BMW E36 (ITS) Ring sizes? [Archive] - Improved Touring Racing Forums

Banzai240

11-09-2005, 02:22 PM

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 7 2005, 05:06 PM
Deves rings has the same specs for OE replacments.

http://www.deves.com/devesrings/cars_BMW.html

64790

I've recieved a message that states that these specs are not accurate for this car... I'm still working of finding some official documentation to show one-way or the other... BMW of North America doesn't have this information available, and they suggested getting in touch with a BMW Service Department and looking it up in a Service Manual...

I will keep searching...

One would suspect that for every E36 out there in ITS, there would be the REQUIRED service manual, so someone out there must have this information... Otherwise, how would they be able to e-mail me and tell me these specs are "wrong"???

With some cars, I guess part of the "mistique" is the mysteriousness of the specs... :rolleyes:

I find it odd that some of the most prominant piston ring manufacturers in the nation would have the "wrong" sized factory replacement piston ring sizes...

Smells a little like Pike Place Market around here... <_<

And people wonder why some of these things take on the apperence of a "witch hunt"...

I will find this information...

Joe Harlan

11-09-2005, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 9 2005, 11:22 AM
I've recieved a message that states that these specs are not accurate for this car... I'm still working of finding some official documentation to show one-way or the other... BMW of North America doesn't have this information available, and they suggested getting in touch with a BMW Service Department and looking it up in a Service Manual...

I will keep searching...

One would suspect that for every E36 out there in ITS, there would be the REQUIRED service manual, so someone out there must have this information... Otherwise, how would they be able to e-mail me and tell me these specs are "wrong"???

With some cars, I guess part of the "mistique" is the mysteriousness of the specs... :rolleyes:

I find it odd that some of the most prominant piston ring manufacturers in the nation would have the "wrong" sized factory replacement piston ring sizes...

Smells a little like Pike Place Market around here... <_<

And people wonder why some of these things take on the apperence of a "witch hunt"...

I will find this information...

65033

Ok if the person sending you the information knows the specs are wrong then why are they not providing the proper specs or a link to them?

Banzai240

11-09-2005, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 9 2005, 06:28 PM
Ok if the person sending you the information knows the specs are wrong then why are they not providing the proper specs or a link to them?

65035

Don't know... I asked the same thing...

I suppose there is a fear that I'll use this information for some kind of protest or something like that... Seems silly really... If the information is available to verify the data, and it's all on the up-and-up, then one really shouldn't have anything to hide... RIGHT?? :blink:

All I'm trying to do is get the correct information so the ITAC can properely respond to a letter from a BMW owner who has made a request to the CRB concerning BMW over-bore pistons and the factory ring sizes...

Like I said, it's not a big deal... I'll find the information we need eventually...

Banzai240

11-09-2005, 03:21 PM

OK guys... So which is correct??? Or is the answer "Both"???

Thanks,

From the DEVES catalog:

Model Years Num. of Cyls. Bore 1 2 3 Set No.
325i, 525i 5/92- 6 84.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 2659
2.5l, 4V, M50

325i, is, Cabriolet,
2494cc 1987-95 6 84.00 1.50 1.75 3.00 2297

Joe Harlan

11-09-2005, 03:37 PM

Banzai240

11-09-2005, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 9 2005, 07:37 PM
A FSM or a factory part is the only way to get the answer.

65040

Exactly... That's what I'm now looking for...

Doc Bro

11-10-2005, 12:48 PM

Gooood Luck Darrin,

BMW is very stingy with their information. I've been searching for Z3 wheel option statistics to no avail. They'll gladly sell you the replacement wheel though for the right $$$$. And they'll gladly TELLl you they sold it. I haven't found any overbore pistons available for the m44 engine either (let alone rings). Apparently BMW doesn't believe in overboring the m44 motor if it has problems- they probably just sell you a new one!! (I wish I still had a small block chevy!!!)
I can't even find how many '04 e46 M3's were sold with black/natural color combination (which I own). Furthermore I can't even find out how many e46 M3's were sold in the US in '04. Porsche does a much better job with releasing this info.
If you can find a source for some of these stats. please let me know where.
Thanks
Rob

Banzai240

11-10-2005, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 10 2005, 04:48 PM
Gooood Luck Darrin,

BMW is very stingy with their information.
65093

Sounds like a trip to the tech shed could be VERY interesting for a BMW driver who is under protest for such things... :(

Unfortunatly, I'm not sure that aftermarket suppliers, or BMW Motorsports division, etc., can be used as definitive confirmation of the factory specs... I find it hard to understand how people are rebuilding these things if they don't have the factory specs... Surely you aren't just taking the word of Turner Motorsports or ??? are you??? I know their pistons say "Exact dimensions of the factory pistons except for bore diameter... Perfect for ITS"... But how can you be sure? How are THEY sure???

Interesting issue... http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/33.gif

Andy Bettencourt

11-10-2005, 02:33 PM

http://bmwccaclubracing.com/static/forsale/forsale.htm

Couple of ITS cars on here with .040 stuff. Maybe Shafer can tell us who did his engine so we can contact them and ask about replacement pistons and ring sizes...

AB

Doc Bro

11-10-2005, 03:59 PM

[quote]
Unfortunatly, I'm not sure that aftermarket suppliers, or BMW Motorsports division, etc., can be used as definitive confirmation of the factory specs... I find it hard to understand how people are rebuilding these things if they don't have the factory specs...

I've sort of resigned myself to the fact that I cannot have a legally prepped IT motor....at least not one with the information I've found so far. The IT legal parts that the Japanese guys have access to just don't seem to exsist for my particular application. My motor will remain untouched at this point, and I will probably always run a "bone" stock motor for this very reason. My opinion is that is why the BMWCCA rulebook is more liberal than the SCCA GCR.

