SCCAForums.com

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. 

It was marginally lighter, and maybe had 5-10 hp more...  whatever was attainable from basically blue printing the engines, which probably isn't a lot on a BMW engine.
 

Ok, so I guess it's time for me to pitch in on this discussion.  Most of what I wanted to say has already been said, so I'll get right to it.  I love the idea of creating a boost class for all the STi's and Evo's (good idea Fair).  Let them have fun by themselves, making all the legal boost they want.  Create a rule that they can play around with boost and what every they see fit, but there is no way that a N/A car should have to try and compete against these hp demons.  In addition, create another class for all the e36/e46 M3's, RX-8, 350Z's, S2k's, 944s2/968's, 2nd gen MR2's, basically what made up the old AS/BS classes.

On to STX, keep the M3 out of the class, just change the tire allowances.  For the 2wd cars, allow 9" rims and 255 tires.  For awd cars, allow 225 tires and leave the 8" rims.  This way it is not such a big take-back for the subies.  They get to keep the wheels they have been running on, but they only need to buy a smaller tire.  As seen in STU, the 20mm difference in tire width is not nearly enough, the 2wd car's need to have at least 30mm of difference to make of for the lack of traction. 

e36racer:

On to STX, keep the M3 out of the class, just change the tire allowances.  For the 2wd cars, allow 9" rims and 255 tires.  For awd cars, allow 225 tires and leave the 8" rims.  This way it is not such a big take-back for the subies.  They get to keep the wheels they have been running on, but they only need to buy a smaller tire.  As seen in STU, the 20mm difference in tire width is not nearly enough, the 2wd car's need to have at least 30mm of difference to make of for the lack of traction. 

I like the direction Bryce is going with this.   Heck, we can even leave the AWD cars with their 235's.

e36racer:

On to STX, keep the M3 out of the class, just change the tire allowances.  For the 2wd cars, allow 9" rims and 255 tires.  For awd cars, allow 225 tires and leave the 8" rims.  This way it is not such a big take-back for the subies.  They get to keep the wheels they have been running on, but they only need to buy a smaller tire.  As seen in STU, the 20mm difference in tire width is not nearly enough, the 2wd car's need to have at least 30mm of difference to make of for the lack of traction. 

Since you didn't mention the R32....do you really think my 3200# +  car can be competitive on even smaller tires?  I say the 2wd cars  should be allowed wider tires, but on the drive wheels only.  If the issue is ability to put down power, why do they need wider front tires? 

 So, I say - 8 in wheels 245 tires for AWD and 265-275 tires on 9 in rims for the drive wheels on 2WD (245 on non-drive end).
 

I think the E36 M3 in STX on 245's would become an overdog personally.

That said, I'd love to see it moved as I'd try and prep one for the class. 

JenC:

Have you asked any of us??  Phil pointed out multiple times in this thread that we have had a mechanism in place for several years.  Just because you seem to want to ignore the existence of enforceability doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 OK, what is this secret system?  I have raced my STi the last 3 years in STU and I have never heard of this and I have asked around and discussed this with other STU drivers.  Never saw any mention of this on the NASIOC motorsports forum either in the last 3 years.  So please share this "mechanism" you speak of so I can protest my competitors.

Andy Hollis:

Well, since I started the thread, I'd like to keep those two concepts together since that's the way it has to be considered.  Personally, I see it as either/or (or not at all), rather than both.  And the decision on each is intertwined heavily.

I don't understand why this is the case. Removing it from the exclusion list would be an incremental change. We could see how it does with 245's and 8" wheels and go from there. Letting it off the list and giving it STU wheels/tires would make it harder to evaluate the impact of the changes separately.

One other question... did Chris and Neal ever go head to head on a more grippy surface than HPT? (I have no personal experience there, but people seem to think it's slippery).

John

Butt Dyno:

Andy Hollis:

Well, since I started the thread, I'd like to keep those two concepts together since that's the way it has to be considered.  Personally, I see it as either/or (or not at all), rather than both.  And the decision on each is intertwined heavily.

(emphasis added)

I don't understand why this is the case. Removing it from the exclusion list would be an incremental change. We could see how it does with 245's and 8" wheels and go from there. Letting it off the list and giving it STU wheels/tires would make it harder to evaluate the impact of the changes separately.

One other question... did Chris and Neal ever go head to head on a more grippy surface than HPT? (I have no personal experience there, but people seem to think it's slippery).

John

Holy cow! That was four pages back!

You misunderstood my comment.  I am agreeing with you.  Look above at my comment again for the part I just bolded.  Since I believe that any action taken will be a single action (tires or M3 or nothing), I believe that it is best to compare and contrast those options in the thread.  Discussing them in separate threads as you suggested will not yield that comparison.

