It's here...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by buldogge@Jan 23 2006, 11:32 AM
With all due respect Andy... You stated the following in #95: "The BMW's can make too much HP in legal IT prep for a 2850lb minimum weight. Simple as that. Limit it to about 220hp (crank) and you 'fit' into ITS."
I think most of us would like to know an actual RWHP #...not "about 220hp crank" (and having said that...what drivetrain loss deviation are you using to determine the output?)...but...The E36 BMW 325 SHALL ONLY BE ALLOWED to make 'X' RWHP to fit into this class...period.

Thanx...

[snapback]71711[/snapback]​

We don't use WHP in the process. We use it as validation or contradiction - POST process. Crank hp is the number that runs through...

Some have done the math in this thread and others. 220 crank hp would be the target given 2850 min weight in order to not hurt the class.

 

[Joe Harlan]

So lets say we pin it down to "the 325 shall make 220 flywheel HP or say 195 wheel HP" How long do you think it will be before we are dynoing every 325 in a protest....Bing 221 or 196 and yer bounced?

The SIR will be the best average limiter and still allow those that wake the time to fully develop and drive the ability to shine.

I will also go one better. If anyone in the PDX/Seattle Market is willing buy the SIR and pay the Dyno fee for a day. I will give one day of my shop time to helping on the dyno to maximize your effort. I would really like to help prove this concept works and works well.

 

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by JeffYoung@Jan 23 2006, 03:54 PM
2. Average 325s can run up front right now (SIR doesn't fix this).

[snapback]71693[/snapback]​

There is NOTHING wrong with a well prepped E36 being able to "run up front"... There IS a problem with an average prepped E36 DOMINATING the event...

The SIR will allow the E36's to remain VERY competitive if well-developed, but an average example should not be able to dominate as they sometimes have...

It's still going to take a well-prepped car and a good drive... Road racing is about the corners... It seems to be that since we are comparing the E36 to cars already weighing 2400-2650lbs, or 200+lbs lighter, there is already a handling penalty, given equal HP... Since the E36 has more hp than these same cars, that is what needed to be addressed...

Look, there is going to be ONE car that sits atop the heap... there currently IS no higher class to consider for the top of ITS, and the E36 happens to be the car that is on the top... That is the only reason it appears to be "targeted"...

I can't speak for future ITACs, but I can say that from the point of view of THIS ITAC, we don't want to be making ANY more adjustments of this nature... Certainly not to the BMW, and hopefully not to the rest of the cars as well...

Have we missed a few... Likely...

Will we work to correct mistakes... YUP...

Will there be anymore large scale changes like this coming down the pike... NOT LIKELY...

We feel we've addressed what needed to be addressed to ensure that the classes are more balanced, and that future classifications will truely be able to fit in the existing classes...

In simple terms... we WILL NOT be making nit-picky, Production-Style adjustments to individual cars from this point forward...

Now, we want to get to work on making a place for future IT cars!

 

[buldogge]

Darin... I know it is a moot point at this juncture...but exactly what average prepped E36 went around DOMINATING events???

Everytime the E36 debacle is touted out...we speak of Mr. Wittel as the shining example. Andy has spoken of the Autotechnic cars...do you consider any of these "average" prep?

It's all about the corners...but...the Speedsource cars I encounter at Memphis have equal or even SLIGHTLY greater straight line speed...and I don't mind saying (as if it matters now) that I have ZERO problems with straight line speed.

FWIW...My car is "fully prepped"...minus Motec... and I run just over weight limit.

What are we to do as the "fully prepped" RX-7's walk away...whine???

Originally posted by Banzai240@Jan 23 2006, 04:52 PM
There is NOTHING wrong with a well prepped E36 being able to "run up front"...  There IS a problem with an average prepped E36 DOMINATING the event...

The SIR will allow the E36's to remain VERY competitive if well-developed, but an average example should not be able to dominate as they sometimes have...

It's still going to take a well-prepped car and a good drive...  Road racing is about the corners...  It seems to be that since we are comparing the E36 to cars already weighing 2400-2650lbs, or 200+lbs lighter, there is already a handling penalty, given equal HP...  Since the E36 has more hp than these same cars, that is what needed to be addressed...

Look, there is going to be ONE car that sits atop the heap...  there currently IS no higher class to consider for the top of ITS, and the E36 happens to be the car that is on the top...  That is the only reason it appears to be "targeted"...