I'm very curious to see what Sunbelt would say if I called stating that I wanted a potent, legal Z3 (m44) motor.....hmmmm........HOW MUCH ARE YOU WILLING TO SPEND?? I'm sure would be their response. I'm assuming it would be TOTALLY cost prohibitive ?20K? because of all the custom manufacturing of parts that would meet factory specs.

If this seems like hogwash to any lurking BMW guy then please point me in the direction of someone who has IT LEGAL parts/knowledge for the m44 motor.....We can't even purchase underdrive pulleys, chips..yeah right the car doesn't have any! Try a header....better off making one from scratch.(if not help me get the legal race weight at least down to the 2559lbs factory spec!!) Thanks in advance. (sorry for the bellyaching :blink: )

Rob

Z3_GoCar

11-11-2005, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 9 2005, 12:21 PM
OK guys... So which is correct??? Or is the answer "Both"???

Thanks,

From the DEVES catalog:

Model Years Num. of Cyls. Bore 1 2 3 Set No.
325i, 525i 5/92- 6 84.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 2659
2.5l, 4V, M50
325i, is, Cabriolet,
2494cc 1987-95 6 84.00 1.50 1.75 3.00 2297

65039

I'd say it depends....

Are you looking for ring specs for a M-50, or a M-50TU?
As for the shop manual, the one that everyone has, and it's the only one you can purchase at the dealer, is the one from Robert Bentley. If you cruze e-bay one might also find an etk C-D set for the later cars like the e-36/7. One may have the correct rings based on engine VIN#'s. That's how it appears by the overlap.

James

On second thought, looks like the 87-95 would be the M20 12valve motor. Probably what you have is the aftermarket applying the M20 piston to the M50 engine. Why make another piston when the one your making works just as well :bash_1_:

Well at least they make one for it :blink:

Joe Harlan

11-11-2005, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 10 2005, 09:04 PM
I'd say it depends....

Are you looking for ring specs for a M-50, or a M-50TU?As for the shop manual, the one that everyone has, and it's the only one you can purchase at the dealer, is the one from Robert Bentley. If you cruze e-bay one might also find an etk C-D set for the later cars like the e-36/7. One may have the correct rings based on engine VIN#'s. That's how it appears by the overlap.

James

65141

So what is the difference?

Z3_GoCar

11-11-2005, 12:24 AM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 10 2005, 12:59 PM

If this seems like hogwash to any lurking BMW guy then please point me in the direction of someone who has IT LEGAL parts/knowledge for the m44 motor.....We can't even purchase underdrive pulleys, chips..yeah right the car doesn't have any! Try a header....better off making one from scratch.(if not help me get the legal race weight at least down to the 2559lbs factory spec!!) Thanks in advance. (sorry for the bellyaching :blink: )

Rob

Not a clue on anyone who make IT legal parts for the M-44, pretty much an orphan in the auto-sports world. Although you can get one from Bavarian Engine Exchange, but it'll have teflon coated pistons for that race winning edge :P I also wouldn't be to sure that a fully developed header would help things as the stock manifold is about as good as it gets. The one that was racing in Sweeden had an S-14 in it. I'd think it's pretty much fixed to the stock hp numbers and not much can be done to move it.

James

Z3_GoCar

11-11-2005, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 10 2005, 09:11 PM
So what is the difference?

65142

M-50 spec (http://www.bmwworld.com/engines/m50.htm)

It looks like the M50TU has Vanos variable valve timing introduced in '93 the earlier M-50 had fixed valve timing.

I suspect that the difference that Darin found was the pistons for the older M-20 12 valve engine.

James

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 11 2005, 04:24 AM
I'd think it's pretty much fixed to the stock hp numbers and not much can be done to move it.

James

65143

[SIZE=7]EXACTLY MY POINT!!
Let's be generous 137 stock (crank) HP
+2 for K&N
+6 to reflash the computer (given it matches to the ambient conditions every weekend)=
145 crank HP
-15 (conservative- driveline drag)
130 Rwheel hp.......2675 race weight?

I'm not slamming the ITAC on this as I think the new system will be fair once (IF) implemented however I think that the IT prep gains are overestimated in this case.
In the meantime the burden of proof is left on Z3 owners to show that the IT mods are unavailable or unrealistically attainable if at all.

How in the world does one go about showing that a car (especially a BMW) does not have the potential that it was estimated to have?

I guess this leaves me rather confused. No one will deny that the upgrades are simply not there. No one will deny that it is a BMW and therefore is viewed in the same performance light as the e36 325is. But will anyone agree, other than its owners, that the car is an orphan for BMW???? I am sure that no one will take my plight to hand...and I do expect to hear the exact opposite based mostly on marque...but, it is true.

My point is the ITAC is interested in 10/10ths cars being able to neutralize one another and let the race be a drivers race based on strengths of cars offsetting weakness of cars. I get it in principle. What I don't get though is what if it its assumed that 10/10ths is universally achievable but it really isn't. Unless the ITAC has done the research which time wouldn't permit the burden is left solely to the car owner.... it's hard (almost impossible) to prove something doesn't exist!! (images of an agnostic and a catholic having lunch come to mind :rolleyes: )

Sorry for the hijack on this thread...it is because I am struggling to find info from BMW too!!!!

Rob

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 12:34 PM
[SIZE=7]EXACTLY MY POINT!!
Let's be generous 137 stock (crank) HP
+2 for K&N
+6 to reflash the computer (given it matches to the ambient conditions every weekend)=
145 crank HP
-15 (conservative- driveline drag)
130 Rwheel hp.......2675 race weight?

I'm not slamming the ITAC on this as I think the new system will be fair once (IF) implemented however I think that the IT prep gains are overestimated in this case.
In the meantime the burden of proof is left on Z3 owners to show that the IT mods are unavailable or unrealistically attainable if at all.

