ITR BMW'S IN BMWCCA

[BMW RACER]

Right now ITS spec 325s can run in BMWCCA racing in JP with no restrictor. Any idea if ITR spec BMW will be classified for JP?

[dj10]

Right now ITS spec 325s can run in BMWCCA racing in JP with no restrictor. Any idea if ITR spec BMW will be classified for JP? [/b]


IT rules require the replacement be stuffed into the oem case.

James, lets get this rule revised.

[gpeluso]

I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE JP, BUT YOU NEVER KNOW. AN ITR CAR WOULD HAVE LESS ENGINE MODS(CAMS) , SMALLER BRAKES , BUT AN ITR CAR WOULD BE 135 LBS(ABOUT) LESS THAN A JP CAR. I STILL THINK A FULL BLOWN JP CAR WOULD BE MUCH FASTER. WHERE THINGS GET SCREWED-UP IS THE RESULTS OF RACES. SCCA DRIVERS TEND TO BE FASTER EVEN THOUGH THEIR CARS ARE UNABLE TO HAVE AS MANY PERFORMANCE MODS (ITS CAMPARED TO JP). BMWCCA SHOULD REACT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO EVEN HELP THEIR CAR COUNTS, BUT IT WILL PROBABLY BE A DELAYED REACTION. ONE REALLY CRAZY THING ABOUT BMWCCA IS THE FACT THAT THE CAR CLASSES ARE SO FAST. A JP CAR IS GETTING TO BE ONE OF THE SLOWER CLASSES IN BMWCCA. I THINK THE SPEED IN BMWCCA IS GETTING SCARY AND I WONDER IF IT REALLY BENEFITS BMWCCA DRIVERS SKILL LEVELS.

BMWCCA PUT THE 325 E36 ITR CARS IN JP.................


GREG

[Z3_GoCar]

Hey John,

This very question prompted my "how long on ITR??" thread. I will write a rules clarification now that ITR is in the SCCA Fastrack for next year. It may help motivate me to get my car in compliance with IT rules as it's now needs to be dialed back in some areas. Running DOT rubber, I'm not even close to other DM cars who're running Yoko slicks, not to mention the cam, intake, and custom rods. My real bind is engine mangement, no matter which direction I go it's going to be expensive to make compliant with either rule sets. Prepared rules don't allow replacement of oem OBDII, and IT rules require the replacement be stuffed into the oem case.

James

[Fastfred92]

IMHO there is no logical reason ITR e36 cars should not be in JP ( BMWCCR ). They are allowed to run ( ITS style ) now without restrictor so only the weight change and 17" wheels have changed. As somebody has already pointed out a true 100% build JP car would blow away a ITS, ITR car even with the weight difference.

[lateapex911]

How much power would a full JP engine make? What wheels are they allowed?

[gpeluso]

How much power would a full JP engine make? What wheels are they allowed?
[/b]



I would say a fulll blown JP car has 20-25 more hp and they too run 17 in wheels and big brake kit are allowed.

[mlytle]

I would say a fulll blown JP car has 20-25 more hp and they too run 17 in wheels and big brake kit are allowed.
[/b]

concur. engines in jp are basically it prep, plus cams and injectors, and chipped stock ecu. but they can also do light flywheels, big brakes and wings/splitters. i just ran with bmwcca at road atanta and was shocked at how much faster the jp cars were in the high speed turns. they were flat out through 12 and 1, while us its cars were feathering a bit to stay on the track.

its car advantages are spherical bearings in the suspension, aftermarket ecu in stock box and lighter weight.

i actually submitted a bmwcca rule change suggestion during the draft rule review period in august that would have dropped references to it a,b,c, and s in the classification wording and just leave it at "it cars will be classed in the appropriate prepared classes", but the suggestion was rejected. if it had gone through then the itr cars would have automatically gone to prepared. oh well.

to bmwcca's credit, they reacted pretty quickly last spring when scca was screwing with sir's for the e36's. a mid year rule change was done to allow running in prepared without the restrictor. i can't get mad at them for not accomodating itr cars in prepared immediately. the 2007 bmwcca rules came out the same time that scca ok'd the itr class for 2007. unfortunately scca crossover cars are not very high on the priority list in bmwcca. sometimes they seem to treat us more as an annoyance.

marshall

[Z3_GoCar]

I just sent in the rules clarification, so we'll see if there's any comment on 'R in Prepared :cavallo:
Marshall, I suspect to hear that there won't be a problem with most of the R-BMW's. I suspect the oposition was because ITE will allow anything with DOT rubber on it.


James

[gpeluso]

I just sent in the rules clarification, so we'll see if there's any comment on 'R in Prepared :cavallo:
Marshall, I suspect to hear that there won't be a problem with most of the R-BMW's. I suspect the oposition was because ITE will allow anything with DOT rubber on it.
James
[/b]


Great point, never thought of ITE creating that situation.

Greg

[mlytle]

I just sent in the rules clarification, so we'll see if there's any comment on 'R in Prepared :cavallo:
Marshall, I suspect to hear that there won't be a problem with most of the R-BMW's. I suspect the oposition was because ITE will allow anything with DOT rubber on it.
James
[/b]
i had specifically put other wording in my suggestion that disallowed ITE crossover into prepared....
basically, it a,b,c,s,r are nationally recognized regional classes with specs in the gcr. ite is a regional only catch all with no specs in gcr. my proposal was only for the "national" regional it classes.