I can't speak for future ITACs, but I can say that from the point of view of THIS ITAC, we don't want to be making ANY more adjustments of this nature...  Certainly not to the BMW, and hopefully not to the rest of the cars as well...

Have we missed a few... Likely...

Will we work to correct mistakes...  YUP...

Will there be anymore large scale changes like this coming down the pike... NOT LIKELY...

We feel we've addressed what needed to be addressed to ensure that the classes are more balanced, and that future classifications will truely be able to fit in the existing classes...

In simple terms... we WILL NOT be making nit-picky, Production-Style adjustments to individual cars from this point forward...

Now, we want to get to work on making a place for future IT cars! 

[snapback]71717[/snapback]​

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by buldogge@Jan 23 2006, 12:10 PM
Darin... I know it is a moot point at this juncture...but exactly what average prepped E36 went around DOMINATING events???

Everytime the E36 debacle is touted out...we speak of Mr. Wittel as the shining example.  Andy has spoken of the Autotechnic cars...do you consider any of these "average" prep?

It's all about the corners...but...the Speedsource cars I encounter at Memphis have equal or even SLIGHTLY greater straight line speed...and I don't mind saying (as if it matters now) that I have ZERO problems with straight line speed.

FWIW...My car is "fully prepped"...minus Motec... and I run just over weight limit.

What are we to do as the "fully prepped" RX-7's walk away...whine???

[snapback]71721[/snapback]​

Good questions.

We have a e-mail exchange from a BMW owner who runs in the top 3 in his Division with STOCK motor with just bolt-ons...and that includes a FACTORY EXHAUST MANIFOLD.

I use the Wittle car as a 10/10ths example. The Autotechnic cars (and yours) as a 9/10ths example - everything except for programmable fuel mangement. We can't speak to the legality of any car you run against nor can we know if you are being outdriven. That is for you to look into.

Regional results can be accurate or skewed. It takes a lot to understand if they are accurate. Then you have to take into account the track. That is why the process eliminates all of those things.

AB

 

[Joe Harlan]

FWIW...My car is "fully prepped"...minus Motec... and I run just over weight limit.

It is not fully prepped then. Until you have exploited every rule to it's maximum potentiol you are not fully prepped. That's like saying I cut a perfect lap but lifted early into 1 and missed a shift on the back straight. It may have been good enough for the record but it was not perfect.

 

[turboICE]

Originally posted by buldogge@Jan 23 2006, 01:10 PM
FWIW...My car is "fully prepped"...minus Motec... and I run just over weight limit.

[snapback]71721[/snapback]​

It does make me curious though - would you say that no adjustment was justified to the car or that you would have preferred 300 lbs have been added?

Where do you think a fully prepped car should have fallen out in the process?

 

[buldogge]

Thanx...That's why it was in "quotes"...and hence my sarcasm involving the poor RX-7's.

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Jan 23 2006, 05:41 PM
It is not fully prepped then. Until you have exploited every rule to it's maximum potentiol you are not fully prepped. That's like saying I cut a perfect lap but lifted early into 1 and missed a shift on the back straight. It may have been good enough for the record but it was not perfect. 

[snapback]71728[/snapback]​

 

[buldogge]

I've already stated that I prefer the SIR.

Are all the cars/drivers that have complained (or is it campaigned) against the E36 running fully prepped examples of their model?

How many examples of fully prepped cars are there of each model?

I think you have a lot of good racing going on around the country...and a few examples of "overdogs" ("your" phrase not mine).

Eliminate the Motec...for everyone. That's more in the spirit of IT...isn't it?

Originally posted by turboICE@Jan 23 2006, 05:44 PM
It does make me curious though - would you say that no adjustment was justified to the car or that you would have preferred 300 lbs have been added?

Where do you think a fully prepped car should have fallen out in the process?

[snapback]71729[/snapback]​

 

[buldogge]

Andy...My point is we are being made to "pay" for the "sins" of a few. Every marque has it big spenders...

When the RX-7's are now the ones "walking away" from us (on the straights as noted) what will be the recourse...nothing.

I can handle be outdriven (hell I'm only going into my 2nd season), but HANDING the competition (fully prepped cars...right) an advantage doesn't sit well.

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 23 2006, 05:32 PM
Good questions.

We have a e-mail exchange from a BMW owner who runs in the top 3 in his Division with STOCK motor with just bolt-ons...and that includes a FACTORY EXHAUST MANIFOLD. 

I use the Wittle car as a 10/10ths example.  The Autotechnic cars (and yours) as a 9/10ths example - everything except for programmable fuel mangement.  We can't speak to the legality of any car you run against nor can we know if you are being outdriven.  That is for you to look into.

