Weight added to BMW e36

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by mlytle:
.... all the rest sort of "fill the field". if the intent of pca's is serious (and not just the e36 witch hunt it appears to be), then ALL of these "overdogs" would be being considered for more weight. yes? no?

Some of them have been moved to A...but what about the rest? How many of them (& which models?) have received the development that the front runners have?



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
You can slow down the "overdogs"...

Ok Darin, can you please tell us which overdogs you're looking at for ITA, ITB, and ITC?

But honestly, how is slowing down 1 or 2 cars per class (at least I don't think there are more overdogs, per class, than that) going to help the 'tweener' cars?

Also, since you've said that the 240Z defines the upper end of the performance envelope for ITS, can you tell us which cars you're using to define the upper and lower bounds of the performance envelope for all the classes?

And if there was never any intent to reduce the weight of slower cars (speed them up), why did the PCA rule say weight adjustment? That term implies that the weight could go up or down.

Based on your comments, the new PCA rule does nothing more to stop the marginalization of the slower cars in a class.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Rick_htm]

The atlanta region web site has the new RA track records. Chet turned a 1:40.2 I believe earlier this year. The 2:12 he ran at VIR in qualifying was 2 to 3 seconds faster than any one had ran there.
The problem I see as a non-BMW driver is that there are a few BMW's that are wicked fast and untouchable, then the rest seem to run with the RX-7's. The real question is what seperates the two groups. Are Sunbelt and Bimmerworld engines that good. Or is it suspension or driver. I think its mostly engine with a little bit of the others added. But I wouldn't want to be in the position of asigning a wieght value to it. By the way, good job to everyone at the ARRC. The lap times were fast, most of the races were close, and the driving was clean.
Rick Harbaugh
ITS# 2

[wburstein]

While most of the discussion has been related to how the 240Z and RX7 perform compared against the E36, there used to be some other competitive cars in ITS.

Well a few years ago (before the E36 came to ITS), the 944 and E30 BMW were competitive in ITS. In one year of the MARRS series, we had wins by RX7, E30 and 240Z, as well as track records set by RX7, E30, 240Z and 944. The racing was awesome, the fields were large, and things were good.

Fast forward to 2004 with 9 MARRS races, 9 wins by E36s (4 different drivers), and a track record set by an E36. If anyone thinks that is parity, they need their head examined!

[Banzai240]

I think if you take a hard look at all of the classes, you'll find two things.

First, you'll find a LOT of car makes/models that are capable on a given day of competing amongst one-another. If properely prepared and driven, any number of car makes/models in any of the IT classes can do battle with each other.

Second, however, you'll find a small number of cars, usually (though not always) recently introduced, that clearly are at the top of the class. There are a LOT fewer of them, than of those in the paragraph above.

Perhaps looking at the situation in this light could bring about an alternate solution to trying to move or otherwise make the "marginalized" cars more competitive by speeding them up.

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited November 12, 2004).]

[chuck baader]

Someone said "you can't go back" and that is very true in SCCA racing. Large fields of yesteryear have been diluted by new classes such as spec Miata. Look at how many front runners in ITS also ran a spec Miata or have moved to that class altogether. Money has also worked to reduce the ITS fields. The current perception is that you have to have a 45k car to be competitive. Fact is, you had to have that for the last umpteen years! The difference is that many more top drivers have the means to build that class car or have moved to a perceptionally cheaper class.(actually I think you could build a front running SM for around 35k) I don't think we will ever see the very large ITS fields we once saw, even with comp adjustments to even the playground. I think the new large fields will be ITA...mainly because so many cars have been moved there... and ITB-where a sub 10k car can be a top finisher. CB

[wburstein]

Chuck,

My point is that within the last five years, we had fields that were twice as large as today, and the reason for the large fields was that there was a choice of cars to run competitively.

In the DC region, many more ITS drivers have decided to leave their cars at home in the garage than have switched to SM or another class. It is frustrating to be a front running driver with a previously competitive car and go the the track knowing that short of attrition, there is little you can do to be in the top three.

ITS has never been a cheap class, at least for IT standards. I seriously doubt that it is significantly more expensive to race an E36 today than it was to race an E30 five or ten years ago, at least if you factor in todays generally higher overall costs.

