IS300 in ITS?

[its66]

Wow, an E36 "disagreement" that i didn't start.

Bruce,
Was that your dad's 911 I saw at Sebring labor day? Nice..

[dspillrat]

Haven't been in the loop this year..or last for that matter. have to throw in my 2 cents here on the 325 HP...oopps 325i ITS cars...
222-227 RWHP for what I saw in fall 2003 .......12.75-13 lbs per horsie.

david spillman

Originally posted by Bruce Shafer@Sep 13 2005, 03:19 PM
And once again we are hearing about the mythical 217 hp at the rear wheels M50 motor. Try 195 HP @ rear wheels prior to the restrictor plate. SCCA has the dyno sheets. :P

[snapback]60072[/snapback]

[Bruce Shafer]

Originally posted by its66@Sep 13 2005, 02:01 PM

Bruce,
Was that your dad's 911 I saw at Sebring labor day? Nice..

Yes, another German car to push around the paddock. Weber carbs are a blast, not to mention all the other idiosyncrasies with that car. He's been wanting me to drive and sort that thing out for about 6 months now. The minute I get in there, that engine will come apart. I’m tired of working on race cars…

If I had known you were at the track I would have stopped by. It was actually a nice relaxing weekend not running my car.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Bruce Shafer@Sep 13 2005, 02:01 PM
Yes as far as I am concerned, built to the max for IT. As I have stated before I do not have MOTEC, the minute I buy that it’ll be outlawed.

Now I’m going to sit back and wait for somebody to get on here and say that MOTEC is good for 22 hp at the rear wheels. I need a real good laugh!

I’ve provided my proof. Now it’s your turn to provide something more than innuendo and BS.

[snapback]60085[/snapback]

IIRC, didn't James Clay say that they were getting RWHP on the North side of 200? I'd have to go back through the archives, but that's the way I remember it.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Bruce Shafer@Sep 13 2005, 01:01 PM
Yes as far as I am concerned, built to the max for IT. As I have stated before I do not have MOTEC, the minute I buy that it’ll be outlawed.

Now I’m going to sit back and wait for somebody to get on here and say that MOTEC is good for 22 hp at the rear wheels. I need a real good laugh!

I’ve provided my proof. Now it’s your turn to provide something more than innuendo and BS.

[snapback]60085[/snapback]

Actually, you have provided DATA, not proof. Spillman above quotes over 220...VanSteenburg's car made in excess of 215 - we use the same dyno guy in MA.

Without a MOTEC-type system, you are not at 100% and your 'data' can't be used as the gold standard. We thank you for the data, but it is just part of the puzzle. I am betting Miller will find that stuff from BW...

It's ok, you are still winning....

AB

[Bruce Shafer]

Yes, I provided data. Data that didn't fall into line with the preconcieved notions of this website and the ITAC.

I do feel it's possible for an IT M50 to be over 200 hp, but not much. I say 205 max with Motec and everything else including the kitchen sink.

Case in point, I have dyno sheets somewhere from my old '95 M3 3L that pretty much had a motor in IT trim, intake, header, FF exhaust, custom dyno tuned Conforti chip (burned by Jim himself). 224 hp at the rear wheels and that car was rocket ship. The HP numbers quoted by some folks just don't add up.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by Bruce Shafer@Sep 13 2005, 06:01 PM
Yes as far as I am concerned, built to the max for IT. As I have stated before I do not have MOTEC, the minute I buy that it’ll be outlawed.

Now I’m going to sit back and wait for somebody to get on here and say that MOTEC is good for 22 hp at the rear wheels. I need a real good laugh!

I’ve provided my proof. Now it’s your turn to provide something more than innuendo and BS.

[snapback]60085[/snapback]

and of course all the hp claims are relative to the type of dyno, weather, etc. i am not an expert on the differences between dynos. i have heard from many sources there can be 10-20% difference in numbers between dyno brands. true? false?

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bruce Shafer@Sep 13 2005, 03:19 PM
Try 195 HP @ rear wheels prior to the restrictor plate. SCCA has the dyno sheets. :P

[snapback]60072[/snapback]

First, let's just get this out of the way... the restrictor plate has NO effect on these motors... The throttle plates are NOT the limiting point of these engines, and were WAY larger than necessary in the first place, so the restrictor is a non-issue and hasn't slowed anyone down...

