April SIR ruling

[Harry Balszac]

Bill,

You will find it in detail in the rediculous thread on Bimmerforums. Post 101.

You miss that? You are one of the guys that took the most swings at me personally on that site. Thanks for paying attention.


[/b]

Andy, all due respect...but IIRC, Bill never has take a swing at ANYONE, either here on anywhere else.

Also, I know for a fact that his motor is a Stickley motor. I was in his shop when it arrived.

You sir, are a cowardly tool!
That, more than anything else I've read about SIR's, just screams of BS.
"DoubleD", I'm w/ Steve on this one, IT really doesn't need people like you.
[/b]

Wow.

Name calling.

Denying the truth.

And exclusionary elitism.

You sure are showing IT's best side, aren't you, Bill?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I'm not sure why you are bringing that back up. I think I have been civil and polite here.

I have made a simple request and you have now it turns ugly.

I believe there were pleny of mud thrown on both sides, but again, why bring it up now, rather than answering my question?

Who has now made it personal?

Show me where on this current thread have I said anything personal about anyone.

It seems you resort to personal attacks when unable to answer tough questions.

I just want to see the numbers. I want to see all the numbers so I can see for myself whether it makes sense or not. If it makes perfect sense as the ITAC says, why not publish the "formula" in the GCR?

Why can't we see weight + X * Y = HP? And, what X & Y mean so we can take another hypothetical car and get the weight for it? And, to verify the weight for all the cars in IT?

Any person that blindly believes the end numbers without seeing how it got there is a person who goes through life as a sucker. Do you just sign at the dotted line when buying a car? Or a house? You want to see all the numbers yourself for errors or other issues.

You are demanding that we accept the end number without any explaination. I find that rather humerous as I don't think you got to the position in your life by accepting other's conclusions blindly. If so, I got some hot stock for you.

I want to see for myself how the ITAC got from 2850 to 3150. Again, if the process is so "fair", why the personal attack, rather than a simple answer? Can you humor us and just give the absolute formula and numbers once more? I promise I will go away after I get an answer to this question.

If the "formula" has fudge factors, that is fine, but it should be defined, rather than ad hoc per car. If there is ad hoc assignment of fudge factors per car, that isn't a formula. That is ad hoc assignment of weight.

If that is the case, other people running in IT should be very concerned as the formula is nothing more than a sham for for ad hoc weight assignment with no basis.

Bill [/b]

Bill,

Just because you have been good here doesn't mean I am going to turn my back on you based on your history.

The 'process' was defined to the number - for the BMW in that post #101. Your 'tough' question has been answered. Not sure why you can't see that. When you read it again, let me know where it is vague and I will clear it up for you.

AB

[stevel]

...

[Singletrack1]

I guess he didn't tell you exactely where to put it, like how close to the AFM or HFM or how close to the air filter it needs to be?
Thanks
[/b]

No - his response was that as racers, we have to do all our own development. We have exactly 5 weeks to do the development and we have to do it on a part that he did not do the proper development or testing on for this application and is not willing to share the data on how to make it work.

One thing I would ask of the BMW racers that are going to purchase the SIR is to not buy from Raetech. There are other sources for SIR's and why support the person who helped to create a large part of this mess and isn't supporting his product?

Bill

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy, all due respect...but IIRC, Bill never has take a swing at ANYONE, either here on anywhere else.

Also, I know for a fact that his motor is a Stickley motor. I was in his shop when it arrived.

[/b]

Hey Harry, tell me what you think of this pile of BS:

I agree with you 100%. If/when the E46's start beating Andy Bettencourt, it will get a restrictor too.

I agree this is a bad precident as there was no problem to fix, other than RX-7's not dominating any more. And, now all Andy has to do is to put a restrictor on any car that beats him. The ultimate "I" class.

I'm not sure if there was ever a good sactioning body to race with, but SCCA is proving again that it is run purely by politics. Why does NASA exist?

Bill[/b]

If that isn't an uppercut, I don't know what is. It may be a past viewpoint and if it is, I accept it as water under the bridge.

Let's get past it. Let's all try and look at the data objectively.

AB

[Harry Balszac]

Hey Harry, tell me what you think of this pile of BS:
It may be a past viewpoint and if it is, I accept it as water under the bridge, but not until then.

AB
[/b]

Andy, given the fact that you have a vested interest in RX-7's success, why would you expect BMW racers being penalized by what turned out ot be an EXTREMELY ill-conceived & secretive ruling to feel any other way?

I mean, come on! Use your head! If someone raising a legitimate appearance of favoritism is, in your world, a personal attack, well I don't know what to say.

Far from being BS, it is in fact a widespread point of view.

