RSTPerformance
New member
Does anyone know what the chart on page 4 is refering to? Are these cars to be classified in te future?
Stephen
(I am interested in the Audi 80
Stephen
(I am interested in the Audi 80
January FasTrack is up!
- Thread starter Bill Miller
- Start date
Bill Miller
New member
Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
Does anyone know what the chart on page 4 is refering to? Are these cars to be classified in te future?
Stephen
(I am interested in the Audi 80
That chart confused me too, but I'm pretty sure those are Solo II cars.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Joe Harlan
New member
As A Driver and Tech Official and Car builder I will lay money on it any day. This will not be a regualr proceedure unless the Restrictor is placed forward of the TB..(Which is not gonna happen) Sealing the thing would be the right way to go but there is no rule to make that happen. So we are left with competitors policing this deal. I will be purchasing a large quantity of E36 TB gaskets and spending a few bucks in my area to show people this is as serious making weight. Having run a T2 car for a couple of years now I have never seen the Throttle restrictor checked at a national without a protest to see it.
Ron Earp
Administrator
With all the discussion of this particular topic, that is restrictor plates, it is apparent that a lot of people are interested in this topic. About the only people I don't see here are the people it affects, the BMW 3-series racers. What is their take on this, that is, the rule making restrictors maditory and how do they think it will affect them? Expect it? Like it? Hate it? Think it unfair? Maybe some of you are 3-series racers, but without cars in the sig lines or knowing you I cannot tell.
------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!
------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Hence my comment regarding sigs.
So far E36 driver commentary here has been minimal. "Skeptical" would be a good description of what has been written here by guys who are E36 drivers, to the best of my knowledge.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
So far E36 driver commentary here has been minimal. "Skeptical" would be a good description of what has been written here by guys who are E36 drivers, to the best of my knowledge.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
robits325is
Member
I think this is a joke. The only car that is allowed to be a dominate car is the RX-7? If the E-36 is an overdog than what about the Mazda? If adjustments were made on the 325 why wern't they made to the RX-7 too?
This rule change might make competition equal for some drivers at a few tracks but over all it is very bad for the class.
So if a Mazda wins every race at every track will that end this witch hunt? Why can't there be different 'penalties' for different cars at different tracks? Example: Restrictor plates at fast tracks with long straights like Road America or Atlanla?
This will equalize the 3 or 4 super E-36s in a few regions across the country but virtually eliminate the close racing everywhere else.
Any of the mid pack E-36 drivers hoping to advance to the front of the pack next season just had the rug pulled from under their feet.
I'm glad I sold my E-36 ITS car before the rule change.
Rob Driscoll
ex:E-36 ITS Racer
ed325its
New member
I think Rob has spoken for many E36 drivers. From my point of view it appears that a few ITS owners took the entire IT group down the path of Performance Adjustments which will only hurt the class. Each class has always had high achievers and under achievers. The E30, 944, and 240/260z have each had there days at the front of the pack. Now it's the E36 and RX7's and soon to include 944S and Acura.
I have but two questions.. (1) Where are the adjustments for the RX7 and 944S? and (2) Where is the data used to calculate the size of the bmw restrictor plate and how was it analized?
The latter question has been asked in this thread previously and is yet to be answered. Are there any members of the ITAC on this list to answer mlytle's question? I believe all members of SCCA have the right to know how their cars are classed and why.
As to the results of PCA I think each BMW racer has to decide whether to race elsewhere, race less, or spend more money on development. Although I have not yet made my decision it appears that Rob may have. Rob, sorry to hear you sold your car. You have been racing BMW's in IT for many years and I was looking forward to another year of competition.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
I have but two questions.. (1) Where are the adjustments for the RX7 and 944S? and (2) Where is the data used to calculate the size of the bmw restrictor plate and how was it analized?
The latter question has been asked in this thread previously and is yet to be answered. Are there any members of the ITAC on this list to answer mlytle's question? I believe all members of SCCA have the right to know how their cars are classed and why.
As to the results of PCA I think each BMW racer has to decide whether to race elsewhere, race less, or spend more money on development. Although I have not yet made my decision it appears that Rob may have. Rob, sorry to hear you sold your car. You have been racing BMW's in IT for many years and I was looking forward to another year of competition.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
mlytle
New member
as a mid pack e36 racer, i would say the restrictor sucks. all the scca did was add a restrictor of a certain dimension, with no explanation of where the dimension came from. i asked these question up near the top of this thread..
