restrictor plate delete - not scca

**mlytle** · 02-24-2005, 01:45 PM

for you bmw guys that race both scca its and bmwcca jp with your e36's..

the bmw cr tech committee approved my request to allow its prepped cars to remove the scca intake restrictor plate when racing in bmw cr events. a rule change should be published soon to document this.

marshall

**Greg Amy** · 02-24-2005, 02:17 PM

Good move. That should resolve potential conflicts for both orgs...

**Andy Bettencourt** · 02-25-2005, 08:57 PM

...and your E46's...

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

**Bryan Watts** · 02-28-2005, 05:34 PM

Andy - No restrictor required for the E46? Unless I've missed something from SCCA in the last month.

[This message has been edited by Bryan Watts (edited February 28, 2005).]

**Super Swift** · 02-28-2005, 06:37 PM

Try the new fastrack it adds the 2000 323 and a 56mm little buddy.

Why? Never seen one run so it must be an over dog.

**Bryan Watts** · 03-01-2005, 12:38 AM

Just saw that. What a load of #*$) from those who make decisions. Has anyone even finished building an E46 yet?

**robits325is** · 03-01-2005, 10:27 AM

We have contacted SCCA about the E-46 restrictor plate. Apparently someone arbitrarily felt that this car might be an overdog and randomly decided to penalize this car with a restrictor plate. No supporting data, no on track performance (No E-46 has even entered into one event). This is an obvious mistake by an overzealous and trigger happy official. Before we take this argument to the highest level, I would like to give the SCCA a chance to clear up this mistake.

Rob Driscoll
Auto Technic, LLC.
6 Danbury Road
New Milford, CT. 06776
www.autotechnic.net

**Andy Bettencourt** · 03-01-2005, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by robits325is:
This is an obvious mistake by an overzealous and trigger happy official. Before we take this argument to the highest level, I would like to give the SCCA a chance to clear up this mistake.

Rob Driscoll
Auto Technic, LLC.
6 Danbury Road
New Milford, CT. 06776
www.autotechnic.net

Actually Rob (as you know now), this appears to be a clerical error. We are working to get it fixed for the next Fastrack.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

**robits325is** · 03-01-2005, 04:49 PM

Thanks Andy - I glad we didn't have to unleash Stewart - we keep him tied up in the back room for situations like this.

Rob

**Banzai240** · 03-01-2005, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Actually Rob (as you know now), this appears to be a clerical error. We are working to get it fixed for the next Fastrack.

AB

Andy is right... this was a clerical error and was not a recommended change... (pretty tough to justify a PCA to a car that isn't even on the track yet...)

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

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited March 01, 2005).]

**ed325its** · 03-01-2005, 08:26 PM

How can anyone, with a stright face, suggest that thie posting in Fasttrack was a typo?

Anyone know the real story?

------------------
Ed Tisdale
#22 ITS '95 325is
Racing BMW's since 1984

**Andy Bettencourt** · 03-01-2005, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by ed325its:
How can anyone, with a stright face, suggest that thie posting in Fasttrack was a typo?

Anyone know the real story?

[Straight Face]

WE know the real story, Ed. And we just told it to you. It was an error and will be corrected in the next Fastrack.

[/Straight Face]

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

**Banzai240** · 03-02-2005, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by ed325its:
How can anyone, with a stright face, suggest that thie posting in Fasttrack was a typo?

Anyone know the real story?

The car makes 19 less HP than the E36, and we've classified it at 3000lbs. vs the E36's 2850lbs + 56mm restrictor (not enough, in my opinion...)...

Can anyone with enough success in life to own/race a BMW really come here with a suggestion that a group of people who have DEMONSTRATED over the past season that they are working in a logical and consistant manner would puposefully put a restrictor plate on a car than they MEANINGFULLY classified at a weight consistant with their classification process??? GIVE Me a freakin' break...

The facts are that, when the request came in to add the 2000 model year to the Spec line for this car, the question was asked as to whether or not the car needed the same restrictor that the E36 has. The opinion of the ITAC was that the car was correctly classified using our process and that there was no justification for putting a restrictor on a car that hadn't yet shown excessive performance potential for the class...

Someone who was taking notes (usually me, but not this time...) must have written down "add restrictor" and that got into the CRBs notes.

So YES, it WAS a "typo", or otherwise inadvertantly inserted into the addition of the model years that were added...

I talked to the CRB and clarrified this issue and it is being corrected...

I know you are all perfect... but there are still those of us out here who make mistakes on occasion...

Should this car generate enough data to show that it's performance potential exceeds the original estimates, rest assured that a restrictor or other PCA adjustment WILL be applied to the specifications...

Again... JUST ASK next time if you think something doesn't look right. We'll be more than willing to tell you the truth. We have no reason to hide behind false statements...

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

**Bruce Shafer** · 03-02-2005, 12:47 PM

Originally posted by ed325its:
How can anyone, with a stright face, suggest that thie posting in Fasttrack was a typo?

Anyone know the real story?

Yeah, somebody hit the send button too soon.

The ITAC was supposed to wait until an E46 hit the track, then hit the send button on the email requests for the restrictor plate.

**lateapex911** · 03-02-2005, 09:02 PM

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

**seckerich** · 03-02-2005, 09:46 PM

Yea,just check out Whittel's times at the pro last weekend at Road Atlanta and you can see the restrictor just killed you guys. 1:40 and change just like the ARRC.

**Bryan Watts** · 03-03-2005, 02:54 AM

sec - From what I understand, a pavement change in 10A had eveyone's laptimes low. Any speed gained in 10A is carried all the way down the hill and into T1. Spec Miata was below track record too.

**seckerich** · 03-03-2005, 08:40 AM

That makes sense, will see at VIR in a few weeks.
SE

**kthomas** · 03-03-2005, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by seckerich:
Yea,just check out Whittel's times at the pro last weekend at Road Atlanta and you can see the restrictor just killed you guys. 1:40 and change just like the ARRC.

Pavement at 10a and continued off season suspension development: not all "horsepower" is located in the engine. OTOH, Sunbelt will find you all the horsepower that is.

------------------
katman

**Bruce Shafer** · 03-03-2005, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by Bryan Watts:
sec - From what I understand, a pavement change in 10A had eveyone's laptimes low. Any speed gained in 10A is carried all the way down the hill and into T1. Spec Miata was below track record too.

Please, don't let facts cloud this issue.

Thread: restrictor plate delete - not scca

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

restrictor plate delete - not scca

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions