ITS e36 BMW

[Bill Miller]

Edit:
Wasn't Giles involved in some of the ITR stuff way back when?

I forget who exactly was on the ITR 'committee'. I know it was Kirk, myself, Jake, Jeff Young, Ron Erp, George Roffe, Andy Bettencourt, and I think Greg Amy. Beyond that, I can't recall.

[gt40jim]

I am not worried about telling our numbers. Dan Jones car (ITR spec e36 with a handful of lap records) BEST ever was 208 rwhp with aftermarket ecu and single vanos. Again dynos DO vary. Doc is a touch lower due to exhaust system. NO bullshit. 220 P.S. Gregs e46 is nice Chuck...

[JeffYoung]

Dynos vary, and so do the quality of engine bills. Emoticon all you want, but you just had one of Sunbelt's engine builders post here saying 215 was average and 227 best.

Christian, ITR essentially came about this way. Folks had talked about a class above ITS, but more because of the Z32 300zx than anything, which the CRB/ITAC had refused to class.

But that was mostly talk. The guy who actually got things going was Ron. Over Christmas in 2006 I think, he put together a spreadsheet with the first listing of ITR cars, and then I added some and also wrote the ITR proposal doc.

At that point, someone decided that an ad hoc committee on this board would be a good idea, so we on our own put one together. I think Bill's list above is correct on members, although Scott was on it too.

Best committee I've ever been on. We motored through the list, made some decisions on various cars and got the shit done. Sent it in to the ITAC, and then the CRB/Bod and approved.

The only hitch was the process was in its infancy and the way final weights were set - including the E36 -- was inconsistent and never clear to me (I was not on the iTAC at the time).

[Tristan Smith]

Well knowing what my car makes HP wise, and reading the numbers here for the E36, there needs to be a shit-metric-ton of weight put on that car, or weight taken off mine.

But since there are not a lot of places to take weight off of mine, throw some lead at that thing.

[JeffYoung]

By the numbers it certainly looks like it.

[Ron Earp]

Well knowing what my car makes HP wise, and reading the numbers here for the E36, there needs to be a shit-metric-ton of weight put on that car, or weight taken off mine.

But since there are not a lot of places to take weight off of mine, throw some lead at that thing.

I believe ITR needs to be realigned. Probably not a popular opinion, but I believe that the class was somewhat crippled from the start by using the E36 as a benchmark for the class. I also think a couple of cars received estimated power levels that were too high.

I'll have to look through some of the early ITR spreadsheets I have and see what the initial power estimates looked like on the ITR E36. It could be they were the figures that were adopted in the end, hard to say.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I believe ITR needs to be realigned. Probably not a popular opinion, but I believe that the class was somewhat crippled from the start by using the E36 as a benchmark for the class. I also think a couple of cars received estimated power levels that were too high.

I'll have to look through some of the early ITR spreadsheets I have and see what the initial power estimates looked like on the ITR E36. It could be they were the figures that were adopted in the end, hard to say.

I can tell you. 30% was used on all the I6's and the 300ZX in ITR. The 325 was classed VERY aggressively at 30%. Nobody on the CRB was willing use 40%, which is about 216whp.

[JeffYoung]

But they would use it for implementing an SIR on the car in ITS? Inconsistent it seems to me.....

Ron is right about the E36. We took a car with 190 stock horsepower, or at the very bottom of the ITR "curve" and used it as the baseline for the class.

If the power to weigh multiplier of ITS is adjusted down then the car may fit back in S.

[Bill Miller]

Dynos vary, and so do the quality of engine bills. Emoticon all you want, but you just had one of Sunbelt's engine builders post here saying 215 was average and 227 best.

Christian, ITR essentially came about this way. Folks had talked about a class above ITS, but more because of the Z32 300zx than anything, which the CRB/ITAC had refused to class.

But that was mostly talk. The guy who actually got things going was Ron. Over Christmas in 2006 I think, he put together a spreadsheet with the first listing of ITR cars, and then I added some and also wrote the ITR proposal doc.

At that point, someone decided that an ad hoc committee on this board would be a good idea, so we on our own put one together. I think Bill's list above is correct on members, although Scott was on it too.

Best committee I've ever been on. We motored through the list, made some decisions on various cars and got the shit done. Sent it in to the ITAC, and then the CRB/Bod and approved.

The only hitch was the process was in its infancy and the way final weights were set - including the E36 -- was inconsistent and never clear to me (I was not on the iTAC at the time).

Hard to believe it was that long ago Jeff. I guess that's why I forgot about the Nissan. I think there were some other cars that got turned down because the exceeded the performance envelope of ITS, but I'm not totally sure. Some flavor of the 944 IIRC.

And I agree, it was a great group to work with. For the most part, there was no BS, and we all were on the same page, and just got shit done. I was even more impressed at how fast it got through the system and was approved. I guess we did it right.

[JeffYoung]

It was a great experience Bill. Shows what a small focused group in ABB can do if given some leeway to do it.