IS300 in ITS?

[lateapex911]

sorry......i HAD to do this..

400!!!!!!!

[C. Ludwig]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Sep 22 2005, 04:44 PM
How do you know what power he's making?? Have you seen his dyno sheets? Again, we are trying to look at things from an mechanical and physical angle to the greatest degree possible, with observation of known qualtities as supporting or conflicting evidence.

[snapback]60984[/snapback]

I assume that was Dan Jones that brought this up from the initials in his screen name. Thanks for the compliments. Can I use that testamonial in my next print ad for Ludwig Motorsports?


Last time the car was on a dyno it put down all of 166. That was on a Superflow dyno. Not Dynojet or Mustang so it adds another variable into the equation. I'll link that graph if anyone wants a look. That number was with an A/F ratio no leaner than 12:1. Our pressure regulator was giving us fits. With the regulator fixed and with fuel control we were able to get a proper A/F ratio. We never got the car back to the dyno but the SOTP difference was night and day. I'd bet the farm that engine was in the meat of the 175 range. Alas, that's just conjecture because that engine will never see a dyno. We had a coolant hose fail in August. The engine lost just enough coolant that the combustion chamber temps went up just enough to detonate wiping out the front rotor and housing.

Funny thing? Good story, worth the read IMO. That engine was an absolutely legal 10/10th deal. I'm the builder but even Speedsource really can't give you anything as far as hard parts that engine didn't have. It runs on a completely stock ECU. After it blew we went with our spare. Calling the spare a junkyard engine is being nice. The engine was pulled from a 110k mile street car and then sat on my buddy's back porch, in the elements, for three months. Long enough to stick a side seal and lose compression on the front rotor. I disassembled it, cleaned it up so it would look the part, and put it back together with a new soft seal kit. All the apex and side seals were original to the engine as were the springs. The engine now doesn't make enough cranking compression to start off the starter. It literally makes 50psi of cranking compression. Mazda replaces street engines under about 80. I've built engines that make 120 before they are fired for the first time meaning no time to seat in and start making compression. This engine sucks!! We had to push start it for every session two weeks ago at Mid-Ohio. It obviously "feels" softer than our old engine. And I'm sure it is but why waste dyno time to prove it? My point? With this engine we ran within 2/10th of our fastest lap at Mid-Ohio (1:43.6 in qualifying, 3/10 under the race record) and ran under the track record at Grattan (though Rob Huffmaster went even faster and claimed the record that weekend). So just to play devil's advocate...how much does all this horsepower talk really mean?

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Sep 23 2005, 03:14 AM
sorry......i HAD to do this..

400!!!!!!!

[snapback]61029[/snapback]

Uh Jake, you may want to check the post number on that.

[zracre]

the driver variable is what is so hard to calculate...there are many fast high dollar guys in ITS with the bimmer so that makes it harder yet...as many saw a place to race a current fast car for the class...yes i think it is an overdog, but what did people think when the gen 2 rx-7 came to bat? it destroyed everything out there...maybe some adjustments need to be made but i think the scca may have jumped on the restrictor without proper testing or knowing the potential with the restrictor. if all cars in all classes were as developed as some of the bimmers out there we would have world challenge. I have an 8/10ths car and do pretty well on my local tracks, but have some driving work to do at away ones. does that make my car an overdog? I know all regions have some cars that are fast and some slow (I have seen some bimmers in my rear view before with bimmerworld on them) so driving has to play a large variable in the equasion. all this banter about high numbers can only be resolved with someone tearing down their car to make sure it is legal then dynoing the thing to see the raw numbers...with scca tech witnesses...then make a decision. enough back and forth with quotes and accusations. I like this website and dont think we should drive people away from it with trash talk. we are here for our HOBBY! lets just have fun and make rash tech based decisions at the top so we can continue. It really is very simple if you put all aside and look at it.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by zracre@Sep 23 2005, 12:04 PM
the driver variable is what is so hard to calculate...

[snapback]61034[/snapback]

Based on the way the ITAC recommends classifications, it's actually VERY easy to calculate... It's cancels completely out of the equation...

[dj10]

Originally posted by C. Ludwig@Sep 23 2005, 09:42 AM
I assume that was Dan Jones that brought this up from the initials in his screen name. Thanks for the compliments. Can I use that testamonial in my next print ad for Ludwig Motorsports?

