SIR testing?

Then look at post #23.[/b]
Click to expand...
Yes, I saw that. Who is "they"? Raetech, or the SCCA? I also don't see anything in that post about correctly-sized flanges.

As far as the plumbing goes do a search for silicon hose. [/b]
Click to expand...

Shouldn't I search for silicone hose?

I found many sizes and shapes that would fit the intake system of our E36's.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Can you provide a specific supplier and product? I can't find anything that will reduce the 80mm diameter of the MAF flange to the 3.0-inch flange on the SIR. I've been all over the Samco site, and a few others. (Some that look really dicey, too.)

I suggest a K&N Filter which should fit easily.[/b]
Click to expand...

No need for a filter; I'm quite happy with the cone filter I've got. It has a 3.0-inch flange which I can mate to the 3.0-inch flange on the SIR with bit of silicone coupling hose.

You seem unsure of your self when trying to make this work, if so I suggest a pro. I am sure they could fit this up with very little trouble and little expense. If I find anything out I'll post it ASAP.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Well, as Andy is happy to point out, I know nothing about SIRs.

So for now, I'm just trying to make the car legal. As I've stated previously, the hangup is that the reducer knocks me down to 3.0 inches (76.2mm) when I should have an OD of 80mm. I don't think silicone hose is going to give enough (at least, good silicone hose shouldn't!), and I'd hate to force something over the plastic flange on my MAF and crack it as it's an expensive part. It's slightly less than the SIR itself, but still...
 
So you're trying to get a roughly 77mm (ID?) hose over an 80mm(OD)???flange/pipe? Thats about 3mm, or about 1/8th inch.

Maybe I misunderstand the IDs and ODs, but that sounds very close given the overall number. Might be worth a try....

If I am mixed up, sorry!
 
Yup, I know exactly what he was asking - and the comments posted by Darin in that post specifically address the information mistakingly conveyed by Mr. Finch to Mr. Norris. :rolleyes:

AB
[/b]
Click to expand...

Thanks Andy, but I wanted to hear about the conversation 1st hand from John Norris.
Thanks John for clearing things up.
dj
 
Shouldn't I search for silicone hose?
[/quote]

Yes Mike, please search with the correct spelling. B) Or just go to the site Joe Harlan was so kind to post. You can build something from there.
 
The SCCA may be potentially losing future entries
[/b]
Click to expand...

May be nothing. I had a donor car identified, a cage builder set, and a motor on order. I dropped it all when I came to the conclusion that equality is not what is going to happen.
 
May be nothing. I had a donor car identified, a cage builder set, and a motor on order. I dropped it all when I came to the conclusion that equality is not what is going to happen.
[/b]
Click to expand...
Count yourself as lucky then...There are plenty of people that have had it happen to their ITS investments in the past few years and have just mothballed their cars or sold them at a huge loss.

-Gregg, who has no problem with the weight dumped on his "overdog" ITA car if it will make the racing closer.
 
May be nothing. I had a donor car identified, a cage builder set, and a motor on order. I dropped it all when I came to the conclusion that equality is not what is going to happen. [/b]
Click to expand...

Again, based on what? IF, and that is a big IF, the SIR needs sizing correction, what makes you belive that the end-result won't be what the original goal is?

Actually, let me ask you this:

What do you think the original goal is?
 
May be nothing. I had a donor car identified, a cage builder set, and a motor on order. I dropped it all when I came to the conclusion that equality is not what is going to happen.
[/b]
Click to expand...

You came to the conclusion...........and HOW did you arrive at your conclusion??? What makes YOU the all seeing all knowing future predictor??

Do tell....
 
Well, you guys can carp about DoubleD's comment about losing entries, but I'm not sure anyone can say that this entire sorry episode is good for the class, IT or SCCA. Even giving all participants noble intentions, the way it has turned out (so far) has certainly turned off more than a few existing and potential racers.

I also looked at the class/car (325) last year, and decided to put my money into a different car/series.

I drop in from time to time to see what has happened, and at this point, I'm very happy I did go elsewhere.

Best of luck...really. I hope it works out.
 