To me, the key issue that keeps more people from developing the previously competitive models is that to go a little faster with a well developed car is quite costly. People are willing to spend those large amounts only when they feel they have a reasonable chance of success (i.e. winning). With today's ITS situation of being pretty much a one car class, the competitors of other brands first slow up their development programs, and then gradually stop coming to the track at all. I have seen it happen to many good drivers in the MARRS ITS race group, and would like to see that trend reversed. The drivers and cars are out there, just waiting for a chance to come back competitively. If we provide it, I am pretty sure that ITS will return to larger, more competitive fields.

[apr67]

Originally posted by chuck baader:
(actually I think you could build a front running SM for around 35k)

Chuck.

You could probably spend $35k building a front running SM, or buy Jim Dainel's 2004 ARRC winner for $25k.

Still a lot cheaper than a winning E36. Hell, whats an E36 street car in decent shape cost?

[mlytle]

i can't agree with your logic wayne. to say the e36 is the evil killer of its fields is kind of a big stretch. in that same time period sm has exploded and the economy has gone downhill big time. both of those are big factors in the high dollar its class. people moved to cheaper cars or just couldn't afford to come out to all the races.

and the "won't compete because i can't win" concept is a little thin too. many folks have continued competing for years with no hope of winning. racing is fun whether you win or not. i have a mega-dollar e36 in the marrs series (at 3x the price of my e30!). do i have a chance of winning? nope! not with ed york and sam asinugo running in our marrs series. that puts me in the same position as all the other "uncompetitive cars". do i keep coming out to race every year? absolutely! it is a blast! yes, i did win the last race of the marrs series this year, but only because ed and sam didn't run. that race was the closest of the year. at the finish, the second place acura was less than a second behind me and a z car was the same distance behind him. you should have been there!

maybe some discouraged drivers are staying away from its because they can't win, but i doubt it is the big reason for the its field geting smaller.

[mlytle]

e36 street car in decent shape is in the $4-6k range.

The saddest part of all this is some of you guys talk about 25K-45K like it's nothing, to run in a REGIONAL ONLY class.

I can think of dozens of competitive Production cars that are for sale right now for less that would take a decent driver to a chance to compete at the Runoffs. I can think of a few Pro series cars that you could buy for the same investment.

The majority of drivers Wayne speaks of, that I also know quite well, would rather park their cars than have to spend a National budget to race for a chance to take home a cheap trophy in a Regional class. We sit around the paddock remiscing about the "good old days" of IT racing, where anyone could buy or build a car (for less than the price of a new minivan) and go out and have at least a chance of coming away with a trophy.

I quit ITS about the same time that Wayne had joined the class in the DC region, and at that time I was driving a car that I built myself and had about 8K into it and was able to run in the top 15 overall in a ITS/ITA group and was only 4 seconds off the ITS lap record at Summit. Now people with cars that have twice as much money and time invested into them are lucky if they can come within 8 seconds of the current lap record.

You want larger fields and bring in new members? It's got to be worth the investment, no matter how much the investment is, if they don't get the "bang of the buck" they won't join or stay.

[lateapex911]

A year or two ago I said that 90% of the classification problems in IT were caused by 10% of the cars.....and fixing those 10% will help the marginalization of the entire class.

After watching the E36s for years, and watching them run in Atalnta, it is very hard not to think that they aren't just a little stout for the rest of the class.

Are they the villian of IT?? Of course not! Nothing in life is B&W, and the "demise" of ITS can't be placed on one cars shoulders. However, I am sure that some drivers who were once competitive have rethought their programs when they are faced with the "unsurmountable odds" of beating the well prepped and driven versions of the E-36.

AS I see it, the car has evn more potential. The ITAC and the CRB need to decide to either cut bait, drp the weight 150 or so and put it into a new class on top of ITS, or suck it up and slow it down just a bit.

Either way, it's time to piss or get off the pot, so to speak.

That said, I know it's an ongoing process....and they are debating it monthly, no doubt! My vote is for a new class...lets see what these things can really do!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
I think if you take a hard look at all of the classes, you'll find two things.

First, you'll find a LOT of car makes/models that are capable on a given day of competing amongst one-another. If properely prepared and driven, any number of car makes/models in any of the IT classes can do battle with each other.

Second, however, you'll find a small number of cars, usually (though not always) recently introduced, that clearly are at the top of the class. There are a LOT fewer of them, than of those in the paragraph above.

Perhaps looking at the situation in this light could bring about an alternate solution to trying to move or otherwise make the "marginalized" cars more competitive by speeding them up.

