It's May 1st...How's your SIR???

Here's a thought, how about you classify the E36 in ITS and ITR for one year, keep an eye on results and then choose ITS or ITR after some testing? I'm all for making my car faster (no restrictor 100 lb less weight) but I still would like to be competitive.

Just a thought.
 
"And while I also feel for the E36 folks that have spent the money to develop the cars w/ an SIR, rules changes are a fact of life. RR shocks, engine coatings, open ECUs, etc., etc., etc. All rules changes cost people money and time, that's a fact of life."

Coatings: cost me an engine after our buddy Swen told us the coating I was using was okay. #@$%&!
RR shocks: cost me a set of shocks (actually it didn't, we sold the car to build an E36) %$@*&!
ECU's: hey, this one didn't cost me anything!
SIR's: another car for sale. Paid a bunch to develop it under the OLD rules. Ain't doing it again. &%@$#!

Finally got tired of paying SCCA's IT "tax on the rich". We're outtta here. Member for 24 years. Maybe we are taking our ball and going home, but it just hasn't been that fun playing ball when the rules keep making my ball illegal...
 
The ITAC/CRB is to be commended for doing the testing. They could have made a decision by fiat without any information gathering and that would have been that. But I'd maintain the testing was necessitated by the fact that the CRB has chosen to blaze new ground with use of the SIR in IT -- so the CRB gets points for making the decision to test, but working outside the box of accepted solutions was also their decision.
tom
[/b]
Click to expand...


um, except for the fact that ZERO testing was done prior to the CRB implementing the SIR rule. the testing only occured AFTER the rule was instituted and AFTER the huge outcry of foul. the CRB should get no credit, commendation or points for testing, they only did it under duress for CYA purposes.

if they had actually done some research, testing and tried to fit an SIR into the car before they issued the rule, it would be another story. but that isn't what happened.
 
andy you have my data .but the impression i get from your email is that my data is garbage .or it's not what you want to see or hear.if that's the way an SCCA representative treats it's members i don't think you'll get much cooperation from it's members.
also i believe that you and the CRB have already made your decision and no amount of real world data is going to change that .sorry to be so negative but that's my opinion and my .02 cents on this issue.
i would really like to see the car stay in ITS . than go to ITR.it would cost a lot more money to buy new rims etc.and then, now to develop the engin e unrestricted. :eclipsee_steering:
ps why won't the CRB/SCCA share your :wacko: dyno numbers of your SIRtesting??????? are you afraid that the hp numbers you guy are quoting is way off??????????
 
andy you have my data .but the impression i get from your email is that my data is garbage .or it's not what you want to see or hear.if that's the way an SCCA representative treats it's members i don't think you'll get much cooperation from it's members.
also i believe that you and the CRB have already made your decision and no amount of real world data is going to change that .sorry to be so negative but that's my opinion and my .02 cents on this issue.
i would really like to see the car stay in ITS . than go to ITR.it would cost a lot more money to buy new rims etc.and then, now to develop the engin e unrestricted. :eclipsee_steering:
ps why won't the CRB/SCCA share your :wacko: dyno numbers of your SIRtesting??????? are you afraid that the hp numbers you guy are quoting is way off??????????
[/b]
Click to expand...
We have you and Carlos' inputs, Steve, and nobody is treating your data as garbage. Andy's call was for additional data.

The CRB has recommended to the BoD that ITR be created and the 325i/s would go there if that is done, so in that sense, yes, our minds are "made up". However, the BoD has not yet approved ITR, so it's not a done deal, and there is also the question of allowing dual classification for a period of time, which is not yet decided by any means. We are sensitive to the financial impact and want to make the choice as painless as practical.

As for why we don't share actual dyno data, it is simple. The racers who've shared dyno sheets with the CRB do so with the understanding that their data will remain private, and we are going to honor that expectation. Furthermore, the data come from several dynos and from engines with differing levels of preparation, so there is some scattering of peak hp numbers. That said, there has been plenty of discussion about the range of hp we've seen.

