Teach me about ITR 325's

[Andy Bettencourt]

** The thing that's different between the two cars is quite reasonably a "front spoiler"

K

But it isn't a 'spoiler', it's a entire bumper cover.

I see the issues. I just think that a limited production 'model' is NOT ILLEGAL. The rules do NOT say that 'limited production items' are illegal as Derek broadly sweeps if I read his post right.

The question comes down to what you call the part. I'll call it a bumper cover that is legal to update - that came on a limited production car that is on the E36 325 spec lines in ITS and ITR.

Again, it has been said that this car has different suspension reinforcements than a plain old 325. If that is the case, then the car needs to be addressed.

[madrabbit15]

But it isn't a 'spoiler', it's a entire bumper cover.

I see the issues. I just think that a limited production 'model' is NOT ILLEGAL. The rules do NOT say that 'limited production items' are illegal as Derek broadly sweeps if I read his post right.

The question comes down to what you call the part. I'll call it a bumper cover that is legal to update - that came on a limited production car that is on the E36 325 spec lines in ITS and ITR.

Again, it has been said that this car has different suspension reinforcements than a plain old 325. If that is the case, then the car needs to be addressed.

I am merely useing "limited production items" so I do not have to keep quoting the GCR about spoilers, wings and such every time I talk about it. I am only referencing them for this debate, not a broad sweep. Should stock items be allowed in IT, yes, I believe they should be. However this clause in the GCR creates a definite question about this piece on an M-Tech, or possibly other cars.

I guess the question comes down to, is it a bumper cover, or a spoiler? Lets face it, the design of this bmw piece was to include a spoiler type bumper cover. If we are going to call it a bumper cover then, I guess it would be fine, but its still not following the spirit of the rules in my opinion. As this was a limited production thing. If we are going to use parts from an M-Tech, should it be on the spec line or not?

Derek

[Andy Bettencourt]

If we are going to use parts from an M-Tech, should it be on the spec line or not?

Derek

It doesn't have to be IMHO. It's a 92-95 325is. The ITCS does not neccesarily call out the trim level. Its fairly common for cars that share the same driveline and platform to encompass all trim levels, the 'best of breed' being the chosen one.

Again, if we want to expand the 'limited production' clause to actual trim levels and stock options, that is a whole 'nother story.

[dj10]

I guess the question comes down to, is it a bumper cover, or a spoiler? Lets face it, the design of this bmw piece was to include a spoiler type bumper cover. If we are going to call it a bumper cover then, I guess it would be fine, but its still not following the spirit of the rules in my opinion. As this was a limited production thing. If we are going to use parts from an M-Tech, should it be on the spec line or not?
Derek

From Realoem.com, FRONT BUMPER TRIM, M TECHNIC01Trim panel

If that's not a bumper cover I'll eat my hat!

[madrabbit15]

Front bumper cover it is......

So what is everyones thought on this? As long is the part is called a bumper cover and not a spoiler, we can use a limited production piece? Again, my intention this whole time was to understand myself.

Derek

[dj10]

Front bumper cover it is......

So what is everyones thought on this? As long is the part is called a bumper cover and not a spoiler, we can use a limited production piece? Again, my intention this whole time was to understand myself.

Derek

Can you run a M Technic in ITR? If you can, all other questions are irrelevant.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Front bumper cover it is......

So what is everyones thought on this? As long is the part is called a bumper cover and not a spoiler, we can use a limited production piece? Again, my intention this whole time was to understand myself.

Derek

There are two issues at play here. 1. A limited production PIECE - on its own, and 2. A limited production CAR that has unique pieces on it. In scenario #2, we have the MT 325is. Legal in IT because it's on the spec line - and all the cool little pieces that make it what it is. Scenario #1 is like the below example or the 'IMSA' rear spoiler on a 1st gen RX-7 (just quoting Mazda stuff, I am sure there are plenty of different examples from all makes). Dealer add-ons that were not part of a real package.

We have to agree on 'production'. For instance, Mazda sells this front bumper cover right out of it's network of parts departments:


It may be limited production, but it was not 'PRODUCTION'. Meaning, it was not a factory option as delivered to a dealer. This kind of piece (bumper cover in this case) should NOT be allowed in IT IMHO. It isn't now, nor should it ever (too bad too - it's a gorgeous piece). No car on the RX-8 spec line ever came with that BC as stock.

The MT 325is IS on the spec line and is it's own trim level. Limited production yes, but still as delivered from BMW to a dealer.

[Knestis]

From Realoem.com, FRONT BUMPER TRIM, M TECHNIC01Trim panel

If that's not a bumper cover I'll eat my hat!

...SO one can legally use the part labeled 1 but not the part labeled 23...?

K

[dj10]

...SO one can legally use the part labeled 1 but not the part labeled 23...?

K

Correct

[Andy Bettencourt]

Can't find any good pics of my E36 M3 so I can't verify the lower lip and it's legality (Lawton - quick look at yours?) but I will say this:

I do NOT think it's ok to take that lower lip off. Parts that are UD/BD are supposed to be done so as an assembly. Picking and choosing pieces and parts on that bumper cover I would say is illegal.

[Greg Amy]

If one is to accept that the M-Tech is a legal car for IT - and arguments here support that, given there's no restriction against limited production vehicles - then the car and all of its parts is legal as-is, regardless whether those parts would not meet subsequent IT rules otherwise.

If, however, you are arguing that the M-Tech bumper/spoiler is not legal for IT as-is, then you're arguing that the M-Tech vehicle itself is not legal for classification in IT...

GA

[seckerich]

Can't find any good pics of my E36 M3 so I can't verify the lower lip and it's legality (Lawton - quick look at yours?) but I will say this:

I do NOT think it's ok to take that lower lip off. Parts that are UD/BD are supposed to be done so as an assembly. Picking and choosing pieces and parts on that bumper cover I would say is illegal.

I believe the car was available with or without the extra lip. My late 98/early 99 had that bumper cover. At the end of a model run they are notorious for cleaning out the parts bin. If so it is legal either way, regardless of overhang if it is a stock piece. The precedent was set with the S2000 shock good or bad.

[dj10]

Can't find any good pics of my E36 M3 so I can't verify the lower lip and it's legality (Lawton - quick look at yours?) but I will say this:

I do NOT think it's ok to take that lower lip off. Parts that are UD/BD are supposed to be done so as an assembly. Picking and choosing pieces and parts on that bumper cover I would say is illegal.

Andy,
The E36 M3 front bumper cover is the exact same as the M Technic front bumper.

Does your statement mean that I can put on the black splitter piece and be legal?