot down by ...none other than the E36 drivers themselves, with lines like jwsbmw325's \"But it will force us to spend more time in the shop on development and as you know that means more $$ into the car, and no, I'm not happy about it.\" </font>
Click to expand...


I'm not so certain that the statement supports the overdog theory. If your RX7 was fully developed and they moved it to B on 6" wheels and put 100# on it, wouldn't you have more development work to do?
 
Originally posted by Quickshoe:
Originally posted by lateapex911:
What if you HAVE a car, you DID your homework, you developed the HECK out of it, and the board adds a car to the class that is clearly an overdog? Is that FAIR?
Click to expand...


Well, hopefully that doesn't happen too often.  If I have had car \"A\" for a few years (probably so if I've developed the heck out of it) then I keep an eye on the new \"overdog\" with the intention on building one after the guinea pigs have done most of the development and it becomes a must have car to win.  IF that happens every five years or so, I am okay with it.  YMMV.

This is one reason that part of my homework includes researching where most of the new classifications end up and deciding if I can afford to play there.

 
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">And the denial of the car being an overdog has already been shot down by ...none other than the E36 drivers themselves, with lines like jwsbmw325's \"But it will force us to spend more time in the shop on development and as you know that means more $$ into the car, and no, I'm not happy about it.\" </font>
Click to expand...


I'm not so certain that the statement supports the overdog theory. If your RX7 was fully developed and they moved it to B on 6" wheels and put 100# on it, wouldn't you have more development work to do?
Click to expand...

___________________________________________
Good points....but in the BMWs case, I probably should have quoted the guy(s) who stated (on another thread) that they would now have to go out and get an ECU, or "build a motor"....leading me to believe that their examples were doing just fine in their eyes without developing the car to anything NEAR its full potential .

I think the RX-7 example is valid, but a bit of a greater extreme...the guys who have full blown development will have minimal changes available to them with the new plates. Its not like NASCAR...no cams, etc to play with. It IS unfortunate that they have a bit of work, but it IS better than the alternative, which is the potential "one model" class.

(I think James Clay of Bimmerword admitted on this forum, a year or more ago, that yup, the car was an overdog, and if they (SCCA) adds weight, hey, that's fine....it had it's day in the sun....)

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited December 07, 2004).]
 
One last thought, jwsbmw325....do the AutoTecnic guys know you're shooting your mouth off? It's not making them look too good.....

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
I know of plenty of BMW's that have already done some testing with the restrictors of various sizes before the rule was published and it takes a lot more than most think to slow them down. I have not figured the percentage of restriction with the current size (don't have the stock diameter handy) but I would wait until I ran to get too worked up. As for Andy leading the charge I can promise you that Phil Clark probably quit so I would stop calling and some other comp board members as well!! All our cars will someday be replaced by faster, newer cars and we will have to replace them--just not a whole class in one screwed up classification. The BMW has battery in rear stock, very balanced, good brakes, well spaced gears in trans, good selection of rear gear ratios, slipped in 16" wheels this year for new Hoosier with very short sidewall, and TONS of torque and horsepower. Life sucks!! Welcome to 10-10ths to win instead of 9-10ths and zero to hero.

Steve Eckerich
ITS 18 Speedsource RX7
Southeast
 
Originally posted by GregAmy:
http://www.autotechnicracing.com/gallery/car11

http://www.autotechnicracing.com/gallery/c...ck_welded_1_006

http://www.autotechnicracing.com/cars.php
Click to expand...

John Stewart

Born before 1970, John has been racing before the Disco craze of the 70's Proud owner of the shiniest car on the grid, John prides himself on the cleanliness of his high speed, beautifully prepared car. John resides in Westport CT and New York City.

2004 results for Car #11 pictured above driven By John Stewart

5/08 LRP 3rd
5/15 POCONO DNF
6/19 LRP 1st
8/07 LRP DNF
10/03 LRP 3rd

Stephen

Team AutoTechnic takes a 1-2 finish at Limerock Park!