Stan

PS - Offline today as I drive to Road America...
 
andy you have my data .but the impression i get from your email is that my data is garbage .or it's not what you want to see or hear.if that's the way an SCCA representative treats it's members i don't think you'll get much cooperation from it's members.
also i believe that you and the CRB have already made your decision and no amount of real world data is going to change that .sorry to be so negative but that's my opinion and my .02 cents on this issue.
i would really like to see the car stay in ITS . than go to ITR.it would cost a lot more money to buy new rims etc.and then, now to develop the engin e unrestricted. :eclipsee_steering:
ps why won't the CRB/SCCA share your :wacko: dyno numbers of your SIRtesting??????? are you afraid that the hp numbers you guy are quoting is way off?????????? [/b]
Click to expand...

Steve,

We do have your data. I e-mailed you off-line to qualify the data. You never responded. Your dyno sheets show 170whp unrestricted and 155whp with the SIR. The numbers simply do not make sense to me (or the ITAC) for a car that is winning races in a very competitive series. All I asked you was some qualifying questions in order to help me understand the numbers - and got no reply - actually you did reply and said that anything over your numbers was illegal.

As far as real world data is concerned, you guys are still winning races. What other RWD do we need?

The information from the dyno testing that the CRB wanted to share was posted by Bob Dowie months ago. Your pre-post SIR install falls right in line with how much the SIR restricts.
 
Dyno, schmyno. The only way to have properly implemented this would have been with real track testing.

Where's the formula for relating power/weight to laptime? Peak HP numbers mean nothing.
 
well andy and the CRB my numbers to you sounds off ?????
then my suggestion to you guys would be rent a dyno and take it to the track lets
say daytona or whatever track is next.it's a SARRC race so top 5 goes to impound .we just ask the other guys to come in to impound, and dyno the top 3 BMW's and the top 3 RX7 and the datsun's.
then you have real racetrack data. yes i know that it takes money to rent a mobile dyno but SCCA is a big club and can afford it .as us racers have to find the money to make our cars legal if you want to race.
peak numbers are for dragracers and dyno queens i go after power under the curve!
i am a bit slow so please can you post a link where i can find your SIR test results???as you stated.
yes we are winning races but maybe we don't have the SIR installed.at 155 whp we were lucky to beat ronnie's ITA integra.
 
Dyno, schmyno. The only way to have properly implemented this would have been with real track testing.

Where's the formula for relating power/weight to laptime? Peak HP numbers mean nothing.
[/b]
Click to expand...


Welcome to life....sigh..........

Sure, lets have the club buy a few exampes of the cars and start testing on track. Rent the track, hire the drivers, better buy some other cars too for comparision. (Can't borrow the cars, that would lead to cries of "foul... his car isn't legal or isn't prepped well", or whatever)

Then there will be complaints that the wrong drivers were used, the tracks rented weren't representative of the "Right " kind of track, that the shops used to build the engines were biased, and so on.

Sure, in a perfect world, we'd all love to. But what club out there effectively manages such a diverse category better?? Think carefully about that.

(And I'm not saying that this wasn't handled perfectly, but that your comments are aimed at a specific target, but are much more global in reality)

then my suggestion to you guys would be rent a dyno and take it to the track lets
say daytona or whatever track is next.it's a SARRC race so top 5 goes to impound .we just ask the other guys to come in to impound, and dyno the top 3 BMW's and the top 3 RX7 and the datsun's.
then you have real racetrack data. yes i know that it takes money to rent a mobile dyno but SCCA is a big club and can afford it
[/b]
Click to expand...

You should know that the previous testing that occurred was privately funded. Dollars came out of my personal pocket, as well as more dollars out of other guys pockets. Competitors, CRB guys, etc.

If you think that thats OK, then fine.

If you have issues, be part of the solution.. create a group of guys to discuss and come up with a proposal to the club as to how better to handle such issues. I suggest that you make it a club wide movement, as complaining about one car/class doesn't get a lot of traction.

Yes, tech support is paramount today more than ever, and it's up to us to improve it. Thats me, AND you.
 
I have run with that BMW too many times to buy the 170hp numbers. I make 174 and it is all I can do to just keep up in the draft. Not a chance of pulling out to pass. Are those dynojet numbers?? If so you need to get that dyno checked. Don't get me wrong Steve, I am not saying you are lying--just doesnt hold up to what I have seen. The BMW is supposed to be a brick in the wind and yet it pulls easy with less HP and more weight. Sound right to you?
 
Hey Guys... I think we're talking Mustang numbers here (AA...No?).

FWIW...

