SCCAForums.com

The S2K is excluded because it only has two seats. It clearly can't conform to any of the ST rulesets.

donour

andy said doug gill is busy preparing for the 2008 scca national convention so don't expect a response for a couple of weeks.

also cc the STAC (stac@scca.com) when you email you letters to seb@scca.com on ST* issues.  the members listed on the STAC committee page aren't current afaik so emailing them individually (like i did) isn't such a good idea. 

I actually thought about trying to turn my wife's car into an 'STX' Miata (it's a '99 sport) just to see how it would do, but alas I lack the money for another project car and the skill to prove anything with it. I still think it would be fun, but she wants a Smart now and the garage is out of space.

Oh yeah, M3 something, something....Street tires aren't blah, blah, blah...Yeah, so that means this post isn't totally OT now, right?

- Bret 

shinronin:

also cc the STAC (stac@scca.com)

I don't believe this is a direct line.  I think it goes through Doug's box just like the SEB addy.

That whole process really sucks bigtime and I really wish it was improved.  The single-human-bottleneck element makes it too subject to workloads and priorities and human error (no slam on Doug, but we all do it).

--Andy

Andy Hollis:

shinronin:

also cc the STAC (stac@scca.com)

I don't believe this is a direct line.  I think it goes through Doug's box just like the SEB addy.

That whole process really sucks bigtime and I really wish it was improved.  The single-human-bottleneck element makes it too subject to workloads and priorities and human error (no slam on Doug, but we all do it).

--Andy

 

Can we write letters asking the SEB to make the communication system more efficient?  Can they fix that mid year?  Does it need to go through member comment? :P 

129STS:

Can we write letters asking the SEB to make the communication system more efficient?  Can they fix that mid year?  Does it need to go through member comment? :P 

How about building them a request tracking system? I've done it before for work, it's not terribly difficult.
 

murph1379:

Fair:

well, we did have some great posts by RX8 drivers: Isley, Ian and Foley all made very good arguments to lump the underpowered RX8

I'm still mystified at how the RX8 could be considered underpowered in STU but the S2000 is actually excluded from even STU? Neither of them gain much power in ST trim, and the RX8 will gain more suspension help in ST* trim than the S2000, since the S2000 is starting from a stiffer place. I guess I don't see the 200lbs that the S2000 is lighter than a WRX overcoming the torque and AWD of the WRX, and certainly I don't see it doing a whole lot in STU.

Can someone help a n00b out here? 

 Sure -  As a two seater car, the S2000 is explicitly excluded from STS, STX, and STU. Since it's on the STS2 exclusion list, it's also out of that class, which gives it zero places to play in Street Touring. Much like any Miata ever produced with a Torsen, or any Miata made after 1999 is excluded from the entire Street Touring category, along with a whole host of other 2-seater cars. But that's a discussion on an entirely different aspect of stupidity regarding the ST ruleset.

Oh, and for the record the S2000 is more like 500-600 pounds lighter than a WRX.
 

altiain:

Sure -  As a two seater car, the S2000 is explicitly excluded from STS, STX, and STU. Since it's on the STS2 exclusion list, it's also out of that class, which gives it zero places to play in Street Touring. Much like any Miata ever produced with a Torsen, or any Miata made after 1999 is excluded from the entire Street Touring category, along with a whole host of other 2-seater cars. But that's a discussion on an entirely different aspect of stupidity regarding the ST ruleset.

Oh, and for the record the S2000 is more like 500-600 pounds lighter than a WRX.

My letter on THAT subject was sent many many moons ago.  Before I bought my M3 2 years ago.

 My letter onthe current subject was sent to the SEB and STAC monday, no # yet, but if Doug is occupied, no biggie.

murph1379:

129STS:

Can we write letters asking the SEB to make the communication system more efficient?  Can they fix that mid year?  Does it need to go through member comment? :P 

How about building them a request tracking system? I've done it before for work, it's not terribly difficult.
 

