adding weight

[zracre]

Ok...now I have to add weight...the question is how do I bolt 160# to the footwell safely. I can understand the adjustments, but how come the 325e stays the same...i was just catching him now I doubt i will be able to keep up...

[Greg Amy]

Some suggestions:

- Use this as an opportunity to make some mongo-bongo roll cage additions. Weight strategically placed (such as rear roll cage crosstubes and possibly a "rear end crush preventer structure" will go a long way to help making the weight and improve safety (~50#).
- Re-install the spare tire in the rear tire well. I suggest using a stronger bolt than factory and safety-wiring it in (~25#).
- Accusump and/or fire system, mounted in the right rear corner of the trunk area (~25#)
- Be creative (~infinity)...

GA

[handfulz28]

Hey Evan, I feel your pain with that particular bimmer. I always thought he was running around in a "tweaked" ES, but I just realized this morning when I looked through the ITCS that everything is probably E-spec because they're on the same line. The problem is nobody else is running that car around the country, at least not to the "success" that he has, so the car was probably overlooked for adjustments. And he never leaves CFR because he's protected there.

Where I don't feel your pain: I've already been running 100lbs over, so I might actually have to start paying attention to my finishing weights :P

One of these days I'll finally get my Supermotard wheels on the DRZ; we'll have to get together.

Michael

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by handfulz28@Jan 25 2006, 09:14 AM
Hey Evan, I feel your pain with that particular bimmer. I always thought he was running around in a "tweaked" ES, but I just realized this morning when I looked through the ITCS that everything is probably E-spec because they're on the same line. The problem is nobody else is running that car around the country, at least not to the "success" that he has, so the car was probably overlooked for adjustments. And he never leaves CFR because he's protected there.

Where I don't feel your pain: I've already been running 100lbs over, so I might actually have to start paying attention to my finishing weights :P

One of these days I'll finally get my Supermotard wheels on the DRZ; we'll have to get together.

Michael

[snapback]72059[/snapback]

The E and the ES are the same car, just 4 doors or two IIRC.

The 325e redlines at a very low 4800 RPM and only had 121 hp but 174 lb-ft of torque and an incredibly flat powerband to compensate. The "e" stood for "eta," which is the Greek letter for efficiency and was the theme for the 325e - only a 9.0 comression ratio.

[zracre]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 25 2006, 10:35 AM
The E and the ES are the same car, just 4 doors or two IIRC.

The 325e redlines at a very low 4800 RPM and only had 121 hp but 174 lb-ft of torque and an incredibly flat powerband to compensate. The "e" stood for "eta," which is the Greek letter for efficiency and was the theme for the 325e - only a 9.0 comression ratio.

[snapback]72060[/snapback]

ok i just re-read the addendum...the 325e gets to LOSE 200# ...now what...the worlds fastest bimmer??? dean will surely massacre the ITS field now...he was almost there before with his ITA car....FWIW I have a 9.2 comp ratio...2380 1.8 94/95 miata has 9...

[Bob Roth]

ok i just re-read the addendum...the 325e gets to LOSE 200# ...now what...the worlds fastest bimmer??? dean will surely massacre the ITS field now...he was almost there before with his ITA car....FWIW I have a 9.2 comp ratio...2380 1.8 94/95 miata has 9...
[/b]

Its been a almost twenty years but I recall reading an article about the eta engine back in the 80's. I was curious on what made it so economical and i seem to remember that it had the lowest tension valve springs springs known to mankind. The reason why the rev limit are so low is because anything over 4500 RPM is "supposed" to result in terminal valve float. :119: I would be interesting to know if what I remember is true. And for those truly curious, whether these eta part's so offending to BMW's racing tradition could be easily replaced with more sporting parts from higher performance 325 series engines the as we know BMW probably "intended" to use.....

whatever.....

[zracre]

The reason why the rev limit are so low is because anything over 4500 RPM is "supposed" to result in terminal valve float. :119: I would be interesting to know if what I remember is true. And for those truly curious, whether these eta part's so offending to BMW's racing tradition could be easily replaced with more sporting parts from higher performance 325 series engines the as we know BMW probably "intended" to use.....

whatever.....
[/b]

so his car should not turn 7500RPM's :119: ?? LOL I think he is up for a wake up call soon!!

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by zracre@Jan 25 2006, 09:42 AM
Ok...now I have to add weight...

[snapback]72046[/snapback]

Pizza and beer. Works every time for me.

[Andy Bettencourt]

We aren't talking about the same car here. It's the ITA car that loses weight.

[RacerBowie]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 25 2006, 11:47 AM
We aren't talking about the same car here. It's the ITA car that loses weight.

[snapback]72083[/snapback]

Nah Andy, you guys are talking about the same car.