"so where is the data used to calculate the size of the bmw restrictor plate? what was the target hp desired? was it tested? is this a swag?"
just because scca pro has experience with restrictors doesn't mean any of that experience was used in this decision.
i have to wonder if any testing was done. the rule now also allows a spacer to clear the throttle "if necesary?. well since all the tb's should be the same, the spacer is either needed to clear or it is not. did they even check?
let's see in the open what went into the decision. rather than wondering what the e36 racers think is going to be the result, how about scca telling us precisely what result they are looking for.
and what about the adjustments for the rx7's and z's to slow them down so we can all be competitive with 190's and the hordes of other relatively uncompetitive cars in its?
not directly scca's concern, but the rule change probably killed the its prepped e36 in bmw club racing competition. before this change we could be competitive with e36's prepped to bmw jp rules. not any more. i am probably one of a few its e36 drivers now considering dropping out of scca to prep the car for bmw club racing instead. one of the draws of the e36 in its trim was that it was competitive with multiple sanctioning bodies. now it may have to be a choice of one or the other.
marshall
oh yeah...E36 325IS ITS/JP #64
"so where is the data used to calculate the size of the bmw restrictor plate? what was the target hp desired? was it tested? is this a swag?"
just because scca pro has experience with restrictors doesn't mean any of that experience was used in this decision.
i have to wonder if any testing was done. the rule now also allows a spacer to clear the throttle "if necesary?. well since all the tb's should be the same, the spacer is either needed to clear or it is not. did they even check?
let's see in the open what went into the decision. rather than wondering what the e36 racers think is going to be the result, how about scca telling us precisely what result they are looking for.
and what about the adjustments for the rx7's and z's to slow them down so we can all be competitive with 190's and the hordes of other relatively uncompetitive cars in its?
not directly scca's concern, but the rule change probably killed the its prepped e36 in bmw club racing competition. before this change we could be competitive with e36's prepped to bmw jp rules. not any more. i am probably one of a few its e36 drivers now considering dropping out of scca to prep the car for bmw club racing instead. one of the draws of the e36 in its trim was that it was competitive with multiple sanctioning bodies. now it may have to be a choice of one or the other.
marshall
oh yeah...E36 325IS ITS/JP #64
Ron Earp
Administrator
Like you, I am looking to why the restrictor and wanting to know more about the decision process. Mainly about the decision process, since I don't race a 325, race against 325s, or even race in IT yet.
I am curious though. Having a restrictor plate hardly makes you non-competetive for club racings or making you choose between on or the other. A restrictor is easy to remove, so, since no other changes were made for your car in IT trim just pull it off and go club racing. As I recall on my own E36 tbody swaps were about a 5 minute activity and the restrictor should be just as easy. Put it back on and go IT racing. Why would prepping the car for IT trim make it not suitable for club racing? You've got a fantastic ECU setup even with the stock system as it is a hot wire MAF system that can easily compensate for the difference in flow to provide proper mixture.
------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
No disrespect intended to the BMW guys - because I know some of you and I know you are good people...BUT:
This is sour grapes. The cars at the top prep level are very powerful. MORE powerful than either yours Rob or yours Ed. Nick has the on-track data to prove that. He loses 5 car-lengths to the fast Bimmers on the back of RA but loses nothing to your car at Pocono...without MOTEC etc, you just aren't making the power that is possible with these cars.
It saddens me that someone would opt out of SCCA because there car lost it's competitive advantage. The goal was to bring the E36 power levels back to where they should be in order to have them 'fit' in ITS again.
The CRB made the call on the resrictor and size. They have hours and hours of dyno experience with the Z4 and it's restrictor implementation for this year to draw of off. Sorry if that's not good enough, it's all I have.
The bottom line is that the 'mid pack' BMW guys are complaining. Guess what? Your mid-pack car was better than any other mid-pack car out there. Each make and model has owners/drivers who don't care to or who can't afford to bring the car to 10/10th's. When you compare 10/10th's Bimmers to everything else, there is a MAJOR HP disparity - and this move brings the car back into the ITS 'ZONE'.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
This is sour grapes. The cars at the top prep level are very powerful. MORE powerful than either yours Rob or yours Ed. Nick has the on-track data to prove that. He loses 5 car-lengths to the fast Bimmers on the back of RA but loses nothing to your car at Pocono...without MOTEC etc, you just aren't making the power that is possible with these cars.
