<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">Originally posted by mlytle:before this change we could be competitive with e36's prepped to bmw jp rules. not any more.</font>
Marshall,
Not for nothing, but what does one series have to do w/ the other? The fact that you have an additional series to race in, and that you can be competitive in that series w/o any changes to your car, is, IMHO, a really nice bonus that not many people have. To come here and complain that a rule change that addresses a
strongly perceived inequity in one series, because it impacts a totally unrelated series (that many in the first series can't participate in), is disingenuous at best.
Andy,
I'm really not trying to make this argumentative, so please don't take it that way. You stated that the CRB made the call on the restrictor and the size. You make it sound as if that was not necessarily the recommendation of the ITAC. I'm not sure why the CRB would analyze data from Pro (WC), rather than pass it on to the ITAC. And while I'm not up on SS, didn't they only take one swipe at the restrictor on the Z4 this year, and will now reduce it, in size, even further for '05, due to JL's performance at the Runoffs this year?
And while I'm sure there's lots of WC data, is it really a valid correlation? If you look at the WC data against the SS data, do you see a similar regression line? After all, WC and SS both have different prep levels than IT. For example, I'm guessing that the SSB Z4 was already flow-restricted on the exhaust side, which is why the restrictor that was added for '04, didn't really slow the cars down that much.
I'm not convinced by the arguement that the restrictor was the right way to go, because the power was what needed to be brought into line. Let me explain why I think that way. Obviously, the current brake system is up to the task of the ~220 whp that the top cars are believed to be making. If not, they wouldn't be able to take advantage of it. The suspension system is what it is, and has a performance boundry that is not impacted by how much slower/faster the car is, or what the brake efficiency is. You've got to get the car slowed down to w/in the performance boundry, or you're not going to make the corner. Granted, an increase in weight will probably lower this boundry.
Now, on to the brakes. Since they are currently adequate at
xxx terminal velocity, using only a restrictor to reduce that terminal velocity, will, in fact, make the brakes 'better'. If it takes the car
zzz feet to go from
xxx mph (terminal velocity) to
yyy mph (determined by the suspension performance boundry), it will take <
zzz feet to reach that reach that same
yyy "cornering speed", if the terminal velocity (
zzz) is reduced, given no change in the car's weight.
Sure, the cars won't be going as fast at the end of the straight, but they'll be able to brake deeper. Not to mention that the brakes will be doing less work, as they have a smaller delta(speed) that they have to achieve. So, while lap times may go up, they may not go up as much as expected, as the increase in lap time attributed to lower terminal velocity will be offset by the improved braking and subsequent ability to stay at terminal velocity longer.
I'll ask the question again, what's the target weight for the car, as predicted by the process, assuming the 'normal' power gain by IT prep? Pretend that you don't have any idea what the real whp number is, and treat it as if it were just being classed. This should at least get us closer to understanding if the initial weight was truly off, or that the car really does make that much more power than you would expect.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
this is not necessarily played out (ref. previous mention of how PCAs work). I think you will find that the ITAC and CRB will continue to monitor this situation and will follow discussions on it. But I honestly don't think we'll put current thinking on an active subject out in public.