How in the world does one go about showing that a car (especially a BMW) does not have the potential that it was estimated to have?

I guess this leaves me rather confused. No one will deny that the upgrades are simply not there. No one will deny that it is a BMW and therefore is viewed in the same performance light as the e36 325is. But will anyone agree, other than its owners, that the car is an orphan for BMW???? I am sure that no one will take my plight to hand...and I do expect to hear the exact opposite based mostly on marque...but, it is true.

My point is the ITAC is interested in 10/10ths cars being able to neutralize one another and let the race be a drivers race based on strengths of cars offsetting weakness of cars. I get it in principle. What I don't get though is what if it its assumed that 10/10ths is universally achievable but it really isn't. Unless the ITAC has done the research which time wouldn't permit the burden is left solely to the car owner.... it's hard (almost impossible) to prove something doesn't exist!! (images of an agnostic and a catholic having lunch come to mind :rolleyes: )

Sorry for the hijack on this thread...it is because I am struggling to find info from BMW too!!!!
Rob

65159

10/10th's IS achievable on every car. It just may be defined differently for every car. You have no adders in there for header/exhaust? Balance/blueprint? Head work? It's all perfect from the factory?

We have learned about Honda potential. We have learned about Porsche potential, we have learned about Rotory potential...build one, tell us the specs and we will have the info. If you are telling me that an optimized Z3 motor is all of a re-flash and a K&N...I would submit that you DO need to prove that conventional wisdom is wrong. The lack of a .040 piston is small potatos.

Just becasue you can't purchase something off the shelf doesn't mean it can't be made. Send your pullies to a machine shop and develop something. The header on my Miata project is being hand-made right now. Should cost me in the neighborhood of $550 by thetime it gets bolted on.

If you class a car based on 'what's available', then it comes in too light and people start making parts - and then you have an overdog. The hot set-up for a 13B ITS RX-7 is a home-grown and dyno-derived header/expansion chamber/mufler 'system' from an independent shop in Florida....see the issue?

I understand the frustration, but also understand the implication of not classing it at it's ultimate potential...some are just harder to get to...

AB

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 04:46 PM
10/10th's IS achievable on every car. It just may be defined differently for every car. You have no adders in there for header/exhaust? Balance/blueprint? Head work? It's all perfect from the factory?

We have learned about Honda potential. We have learned about Porsche potential, we have learned about Rotory potential...build on, tell us the specs and we will have the info.

AB

65160

Andy, Please forgive me. And I do mean all of this with respect. My stance is that I own the burden of proof in all situations concerning the CRB and that is where my dilemma begins:
Are you suggesting that a competitor has to dyno and develop only to find that his or her initial suspicion was true. To rephrase using specifics. The Z3 has a darn good (great) stock header anyone will agree (that maybe why no one makes an aftermarket). Am I to design and build or have a new header built and dyno to find out what I had already (KNEW) suspected just to satisfy anyone who is skeptical on the CRB. How deep do your pockets have to be if that is the case???

As I see it if I dyno with a stock header (which I know is good) and go to the CRB/ITAC the first and standard response will be....yes but you have a stock header. This is similar to your response to my post. It seems so easy for the CRB or ITAC to continually say "yes, but you didn't do xxxxx" in almost any situation. How much REALISTIC gain will be felt from balancing/blueprinting? I mean I will do it but lets call a spade a spade.

I totally get that the CRB/ITAC has to protect the masses from the one guy who'll show up with a 75K ITA car, but is this a real threat. The Z3 is not an unpopular, one-off car. There are plenty out there, but...they are a BMW orphan- pieced together from some of the companies less desirable off the shelf parts (e30 rear suspension for example).

If my suspicion is true then the only reson to bring an new car to game is for uniqueness. It's classification process is to most on the forum "mysterious" and the $$$$burden of proof$$$ is on the competitor to say that there was an overestimation in the "mysterious" classification process. It'd be more fun, cheaper, quicker and easier to go to Anthony and say build me an Acura. We'd all have a shot at a win then. I'm not opposed to spending $$$-I'm not married and I have no kids....that's not the issue. The issue is eliminating the "yes, but xxxx" from the equation. A sincere effort should be viewed as such.
Rob

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 02:13 PM

Rob,

No forgiveness neccessary. While we should talk more at the track, I suspect you are on the up and up. And I have a feeling you feel the ITAC is too. We just need more info.

I guess for me, the fact you "know" the stcok EM can't be improved upon isn't good enough (No offense intended). Take my situation. In building the IT Miata, I have info from Sunbelt that the cars will make only about 7 more hp than in SM trim...WHAT??? The EM on the MIata is like a little header...so off-the-shelf stuff isn't much, if any, of an improvement. So I had to go to a Production builder who makes headers for GT and Prod cars for a custom unit that is the latest and greatest. Gonna cost me but it needs to be done.

I talked to that builder today and when I was describing all the things you can do in IT prep, he was dismissing them as 'only one or two hp here and there" - well guess what? When I run in ITA in NER, I am going to need that cumulative 10 hp to even SEE the MSN Integra's and BBRacing 240SX's. Here is what I would say:

Custom header
Shave head (gain .5 of compression)
Port manifolds
Valve job
Balance/Blueprint
Fuel pressure regulator (Have you done dyno development?)
Turner makes their own pully sets - have them make one for the 4cyl Z3...

I know this is exactly what you didn't want to hear but how are we all supposed to believe that none of this makes a difference until someone does it? Why wouldn't it? Someone just wrote in and asked us class teh Integra Type R in ITS. At 195hp stock it would seem it is outside the envelope but that is as close to an IT motor from the factory as I have seen...are you saying that this Z3 motor is as developed from BMW?