--Andy

Butt Dyno:

One other question... did Chris and Neal ever go head to head on a more grippy surface than HPT? (I have no personal experience there, but people seem to think it's slippery).

John

They did several times in Milwaukee with about the same result… Miller Park and HPT are similar surfaces…

IMO, if you're going to try one option or another, increase the tire size limit for the 2WD cars, rather than allowing the E36 M3. The increased tire width will help more than just one car, and the E36 M3 inclusion could hurt more than one car while only helping one.

Does that make sense? (greatest good for the greatest number and all that...) 

shinronin:

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. 

Well after no log number after 8 days I resent mine to these addresses. Hopefully they get read?

edit: the STAC address no workie.

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

    stac@scca.com

Technical details of permanent failure:
PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 13): 550 No such user - psmtp

Chris Conant:

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.

Bench racing is fun. There are non-M E36 cars that came without the power sunroof as well, and they don't drop 50+ pounds. Gutting a number of E36 cars in the past I have removed the entire sunroof cassette and panel and they weigh closer to 32 pounds for everything. Add back the steel that would fill the hole, and its less. I am a nut about weights - I freagin weigh everything that comes off of or goes onto one of our cars, and won't just "bench race numbers". I'd have these lower control arms on the car if it was legal (not if you have camber plates also):

As stated in a post below yours there are several other items on the M cars that are indeed different, and heavier.

Chris Conant:

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. ... 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.

Again, I would beg to differ. My STU E36 M3 ('97) car made 220 whp in STU legal trim (with a chip and cold air plus exhaust). There isn't 50 hp in driveline losses. That was a couple of years ago - I will re-dyno our car soon and repost a dyno chart from this, the '06 & 07 STU-L class winning M3. Its underwhelming as hell. A modern Honda Accord makes more power than my E36 M3!

LEFT: Once legal Hi Flow MAF and removed Traction Control Throttle Body, with cold air; removed in early 2005

RIGHT: This non-sunroof M3 on STX wheels/tires would still outweigh a 325is by 150 pounds or more

LEFT: A view of the $1000+ all mandrel bent exhaust system and high flow cats

RIGHT: Current cold air set-up (14" K&N cone filter) with mandated stock MAF and 2nd TC-TB (aka: "the straw")

Chris Conant:

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

Yes, if your last name is "Tunnell". Past results (especially from 10+ years ago) do not necessarily tell the whole story of today's competition - hell, even data from 3 years ago (Forbes Field) has to be largely thrown out due to the extremely slippery HPT surface. BMWs have been reclassed many times and nowadays seem to be struggling to bring home a win... did any E36 M3 win any open class last year, other than XPrepared? The "winningest car in solo history" is sure getting slapped around in lots of classes, including: BS, STU, BSP and SM.

Chris Conant:

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

Well, that is also debatable. Bench racing gets trumped by real world results and testing. The weight drop for those cars over the E36 M3 is significant, especially the E30M3. The E30M3 is a bit more "long in the tooth" and fewer racers are prepping them for ST use these days due to costs/maintenance hassles, but Brian Fitzpatrick trophied in STX (5th, I think) and his wife Kathy won (another) championship in STX-L back in 2006 in an E30 M3, at HPT...

Fair:

shinronin:

The E36///M3 with a Shark injector(ECU program/Chip) and cold air intake are reported to have close to 270HP.

Again, I would beg to differ. My STU E36 M3 ('97) car made 220 whp in STU legal trim (with a chip and cold air plus exhaust). There isn't 50 hp in driveline losses. That was a couple of years ago - I will re-dyno our car soon and repost a dyno chart from this, the '06 & 07 STU-L class winning M3. Its underwhelming as hell. A modern Honda Accord makes more power than my E36 M3!

I'll back Terry on this.  I have both a '00 M coupe and the '95 M3.  Back when I dynoed the M coupe with the BMW CCA San Diego chapter, my bone stock M coupe put down better whp and wtq numbers - significantly - than *all* of the chipped and filtered M3s.

I haven't dynoed the M3 in quite some time, but after the custom programming and exhaust, it put down a rippin' 211 ft/lbs of torque and 226 wheel hp. I have resolved some exhaust system problems, though, so there's probably a little more there now, but not much.  Nevertheless, Max Hayter and I enjoy very close competition at our local events as well as the local Tours and Pros.  That will change in '09 though.

Mike 

msimanyi:

  Nevertheless, Max Hayter and I enjoy very close competition at our local events as well as the local Tours and Pros.  That will change in '09 though.

Mike 

What aren't you telling us Mike????

Thanks, Terry, for posting some realistic numbers.  I was up close and personal with at least one of the unique M3 pieces this week: the front subframe was out of my car.  It has "M3" stamped right on it.  Darn, I didn't weigh it.....

I haven't gotten a log number either.