Well, you guys can carp about DoubleD's comment about losing entries, but I'm not sure anyone can say that this entire sorry episode is good for the class, IT or SCCA. Even giving all participants noble intentions, the way it has turned out (so far) has certainly turned off more than a few existing and potential racers.

[/b]
Click to expand...
No argument here. The various situations with this car have hurt ITS - both with cars trying to compete with it in various unrestricted and restricted forms, and now twice with Bimmer owners while the SCCA tries to correct a major classification mistake (2850).

It is the sincere hope of all involved that this is the LAST we see of this car on an agenda. The goal is the same competition potential as the rest of the class using a common process (in this case backing into it). We do have a group of silent owners who understand the issues and have been patient, VERY patient. All that can be said is that the CRB is working hard on getting this right, once and for all, weight or SIR.

Thanks for you input.

AB
 
You came to the conclusion...........and HOW did you arrive at your conclusion??? What makes YOU the all seeing all knowing future predictor??

Do tell....
[/b]
Click to expand...

The ability to grasp the obvious hardly makes me all seeing.

Another example of this is my objection to the SIR mandate without testing. You and AB both asserted that testing was not necessary because the math was already done.

It's painfully obvious why the testing info has been kept confidential and it has nothing at all to do with the car owner's desire.

:wacko:

It's also reasonably obvious how this is all going to shake out. The E36 is going to end up with either a 33-35mm SIR or 300lbs. BMW drivers are screwed both ways to Sunday as a result. They'll have a non competitve car worth 30% less on the market than they were 5 months ago. But hey, who cares, right? BMW owners are just a bunch of talentless check writers anyway...
 
It's also reasonably obvious how this is all going to shake out. The E36 is going to end up with either a 33-35mm SIR or 300lbs. BMW drivers are screwed both ways to Sunday as a result. They'll have a non competitve car worth 30% less on the market than they were 5 months ago. But hey, who cares, right? BMW owners are just a bunch of talentless check writers anyway... [/b]
Click to expand...

Everyone on the ITAC and CRB cares, bet on it. Your 'reasonably obvious' assumptions are way off. Just sit tight and make your decision when the new rule comes out. Will any BMW guys be happy? No. Nobody wants a reduction in power no matter how fair it is to everyone else.

The fact you think the car will be non-competitive after this decision is handed down by the CRB says volumes about your bias.

Thankfully, I have talked with some very reasonable BMW guys recently on the phone. It's kept me sane.

AB
 
......It's also reasonably obvious how this is all going to shake out. The E36 is going to end up with either a 33-35mm SIR or 300lbs. BMW drivers are screwed both ways to Sunday as a result. They'll have a non competitve car worth 30% less on the market than they were 5 months ago. But hey, who cares, right? BMW owners are just a bunch of talentless check writers anyway...
[/b]
Click to expand...

Since you quoted me, and posted a response, I will respond in kind.

A 35MM SIR???? And you say the car will "non competitive" as a result?

Prove it. Show me the math that shows that a 35MM SIR (or a 33, or a 34) will take enough power away that will "screw" the BMW drivers. HOW did you draw your conclusions?? Let's see the math, show us whatever you have. Otherwise the statement is pure and complete straw grabbing.

(Also, while you're at it, if you are making the same case for weight, lets see how you based your "screwed" conclusion on that as well. )

IF the car loses value, it will be because it will now be a requirement that the car be built to the nines to run at the front with the other cars that are built to the nines.

And don't tell me "who cares", which clearly implies that I and the rest of the commitees that are involved don't care. This thing has cost me time and cash, and it has cost others much more. If we didn't care, the decision would be a lot easier, the people around me would be less ticked off at me for taking days out to work on it, and my clients would be happier too.

And DON'T build your debate on things taken out of context. Statements that an E36 can be very competitive without a full build, DO NOT mean the same thing as "BMW owners are just a bunch of talentless check writers"

I certainly never said, nor thought that, and you are doing a disservice to yourself and others with such a statement. Please find the quote where you feel that ascertation was made, and confront the writer with it.