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 06:13 PM
Rob,

No forgiveness neccessary. While we should talk more at the track, I suspect you are on the up and up. And I have a feeling you feel the ITAC is too. We just need more info.

I guess for me, the fact you "know" the stcok EM can't be improved upon isn't good enough (No offense intended). Take my situation. In building the IT Miata, I have info from Sunbelt that the cars will make only about 7 more hp than in SM trim...WHAT??? The EM on the MIata is like a little header...so off-the-shelf stuff isn't much, if any, of an improvement. So I had to go to a Production builder who makes headers for GT and Prod cars for a custom unit that is the latest and greatest. Gonna cost me but it needs to be done.

I talked to that builder today and when I was describing all the things you can do in IT prep, he was dismissing them as 'only one or two hp here and there" - well guess what? When I run in ITA in NER, I am going to need that cumulative 10 hp to even SEE the MSN Integra's and BBRacing 240SX's. Here is what I would say:

Custom header
Shave head (gain .5 of compression)
Port manifolds
Valve job
Balance/Blueprint
Fuel pressure regulator (Have you done dyno development?)
Turner makes their own pully sets - have them make one for the 4cyl Z3...

I know this is exactly what you didn't want to hear but how are we all supposed to believe that none of this makes a difference until someone does it? Why wouldn't it? Someone just wrote in and asked us class teh Integra Type R in ITS. At 195hp stock it would seem it is outside the envelope but that is as close to an IT motor from the factory as I have seen...are you saying that this Z3 motor is as developed from BMW?

65167

Andy,
I always love a discussion with you because you tell it straight. I'm pretty confident that BMW developed that motor pretty extensively. Travis (Washay) did a head shave to bring it to factory CR when he owned the car. All I've done is exhaust (stock header), K&N filter, installed an electric fan, blueprinted and flowed the injectors, fixed an unmetered air leak, and new plugs and wires. I'm hoping to get a baseline dyno pull soon. I know there is more to development than bolting on parts. I guess some of the frustration lies in knowing that that is sorta all the Honda/Acura and Nissan guys may need to do though. They can follow a "recipe for success" so to speak. Even the e36 guys have this luxury. I'm concerned because of my current petition to the CRB about wheels. The book says 15", the door jam says 15" the part #'s say 15" but the burden of proof is on me to show BMW option packages so that I don't take the best of this with the best of that....etc. If I am having this much difficulty with something so simple and black and white as classing the car with the 15",16" as the e36 then where do I begin finding info for the CRB on the m44 motor???
Is Flatout interested in developing and marketing parts for the m44.....there's obviously a need and demand!!!

PS What's a fuel pressure regulator?!?! :D :D
Rob

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 02:33 PM
Andy,
I always love a discussion with you because you tell it straight.

Thanks! Some BMW guys don't usually see it that way! :014:

The book says 15", the door jam says 15" the part #'s say 15" but the burden of proof is on me to show BMW option packages so that I don't take the best of this with the best of that....etc. If I am having this much difficulty with something so simple and black and white as classing the car with the 15",16" as the e36 then where do I begin finding info for the CRB on the m44 motor???

We are debating this one currently. We can't find any info that shows your car was available with 15" wheels from the factory as delivered to the US market. The info we see shows that 15" wheels for winter use were available...but we haven't determined if it was a dealer option or not. No window sticker or brochure to back up the 15" as part of a factory option package yet but we are still working on it. We want to allow it, but we need to be sure.

Is Flatout interested in developing and marketing parts for the m44.....there's obviously a need and demand!!!

PS What's a fuel pressure regulator?!?! :D :D
Rob

65169

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

AB

robits325is

11-11-2005, 03:15 PM

The US Spec Z3 1.9 was only available with 16" wheels. 15" wheels were available in non-US markets.

Banzai240

11-11-2005, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 06:33 PM
I guess some of the frustration lies in knowing that that is sorta all the Honda/Acura and Nissan guys may need to do though. They can follow a "recipe for success" so to speak.
65169

Rob (Z3 Rob :D )

Please don't be fooled into thinking this... If there is a recipe... it's a recipe for SECOND place... I've seen what the top Nissan builders go through to get things just right, and it's far from a recipe... it's a lot of fine details and rubbing here and there that adds up to an overall package that is very good...

Not too many IT cars out there that can truely "bolt-on" and go to the front...

On Pistons... Weisco or any number of other manufactures will make you ANY piston you want, and DEVES or Total Seal, etc., will make you any ring you want, so essentially, it boils down to how much $$ you have... Just a "benefit" of getting to choose your own race car... ;)

As for the Z3 wheels... The info that Rob (325i Rob) posted is what we are finding... Based on the current rules, the wheels would have had to have been delivered on the car and not an optional purchase item available from the dealer... Basically, 15" "winter tires/wheels" don't count... Sorry about that, but that's the way the rules work in this case...

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by robits325is@Nov 11 2005, 07:15 PM
The US Spec Z3 1.9 was only available with 16" wheels. 15" wheels were available in non-US markets.

65173

Can this be proven definitively? If so what is the source?
If it is a difinitive:
For sale:
4 15x7 Kosei K1
4 15x7 OZ racing wheels

Wanted:
Any 16x7 BMW lightweight aftermarket race wheel under $300 per wheel of comparable quality to the Kosei K1. Good Luck

Is this considered bolt on or do I need to work with a manufacturer and "develop" a wheel?

How many competitive cars (top 20 even) in ITA run factory wheels as their main race wheel? How many cars in ITA run wheels under 300 a pop?
As soon as you jump to the 16" diameter most widths go to 7.5 minimum.

I'll trade a comparably developed ITS 325is at 3100lbs for my ITA Z3 with spares package.....any takers????