[stevel]

I'm not sure why you are bringing that back up. I think I have been civil and polite here.
[/b]

You want a medal? You made personal attacks on another board and them come over here and expect it to be forgotten? All he is asking you to do is go check post 101. That so hard?

I have made a simple request and you have now it turns ugly.

I believe there were pleny of mud thrown on both sides, but again, why bring it up now, rather than answering my question?

[/b]

What did he do to turn it ugly? And I read most of that thread over on bimmerforums. Mud thrown on both sides? I think that is skewing the truth just a little. You guys made personal attacks about him, how he makes money, and other personal stuff. It was a tad bit brutal and quite uncalled for. So, don't expect much over here if you were a part of that.

Who has now made it personal?

Show me where on this current thread have I said anything personal about anyone.


[/b]

How did he make it personal? Did he personally attack you here? I don't see where in that thread it says anything. Like I said, just because you haven't done anything here doesn't mean you start with a clean slate. You sling mud at someone on another board and then expect, what? A do-over? I don't think so.

s

[buldogge]

Andy... Sorry you had to answer that 4 times or whatever...but...I hadn't read the whole thread here...I responded after reading the thread on BF.

Bottom line is...this is just plain wrong. Why couldn't the SIR that Joe H. and Mr. Finch are so fond, of be implemented at the necessary size to ensure that 180 rwhp was the "untouched" magical number?

35mm only cost 4-5hp...so...

What did 30...31...32...33..34mm do???

Sounds like 31mm might have been more appropriate.

First the ITAC/CRB thought that NO TESTING was needed...the pure science of the SIR would shine thru...remember.

Then testing was needed because troubling dynos popped up...so they tested.

Now...it is shown that the SIR IS NOT invisible to moderate-prep motors.

Is there not a size that works as advertised...period???

I am not contending anything. I have said this now, what, 3 times...the SIR did NOT work as billed from Raetech on that front. This error - and it's effect on under-prepped cars WAS a factor in the decision making process of the CRB.

Proponents of the SIR will be quick to point out that going to 3200lbs on a 180whp effort (when 205-210 is out there) would have an equally devistating effect. To which those who have spent the money to get to 'full-prep' would tell you to bend someone elses ear as that is what it takes to run up front.

AB
[/b]

[stevel]

Andy, given the fact that you have a vested interest in RX-7's success
[/b]

How is it a fact?

s

[Harry Balszac]

Andy... Sorry you had to answer that 4 times or whatever...but...I hadn't read the whole thread here...I responded after reading the thread on BF.

Bottom line is...this is just plain wrong. Why couldn't the SIR that Joe H. and Mr. Finch are so fond, of be implemented at the necessary size to ensure that 180 rwhp was the "untouched" magical number?

35mm only cost 4-5hp...so...

What did 30...31...32...33..34mm do???

Sounds like 31mm might have been more appropriate.

First the ITAC/CRB thought that NO TESTING was needed...the pure science of the SIR would shine thru...remember.

Then testing was needed because troubling dynos popped up...so they tested.

Now...it is shown that the SIR IS NOT invisible to moderate-prep motors.

Is there not a size that works as advertised...period???
[/b]

Yeah, and some of the ITAC folks & their defenders wonder why many of the rest of us think this is arbitrary, capricious, ill-conceived, fact-free, and stinky?

How is it a fact?

s
[/b]

Steve, please use your head. How is it not?

If I built E36 ITS cars, as a side business or as my primary business, and then played a direct role in rules which made RX-7's less competitive (and by doing so, the E36 became more competitive), don't you think I'd be viewed the same way?

Sheesh...COME ON!

[Singletrack1]

...
[/b]

How about a personal attack then so you know the difference?

I guess you also subscribe to Bill Clinton's defense of "what is sexual relations"? LOL



I'm off to work and make money to pay for a nice getto carbon fiber wing for BMWCCA.

This has been entertaining and everyone have fun beating up on BMW's after May 1st.

Bye,

Bill

[stevel]

If I built E36 ITS cars, as a side business or as my primary business, and then played a direct role in rules which made RX-7's less competitive (and by doing so, the E36 became more competitive), don't you think I'd be viewed the same way?

Sheesh...COME ON!
[/b]

That's what you're missing. They don't build RX7's as a side business or primary business. I know him and the guys personally. Know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.

s

How about a personal attack then so you know the difference?

I guess you also subscribe to Bill Clinton's defense of "what is sexual relations"? LOL




[/b]

I have no clue what the hell you're talking about.

s

[Harry Balszac]

That's what you're missing. They don't build RX7's as a side business or primary business. I know him and the guys personally. Know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.


s
[/b]

Um...Steve? News flash: on the BF thread to which Andy referred several posts ago, he specifially ADMITTED that he built, prepared, and sold RX-7's.