I will say that I have actually grown respect for certain BMW racers here on the board over this, but others have lost my admiration. But...I am not stupid, and I know the difference between them.
 
Since you quoted me, and posted a response, I will respond in kind.

A 35MM SIR???? And you say the car will "non competitive" as a result?

Prove it. Show me the math that shows that a 35MM SIR (or a 33, or a 34) will take enough power away that will "screw" the BMW drivers. HOW did you draw your conclusions?? Let's see the math, show us whatever you have. Otherwise the statement is pure and complete straw grabbing.

(Also, while you're at it, if you are making the same case for weight, lets see how you based your "screwed" conclusion on that as well. )

[/b]
Click to expand...

Why? That the SIR size can be simply calculated w/o real world testing is an ASSumption that has been debunked. You know it, Andy knows it, CRB knows it, and as soon as real results are released (with or without the CRB's blessing) everyone else will know it too. I simply refuse to follow you down the road of attempting to engineer on paper without testing.

As for the weight case, it's very simple. Because all cars are running on the same width wheels, weight does not affect them all in the same way. I literally laugh each time I read "just give them 300lbs because it's cheap and easy". 300lbs will require a lot of changes to suspension and a lot of testing to get cars handling properly...and that costs a lot of money. But BMW drivers are all made of money, right?

IF the car loses value, it will be because it will now be a requirement that the car be built to the nines to run at the front with the other cars that are built to the nines.

[/b]
Click to expand...

It's losing value because the common perception is that SCCA wants to make it non competitive. It's also losing value because those who went out and "built to the nines" will have wasted money. An SIR, if it works properly, will make the high end equipment pointless.

I will say that I have actually grown respect for certain BMW racers here on the board over this, but others have lost my admiration. But...I am not stupid, and I know the difference between them.
[/b]
Click to expand...

If your admiration meant anything to me, I might build and ITS car.

I won't be building an ITS car.
 
You need to read further....

I've stated many times that an SIR has the potential to be the cheap solution... nowhere have i said lead was cheap and easy...although the implementation is, the set up and tuning are not. Lots' of changes, some will be pricey. The potential also exists for the SIR to have unintended consequences...thats why the entite deadline was rolled back, to get a better handle on it all. Is that the mark of a club that is trying to amke a car uncompetitive? A club that doesn't care?

While you go on about designing on paper, real engineers did the calcs, but the CRB and the ITAC have taken the "proof is in the pudding" to heart and have tested. Does that sound like a club that is "trying to make the car uncompetitive"????? A club that doesn't care??? Doesn't seem like that to me.

A major point that otheres...guys who aren't in the class, or even IT (like you) have raised is that the club cares TOO much..that it should move on and stop wasting so much time ofver one car.

In an auction, it only takes two to define a market. So the popular consensus isn't always the determing factor of value, and the "value card" is a red herring anyway. The first order is to try to create a fair and equitable environment in which to race.

As it stands, the process shows that doesn't exist.

And because of a classing mistake, many other cars suffered in value...the flipside to your contention.

The goal here is to set the class right with the process, and let you guys build your cars, race your cars, (Well, not your car DD, ass you think you're getting screwed) and let the cream rise to the top.

Something tells me that the same sharp guys will be at the pointy end of the stick, just as before.
 
Why? That the SIR size can be simply calculated w/o real world testing is an ASSumption that has been debunked. You know it, Andy knows it, CRB knows it, and as soon as real results are released (with or without the CRB's blessing) everyone else will know it too. I simply refuse to follow you down the road of attempting to engineer on paper without testing.[/b]
Click to expand...

I, for one, can't wait to read your posts when the results come out. Really.


It's losing value because the common perception is that SCCA wants to make it non competitive.
[/b]
Click to expand...

This statement alone speaks volumes! If you really think that then you havn't been listening - AT ALL.

Double DONE with you. Carry on.
 
I, for one, can't wait to read your posts when the results come out.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Then post them. You have them.

edit: Or at least tell us why CRB felt compelled to test a 34mm SIR last weekend.

Engineering on paper is easier than making things actually work, aint it, Andy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top