Funny thing? Good story, worth the read IMO. That engine was an absolutely legal 10/10th deal. I'm the builder but even Speedsource really can't give you anything as far as hard parts that engine didn't have. It runs on a completely stock ECU. After it blew we went with our spare. Calling the spare a junkyard engine is being nice. The engine was pulled from a 110k mile street car and then sat on my buddy's back porch, in the elements, for three months. Long enough to stick a side seal and lose compression on the front rotor. I disassembled it, cleaned it up so it would look the part, and put it back together with a new soft seal kit. All the apex and side seals were original to the engine as were the springs. The engine now doesn't make enough cranking compression to start off the starter. It literally makes 50psi of cranking compression. Mazda replaces street engines under about 80. I've built engines that make 120 before they are fired for the first time meaning no time to seat in and start making compression. This engine sucks!! We had to push start it for every session two weeks ago at Mid-Ohio. It obviously "feels" softer than our old engine. And I'm sure it is but why waste dyno time to prove it? My point? With this engine we ran within 2/10th of our fastest lap at Mid-Ohio (1:43.6 in qualifying, 3/10 under the race record) and ran under the track record at Grattan (though Rob Huffmaster went even faster and claimed the record that weekend). So just to play devil's advocate...how much does all this horsepower talk really mean?

[snapback]61030[/snapback]

Am I a good judge of character or what!!!?? You sure can use it in your testamonial Chris.
In all honesty I have no idea what kind of hp my BMW makes, this is the 1st yr. running the car and I've never had it on any dyno. I'm not worried so much about how much torque & hp the engine is putting out (although a strong engine is important). I'm very happy that I have a car that has a great handling charteristics, great brakes and is very forgiving. The HP will come as I develop as a driver. "CHEATING IS NOT AN OPTION"!!
dj
Dan Jones

[chuck baader]

Unless I have missed an up date in the GCR or SportsCar, the beginning of the IT section specifies that the SCCA does not guarantee the competitiveness of a car.....PERIOD!!! That sword cuts both ways...no guanantee to be competitive, no guarntee to be over competitive. We takes what we gets and plays nice.
Chuck

[Catch22]

Originally posted by chuck baader@Sep 23 2005, 04:25 PM
guarantee

[snapback]61060[/snapback]

So they shouldn't even "try?"
Just because its not guaranteed?

"Ooops, we screwed up the weight on this car when we classified it, but we never guaranteed anything so... Screw you guys, we're going home."

Hey... That sounds alot like the way things used to be.
I really didn't like it very much. How about you?

[chuck baader]

So, Scott, you want to pound people into submission...you left ITS for the same reason I did....my original car was not competitive. We both went another route and continued to race...at least one of us doesn't bitch about everything that comes up. CB

[Catch22]

In case you haven't noticed Chuck, that was then, this is now.

If then was now, I'd very likely not sell my ITS car.
Then there was little to no hope. Now there is plenty.

Me... Bitch?
I write letters, make suggestions, send in dyno sheets, and offer constructive ideas.
Thats not bitching. Bitching is never being happy and never lending a hand to help

Bitching is also running your mouth (keyboard) not realizing that folks are TRYING to make changes and improvements. That sort of bitching looks kind of like this...

Unless I have missed an up date in the GCR or SportsCar, the beginning of the IT section specifies that the SCCA does not guarantee the competitiveness of a car.....PERIOD!!!

[chuck baader]

No Scott, this is bitching....helping is doing something to help the SCCA...like serving on your region board, being a chief instructor at a DE, running a SARRC race, organizing membership meetings, etc.

Sitting behind the keyboard and bitching is just that, bitching! No one wants to be responsible for what they do or the hand they are given...they want to change things to their benefit. I guess some things in life never change. I'm through. CB

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by chuck baader@Sep 23 2005, 12:25 PM
Unless I have missed an up date in the GCR or SportsCar, the beginning of the IT section specifies that the SCCA does not guarantee the competitiveness of a car.....PERIOD!!! That sword cuts both ways...no guanantee to be competitive, no guarntee to be over competitive. We takes what we gets and plays nice.
Chuck

[snapback]61060[/snapback]

You're right Chuck, that's what the ITCS says. But what exactly does that mean? Does that mean that cars get thrown into a class, and that's it, you can never do anything to it? I don't think so. Otherwise, why was there language in there about reclassification, etc.? What my interpretation is, is that they won't necessarily do anything to help a car. Operative word there, is necessarily. Doesn't say they won't ever do anything, just that they don't have to.