There's actually something in the works...a web-based "trouble ticket" system.  Built by one of the membership in their spare time on top of a standard software package.  But alas, its been "in the works" for almost two years now.  If you were at the convention Town Hall last year you may have heard of "Auto-Doug".  That's it.  But it's still not all there yet.  Maybe this year... 

The current e-mail system just doesn't work.  Spam filters, message sizing limits and required human interaction make it both cumbersome and unreliable.  I don't know specifically the cause of all the problems but I've seen the symptoms first-hand and they are bad.

--Andy

Andy Hollis:

murph1379:

129STS:

Can we write letters asking the SEB to make the communication system more efficient?  Can they fix that mid year?  Does it need to go through member comment? :P 

How about building them a request tracking system? I've done it before for work, it's not terribly difficult.
 

There's actually something in the works...a web-based "trouble ticket" system.  Built by one of the membership in their spare time on top of a standard software package.  But alas, its been "in the works" for almost two years now.  If you were at the convention Town Hall last year you may have heard of "Auto-Doug".  That's it.  But it's still not all there yet.  Maybe this year... 

The current e-mail system just doesn't work.  Spam filters, message sizing limits and required human interaction make it both cumbersome and unreliable.  I don't know specifically the cause of all the problems but I've seen the symptoms first-hand and they are bad.

--Andy

 

Are there written requirements for such a system? Hell, I would take a crack at it just for fun, even if it didn't end up being used.

John
 

Butt Dyno:

Are there written requirements for such a system? Hell, I would take a crack at it just for fun, even if it didn't end up being used.

John
 

Not in the style you are probably used to.  Contact the SEB chair (e-mail addy on the SCCA web site) if you are serious.  I have no idea where they are on this, but I'm sure it will come up for discussion this weekend at their convention meeting.

--Andy

Andy Hollis:

shinronin:

also cc the STAC (stac@scca.com)

I don't believe this is a direct line.  I think it goes through Doug's box just like the SEB addy.

mark sipe gave me that one. 
 

With 50 more HP Tovsen would have been much closer. The E36///M also has more torque. Also the 325/8 and ///M3 share dang near all body panels. The ///M3 has a sunroof delete option on at least the 95's which is good for about 50+lbs and its up high. So with out looking up weight speck how does a ///M3 weigh much more than a 325? And then there is probably a gearing difference as well i would assume (i will have to check that out) So give the E36 325's 50 more HP and more torque and see how they would have done.  Apart from Fenter i would assume they would have dominated that class. Now the 4door M3 i do believe is heavier. I think Tovsen ran the same tire I did which was a 235/40/17 not a 245 and the 245 is slightly taller than the 235 (i know i have tested them and currently have a 245 sitting in my office F/S). The 325/8 are fairly hi geared so 245 may hurt gearing a tad.

Also anything with an M on it was balanced very closely (my sponsor is a 30 year BMW master tech). Built in a different factory. The 325's were not as balanced if any. The weight difference (insignificant compared to the advantage of more HP/Tourque) is probably in the frt and rear bumper covers (possibly frt seats vaders,, wood grain stuff as well) which i believe can be swapped anyway. The 325 can have the M3 cams installed and you wont be able to notice the difference at all until you drive it (i know a BMW club member that has done this) or tear it down.

Now isn't the E36///M3 one of the winningest car in Solo history?

So if the M3 didn't have an advantage then why did they give them a bunch more HP/Tourque? The E36///M3 with a Shark injector(ECU program/Chip) and cold air intake are reported to have close to 270HP.

 E36///M3 in STX means the 325/8 - E30M3 will be insignificantly classed.