I have run with that BMW too many times to buy the 170hp numbers. I make 174 and it is all I can do to just keep up in the draft. Not a chance of pulling out to pass. Are those dynojet numbers?? If so you need to get that dyno checked. Don't get me wrong Steve, I am not saying you are lying--just doesnt hold up to what I have seen. The BMW is supposed to be a brick in the wind and yet it pulls easy with less HP and more weight. Sound right to you?
[/b]
Click to expand...
 
Hey Guys... I think we're talking Mustang numbers here (AA...No?).

FWIW...
[/b]
Click to expand...



170 hp is definately not a Dyno Jet unless this car is on 5 cyls. This is a under developed 2.5L on a Mustang Dyno. I bet it would read about 190 to 195 on a Dyno Jet.


For you guys who think dyno testing at the track means nothing, I saw NASA DQ a car right off the track at the finish of a race because it was over on the dyno jet number they were suppose to be at, & also gave them a 70# plenty! They also weight the cars randomly after the qualifiying sessons. If your below your weight you start at the back. SCCA, take notice.
 
yes we are winning races but maybe we don't have the SIR installed.at 155 whp we were lucky to beat ronnie's ITA integra.
[/b]
Click to expand...


Wow Steve!! If I read this sentance as it is written, than I am extremely dissapointed in you and Carlos. I really hope I have misinterperted your statement. If not, it means Carlos beat Peters 100% Rx-7, my 80% Rx-7, Dick Gallup's 90% Rx-7 AND Paul Ronnies ITA Integra with an illegal car. Guess I should have pressed you to show it to me on Sat. Rest assured we all will be asking to see it at Daytona.....ON THE GRID.

I just shake my head.
 
marc read it again slowly.
and if you guys want to see it just come by.
and jake how do you thinkthe BMW guys are funding the hasty and indecisive decision made by the CRB and SCCA ??????remember i voted for weight.cheaper to buy than the SIR. and if you came out with the new class next year just removeit. no expensive testing and dyno time and changing final drives etc.
i am putting up a fight for the BMW guys because whatever happens now with the BMW and the SIR will be passed on to the next overdog in IT.can someone say ITA miata?????since you cannot add weight then you must implement the SIRon that car.and who knows what 's next.
i personally believe SIR's have no place in club racing.it's way too expensive.not only buying it ,but to develop your engine package,then change final drive to better use the available power .then readust suspension for less power. how many of us grassroots racers can really afford this ?????
this time it's the BMW next time it may be you..
 
"Sure, lets have the club buy a few exampes of the cars and start testing on track. Rent the track, hire the drivers, better buy some other cars too for comparision. (Can't borrow the cars, that would lead to cries of "foul... his car isn't legal or isn't prepped well", or whatever)

Then there will be complaints that the wrong drivers were used, the tracks rented weren't representative of the "Right " kind of track, that the shops used to build the engines were biased, and so on."

You're right, too much trouble, an impossible task! That's why we should have left the dang thing alone. It's not a class where competitiveness is guaranteed! The cheapest thing for the club to do would be to do nothing. That's all the "management" this class needed.
 
I have to agree with Katman. Competition adjustments have no place in IT!

If you look at the other classes that use weight or restrictors to adjust cars, those cars are more similar in layout. Look at all the different GT cars, if you build them to the limit of the rules they come out very similar. Tube frame, rear wheel drive, same size tires and brakes, just slightly different engines and bodies.

IT is so restrictive (that's why I like it) You have a mix of front wheel drive, rear wheel drive, different weights, gear ratios, engines brakes, wheel/tire sizes etc, they all make speed in different ways, on different tracks

IMHO COMPETITION ADJUSTMENTS IS A HUGE CAN OF WORMS!!

Obviously the E36 is a great car. That's why so many people built them.

At some time something else would have come along and become "the hot car"

What's going to happen then? Will anyone really develop a "hot car"? Why bother, they'll just slap you down with a restrictor. Anyone who's sharp will develop it just enough to win. Now that's what I call real racing!
 
At some time something else would have come along and become "the hot car"

What's going to happen then? Will anyone really develop a "hot car"? Why bother, they'll just slap you down with a restrictor. [/b]
Click to expand...

For those of you who think this is the case, I respecfully submit that you haven't been paying attention to anything the ITAC has been trying to convey in this and other forums. Seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top