John Stewart, driving the #11 AutoTechnic BMW 325is, took his first win and the team's 4th win of the season. Stewart was fast out of the gate, qualifying 2nd on the grid behind the highly competitive Flatout Motorsports Mazda RX-7 of Nick Leverone. Jeff Henderson in the #52 qualified 3rd, while Driscoll in the #25 had trouble getting in a clean lap and started from the 5th position. At the drop of the green, it appeared that Stewart and Leverone were too concerned with one another getting the jump, allowing Henderson get off to his usual flying start, leapfrogging the two to take the lead. The running order was then Henderson, Leverone, and Stewart, with Driscoll close behind. The wagon train continued for 4 laps until Stewart got a good run on Leverone going into the diving turn, pulling even with the Mazda going into the braking zone for turn one. Stewart nosed inside of Leverone's RX-7 and the two exited Big Bend door handle to door handle. The two cars touched, and Stewart's heavier BMW prevailed, with Leverone's Mazda spinning to the outside of turn 2. That left Stewart and Driscoll following Henderson, who had capitalized on Stewart's contact to stretch his lead to several seconds. From there it appeared that the race might unfold as an AutoTechnic 1-2-3 sweep. But you never know with racing, and the usually bullet-proof engine of Henderson's BMW let go on lap 7, leaving Stewart in the lead with Driscoll putting the pressure on as the two threaded their way through the slower ITB class cars.

Despite a few close calls, Stewart managed stay in front of the hard charging Driscoll, and the two ended 1st and 2nd. Ed Tisdale, in his C-Tech Motorsports BMW 325, ran a clean and conservative drive, took 3rd place making an all BMW 325 podium.

It's a great win for the Team and my first win at Limerock! It's also nice to pick up some momentum after my disastrous weekend at Pocono, where my car was way off the pace due to engine management problems. Obviously, we were able to sort them out for today. The car felt awesome right off the trailer. AutoTechnic again put an awesome car under me. Rob had made some subtle suspension set-up changes that really worked for me. I'm really happy to contribute to the team's success this year.

Team Autoechnic now stands atop the SCCA ITS NAARC Championship with 4 series wins. Come watch the streak continue as the BMW's battle again at NHIS on 7/17th and 18th. Don't miss it!!!!


[This message has been edited by RSTPerformance (edited December 07, 2004).]
 
A post like that not only makes all the Autotechnic guys look bad but will get even less sympathy for them to have to spend more money
rolleyes.gif
Way too harsh........

Jeff Lawton

------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi

[This message has been edited by JLawton (edited December 07, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by JLawton (edited December 07, 2004).]
 
Based on the previous post, and especially the pictures, am I to assume that the win captured above was done with illegal Autotechnic cars?

If indeed true this seems rather bold to be placing on the forum in the open, incriminating for drivers and Autotechnic alike, although I don't suppose Autotechnic really has anything to lose since they build the cars - the driver is responsible for legality.

Looks like to me the next time #11 or another Autotechnic car shows up at a race folks are really going to be checking out those subframe pieces and mounting points for signs of strengthening, I'm pretty sure that was specific mentioned as a "no can do" in the GCR. I did save those pictures since someone mentioned it.

------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!

[This message has been edited by rlearp (edited December 07, 2004).]
 
First of all let me again say that I am overwhelmed by the intensity of this issue on the boards here. Be that what it may, yes, I started something with Andy here, cause I know him. As for the "run into you" comment, it is a bit of an inside joke between us and the Flatout Boyz, about Nick pushing me up the hill at Limerock w/ him glued to my "bumpah"....And since I drive in ITS, and he in Spec Miata, that's not possible. I also noticed someone pointed out a typo, perhaps thinking there was somehting sinister in the making: I mentioned Andy's "spex" Miata. If you would all look at your keyboards, you will notice that the "c" abd te "x" are right next to one another. I do not typew for a living and when I do, the results, like my racing, are somewhat mixed....SO for all of you who are reading way too much into this, please, please calm down.
Now, as for the discussion on my sub-frame: These pictures are of a repair made to the subframe while the car was under construction. The car was purchased with over 120K miles on the chassis, the sub-frame was cracked. The repair is consistent with BMW specs laid out in the factory shop-manual, and i beleive them to be legal. The repair poieces are availble from BMW.
Someone asked why I didnt come down the the AARC race? I would have loved to. But I could not arrange the time off of work, with travel and practice days - that is almost a full week commitment. That's why.
That's it....
 