Darin,

Not quite sure what you're trying to say here. Almost sounds as if you're saying that people can race w/ someone else for xx place (but not on the podium), and they'll be happy.

But please, enlighten us w/ this alternate plan that you're hinting at.

And in case you missed it, I'll ask again. How about sharing the cars that define the performance envelope for the various classes.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[lateapex911]

lemme guess..
ITS- the RX7 and Z car
ITA The Integra, the CRX and the 240 SX
ITB- The Volvo
ITC- The CRX

OK, how'd I do?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Bill Miller]

Jake,

That's probably pretty close, but IIRC, the 510 and Rabbit 1.6 were also in there for ITC. Not sure what else would be used for ITB. Maybe the Audis.

Pretty easy to define the upper bound, but how about the lower bound???

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Knestis]

The bottom of B is defined by the top of C and similarly, the bottom of A is defined by the top of B. (That's not an overly simplistic way to look at it, I don't think.)

The bottom of S is poorly defined at this point but that's an example of why it is inherently tough to benchmark an appropriate lower bound - there are just too many variables and not enough datapoints to make decisions confidently:

If there is one AMC Matador six running in ITS and it's at the back of the pack all the time, is it because of attributes inherent to the car's design?

K

(who is still a little anxious that people will get in the business of making PCAs based on anecdotal on-track performance "data")

[apr67]

Originally posted by 2Many Z's:
I can think of dozens of competitive Production cars that are for sale right now for less that would take a decent driver to a chance to compete at the Runoffs. I can think of a few Pro series cars that you could buy for the same investment.

A competitive production car that could compete at the runoffs for $25k? By compete you mean 'run around at the back of the pack'?

And Pro car for 25K.. What, hopping you can get a top 40. That might work for music group, but it doesn't work for most of us.

Beyond that, a Prod or Pro car is going to cost a lot more to run. Most IT cars don't need two motors to go a season. Hell some winning ITB cars that I know of won with 100 RACES on the motor.

Alan

[OTLimit]

I really don't think we have $25K of hard dollars in our GP car (but I could be wrong), but then again, I don't REALLY think we are competitive yet. I know people will say, Hey, you finished 4th this year, but that's not the whole picture, especially when you look at lap times. And I think that putting a price on a car is really difficult, especially the limited prep cars.

------------------
Lesley Albin
Over The Limit Racing
Blazen Golden Retrievers

[lateapex911]

Well, it's just like IT....when a friend asks about what it takes to go racing, the smart answer starts by telling him about the THREE vehicles that are needed that will get him or her home at the end of a bad day...the trailer, the tow vehicle and finally the race car!

In other words, the cost of the race car itself is only the tip of the iceberg. Pro? AS in SpeedTouring for example? Prepare to part with upwards of 300K to have a reasonable chance of TV exposure for reasons other than crashing.

And as it's been pointed out, prod cars require more maintenance, (AKA expensive parts and machine work) in general than IT, if you want to be competitive. And because of sketchy local fields, I am referrring to the Runoffs as the place to be competitive. Perhaps Limited Prep will change that, we shall see.

Interesting, isn't it, the liited prep movement? I sometimes wonder if IT is morphing....

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Bill Miller]

Alan,

That's a myth that keeps getting perpetuated. You can pick from several top Prod cars for around $25k. Larry Dennis sold his full-prop GP 510, that Kevin Allen put on the podium at the '03 Runoffs, for $20k IIRC. Kevin Allen is selling his GP Spitfire for $15k. This is a car that's been on the pole 3 times at the Runoffs, and holds track records at 6 or 7 tracks. Bill Blust was selling his 2-time FP National Championship Midget for around $20k. Karl McColl is selling his GP 510 for $18k, including all the spares. Steve Burkett has a full-blown EP 1st gen. RX7 package (tons of spares) for $19k. John Weisberg is selling is EP 2nd gen. RX7 for $22k. This car won the NE Div 3 times. Runs 1:36 at M-O, :59 at LRP, and 2:12 at WGI (long course). Spend $30k and get Doug Piner's EP 240Z w/ a dozen wheels and an extra motor/tranny. And the list goes on.

These are all solid, National-level, Runoffs vetrans, that aren't running around at the back of the pack. It's not true that Prod costs any more to run than IT, these days. Not if you want to win.


Jake,

Limited-prep IS the future of Prod. The CRB has come out and stated that those are the only cars that will be classified, going forward.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608