[Catch22]

Originally posted by chuck baader@Sep 23 2005, 07:53 PM
helping is doing something to help the SCCA...

like serving on your region board
Well, I've done that. Had to quit when I moved 4 hours away from Atlanta.
I wish I still could be on the board. I enjoyed it.

being a chief instructor at a DE
Well, I was going to do that this weekend, but my stepdaughter prefers I go with her to her track meet and be a nice parent type thingy. I hope thats OK with you.
I have instructed at several SCCA schools though, and will probably instruct in February at the Roebling double school.
I sincerely hope that meets your criteria. If not I'll try harder.

running a SARRC race
Now I have never done this. Maybe I should give it a shot.

organizing membership meetings
Didn't organize them, but I have loaded my car up and carried it out to a public spot on a Saturday afternoon and manned a booth.
Again, I hope thats good enough to be counted as a contributing member of the club in your eyes. If not, I promise to try harder in the future.

So, Chuck...
You like to interject your $.02 into these little classing discussions. When was the last time you sent some data into the ITAC? A dyno chart maybe?
I've done it. Several times. For cars that aren't even in my class. You know, to try to "help."
ITAC members have told me they appreciate it and that it helps. I dunno, maybe they are just being nice and actually wish I'd just quit pestering them.
Again, I'm sorry for all the trouble. Hopefully I can be a better member in the future.

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bill Miller@Sep 23 2005, 08:56 PM
You're right Chuck, that's what the ITCS says. But what exactly does that mean?

[snapback]61077[/snapback]

For what it's worth, here is my interpretation...

"We will spec your car as closely as we can to the class targets and within the class performance envelope... The "competitiveness" of your program will be up to you..."

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Sep 23 2005, 05:16 PM
For what it's worth, here is my interpretation...

"We will spec your car as closely as we can to the class targets and within the class performance envelope... The "competitiveness" of your program will be up to you..."

[snapback]61081[/snapback]

[lateapex911]

hey!

i think I just saw a pig flying!!



(Positive and constrctive feedback appreciated)

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Catch22@Sep 23 2005, 05:15 PM
.....ITAC members have told me they appreciate it and that it helps. I dunno, maybe they are just being nice and actually wish I'd just quit pestering them.
........

[snapback]61080[/snapback]

I'm sure I speak for all on the ITAC when I say that we appreciate well thought out requests, submissions and information.

Whatever you want to send Catch, we'll read and discuss.

[chuck baader]

Darin, THANK YOU.


Bill..."thrown into a class" I think is a slight oversimplification


Scott: You have had a problem with me and everything I have said for a couple of years. That is the reason I usually don't post after you but unfortunately I allowed myself to be drawn in this time. Everyone please excuse me for this lapse in judgment.

See ya'll on the track. Chuck

[Ron Earp]

Fellows, maybe it is time to start a new thread. To go a step further, maybe it was time to start one a long time ago, but this jabbing at specific indivduals is not useful and has nothing to do with a BMW 325i in ITS, and surely absolutely nothing to do with a IS300 in ITs.

It looks like the ITAC is looking at the BMW in ITS and that is a proper thing to do given the responses to the thread. Nothing is going to happen for awhile, but at least folks are on the case and I for one really appreciate the open nature of the discussion and folks from the ITAC posting on this thread.

Ron

[Catch22]

Originally posted by chuck baader@Sep 23 2005, 10:37 PM
Scott: You have had a problem with me and everything I have said for a couple of years.

[snapback]61086[/snapback]

News to me.
If you check you might actually find a few people that'll tell you how I told everyone around me that was complaining about Barber Registration last year that you were doing a fantastic job under the circumstances.
And you guys DID do a fantastic job. It was noticed and appreciated by those of us who understand that a 3 hour line for registration isn't necessarily all the registrars fault.
Most folks that think this have never done any registration work, which by the way, is another thing I've done. 'Cause I like to help.

See, I'm trying.
I'm just all chock full'o'help.

PS - I'm also currently trying to drum up membership to start a SCCA Chapter in South Georgia. I think that counts towards a few "help the club" points. At least I hope it does, I'd hate to do all this work for nothin'.

Now, back to climbing to the 500th post about how heavy the poor pitiful <sniffle> BMWs are about to be...