8" wheels? excuse me? Sure, they go great with the M-5 cross-drilled rotors....!!! Guys, guys, guys, stop it - the only wheels I own are SSR Comp 15X7.
 
Originally posted by jwsbmw325:
..SO for all of you who are reading way too much into this, please, please calm down.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think people are only reading what you wrote.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Well. Where to start?

I do know John and he is a good guy. All the Autotechnic guys are good guys.

Simple and calm response? John, your perception of my position on the E36 is very agressive and distorted. I would be happy to talk to you about it offline, anytime. Just know this, I am in the majority, you are in the minority.

As far as my driving record (I beat you at NHIS, you beat me at LRP), my financial position (I do ok) and the other personal stuff you mention, let's just say that I expected better from you.

My position on the E36 is simple and easy. The cars performance potential was underestimated from the get go and a correction is being made. I believe that 10/10th's examples of cars in each class should be in the same stratosphere...and this is a good step.

Andy

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
Originally posted by jwsbmw325:
Now, as for the discussion on my sub-frame: These pictures are of a repair made to the subframe while the car was under construction. The car was purchased with over 120K miles on the chassis, the sub-frame was cracked. The repair is consistent with BMW specs laid out in the factory shop-manual, and i beleive them to be legal. The repair poieces are availble from BMW.
Someone asked why I didnt come down the the AARC race? I would have loved to. But I could not arrange the time off of work, with travel and practice days - that is almost a full week commitment. That's why.
That's it....[/B]
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by jwsbmw325:
Now, as for the discussion on my sub-frame: These pictures are of a repair made to the subframe while the car was under construction. The car was purchased with over 120K miles on the chassis, the sub-frame was cracked. The repair is consistent with BMW specs laid out in the factory shop-manual, and i beleive them to be legal. The repair poieces are availble from BMW.
Someone asked why I didnt come down the the AARC race? I would have loved to. But I could not arrange the time off of work, with travel and practice days - that is almost a full week commitment. That's why.
That's it....[/B]
Click to expand...

Sorry for 1st post must of bumped key...hehe.

As to his post on the subframe repair, he is correct, these are BMW parts and this is the appropriate repair to these cars. My question is are the brackets you welded to the sway bar brackets also a BMW Repair? What about the short shifters & 8" wheels?
I just saw the #25 BMW ITS.
DJ
 
Maybe the repairs are correct, but, I suppose the question would be how many E36 ITS cars have these "repairs". If #11 is the only car then fine. But if many cars have identical repairs then you know something is fishy. I would think it easier and quicker to pull pieces from cars in yards instead of making repairs, there are plently of E36s around.

------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!
 
Oh, you know Andy. I guess we should be glad we don't know you as well.

If you know him, then keep this garbage off line. Otherwise consider writing your complaint in a more professional manner (or should I just say like an adult would). Just out of curiosity, was all of this what you hoped for when writing that silly post? Or did you not put any thought into any of this at all?

What bothers me the most about this junk is that we have many novices reading these forums. This is not the impression we want them to get about this forum and club racing in general.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[This message has been edited by gran racing (edited December 07, 2004).]
 
That "repair" raises an interesting issue. Rear subframe failures are a known issue on E36s. BMW has, if I recall correctly, authorized the above strengthening, etc. as a repair of a known "stock" fault. Is THAT legal? A factory authorized repair that goes beyond what was stock on the car?

If so, that opens a pretty big door
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top