Sebastian R.:

msimanyi:

  Nevertheless, Max Hayter and I enjoy very close competition at our local events as well as the local Tours and Pros.  That will change in '09 though.

Mike 

What aren't you telling us Mike????

He is moving to Texas for some real competition.  =P

Fair:

shinronin:

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. ... 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.

Again, I would beg to differ. My STU E36 M3 ('97) car made 220 whp in STU legal trim (with a chip and cold air plus exhaust). There isn't 50 hp in driveline losses. That was a couple of years ago - I will re-dyno our car soon and repost a dyno chart from this, the '06 & 07 STU-L class winning M3. Its underwhelming as hell. A modern Honda Accord makes more power than my E36 M3!

hi terry, just to clarify, that quotation and the rest you made were from 'Chris Conant' not me. 

Fair:

shinronin:

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. 

Well after no log number after 8 days I resent mine to these addresses. Hopefully they get read?

edit: the STAC address no workie.

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

    stac@scca.com

Technical details of permanent failure:
PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 13): 550 No such user - psmtp

Chris Conant:

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.

Bench racing is fun. There are non-M E36 cars that came without the power sunroof as well, and they don't drop 50+ pounds. Gutting a number of E36 cars in the past I have removed the entire sunroof cassette and panel and they weigh closer to 32 pounds for everything. Add back the steel that would fill the hole, and its less. I am a nut about weights - I freagin weigh everything that comes off of or goes onto one of our cars, and won't just "bench race numbers". I'd have these lower control arms on the car if it was legal (not if you have camber plates also):

As stated in a post below yours there are several other items on the M cars that are indeed different, and heavier.

shinronin:

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. ... 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.

Again, I would beg to differ. My STU E36 M3 ('97) car made 220 whp in STU legal trim (with a chip and cold air plus exhaust). There isn't 50 hp in driveline losses. That was a couple of years ago - I will re-dyno our car soon and repost a dyno chart from this, the '06 & 07 STU-L class winning M3. Its underwhelming as hell. A modern Honda Accord makes more power than my E36 M3!

LEFT: Once legal Hi Flow MAF and removed Traction Control Throttle Body, with cold air; removed in early 2005

RIGHT: This non-sunroof M3 on STX wheels/tires would still outweigh a 325is by 150 pounds or more

LEFT: A view of the $1000+ all mandrel bent exhaust system and high flow cats

RIGHT: Current cold air set-up (14" K&N cone filter) with mandated stock MAF and 2nd TC-TB (aka: "the straw")

shinronin:

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

Yes, if your last name is "Tunnell". Past results (especially from 10+ years ago) do not necessarily tell the whole story of today's competition - hell, even data from 3 years ago (Forbes Field) has to be largely thrown out due to the extremely slippery HPT surface. BMWs have been reclassed many times and nowadays seem to be struggling to bring home a win... did any E36 M3 win any open class last year, other than XPrepared? The "winningest car in solo history" is sure getting slapped around in lots of classes, including: BS, STU, BSP and SM.

shinronin:

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

Well, that is also debatable. Bench racing gets trumped by real world results and testing. The weight drop for those cars over the E36 M3 is significant, especially the E30M3. The E30M3 is a bit more "long in the tooth" and fewer racers are prepping them for ST use these days due to costs/maintenance hassles, but Brian Fitzpatrick trophied in STX (5th, I think) and his wife Kathy won (another) championship in STX-L back in 2006 in an E30 M3, at HPT...

These boards are "Bench Racing" arnt they as it is all speculation until we try right?? The weight is insignificant compared to the power increase over the non ///M's. What do they (325/8's) put to the ground? And I believe (chime in here guys) they were using 235's and not 245's (i thought).  Even with the extra weight BMW wouldn't have done it if it didn't make a difference right? You wouldn't have a sunroof delete if it didn't matter right?

On the E30 M3 what does "Long in the teeth" mean? I agree they are competitive in STX and would like to keep it that way. They are not competitive in any other class. Not competitive in CSP or SM. Most of the E30///M3 guys track them and don't run SCCA solo at all. As Autocrossers some one picking a car wont consider the E30///M3 due to extreme cost ( i would like to have a half price exhaust like you have). They are now more expensive than a E36M3 and still going up in value due to only 5k brought here to the US and 50K+ e36's(///M3) brought here between 95/99. I'm out numbered That being said i could understand the e36///M folks wanting to get into a more competitive/dominant class because there are more of them. Heck i would as well if i still had my 95m3.

 You do bring up a good point about the Forbes/HPT surface favoring the AWD (I assume that is what you meant). Heck I would like to go back to Forbes.

 Have a good one,

shinronin:

hi terry, just to clarify, that quotation and the rest you made were from 'Chris Conant' not me. 

Sorry, fixed. I was quoting multiple people in that thread and I cut-n-pasted the wrong quote tag on a few lines. My bad.