Rob "sorry for the sarcasm but I'm feeling penalized by my car choice" Breault

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 04:06 PM

A 30 second trip to Tirerack.com showed ASA AR1's in 16x7 for 169 each for the Z3 1.9.

http://www.tirerack.com/images/wheels/asa/swap/asa_ar1_ci3_l.jpg

AB

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 04:09 PM

Just searched Ebay (again). I can get all the "Alutec" 16x7 wheels I want for $439 for a set of 4. Hub centric ...I think not. How many guys want to put their 2675 lbs racecar on those. I'm sorry but my life is too important....and quite frankly I work too hard for my money to spend 3000 for 8 race wheels without tires. Bring the spec 16"diameter wheel to 7.5" width and you won't hear a complaint out of me. I can buy those, they don't need to be "developed". I don't think that I'm out of line here. If this is not entry level wheel to wheel road racing what is?
I feel that it takes a certain amount of courage to ask the tough questions and challenge the establishment. The Z3 is a newly classed car fitting into old rules. Sometimes evolution needs to ensue....note- evolution not rules creep. The parameters of change need to be explored....who out there is teaching their kids computer technology on a Commodore 64??
Here's one for you where technology has surpassed the rulebook. If we remove our wheel sensors per the rulebook the computer goes into limp mode. The car needs at least one wheel sensor RR to function. The rules don't alow for this (they also don't allow for a 16x7.5" wheel). We will be working on this change soon and I'm sure it will be approved because it's pretty straight forward.

Again, the burden of proof totally lies with me. I'm having trouble too, so that means the car didn't come with 15" wheels. That is definitive. Not very conclusive in my mind.
I'm sorry but I'm seriously thinking about selling my car and going to an ITS 325is (at 3100lbs) rather than "developing" it this offseason. At least I'll have the masses on my side. If I do stay with the Z3 I'll at least have the priveledge of "developing" wheels. Who knows maybe I can re-invent the wheel while I'm at it!!!!

Rob "still sarcastic about the whole thing" Breault

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 08:06 PM
A 30 second trip to Tirerack.com showed ASA AR1's in 16x7 for 169 each for the Z3 1.9.

http://www.tirerack.com/images/wheels/asa/swap/asa_ar1_ci3_l.jpg

AB

65177

Race wheels?? Last time I called about those they weren't even available...furthermore the salesman "WOULD NOT" recommend them in that application. No thanks.....

Then there's the Team Dynamics.....been waiting over a year for the 8 I ordered from (unnamed BMW retailer). I sure would hate to bend one at a race and need a replacement in a hurry....bye, bye season. I'm not casting stones only trying to shed light on the facts for everyone to see.
Very, very frustrating!!!

R

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 04:16 PM
Race wheels?? Last time I called about those they weren't even available...furthermore the salesman "WOULD NOT" recommend them in that application. No thanks.....

Then there's the Team Dynamics.....been waiting over a year for the 8 I ordered from (unnamed BMW retailer). I sure would hate to bend one at a race and need a replacement in a hurry....bye, bye season. I'm not casting stones only trying to shed light on the facts for everyone to see.
Very, very frustrating!!!

R

65180

Some will tell you to run the 15's under the premise that you think they are legal...then it would take a protest to ding you...you have a stock Ring and Pinion? Who would protest?

I hear your frustration. Have you called Circle or Panasport?

Try here: http://www.circleracing.com/Merchant2/merc...ategory_Code=16 (http://www.circleracing.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=CR&Product_Code=82670&Category_Code=16)

AB

robits325is

11-11-2005, 04:36 PM

We have some 16x7 Forgeline Race wheels in stock. Very nice, very strong and less than $300 per wheel. Custom offset for E-36/E-46 cars. No hub centering rings or spacers required. Right here in Connecticut.

Rob

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 08:23 PM
you have a stock Ring and Pinion? Who would protest?

AB

65181

Totally stock 3.44 LSD only ratio available for the car with a 5 spd.
R

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by robits325is@Nov 11 2005, 08:36 PM
We have some 16x7 Forgeline Race wheels in stock. Very nice, very strong and less than $300 per wheel. Custom offset for E-36/E-46 cars. No hub centering rings or spacers required. Right here in Connecticut.

Rob

65182

Can you send me some info on them- a model # perhaps. I'm hoping not 299.99 :D

Rob, maybe we should talk about what can be done with this car for IT I know that you and Jeff have a decent amount of experience with them in SS trim. In fact I own Jeff's old motor as part of my spares package!!
Rob

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 05:35 PM
Totally stock 3.44 LSD only ratio available for the car with a 5 spd.
R

65186

WOW. What are your options? I will be going from a stock 4.10 to a 4.88 on the Miata. Betting there is a lot to gain in lap times there...especially at NHIS...

AB

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 09:42 PM
WOW. What are your options? I will be going from a stock 4.10 to a 4.88 on the Miata. Betting there is a lot to gain in lap times there...especially at NHIS...

AB

65188

Andy,
We can put other ratios in as long as they are from a small case diff. (non 325) put the availability isn't so great because of BMW Motorsport being uninterested in continuing to sell R&P's in the US anymore. I'm sure you've heard about that.

But to echo your post I keep asking myself "wow, what are my options"
The other problem is if you go too steep on the diff ratio you're going to be in 5th gear a lot... rev limiter is 6700. Reflashing the computer will bring it to about 7200. I'm curious I've never been to the Glen....me thinks it may favor the car as is. NHIS doesn't, LRP doesn't play to its strengths either (not enough braking zones). The car has great brakes no doubt about it. It's sorta a kamikaze ride to be constantly going for the outbreaking maneuver though, besides most people block that anyway...it's easy to see it coming. It also gets dangerous if it doesn't work!! :D

Rob

Joe Harlan

11-11-2005, 07:13 PM

Just a quick note: There is no way that a stock exhaust header cannot be improved on. The OE stuff does not focus on performance other than to make a target sales number and control cockpit noise. An inline 6 with a proper 6 into 2 stepped header will make HP and torque, it just takes money.