Oh, and please drop the bitter vindictive act. I do not believe my posts have merited your last sentence directed at me.

[stevel]

Um...Steve? News flash: on the BF thread to which Andy referred several posts ago, he specifially ADMITTED that he built, prepared, and sold RX-7's.
[/b]

Yeah, they have. But it's not there business. They have sold, built, and prepared RX7's, not necessarily as a business venture. If the 3 cars they have sold and the other handful they may have worked on count as primary business that causes a vested interest that you're talking about then you're splitting hairs. I'll let Andy explain more, but if you did actually know the whole picture you would realize what you said sounded stupid.

Oh, and please drop the bitter vindictive act. I do not believe my posts have merited your last sentence directed at me.[/b]

I'll stick by what I said. If you wanna be sarcastic and make accusations about people then know what you're talking about first. And if you don't be prepared to be called on it.

s

[Harry Balszac]

Yeah, they have. But it's not there business. They have sold, built, and prepared RX7's, not necessarily as a business venture. If the 3 cars they have sold and the other handful they may have worked on count as primary business that causes a vested interest that you're talking about then you're splitting hairs. I'll let Andy explain more, but if you did actually know the whole picture you would realize what you said sounded stupid.
I'll stick by what I said. If you wanna be sarcastic and make accusations about people then know what you're talking about first. And if you don't be prepared to be called on it.

s
[/b]

Wow, you sure sound all butch & tough. LOL.

Come on, man, grow up.

I said that many think that there is an appearance of favoritism related to his side business. This is 100% true. I made NO accusations.

Perhaps you should do a little introspection as to why you are so over-reacting and offensively brittle?

[Geo]

If the "formula" has fudge factors, that is fine, but it should be defined, rather than ad hoc per car. If there is ad hoc assignment of fudge factors per car, that isn't a formula. That is ad hoc assignment of weight.

If that is the case, other people running in IT should be very concerned as the formula is nothing more than a sham for for ad hoc weight assignment with no basis.
[/b]

Bill, you are correct in that there are subjective components to the adders and subtractors. It is NOT a formula and no one on the ITAC has ever said it was. I do believe I explaned this when we met.

[Andy Bettencourt]

This is turning into a Bimmerforums-type pissing match where we want to use the numbers and some want to continually bitch and moan about perceived impropriety. Like I said on the other board, I know what it looks like, but it ISN'T that way. If you can't come to grips with that and look at the data, then so be it.

The fact remains that the technology does not work 100% as advertised by Finch, no matter the size. There is no size that gets everyone to the magic number.

Just like in all the other classes, the underprepared will be slower. Funny, how would the big $$$ guys feel if their efforts were marginalized to 180whp and then a low $$$ guys comes in at 180whp and is 'invisible'?

Like I said, this characteristic was considered when the decision was made by the CRB.

[mlytle]

I'm off to work and make money to pay for a nice getto carbon fiber wing for BMWCCA.

This has been entertaining and everyone have fun beating up on BMW's after May 1st.

Bye,

Bill
[/b]

looks like the marrs race at the end of april will be the last one for my car with "its" on the side.

buh bye scca its. see ya over in bmwcca cr bill!

off to go shopping for cams and wings....

marshall

[Harry Balszac]

This is turning into a Bimmerforums-type pissing match where we want to use the numbers and some want to continually bitch and moan about perceived impropriety. Like I said on the other board, I know what it looks like, but it ISN'T that way. If you can't come to grips with that and look at the data, then so be it.

The fact remains that the technology does not work 100% as advertised by Finch, no matter the size. There is no size that gets everyone to the magic number.



Just like in all the other classes, the underprepared will be slower. Funny, how would the big $$$ guys feel if their efforts were marginalized to 180whp and then a low $$$ guys comes in at 180whp and is 'invisible'?



Like I said, this characteristic was considered when the decision was made by the CRB.
[/b]

Maybe, for the future, ITAC and CRB should consider the old adage, "Measure twice & cut once", Andy. This has the appearance of a farce, wheter that is true or not.

[dj10]

Sorry if this has already been addressed. I'm trying to do 3 things at once at work and this is one I shouldn't be doing at the moment.

This engine has one day break-in. I suspect it's still a bit tight. Also, the AF ratios don't look great. However, sometimes the dyno widebands aren't the most accurate (as opposed to a Horriba), so the ratios may or may not be accurate. Mostly I suspect it's still a bit tight.
[/b]

Well I know Chuck, and his engines are clearanced to make HP immediately.

All these personal attacks and accusations have to stop, guys this isn't JR HIGH SCHOOL! I'm disappointed that the results haven't been posted as promised, I'm alittle bummed that the CRB hasn't made it manditory for the placement of the SIR so now it's a gussing game. The CRB has made a decision. Try it if you don't like the results, we have other options.