As for the data... using the data Bruce has provided, which, no offense intended, can be considered an over-the-counter example of a shop-built car (Bimmerworld, right???), the BMW E-36 needs to weigh 3,100lbs in ITS based on the current classification process using dyno data for HP figures, BEFORE adders...... And that weight would STILL put it at the very top of the performance envelope...

If this car were being classified WITHOUT Bruces data, but rather simply using stock hp figures as we do with all the other cars, it's weight would be about 3291lbs BEFORE adders...

NONE of these numbers or the fact that we are discussing this has anything to do with the cars on-track performance or finishes, etc... It's all simply based on the mechanical properties of the car as it exists in race form... JUST like we figure all the other cars we've classified/adjusted...

The baseline for the class is basically the 240Z or the 2nd Gen RX-7, so these numbers are in comparison to equally as well known values as these two cars present...

There isn't a BMW "witch hunt", and no one is out to "get" the BMWs... These are hard numbers based on real information and derived from a defined process...

So, either way (Bruce's numbers or derived numbers), the BMW is WAY underweight to be fairly classified in ITS... OR, it desprately needs a more effective restrictor... At it's current weight (2850lbs)... It needs to be restricted to approximately 220+/- flywheel HP to be on par with the 240Z and the 2nd Gen RX-7...

Fire away...

[lateapex911]

(I was being conservative with the 217 I quoted)

Now, with what Darin just stated, and assuming that the dyno sheets from credible souces are repeatable and consistant, ....

and snce we have some BMW guys here....I have a question for them.

First, I assume nobody racing a BMW wants to have either a real or a perceived overdog, right? I mean, whats the point in winning if everyone walks away saying, "Well, I was first in class...NON BMW class that is.,....." right? It must be a rather hollow victory for a BMW driver....

So, IF there were restrictions to be made, would the E36 guys rather it be all weight, or an SIR to limit the power (not low end torque) to a level more in line with the class targets?
(The Z car and the RX-7)

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Sep 13 2005, 03:05 PM
IIRC, didn't James Clay say that they were getting RWHP on the North side of 200? I'd have to go back through the archives, but that's the way I remember it.

[snapback]60090[/snapback]

As I recall, and it was a long time ago, it was possible to deduce that from his comments...as in "Definately under 225, but thats all I'm saying", then there was a comment about non motecs coming in around 215 strong.

So, I thought calling it 217 was a safe non debateable number....

Also from what I understand, Motec does a lot to "fill in" the curve, rather than add only to the peak number.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Sep 13 2005, 03:51 PM
I am betting Miller will find that stuff from BW...



AB

[snapback]60093[/snapback]

Thanks Andy, I think.

[robits325is]

When will this debate end? BMW drivers still feel that the SCCA has singled out the E-36. When the decision was made to add the restrictor plate last year was there any other Make that was as fully developed (time and $) as the top BMWs? What regions had lopsided results to justify an "extreme situation?" What have been the results this season in those regions? Has this adjustment done anything positive for ITS or IT in general? Looking at the results from my local (NARRC) ITS races this season it looks like we have taken two steps backward.

If all cars have the same horsepower than shouldn't they all weigh the same?

Does someone represent BMW drivers on the board that added the restrictor plate? If not, how do I volunteer?

Page one of the GCR states that 'Not all cars will be competitive" Why arn't there adjustments to the top 2 or 3 makes to balance out the field for everyone? Why arn't there adjustments in any other classes?

Rob Driscoll

[JeffYoung]

Rob, I have been quiet on this thread, but good to see some life back in the board. Just mention BMW and things start a-hopping.

I have read the below, and I have to say this. EVERYONE RX7 drivers, 240zs, 240sxs, 190es, we ALL know that the E36 weights too little. It is that simple. It is the ONLY S car that is classed at several hundred pounds LESS than its curb weight (and please don't pull numbers claiming that the curb weight is 2900 lbs, it is not, and we all know it).

And I do have to say your claim that there are no other makes out ther as fully developed as BMWs is just wrong. People have taken teh 240zs and RX7s to places that were not thought possible. If you are saying that the RX7s and Zs at teh front of the field -- Chet Wittel's Orange Z or Nick's blue RX7 or Steve's black RX7 -- aren't maxed...well, you are just wrong.

Results don't tell the whole story either. There are plenty of E36s that have an average level of prep, and average drivers. Tehy get beat by RXs and 240s. But the fact of the matter is when the baddest of the bad E36s comes out to play at Road Atlanta or VIR, it wins by LOTS. WHOLE LOTS.