It saddens me that someone would opt out of SCCA because there car lost it's competitive advantage. The goal was to bring the E36 power levels back to where they should be in order to have them 'fit' in ITS again.
The CRB made the call on the resrictor and size. They have hours and hours of dyno experience with the Z4 and it's restrictor implementation for this year to draw of off. Sorry if that's not good enough, it's all I have.
The bottom line is that the 'mid pack' BMW guys are complaining. Guess what? Your mid-pack car was better than any other mid-pack car out there. Each make and model has owners/drivers who don't care to or who can't afford to bring the car to 10/10th's. When you compare 10/10th's Bimmers to everything else, there is a MAJOR HP disparity - and this move brings the car back into the ITS 'ZONE'.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
I'm 'fraid that I agree with Andy on this. If we accept the concept of adjustments (and that's a pretty big IF), people are going to base their decisions on on-track performance so the only real indicators that come into play are at the top of the scale.
I'm still not sure that I like where this logically leads but it's the deal we have at this point and I THINK that it's better than the old non-system.
Kirk
------------------
PhilsTireService.com Team GTI - ITB Class Winner, 2004 13 Hours at VIR - Tuned with Cobalt Friction brake pads, KONI racing struts, and quality OE Volkswagen and racing parts from Bildon Motorsport
TOYO and HOOSIER Racing Tires available at Phil's Tire Service
[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited November 27, 2004).]
I'm still not sure that I like where this logically leads but it's the deal we have at this point and I THINK that it's better than the old non-system.
Kirk
------------------
PhilsTireService.com Team GTI - ITB Class Winner, 2004 13 Hours at VIR - Tuned with Cobalt Friction brake pads, KONI racing struts, and quality OE Volkswagen and racing parts from Bildon Motorsport
TOYO and HOOSIER Racing Tires available at Phil's Tire Service
[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited November 27, 2004).]
I'll bet that the 5 car lengths advantage was is in their draft.... Add a 3-4 more when coming from behind you...Please correct me if I'm wrong Nick..
My concern with restrictors, is will they be effective at ITS RPM ranges...I'm not familiar with what World Challenge rpms are, but if the pro data is with higher RPMs 7000 plus ..then restrictors may not be an effective HP equalizer
David Spillman
ed325its
New member
Andy,
You and others continue to make statements about the potential of the E36 as if they are fact. Despite requests by others I have seen no proof to back up those statements on this forum. I'm all for an even playing field, just someone, anyone, show me the proof.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
You and others continue to make statements about the potential of the E36 as if they are fact. Despite requests by others I have seen no proof to back up those statements on this forum. I'm all for an even playing field, just someone, anyone, show me the proof.
------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984
Ron Earp
Administrator
I am still interested in how it got to such a low weight. Did someone write the board and say "it says here in this magazine that it weight XXXX, so there". If so, they were dead wrong.
Back when I went to the drag races a lot there were track scales and they were accurate, just like in tech now. Those E36 BMWs of all types went across there, usually 323s, 325s and M3 in the mid-90s, later the 328 cars. They always went across the scales anywhere from 3175-3350lbs (and more) depending on car, equipment, driver, how much they had paid attention to drop things like spare tires, etc. They are not light, never were. I suppose when you gut them of all the power stuff they might be, but I didn't think race weight was decided on "how light can it get". If that is the case I bet my car can get to 1800lbs light. But, I am at curb weight. If the BMW had been left at curb weight you wouldn't need resitrictors, I think, and this discussion wouldn't be happening.
R
------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey: IT prep progressing!
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
As it should be Ed. A black E36 that ran with us in 2002 and won every "Pro" race at LRP dynoed at 208hp to the wheels after thousands of dollars in tuning time. Remember how fast that car was? A top East Coast tuner is quoting 15 more WHP today than in 2002. Figure CONSERVATIVELY 215whp and up to 220ish. Obviously dyno number differ from dyno to dyno but this was a top 3 ARRC car that year as well.