PS....A 3:44 gear isn't even good for getting across town let alone racing a car. ;)

nlevine

11-11-2005, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 10:58 PM
Andy,
We can put other ratios in as long as they are from a small case diff. (non 325) put the availability isn't so great because of BMW Motorsport being uninterested in continuing to sell R&P's in the US anymore. I'm sure you've heard about that.

65191

I put in a 3.64:1, custom spec'd and built (and I waited a while to get it, too). Everybody I talked to would build anything for the 6-cyl cars - took me a while to find the one guy who would even consider building someting for a 4-cyl BMW. After the advent of the 325i, the 4-cylinder BMWs have been largely overlooked in any performance guise.

I think that until more of us "trend setters" (I like that term better than "gluttons for punishment") start demanding the parts, the BMW aftermarket will remain happy churning out stuff for the M20, M50, and "S" motors - they're the ones perceived as the choices for motorsports. This is why I also read the "oddball" car forum - I can relate.

That said, I still would like a weight reduction, though.. 2675 is a tad excessive for the hampster-power we have, and a bit portly considering the competition (and adding back the stock seat with motors, the stereo amp, and speakers to make weight was fun, too).

Rob, we should chat off-line and come up with a winter development game plan - perhaps we could find sources who would build two of something, rather than just one.

-noam (the other Z3 in NER)

Geo

11-11-2005, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 10 2005, 12:41 PM
Sounds like a trip to the tech shed could be VERY interesting for a BMW driver who is under protest for such things... :(

Unfortunatly, I'm not sure that aftermarket suppliers, or BMW Motorsports division, etc., can be used as definitive confirmation of the factory specs... I find it hard to understand how people are rebuilding these things if they don't have the factory specs... Surely you aren't just taking the word of Turner Motorsports or ??? are you??? I know their pistons say "Exact dimensions of the factory pistons except for bore diameter... Perfect for ITS"... But how can you be sure? How are THEY sure???

Interesting issue... http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/33.gif

65101

Oh my....

You should read about the hellabaloo in BMWCCA racing this year regarding tech of pistons and the fallout. It was so bad it was labeled "Pistongage." I kid you not. I know a lot of the folks here know what I'm talking about.

Geo

11-11-2005, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 10 2005, 02:59 PM

I've sort of resigned myself to the fact that I cannot have a legally prepped IT motor....at least not one with the information I've found so far. The IT legal parts that the Japanese guys have access to just don't seem to exsist for my particular application. My motor will remain untouched at this point, and I will probably always run a "bone" stock motor for this very reason. My opinion is that is why the BMWCCA rulebook is more liberal than the SCCA GCR.

I'm very curious to see what Sunbelt would say if I called stating that I wanted a potent, legal Z3 (m44) motor.....hmmmm........HOW MUCH ARE YOU WILLING TO SPEND?? I'm sure would be their response. I'm assuming it would be TOTALLY cost prohibitive ?20K? because of all the custom manufacturing of parts that would meet factory specs.

If this seems like hogwash to any lurking BMW guy then please point me in the direction of someone who has IT LEGAL parts/knowledge for the m44 motor.....We can't even purchase underdrive pulleys, chips..yeah right the car doesn't have any! Try a header....better off making one from scratch.(if not help me get the legal race weight at least down to the 2559lbs factory spec!!) Thanks in advance. (sorry for the bellyaching :blink: )

Rob

65111

You should log into Bimmerforums and follow the piston saga there.

I think SCCA IT rules are actually more liberal. Basically the rules at the beginning of the year in BMWCCA were essentially the same as IT for the prepared class. But, upon boroscope inspection someone was declared illegal due to a slight variationi in the valve reliefs, yet there is no factory spec for these reliefs.

Now in BMWCCA prepared you can only have pistons in the sizes available from the factory. It was an ugly mess for a while.

Geo

11-11-2005, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 12:29 PM
The Z3 has a darn good (great) stock header anyone will agree (that maybe why no one makes an aftermarket). Am I to design and build or have a new header built and dyno to find out what I had already (KNEW) suspected just to satisfy anyone who is skeptical on the CRB.

I'm sorry. I'm not buying. There is a similar common belief in the 944 world. LOTS of 944 racers will tell you that the stock header is within 1-2 hp of the best header available. I mean, people will swear on a stack of bibles and put their first born up for collateral. This is because what is commonly available does only add 1-2 hp MAX. However, I happen to know that there IS a header available that will add 8 hp.

You may indeed be 100% correct, but until someone undergoes an all out development program it's not going to fly. Do you have to build and try several prototype hand-made headers to find one that works? People in IT do it.

Now, if Sunbelt comes back and says this engine, built all out with MoTeC tuning, etc will only make a 20% increase, then that's a different story, especially if it's backed up elsewhere. Harsh, but true, and that's the way it HAS to be. Cars have to be classified based upon their potential and if their potential is unknown it has to be speculated upon based upon known factors. Off-the-shelf stuff is not state of the art when it comes to racing 99% of the time.

