In a couple of the other threads in Rules or Tech or both, they mention the 325's running 250+ crank HP in IT trim. Is this true? Thats a pretty neat trick, if true. Is this just the e36 bashers making claims or is the reality? Thanks.
Ken
Printable View
In a couple of the other threads in Rules or Tech or both, they mention the 325's running 250+ crank HP in IT trim. Is this true? Thats a pretty neat trick, if true. Is this just the e36 bashers making claims or is the reality? Thanks.
Ken
The distillation, after much "questioning negotiation" narrowed it down to the neighborhood of 217 RWHP.
Neat trick indeed.........
if you have one.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited February 19, 2003).]
215+ RWHP is around 253 crank hp using a 15% loss figure. These engines ROCK when you figure them out. BimmerWorld has done just that.Quote:
Originally posted by vehdyn:
In a couple of the other threads in Rules or Tech or both, they mention the 325's running 250+ crank HP in IT trim. Is this true? Thats a pretty neat trick, if true. Is this just the e36 bashers making claims or is the reality? Thanks.
Ken
I really think the straight 6 is just a great design. Look at the power the BMW M3 makes in E46 form - 333hp - NA!
And the 2.4, 2.6 and 2.8's of the original Z-cars - timeless.
Through a couple turbos on one and you have the monster known as the Supra TT. I have seen over 400rwhp with bolt ons.
Gotta love it!
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Yes the new e46 M3 motor is a straight six, however, the similarities between and 93 e36 325 and it are few. The consensus I have heard today from people who have built legal IT BMW's is about 220-225 crank HP and about 200 RWHP. More power to whomever can squeeze out that extra 25 ponies, but could it just be rumor?
Ken
The driveline losses are higher than 18%. Unfortunately the guys that make the most power will never give correct numbers. I have a car for sale that I built for the ARRC that you can dyno and resell if interested...
I have no idea how much power the Z cars and RX-7s make. I know if I asked I wouldn't get a real answer or if I did, it isn't going to tell me anymore than I already know about how the car performs on the track.
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
James, do you perceive the Zs and the RX7s as being down on power to the 325is, or equal? Or even greater?
I'll tell you what you want to know. People with nothing to hide usually do.Quote:
Originally posted by James Clay:
I have no idea how much power the Z cars and RX-7s make. I know if I asked I wouldn't get a real answer or if I did, it isn't going to tell me anymore than I already know about how the car performs on the track.
My motor makes 170 at the wheels. Full bore S5 'built' 13B's in 2nd gen RX-7's are around 180rwhp from what I have learned. Now the 130ft/lbs is another horrifying issue... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
I guess what I should have said is I don't care how much power other cars are making other than the E36 cars because that is the only one I compare directly to. And quite honestly, I don't actually care about other E36 cars.Quote:
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
I'll tell you what you want to know. People with nothing to hide usually do.
And I have nothing to hide - but I have no ointention of setting a benchmark for others to work toward.
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
I know you guys don't have anything to hide. I just reacted to the notion that people won't tell you (or me) what kind of power they are making when they know. It stinks of CHEATING.Quote:
Originally posted by James Clay:
And I have nothing to hide - but I have no ointention of setting a benchmark for others to work toward.
And when YOU guys protect YOUR E36 numbers, you have additional agenda. I would bet you guys are afraid to let people know the actual numbers because they would cause a riot in ITS. Not your problem, its ours.
Thanks for being on this board. It's nice to have the top builders represented to clear up grey areas.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
I've heard 225 RW HP at a local shop shortly followed by an RX7 at more than 40 HP less. I suspect the BW E36's are higher.
No rules other than weight can begin to equalize this. The older technology of the RX7 EFI system severely limits it's open ECU potential as compared to the E36 or other newer cars, yet to be classified. Not all EFI systems are created equally!
Jeff
No way. 225 RWHP? That is just talk. So using James' 18% loss number (remember he said it is actually higher), that means he is getting 265 HP out of 2.5 liters with stock cams? THat would be a pretty slick to add 75 ponies from stock. If this thread keeps going, I am sure the number will climb to 275 soon.
Ken
If you read between the lines well, the number that wasn't "denied" was in the 215 RWHP range. I'm sure that some motors are a strong 215, while others can't quite get there, but I doubt seriously, (after reading what the guys who build them say) that 225 RWHP is a reality. Urban myth.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
I don't believe that cars prepared by Bimmerworld (or any other really reputable shop) can AFFORD to cheat - they are too big of a target.
I understand James' reticence to divulge what he knows but - again - I don't believe that it "smacks of CHEATING". It smacks of knowing that the 325 makes monster HP without having to cheat. I will TOTALLY agree, having had a chance to watch them on the track at Summit last summer, that it is not all about power with this car. I would suggest that some of their strength comes from a really good rear suspension design that lets them use it. It's the sum of the parts.
However (and with due respect), telling the world how many horsies a properly tweaked 325 powerplant makes is NOT giving up the farm. It would do me no good at all to know that James' car made 210 or 270hp at the flywheel, without having the knowledge and wherewithal to find it. It might, truth be told, piss off a lot of people but (a) not anyone who isn't already upset, and (B) probably not to any greater degree.