There is a REALLY fast 325e down in Florida. It is the only one I have heard of being that fast.

[handfulz28]

Yeah Andy, that's the problem. There's a guy running an ITA 325e in Central Florida Region that typically finishes somewhere near the top 5 OVERALL. He regularly pulls most ITS cars down the straights.
NOW he gets to lose 200lbs? I didn't see that.
Not that I'm trying to call the guy out here on the forum (I've protested him before and will do so again when I get the chance), but according to the guy's own Tell-Tale tach, his motor will spin upwards of 7k RPM in "IT-trim". I imagine there's a lot more than revs being made in "IT-trim"...

[handfulz28]

Just a recent example:

http://www.mylaps.com/results/showevent.jsp?id=112370

[Andy Bettencourt]

I don't want to accuse anyone of anything but:

- When a E30 325e pulls ITS cars, you have a MAJOR problem.
- When a car like that stays 'home' - so close to the ARRC, you have weird coincidence.

AB

[zracre]

It is quite frustrating...I have spent a ton of money on my car since the ARRC hoping for a better showing next year there...I have had some great battles with him but still cant pull him on the straights. he holds the track record at Daytona and Sebring Club Course and his dad holds the track record at Sebring Long. I was hoping that the now faster car would be able to run with it but now with weight being added...I doubt it wasted money. this is why people are turning to SM and other spec classes (self included)stack on weight, add a tweener and listen to the complaints until something gives...or people leave. I will try with the Teg, but I will probably try to run more SM this year than ITA as it seems to be getting silly. I dont know what to protest on the guys car and wouldnt without knowledge. I'm not against the changes, but adding weight to cars that have been there so long and taking silly amounts off of others seems like penalty time for people doing their homework. i'm no rich man and it took me years to build the teg to where it is now to just have lead thrown at me. I'm happy to see the MR2 lose some as well as the others, parity is good, but c'mon people...many people have been running the teg for years (not to mention the CRX...) and NOW a penalty???? please...what happens when you make too many changes at once.......you go backwards.

leave the class leaders weight the same

adjust the cars that obviously need it (MR2 Celica 1st gen Teg RX7 Protege etc)

add new cars and monitor...

I hear all this blah blah talk about performance potential...how is that calculated?? you have raw numbers of stock rated flywheel bhp...where in gods name do you come up with 2380# 140 CHP miata and a 2595# 140CHP Integra??????

If Kip Vansteenburgs 99 Miata is any indication of what a 1.8 is capable of...good luck with IT.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by zracre@Jan 25 2006, 03:04 PM
I hear all this blah blah talk about performance potential...how is that calculated?? you have raw numbers of stock rated flywheel bhp...where in gods name do you come up with 2380# 140 CHP miata and a 2595# 140CHP Integra??????

If Kip Vansteenburgs 99 Miata is any indication of what a 1.8 is capable of...good luck with IT.

[snapback]72128[/snapback]

Evan,

The way it is calculated has been put on this site multiple times. You are getting all worked up over nothing. The 2380 Miata is in ITA and is 128hp stock. Kip's car is a 99+ and is 140hp but it's in ITS.

Does that help your blood pressure?

This is not a penalty. It's a correction of all cars using the methods we use now to class and re-class. Instead of a crap shoot, all cars are starting from a level field. Some cars have been getting a 'free' ride for a while and some cars have been taking one for the team for a while - well, that is all gone now.

The 325e is a seperate issue. The same specs that added weight to your car, decreased weight on that one...121hp stock. I understand your frestration, but you can't complain about it unless you are going to do something about it.

AB

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by zracre@Jan 25 2006, 03:04 PM
...many people have been running the teg for years (not to mention the CRX...) and NOW a penalty????

[snapback]72128[/snapback]

Evan, I've been fairly mum on this subject since last week, mostly because it would seem to be self-serving. However, this weight adjustment is not a penalty in any sense of the word; it's an adjustment to bring these cars back to parity with the rest of the class. You guys should be on your knees thanking the SCCA gods that you've had the advantage for as long as you have...!

For example, did you know that my NX2000's weight was adjusted when it was moved into ITA from ITS? That's right: I went through the same formulaic process last year, and the ITAC/CRB added weight to my car. I didn't hear any Honda drivers complaining about that...

Before you go off to the garden and eat worms, let's do some direct comparisons between our cars:

- Horsepower: Your Integra 140 stock, My NX2000 140hp stock (no advantage). However, I make a demonstrable 147hp to the wheels, and I've got it on very good authority that "well over 150 horsepower" (possibly greater than 155) is possible on the DC2 Acura. We might be able to get more from the SR20DE, but there just ain't anyone else doing development on this engine, and I think we're pretty good...

- Camshafts: 'Teg: VTEC. NX: Fixed (advantage, Acura)

- RPM: Advantage Acura. (The 'Teg engine has nice light rods; the rods on my SR20DE are actually heavier than a small-block Chevy's...)

- Engine Management: Lots of choices for 'Teg, NX gets to choose one vendor (JWT) makes one computer that I've shown makes no difference (unless I want to pay thousands to have a MoTec developed for the car). I tried doing my own ECU tuning last year and blew up two engines...

- IT Weight: Teg: 2595, NX: 2515 (Advantage: Nissan by 80 pounds)

- Suspension: 'Teg: multi-link control arm suspension, NX: Mcpherson struts all around. The Acura can lower the car as low as desired (maybe to the IT limit?); if I lower the NX much more than stock ride height the geometry goes all to holy hell. SIGNIFICANT Advantage: Acura.

- Brakes: 262/239, NX: 257/234 (Advantage: Acura)

- Trans: both 5-speeds with similar ratios. (No advantage)

- Final Drives: a plethora of choices of ratios for the 'Teg; I get to choose between stock or 4.437 (and I have to go to Japan to get that one, unless I want to pay to fabricate my own. Advantage: Acura)

- Limited slips: Acura gets to choose from anything. Nissan gets to buy Nismo's clutch-type LSD and nothing else (Quaife no longer makes one for the NX)

- Aftermarket support: SCADS for the Acura, everything from full-up suspension packages to bolt-on camber plates, to any kind of suspension bushings/bearings you want, to any kind of pads you want. NX2000? EVERYTHING on this car is fabricated (I even had to fabricate my own rear swaybar), and NOTHING available on the aftermarket is race-quality (it's all street crap). Hell, Hawk doesn't even make BRAKE PADS for this thing any more; I have tomodify very-close Mitsubishi pads to fit!

So, let's sum this up to the bottom right-hand corner: If I told you you could choose between a car that has more power, a better bottom-end, better cam design, a better suspension, better brakes, better final drive ratio, more choices in LSDs, and drastically more aftermarket support -- or -- an 80-pound weight break, which would you choose? And I why am I such an idiot?

Sorry, man, it's time for you guys to just suck it up and go racing; I really can't feel any empathy for you... - Greg

[Tristan Smith]

Does anyone know what a cool suit system (loaded with water and ice) weights? Since I need to add a few pounds I might as well get something out of it.

[spnkzss]

Originally posted by Tristan Smith@Jan 25 2006, 03:32 PM
Does anyone know what a cool suit system (loaded with water and ice) weights? Since I need to add a few pounds I might as well get something out of it.

[snapback]72133[/snapback]

My 16 quart cool suit system weighs about 5 lbs empty. 16 quarts = 4 gallons. 4 gallons of water = 33.36 lbs (1 gallon water equals 8.34 lbs). 33.36lbs water + 5 lbs system = 38.36 lbs. Give or take a little bit because you are not going to have a full 4 gallons of water in there and ice takes up more volume then water so it will melt and won't equal the same amount. Logically I would expect a good 25 lbs to be added if not close to 30 if you add a couple cold ones in the cooler for after the race

[DavidM]

Originally posted by Tristan Smith@Jan 25 2006, 03:32 PM
Does anyone know what a cool suit system (loaded with water and ice) weights? Since I need to add a few pounds I might as well get something out of it.

[snapback]72133[/snapback]

Not a bad idea. I may have to consider that as well. I've got a fuel cell, so can't add a spare tire. I already have a fire system, but I'd say it only weighs a whopping 15 lbs max anyways. I'll have to read the cage rules to see what can be done on it. The car is almost perfectly corner weighted with the spring perches at the same height and me in the drivers seat so bolting weight to the passenger floor is going to blow. That's probably what I'll have to do in the short term though. I'll have to say that this does suck for people who spent the time and effort to get their cars down to min weight (or bought a car at min weight like me).

As to fast cars that aren't currently at min weight, I guess they won't be any slower. If the car's at the front, but not at min weight, then making its min weight higher won't do anything to slow it down. I don't if any cars fit that description, just making an observation.

David

[tdw6974]

Originally posted by Tristan Smith@Jan 25 2006, 03:32 PM
Does anyone know what a cool suit system (loaded with water and ice) weights? Since I need to add a few pounds I might as well get something out of it.

[snapback]72133[/snapback]

Hmmm I'm going to assume there is no retriction on cooler size So maybe one of those nice 100 Quart marine coolers filled with blocks of ice Now here is where we need our engineer types to chime in! So as the ice melts and cooler fills with water the weight remains the same. and the in impound you can help your fellow competitors( after passing over the official scales) with some really nice cool water . Happy Racing. TW