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by Geo@Nov 12 2005, 12:01 AM
Cars have to be classified based upon their potential and if their potential is unknown it has to be speculated upon based upon known factors.
65200

Define a "known factor" on a car that is newly classified and just finished its first full year of IT eligibility. Apples to apple or apples to oranges. A Z3 compared to a known Integra is apples to oranges with all due respect. No one truly knows the potential of a Z3. Myself included admittedly. My stance is based on the fact that its "potential" is overestimated relative to its weight. My opinion is based on the fact that I (and Noam, and the 2 other guys in the US ambitious enough to take on this car) have done more research on it than anyone in the ITAC or CRB that's all. My point is that the huge cost and countless hours needed to prove this point are solely the burden of the competitor. The ITAC can use a (forgive me) "mysterious" formula, have the power of veto ( by saying "yes but you don't have Motec or xxx) and it's the carowners responsibility to $$$prove$$$ them wrong if that is possible. I guess it's the ambiguity that confuses me If this is just my naivity please forgive me. It's never been my contention to offend anyone. I feel that this is sort of a case of "you can't fight Capitol Hill".

If I am out of line please just tell me what % increase was used in classifying the Z3, and what evidence was used to derive that number.

PS iI too run a passenger seat and spare tire to make weight.

Rob "still trying to learn the system" Breault

Andy Bettencourt

11-11-2005, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 09:42 PM
No one truly knows the potential of a Z3. Myself included admittedly. My stance is based on the fact that its "potential" is overestimated relative to its weight. My opinion is based on the fact that I (and Noam, and the 2 other guys in the US ambitious enough to take on this car) have done more research on it than anyone in the ITAC or CRB that's all. My point is that the huge cost and countless hours needed to prove this point are solely the burden of the competitor. The ITAC can use a (forgive me) "mysterious" formula, have the power of veto ( by saying "yes but you don't have Motec or xxx) and it's the carowners responsibility to $$$prove$$$ them wrong if that is possible. I guess it's the ambiguity that confuses me If this is just my naivity please forgive me. It's never been my contention to offend anyone. I feel that this is sort of a case of "you can't fight Capitol Hill".

If I am out of line please just tell me what % increase was used in classifying the Z3, and what evidence was used to derive that number.

PS iI too run a passenger seat and spare tire to make weight.

Rob "still trying to learn the system" Breault

65205

Rob,

No issues here. You are on a journey and are asking questions as you come to them...so be it. The great thing about this ITAC is that we have a process that we can (at the very least) defend.

1. If you don't know the true potential of the Z3, then I don't see how you can state that the weight is wrong. What basis could you? If the true potential is not known, then *I* submit that a conservative approach to classification should be taken. Not one that handicapps the car, but one that puts it in the target zone - without potential for creating 'THE CAR'. REMEMBER, the cars you see now on top of ITA have NOT been run through this process. We are trying to get thet approved at the BoD level as we type.

2. It's "potential" is key to setting it's weight. IIRC, we used the standard 25% increase with IT prep to estimate HP. It's a very common increase with the mods we can do. Some get lower, some get higher, but neither can be proven until development has been done. Curb weight has nothing to do with race weight...just to reiterate that.

3. I am glad you know more about the Z3 than anyone on the committee, you should. I know more about 2nd gen RX-7's and Miata's than anyone on the committee...we should all be experts in our own 'field'.

4. You can fight the ITAC/CRB all you want, but I contend that you haven't armed yourself with enough bullets to shoot any holes in our 'estimate'.

Keep 'em coming...a healthy debate is what this site is for...

AB

Doc Bro

11-11-2005, 11:29 PM

Andy,
I am humbled by your response as I had hoped to be...I guess.. Your points are more than valid and I knew them going into this discussion. I am not at all embarassed by my "green-ness". I need to understand the process before I can mount an all out attack on the establishment.
I would much rather be the guy that says the M44 motor is capable of 180hp......prove me wrong.
In my opinion that guy is the ITAC. I hope that that illustrates my fruastration.

I love racing, I love spending race weekends with my friends and family, I love knowing I run a legal car. I would also love to have a shot at hoisting a checkered out my left window. :happy204:

If you look back on my post no one has responded to my hard questions. How is 25% gain assigned arbitrarily to all cars? How does one prove something is not possible or does not exist without spending a small fortune? This fortune will not yield a hp gain but just merely a rule change. It seems like guilty until proven innocent to me....
I do applaud the members of the ITAC specifically you George, Jake and Darin as I do believe as gentlemen and competitors your only goal is the spirit of fair competition. However, reel the Acura's, Honda's and Nissan's in soon or take my post with more than a grain of salt. The Z3 is a newly classed car and really for all practicality doesn't stand a chance against a "spec Serra" with all do respect.
Please don't let another season go by that so blatantly favors the Acura's, Nissan's and Honda's.

Thank you,
Rob

Joe Harlan

11-12-2005, 12:28 AM

Please don't let another season go by that so blatantly favors the Acura's, Nissan's and Honda's.

Thank you,
Rob

Rob I can follow your argument even in the wrong thread right up until you make it personal toward other marques that have done their homework and spent bundles of money development and test time to get their. You would like to be made a front runner in a showroom stock car and that ain't gonna happen. I would suggest you start a thread with some basic facts about the car YOUchoose to drive and offer up some information on the car like engine size factory ratings and capacity, Valve size, engine design, Single Vanos double Vanos ect. I will give you a word of advice that you really should consider. Being a pioneer is gonna be hard and expensive and all the questioning of the adhoc or the CRB will not make that part any better. The facts are plain and simple and others tend to be to poilte to say it. You have not put forth much effort in the development of this car to make any case that the estimates are wrong. I don't believe I have seen any dyno numbers provided for your car and it's list of developmental changes to get their. There has to be a place to start and I think Adhoc has worked very hard to come up with a reasoned set of guidelines to work from. NO SYSTEM WILL EVER BE PERFECT and fortunately there is a little room for correction now. (thanks to the current open group of open minded adhoc and crb folks)

I would propose that you take a long hard look at the idea of developing a new model car cause from your posts I would suggest you don't have the stomach for it.