There is nothing against the E36. I want the car in the class. I just want it classed like everyone else's car -- at or slightly less than curb weight. You bump the weight on that car to 3100 lbs like it should be and I (and most others I think) shut up. If the car dominants at that weight, well so be it. It has a lot of othe rthings going for it as well (suspension, brakes, motor) it doesn't need a weight break as well.

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by robits325is@Sep 13 2005, 11:04 PM


Page one of the GCR states that 'Not all cars will be competitive" Why arn't there adjustments to the top 2 or 3 makes to balance out the field for everyone? Why arn't there adjustments in any other classes?

Rob Driscoll

[snapback]60117[/snapback]

Gears are turning as you type...the E36 is not alone, the SCCA is not trying to single out and screw the BMW drivers, or the Chevy drivers, or anyone in particular....relax.

As Darin pointed out, the math on the E36 puts it at a significant advantage to other cars in the class. There are other cars in other classes that are being looked at as well, and, you might be interested in knowing that action will likely be taken in other classes, and with other cars, before the E36 gets any adjustments. I assure you, it is receiving fair (or better) treatment.

As to the question of fully developed, I think you know that there are, or have been, many fully developed models other than the E36. The RX-7 comes to mind, as does the Z car.

As for the NARRC, is it fair to say that this year represents a full on, fully developed program from any of the local BMW drivers? It's my impression that the new program has had some growing pains and the old cars aren't seeing the same level of attention, but that's just an observation.

[Z3_GoCar]

Hey I'm fine with adding a couple of hundred pounds to ITS BMW's as long as you take it from all the ITA BMW's

Here's some food for thought:

At the last Cal club event:

ITS
1st John Noris 30:18.149 2:07.863 best lap
2nd Charles Buzzetti 31:10.890 2:10.086 best lap

ITA
1st David Lecren 31:31.023 2:22.354 best lap
2nd James Whitton 31:36.270 2:23.173 best lap

SM
1st Don Thibaut 31:10.391 2:12.472 best lap
2nd Jonathon Christian 31:10.899 2:12.595 best lap

It seems odd to me that not only would the SM field blow away the ITA field, they'd even finish well in the ITS field.

James

[Bruce Shafer]

Originally posted by JeffYoung@Sep 13 2005, 11:19 PM
But the fact of the matter is when the baddest of the bad E36s comes out to play at Road Atlanta or VIR, it wins by LOTS. WHOLE LOTS.

When the baddest of the bad show up at Daytona, they get beat!

[its66]

From Mylaps.com
August Double SARRC -Daytona,
Saturday

1 111 CHET WITTEL --bmw
2 27 MICHAEL FLYNN --mb
3 10 CARLOS GARCIA --bmw
4 72 SCOTT FINLAY --rx7
5 04 JEFF BUICE --bmw??? (not 100% sure)

Sunday
1 27 TODD BURAS --mb
2 10 CARLOS GARCIA --bmw
3 111 CHET WITTEL --bmw
4 4 DAN SHAVER --bmw
5 5 KEVIN J. BUSLER -rx7

I can't comment on what happens at other tracks. I know there are many factors that come into play while racing-tires, drivers, luck, accidents, mechanicals, etc. but, when you look at the results form the most recent IT stuff at Daytona, I have to disagree.

(trying hard not to get sucked into this...)

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by its66@Sep 14 2005, 02:01 PM
1 111 CHET WITTEL --bmw
2 27 MICHAEL FLYNN --mb
3 10 CARLOS GARCIA --bmw
4 72 SCOTT FINLAY --rx7
5 04 JEFF BUICE --bmw??? (not 100% sure)

Sunday
1 27 TODD BURAS --mb
2 10 CARLOS GARCIA --bmw
3 111 CHET WITTEL --bmw
4 4 DAN SHAVER --bmw
5 5 KEVIN J. BUSLER -rx7

[snapback]60128[/snapback]

Please excuse my ignorance, but what's an "--mb"??

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Sep 14 2005, 10:10 AM
Please excuse my ignorance, but what's an "--mb"??

[snapback]60129[/snapback]

Darin,

I'm guessing it's a Mercedes-Benz 190 2.3 16v. Please shoot me an IM or email regarding our last conversation.

[lateapex911]

I'm guessing it's the flying Irish Mikes (or whatever it's called, LOL) Mercedes Benz ....the one that was the E30 M3 equivilent. Can't remember the exact model name. I think it's the 4 cyl 2.3 ltr 16V 190E, but I can't swear on it. I have seen it at Atlanta, looks pretty cool in a calmed down German Touring car kinda way.