Regional results can be accurate or skewed.  It takes a lot to understand if they are accurate.  Then you have to take into account the track.  That is why the process eliminates all of those things.

AB

[snapback]71726[/snapback]​

 

[latebrake]

Originally posted by JeffYoung@Jan 23 2006, 11:54 AM
Hmmm...so, the SIR doesn't affect torque (I've seen the 2.5's torque curve and it is better than my 3.5 V80, it only restricts top end horsepower. This means that all of the mid-level prepped BMWs will not be affected by this, only those at the "top."

Again, all due respect to Jake, Andy, and everyone. You guys did a GREAT job on this. ITA looks fantastic.  S looks great with the Z cars and the more importantly the 944 fixed.  But the SIR, I don't get.  Doesn't seem (and I no engineer so open to all further discussion on this so I can learn) that it solves one of the two big problems with the 325:

1. When developed to the max, the 325 is too fast (SIR fixes this).

2. Average 325s can run up front right now (SIR doesn't fix this).

Weight seems to me to be the solution to both problems, and clearly more in line with ITS philosophy.  I wonder if there is any ability to get the CRB to reconsider?

The silence in the BMW forum is deafening. I do fear that most guys are just going to pack it up and give up ITS with the SIR. 

We'll see I suppose.

That 944 sure looks good at 2500 lbs though......George, you must be bustin' a nut!

[snapback]71693[/snapback]​

I thought the 944 and the 924S were at 2570# did I make a mistake? I hope so.

Lawrence

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by latebrake@Jan 23 2006, 01:14 PM
I thought the 944 and the 924S were at 2570# did I make a mistake? I hope so.

Lawrence

[snapback]71739[/snapback]​

2575 each

 

[cherokee]

Does anyone know, realy know what this thing is going to do to their car? Is there a BMW that has run with one yet. Seen what the difference is between with and without the new part? Had one on tested on their car and seen the numbers difference? All I can say is give it a chance before you walk away. The thing that I have trouble with is the I'll take my ball and go play somewhere else attitude. Adjustments are being made as most will say that they where needed, I am sure if there has been an error made it will get fixed, things seem to be getting changed and that is more then you could say before. Give them guys a chance.

 

[latebrake]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 23 2006, 02:19 PM
2575 each

[snapback]71740[/snapback]​

Yeah I jumped the gun and did not read the following post. I still think the 944S2 would be a good pace car for the BMW.

And besides I want a 944S2 anyway You guys should let me have one in ITS.

Lawrence

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by cherokee@Jan 23 2006, 01:23 PM
Does anyone know, realy know what this thing is going to do to their car?  Is there a BMW that has run with one yet.  Seen what the difference is between with and without the new part?  Had one on tested on their car and seen the numbers difference?  All I can say is give it a chance before you walk away.  The thing that I have trouble with is the I'll take my ball and go play somewhere else attitude.  Adjustments are being made as most will say that they where needed, I am sure if there has been an error made it will get fixed, things seem to be getting changed and that is more then you could say before.  Give them guys a chance.

[snapback]71741[/snapback]​

While I agree with you 100%, we also have to understand how it feels to be adjusted every year. The issue at hand is that some Bimmer guys feel singled out and personally attacked. The vast majority seems to see the wisdom behind the moves but it is understandable how, INITIALLY, there is skeptisism in some camps. I saw it on the Honda board...but as the discussion continued, here is a quote:

I don't believe that any of these cars have been turned into "overdogs" or "underdogs" due to these changes. However, now I could also probably list 15 different ITA cars right now that if someone where to put a good effort into building, would have a great shot at winning any ITA race it entered.

I would like to think that everyone feels like we are acting in the best interest of the class...most do but some see it as the betterment of the class at the expense of "me" and some even think it's individual agenda-driven changes. Here is a quote from another BB:

I agree with you 100%. If/when the E46's start beating Andy Bettencourt, it will get a restrictor too.

I agree this is a bad precident as there was no problem to fix, other than RX-7's not dominating any more. And, now all Andy has to do is to put a restrictor on any car that beats him. The ultimate "I" class.

I'm not sure if there was ever a good sactioning body to race with, but SCCA is proving again that it is run purely by politics. Why does NASA exist?

I quess we can only do what we can do and hope people give us the benefit of the doubt. I can tell you my skin is getting thicker.

AB

 

[JeffYoung]

Andy, you guys have done a great job. I'm bowing out of this thread, have said my peace. I am more than willing to see how it all plays out the next couple of years. The SIR might be the way to go -- the racing will show us.

Thanks again for all the hard work.

 

[cherokee]

I agree that being adjusted every year would be a pain, but I think that all racers need to look at the entire pie. Lots of people have to change their car around from year to year. 2 door bars for example, I look at it as part of racing. Bars and tow hooks, and I would bet that Fire systems are not too far down the line of things we will have to have in our cars. Will people gripe about having to install those things, I would bet just like we griped about the belts. I know that these effect all cars and are safety items, but the point is that we have to make changes pretty often to run.
Racing cars is expensive, fun, scarry, madding, confusing, Go have fun.

 

[Doc Bro]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Jan 23 2006, 05:41 PM
It is not fully prepped then. Until you have exploited every rule to it's maximum potentiol you are not fully prepped. That's like saying I cut a perfect lap but lifted early into 1 and missed a shift on the back straight. It may have been good enough for the record but it was not perfect. 

[snapback]71728[/snapback]​

That's why we should get rid of MOTEC............because you can't have a legitmate effort if you don't have it. MOTEC is something that can help if you go for it but can hurt you in many ways if you DON'T have it.

It still makes me laugh that we argue (debate) so many trivial things in the GCR but noone wants to squarely confront the pink elephant in the room!!!!

(and yes, I will take every opportunity to speak my mind about motec!!!)

R

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Jan 23 2006, 05:24 PM
That's why we should get rid of MOTEC............because you can't have a legitmate effort if you don't have it.  MOTEC is something that can help if you go for it but can hurt you in many ways if you DON'T have it.

It still makes me laugh that we argue (debate) so many trivial things in the GCR but noone wants to squarely confront the pink elephant in the room!!!!

(and yes, I will take every opportunity to speak my mind about motec!!!)  

R

[snapback]71780[/snapback]​

I am going to disagree here. Programmable Fuel Management (PFM) may just be coming into the 'affordable' range. MoTec is one of the top products but it isn't the only choice.

Having said that, under your argument, other items would rise to the top. First porting of the head, then overbores, then custom headers, balancing and blueprinting (insert expensive engine mods here) - all would be the new Pink Elephant to guys who haven't done any work to their motors yet. The beef, is that MOST IT cars don't have PFM. Probably only the pointy end of the grid...

I would love to put the PFM Genie back in the bottle, but every day that passes, I believe it becomes easier to swallow and just another allowance for IT.

Any allowable engine mod can help you if you do it and hurt you if you don't...we are at zero hour.

AB

 

[Doc Bro]

I am going to disagree here. Programmable Fuel Management (PFM) may just be coming into the 'affordable' range. MoTec is one of the top products but it isn't the only choice.

Having said that, under your argument, other items would rise to the top. First porting of the head, then overbores, then custom headers, balancing and blueprinting (insert expensive engine mods here) - all would be the new Pink Elephant to guys who haven't done any work to their motors yet. The beef, is that MOST IT cars don't have PFM. Probably only the pointy end of the grid...

I would love to put the PFM Genie back in the bottle, but every day that passes, I believe it becomes easier to swallow and just another allowance for IT.

Any allowable engine mod can help you if you do it and hurt you if you don't...we are at zero hour.

AB

[snapback]71787[/snapback]​

[/quote
Andy,
As you are very well aware I have a car that would greatly benefit from MOTEC or Megasquirt but I am totally opposed to the rule as written. If you're going to write MOTEC (PFM) in as accepteble then WHY cram it in the stock box? Let's let it exist as it is sold. I mean seriously if your going to run a PFM then it's obvious that the only thing a stock box does is disguise the PFM sytem.

Alowing it to exist on its own would make it more available to the masses (who could benefit from it) and free up other companies as options. I think that anyone who uses PFM has probably totally abandoned their stock ECU anyway so the only thing that the rule promotes is the stock box to harness plug. Why not write the rule to say that the sock connection must be preserved but the box can be abandoned?

This is not rules creep at this point....the creep ocurred by allowing the PFM in the first place. This would only allow more options and a better ability to use the BEST option for your application...not just the smallest.

The Megasquirt would be great cheaper alternative to MOTEC but it is physically larger and would be harder to implement as written. And by the way, I totally understand the thought process of keeping the stock box but the arguement still doesn't hold a lot of water.

I am proud of the fact that PFM would help me greatly and I am opposed to the rule as written.


R