Doc Bro

11-12-2005, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 12 2005, 04:28 AM
Rob I can follow your argument even in the wrong thread right up until you make it personal toward other marques that have done their homework and spent bundles of money development and test time to get their. You would like to be made a front runner in a showroom stock car and that ain't gonna happen. I would suggest you start a thread with some basic facts about the car YOUchoose to drive and offer up some information on the car like engine size factory ratings and capacity, Valve size, engine design, Single Vanos double Vanos ect. I will give you a word of advice that you really should consider. Being a pioneer is gonna be hard and expensive and all the questioning of the adhoc or the CRB will not make that part any better. The facts are plain and simple and others tend to be to poilte to say it. You have not put forth much effort in the development of this car to make any case that the estimates are wrong. I don't believe I have seen any dyno numbers provided for your car and it's list of developmental changes to get their. There has to be a place to start and I think Adhoc has worked very hard to come up with a reasoned set of guidelines to work from. NO SYSTEM WILL EVER BE PERFECT and fortunately there is a little room for correction now. (thanks to the current open group of open minded adhoc and crb folks)

I would propose that you take a long hard look at the idea of developing a new model car cause from your posts I would suggest you don't have the stomach for it.

65213

Joe,
You must not have read the evolution of this forum...... I hope. You must drive one of the aforementioned cars. Looking at the numbers they don't fit...period. No ITAC member will argue this. I've been quite clear on my mods and true I have no dyno #'s I wil soon....Forgive me my mouth piece is in front of my dyno schedule. The results will be posted as I intend to be as public as possible. I guess Joe, with all due respect I can't follow your train of thought. My intention was to understand the system if you read my post I was never accusatory. I was looking for fairness in regards to the system. I am sorry if you missed that. I have no regeret or remorse for saying that Acura's, Honda's or Nissan's have not been through the new process and therefore have an advantage. I doubt you will have many believers....I am sorry but it is true.

With all do respect,

Rob

Joe Harlan

11-12-2005, 01:01 AM

No Rob, I don't race any of the cars you are saying have a built in advantage. If thats how you think then you are beat before you even get off the truck. I have built many nissans and raced against many acura's and honda's. The reson the development has gone so well on those cars is their was lots of folks doing them. Th e ITA 240sx was not a real popular piece until Stretch spend the time and money to develop one and prove it could win. Sorry but I did read the whole thread which started out as a thread about rings and that's part of the response you got from me.

Z3_GoCar

11-12-2005, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 09:34 AM
[SIZE=7]EXACTLY MY POINT!!
........
+6 to reflash the computer (given it matches to the ambient conditions every weekend)

.........

Sorry for the hijack on this thread...it is because I am struggling to find info from BMW too!!!!
Rob

65159

Hey Rob,

Look what I found on the OBDII

318ti OBDII Article (http://www.318ti.org/notebook/OBD-II/index.html)

Looks like any attempt to change OBDII is fruitless for the M-44. I suspose that's why J.Conforti hasn't produced any software for it, and the only thing Dinan gives you is an increased rev limit and nothing else. I know someone who was all prepared to buy the Dinan software and was talked out of it by the sales guy. Best thing that can be done to the M44 is to plant the Downing Antlanta Supercharger kit on it :bash_1_:

I'm saying a custom header won't give you much when that's not what limits the engine. Actually the stock manifold is a 4-2-1 and tuned to go with the two stage intake. which means that it's about as good as it gets optimation wise. I think the real limit in this engine is the cams/lifters/valve springs. If we could tune for more revs then we'd see an increase in naturally asperated power. Bottom end wise I'd think it could routinely handle 7-7.5k rpms given a good set of baffles and an accusump.

James

Z3_GoCar

11-12-2005, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 01:06 PM
A 30 second trip to Tirerack.com showed ASA AR1's in 16x7 for 169 each for the Z3 1.9.

http://www.tirerack.com/images/wheels/asa/swap/asa_ar1_ci3_l.jpg

AB

65177

Those are Korean knock offs of BBS wheels made under license. They weight 21lbs each, not exactlyrace weight. You'd be better off staying with the style 35's that came with the 1.9'er which are about 17lbs each.

James

Joe Harlan

11-12-2005, 01:39 AM

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 11 2005, 10:19 PM
Hey Rob,

Look what I found on the OBDII

318ti OBDII Article (http://www.318ti.org/notebook/OBD-II/index.html)

Looks like any attempt to change OBDII is fruitless for the M-44. I suspose that's why J.Conforti hasn't produced any software for it, and the only thing Dinan gives you is an increased rev limit and nothing else. I know someone who was all prepared to buy the Dinan software and was talked out of it by the sales guy. Best thing that can be done to the M44 is to plant the Downing Antlanta Supercharger kit on it :bash_1_:

I'm saying a custom header won't give you much when that's not what limits the engine. Actually the stock manifold is a 4-2-1 and tuned to go with the two stage intake. which means that it's about as good as it gets optimation wise. I think the real limit in this engine is the cams/lifters/valve springs. If we could tune for more revs then we'd see an increase in naturally asperated power. Bottom end wise I'd think it could routinely handle 7-7.5k rpms given a good set of baffles and an accusump.

James

65219

Thats a start. I guess you guys think that all the time we spent cracking the code on the Nissans years ago was easy....Oh and there is always the Motec option.

Geo

11-12-2005, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 11 2005, 10:19 PM
I'm saying a custom header won't give you much when that's not what limits the engine. Actually the stock manifold is a 4-2-1 and tuned to go with the two stage intake. which means that it's about as good as it gets optimation wise.

65219

And how many headers have been designed and dyno tested to come to this conclusion? My guess is this is "common knowledge" just like with the 944, yet there ARE headers that make more than common knowledge believes.

My point is that you're saying you're done before you've undergone any development and testing work in this area.

Your request is not well founded.