Kirk
Quote:
Originally posted by vehdyn:
No way. 225 RWHP? That is just talk. So using James' 18% loss number (remember he said it is actually higher), that means he is getting 265 HP out of 2.5 liters with stock cams? THat would be a pretty slick to add 75 ponies from stock. If this thread keeps going, I am sure the number will climb to 275 soon.
Ken
The probelem here is that nobody with a maxed out BimmerWorld 325 will post their ACTUAL RWHP numbers. Me thinks it's because they are so high we will all screem even louder.
I just got done looking at the thread we had before you were on the board. 215rwhp is the number that wasn't denied. 215 / .82 = 262 crank hp.
And guess what??? The BW contingent admits to there being more power to be had. FACT.
The key is the chip. If you are running the stock chip, you are nowhere near these numbers.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
History question: Was the E36 classified BEFORE the ECU rule change??? Or after?
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
By no means am I assuming James is cheating. Just the opposite. I think others are speculating, exaggerating, etc. Having been around the Bimmer scene for awhile and trading research for some time with other owners, I think the estimates are pretty high. My assumptions are intake, exhaust, and custom chip. If he can do it, more power to him. No pun intended. (Well, maybe just a little bit)
Cheers,
Ken
My bad if I implied the BW guys are cheating. In fact, it has been proven that the stuff they brought to the AARC was legal.
I was trying to say that the numbers are so good that they are having a hard time with actually telling people for fear it will validate the suspisions based on actual on track data.
The hp numbers in my previous post are accurate based on posts by BW car owners. They have unlocked the secret to power. For those who don't believe it, race next to one, I have.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Given the weight advantage over an E36, this is pretty equal to a near-perfect M50 motor with intake, header/exhaust and chip.Quote:
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Full bore S5 'built' 13B's in 2nd gen RX-7's are around 180rwhp from what I have learned.
AB
I know from my own results that it is quite a bit less than 215 hp. I can't speak for BW.
Dan
Dan,
The data might work for your car, but a SpeedSource RX-7 at 180 and a BimmerWorld 325 at 215 are light years apart. And that is before we even talk torque. I bet there is OVER 100ft/lbs difference.
And we are only talking 170 pounds different in min weight.
The comparision is top dog against top dog.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
If we take 215 RWHP as an agreed upon #, we get a power to weight ratio of 13.26. Assuming 180 for the RX-7 we wind up with 14.90.
hey- I wouldn't mind having 14.90, as Im at 19.3 (actually, according to my dyno, 22.45~) and my class leaders are at 17.12.
Of course, if my competition had 13.26, I'd be worried...it's almost 2 pounds difference. Not insignificant.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
You guys discuss this just to depress me, right?Quote:
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">If we take 215 RWHP as an agreed upon #, we get a power to weight ratio of 13.26. Assuming 180 for the RX-7 we wind up with 14.90...</font>
GregA, draggin' ITS ass with a 17.8 FWHP-to-weight ratio
[This message has been edited by grega (edited February 22, 2003).]
egad!
I found another thread about the super powers living within the M50.
Robbie-finally coming back in from the garage from installing my new M50. This one looks so much nicer than the old one with the exploded head. Now if I can only get all those metal particles out of the intake I'll be just about set.
Robbie,
What I really want to get a look at is your GT3 (PS2) garage!!!
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
sure...give me your addy and I'll mail you one of my memory card backups. All the cars in that garage have the hp clearly stated. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif
Right now I'm using the CLK GTR but I still think the Castrol or Denso Supra is the best car in the game. That little IS300/Altezza is strangely one of my faves as well.
I do get some flack from some folks about playing that game all the time- mostly my fiance'- but I am 100% conviced it is realistic enough to truly sharpen certain skills needed in real racing. Jump in on one of those 2 hour enduros and work on keeping your lap times within 1 second lap to lap and you get a great consistancy drill.
Between the GenII, the Integra, and the Bimmer E46 you cna have some pretty cool ITS races in your own living room.
Robbie
http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif I love my PS2
GT3 rocks!
my favorit car (besides the F1 cars) has to be the...
1) S2000 LM
2) ZZII tomikira
3) WRX LM
4) Mazda GTP
how may of yall have gold on the last super licens test? I am yet to meet anyone (you cant meet your self) that has that.
Another fun thing to to with GT3 is see how far you can get with out ever buying a car. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif (if you win all gold in a licens you get a car)
How about this. A 2.5 Modified for World Challenge with M3 cams, higher compression, and a lot of other work averages at 270. Add EFI or Motec and you may be alb eto get more.Quote:
Originally posted by Knestis:
I will TOTALLY agree, having had a chance to watch them on the track at Summit last summer, that it is not all about power with this car. I would suggest that some of their strength comes from a really good rear suspension design that lets them use it. It's the sum of the parts.
You are definitely right. The car you probably saw at Summit had a stock engine with a cone filter, cheaper exhaust, and NO CHIP - the rear suspension is great.