Does anyone else find in interesting that none of the top BMW guys/tuners are refuting these numbers? Only the guys who have 8-9/10ths built stuff are.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
ITS RX-7 and ITA project SM
www.flatout-motorsports.com
We'll never know at this point. The process has been different depending on who was making decisions and what information they were provided with the application.
It would be REALLY groovy if there were a file kept, with all of the notes and documentation for each classification, to maintain a paper trail on the decisions that led up to each listing.
The problem is that there are natural disincentives to do this kind of process. I can totally appreciate how the current ITAC doesn't want members at large picking apart the math that they use to recommend decisions like we have here. It'd be like a Florida presidental race where the degree that you approve of a process will depend strictly on whether it produces the outcome that you favor.
If someone WERE to publish the documentation that led to the restrictor diameter decision, I can guaran-damn-tee that e36 BMW owners would find it completely flawed and other ITS entrants would think it was pretty good - so there is NO point in elaborating on it. The tally is always going to be wrong in a tight race, if your guy don't win...
K
------------------
PhilsTireService.com Team GTI - ITB Class Winner, 2004 13 Hours at VIR - Tuned with Cobalt Friction brake pads, KONI racing struts, and quality OE Volkswagen and racing parts from Bildon Motorsport
TOYO and HOOSIER Racing Tires available at Phil's Tire Service
[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited November 27, 2004).]
lateapex911
Super Moderator
No, I doubt it...I *bet* they did some research (years ago, remember) about what the engine could make in IT trim based on it's stock specs, thought about the chassis and brakes, then set a weight they thought would make it fit the class. And I further bet they tired to make it run with the Z's and the 7s.
Here's where it went wrong: The stock HP is considered to be a bit conservative, and the engine responded better to an IT build than anyone anticipated.
That said, the current weight DOES seem to be proper for the car from a handleing and braking standpoint. So, adding weight was probably not the ideal move.
As a racer I was stuck behind a guy with a much stronger motor at RA. At teh begining of the stright I would gain, but by the end, he would have 5 or 8 car lengths on me...every lap. Veeery tough to get around. When I did, I was able to move ahead and put seconds per lap on him.....
Equalizing the power, to some degree was the right move here.
(I do hope that the "character" of the car remains...I consider it to be *slightly* inferior to the other leaders in the corners and under braking, but strongly superior under power. I hope the new balance changes the "strongly superior" to a "slightly superior"....)
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
lateapex911
Super Moderator
As in all of racing, mid pack cars need to do their homework, just as they needed to before...
I strongly suspect the fast BMWs will continue to win.......perhaps not as often. And the "mid pack" BMWs will continue to be mid pack...unless they do more homework.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
seckerich
New member
It is bad that all BMW drivers will get the restriction necessary to bring the 10/10ths and in some cases 12/10ths BMW's in line with the class, but those are the breaks. I have to run with these cars all the time and can tell you that I loose 10 to 15 carlengths down the back side of VIR. I ran with Nicks RX7 driven by Kip at Roebling Road recently and his car is very close to mine and you state his car is considered the benchmark in his area. I tried to tear down the "Super Bimmer" earlier this year and got screwed in the teardown bond process when the bond was pushed out the roof. I finally realised that I was wasting my time and should just let it get the weight it deserves. If the fast cars are legal they needed the restrictor, and if they are not the BMW drivers should tear them down for their own good. If the RX7's I race against get too fast, I speak to them myself. The rules are set for 10/10ths preperation and anything less is asking to run mid pack, I did for years. And I didn't spend near 30 grand as has been quoted for a Speedsource car. The money you spend with Speedsource, Bimmerworld, etc is for a restoration quality car. The extra money is for cars to be proud of that are well prepared. The same work can be done by yourself for much less if you are willing to do some hard work. The parts that make these cars fast are only half the cost.
Steve Eckerich
ITS 18 Speedsource RX7
Southeast
Steve Eckerich
ITS 18 Speedsource RX7
Southeast
mlytle
New member
why? because of the the intricacies of bmw club rules. you can run either to the letter of scca its rule or the letter of the bmw prepared rules. either or, can't mix. if you prep your car to its rules, you have to leave the restrictor in, and may have things like brake valves and spherical bearings in your suspension. in bmw prep rules, you can't have those things, but can run hot cams and big brakes.
simply pulling the restrictor plate is not an option. end result...no more ability to have decent racing in both groups with same car. gotta choose.