Chris Conant:

With 50 more HP Tovsen would have been much closer. The E36///M also has more torque. Also the 325/8 and ///M3 share dang near all body panels. The ///M3 has a sunroof delete option on at least the 95's which is good for about 50+lbs and its up high. So with out looking up weight speck how does a ///M3 weigh much more than a 325? And then there is probably a gearing difference as well i would assume (i will have to check that out) So give the E36 325's 50 more HP and more torque and see how they would have done.  Apart from Fenter i would assume they would have dominated that class. Now the 4door M3 i do believe is heavier. I think Tovsen ran the same tire I did which was a 235/40/17 not a 245 and the 245 is slightly taller than the 235 (i know i have tested them and currently have a 245 sitting in my office F/S). The 325/8 are fairly hi geared so 245 may hurt gearing a tad.

Also anything with an M on it was balanced very closely (my sponsor is a 30 year BMW master tech). Built in a different factory. The 325's were not as balanced if any. The weight difference (insignificant compared to the advantage of more HP/Tourque) is probably in the frt and rear bumper covers (possibly frt seats vaders,, wood grain stuff as well) which i believe can be swapped anyway. The 325 can have the M3 cams installed and you wont be able to notice the difference at all until you drive it (i know a BMW club member that has done this) or tear it down.

Now isn't the E36///M3 one of the winningest car in Solo history?

So if the M3 didn't have an advantage then why did they give them a bunch more HP/Tourque? The E36///M3 with a Shark injector(ECU program/Chip) and cold air intake are reported to have close to 270HP.

 E36///M3 in STX means the 325/8 - E30M3 will be insignificantly classed.

 

Typically...  most people don't advocate cheating online...  just saying...
 

Quick Q

Would the M3 LTW become legal with this hypothetical lift from the exclusion list?

Chris,

Just going by what the Vorshlag crew posted earlier, the M3 is probably 100-150lbs more.  The brakes are bigger and heavier, diff and halfshafts heavier, rear wheel bearing housing/trailing arm is heavier, motor and clutch/flywheel are probably heavier (trans is the same between 3.2 M3 and the 328, IIRC), the subframes are probably different, the chassis itself is reinforced in several spots.  Bumpers and side skirts, as you mentioned.  Lots of little things make the M3 heavier.

The thing to remember is, on the same tire, whether 235 or 245, the M3 won't be able to put down any more power than the 325/8 until the front wheels are straight.  It won't be any faster in a corner.

An M3 with a chip and intake will not have 270 HP.  MAYBE a 95 with chip/intake/Euro MAF (which we all know isn't legal for BMWs) and the 24lb/hr injectors (which isn't ST legal at all) can get there.  Where was this reported?

The real car to build is still the WRX, with a weight similar to the M3, at least as much power potential, and AWD to drag it out of every corner.

Butt Dyno:

Quick Q

Would the M3 LTW become legal with this hypothetical lift from the exclusion list?

ah ha!  good question.  the Evo RS model is after all legal in STU...
 

Butt Dyno:

Quick Q

Would the M3 LTW become legal with this hypothetical lift from the exclusion list?

Great Question! The LTW could be looked as an option? So folks could go with LTW options and engine? Russ Wiles comes to mind here as he has one.

I think that car was a lot lighter and had 260-280 HP and hand built from the Motorsport factory. 

Butt Dyno:

Quick Q

Would the M3 LTW become legal with this hypothetical lift from the exclusion list?

No.  Car still has to meet eligibility requirements of Stock.  Otherwise you would have seen LTWs in STU.

Chris Conant:

Butt Dyno:

Quick Q

Would the M3 LTW become legal with this hypothetical lift from the exclusion list?

Great Question! The LTW could be looked as an option? So folks could go with LTW options and engine? Russ Wiles comes to mind here as he has one.

I think that car was a lot lighter and had 260-280 HP and hand built from the Motorsport factory. 

Wrongo.  See: http://www.bimmerhaus.com/raceprep/M3toBSP.html  Look at the bottom of the page.

About 200 lbs lighter, same motor, but they picked the "best" motors.

And it's not eligible for Stock, so it's not eligible for ST.  See Appendix A, the LTW is the first car listed as not eligible.