However (and with due respect), telling the world how many horsies a properly tweaked 325 powerplant makes is NOT giving up the farm. It would do me no good at all to know that James' car made 210 or 270hp at the flywheel, without having the knowledge and wherewithal to find it. It might, truth be told, piss off a lot of people but (a) not anyone who isn't already upset, and (B) probably not to any greater degree.
Kirk
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
James,
I thought I remeber 265 HP at the flywheel as a number and then you saying to me that you found another 10 HP since I had heard the 265 number, that means 275 HP at the flywheel. Were you talking about WC cars or ITS cars because I thought we were talking ITS cars? I may have been mistaken, please clarify.
------------------
Nick Leverone
04 ITS Mazda Rx-7
www.flatout-motorsports.com
I don't think I ever told anyone numbers. Customers only get them when I have a deposit for the engine usually.
If weight were added to the E36, how could some cars put it in having close to 100# of ballast already? Do you think ANYONE could convince the comp board to do it? These are serious questions.
Now for more of a rhetorical question - what happened to the other cars that dominated for so long? I think they eventually got outclassed and became less competitive. Four years ago, it was the RX-7. No weight was added. Now it is the drivers of THESE CARS THAT WERE COMPLAINED ABOUT that are heading the charge! Try winning Formula Ford without a new chassis - it doesn't happen. If weight were added to the E36, I would think based on past actions that that would just shorten the competitive life before the next hot car came out.
Look to the future. The 944S has been classed. Cars are getting faster. The E36 won't be around forever and we can all join hands and complain about the next car.
If you guys are serious, fix the system, don't fix the E36. I would go for an IT overhaul, but I have minimal interest in an E36 lynch mob.
Two more notes:
-I never said the E36 wasn't the car to have in ITS right now, I will be the first to tell you it is.
-You are only kidding yourself if you think Dino's car didn't have a custom chip in it before the ECU rule. Real development of the chassis is the difference here - we have done it and others have also. Our power doesn't come from "cheat codes" and "secret maps" inside the computer - it is a lot of research into engine component selection, a computer designed header/exhaust system, and a few legal tricks that it is obvious under visual inspection that others haven't figured out.
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
I think this is where I started the weight-spec conversation 20 months or so ago. We should never be put in a situation where we have to argue specific cars' specifications and the only way to get there is to apply a prescribed system that considers the physical qualities of the vehicles in a class.Quote:
Originally posted by James Clay:
If you guys are serious, fix the system, don't fix the E36. I would go for an IT overhaul, but I have minimal interest in an E36 lynch mob...
It will NEVER be perfect but it will be consistent to apply, equitable, predictable, and will result in a variance substantially smaller than that resulting from the driver skill and development variables. That is all we can ask.
Kirk
Your system is for 4 Cyl only though. How about tweaking a good system in exsistance? Year-end evaluations are the only way, based on recorded finishing positions.
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
You lean this way but I guess that I am more of a fundamentalist about the downsides of adjusting car specs based on on-track performance. Philosophically, I just hate to even start down the road that ends with a system that ihnerently punishes well-developed cars driven by people with skills.
With IT2, I narrrowed the bandwidth of the technology that had to be equalled (by restricting the conversation to one "type" of car) so it was a heck of a lot easier to level things, than would be the case with the top end of ITS - with few different models of disparate type.
What has NOT been tried is a true statistical analysis of an entire season's worth of finishing positions. Some protocol would have to be established for considering the influence of DQs - assuming we were tryint to adjust only for on-track performance - but it would be entirely possible to see if any particular model in a class is disproportionately competitive on a national basis, considering the number and make of other cars entered.
I should be able to tell you what type of statistical test to apply but all of my applied research has been qualitative so that knowledge went "poof". My stats teachers would be disappointed in me...
K
James- I have much respect for your work, your accomplisments and your open minded approach here on the site.Quote:
Originally posted by James Clay:
If weight were added to the E36, how could some cars put it in having close to 100# of ballast already?
-You are only kidding yourself if you think Dino's car didn't have a custom chip in it before the ECU rule.
But...I'm having trouble rectifying the whole weight issue in my head on the E-36. How is it possible to pull so much weight off the car, but then have issues with the 100 pound ballast rule. If you were forced to run a higher race weight, wouldn't it be possible to leave more weight on in the first place? The GCR doesn't require the complete stripping of the chassis, although it allows certain things.
On point 2- Man, you hit the nail on the head here!!! When the whole ECU issue is debated, and the argument of "Show me the statistics that ECU cars are winning now that weren't earlier" is forwarded, it is an impossible debate point because of the lack of a control in the experiment. As you pointed out, we have no idea who was and who wasn't running illegally.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Easier to remove rather than install... We can add the spare tire back, but what then and still make it a clean, safe racecar? Seats shouldn't go in or carpet, door panels are light, I can imagine the issues with sound deadening being re-installed http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif It is hard to figure out where the whole bunch came from, but it could be done. My car needed a spare and no ballast for weight due to some of the other work we did on it. The ARRC 20# weight was insurance.
------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------