Day 1 & Day 2 Results
09-10-2003, 01:38 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 113
Day 1 & Day 2 Results
Tom is 4T. BMW's are 1T and 2T. Porsche is 3T.
http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...groups/fp.html
Boy oh boy. Looks like the competition is extremely tough.
http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...groups/fp.html
Boy oh boy. Looks like the competition is extremely tough.
09-15-2003, 04:00 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 100
I'm back and still #4!
At least I'm consistent!
Like John said it was definitely tough competition! My "realistic" goal was break into the top 3 this year, but knowing who the top 3 would probably be I wasn't going to be upset with 4th again.
On the first day 1st thru 11th were only separated by 1.02 seconds! ANY mistake could cost you big in this bunch. I jumped from 8th to 4th on my last run on Tuesday! I hoped to improve every run again on Wednesday but couldn't improve on my last. I have definitely closed the gap on the top two cars.
The Z was running great and handling awesome! The concrete in Topeka provides a level of grip you cannot imagine. It's also pretty bumpy, especially the north course area. Several times I was up on 2 wheels, but only in the hardest turns. It's kindof freaky when you see the front fender rising up and feel it freewheel the inside rear. Common sense tells you to back it down, but you know if you do, you'll lose.
I need to try and make another event up there before Nationals next year to try different suspension settings and hopefully keep it on the ground more.
Congrats to Chris *** for the win. His BMW car is definitely the class of the field and he busted it off in us all on his last run on day 2! Nearly a second better than the next fastest. He said he had about 3 months on a new "high compression engine from Rebello". Previously the car had a fairly mild M3 engine. I don't know what kindof power is available from a NA M3 with high compression, but I would bet he probably has us all by about 75+hp. We might need to look a little closer at his fuel injection.
Tom
At least I'm consistent!Like John said it was definitely tough competition! My "realistic" goal was break into the top 3 this year, but knowing who the top 3 would probably be I wasn't going to be upset with 4th again.
On the first day 1st thru 11th were only separated by 1.02 seconds! ANY mistake could cost you big in this bunch. I jumped from 8th to 4th on my last run on Tuesday! I hoped to improve every run again on Wednesday but couldn't improve on my last. I have definitely closed the gap on the top two cars.
The Z was running great and handling awesome! The concrete in Topeka provides a level of grip you cannot imagine. It's also pretty bumpy, especially the north course area. Several times I was up on 2 wheels, but only in the hardest turns. It's kindof freaky when you see the front fender rising up and feel it freewheel the inside rear. Common sense tells you to back it down, but you know if you do, you'll lose.
I need to try and make another event up there before Nationals next year to try different suspension settings and hopefully keep it on the ground more.
Congrats to Chris *** for the win. His BMW car is definitely the class of the field and he busted it off in us all on his last run on day 2! Nearly a second better than the next fastest. He said he had about 3 months on a new "high compression engine from Rebello". Previously the car had a fairly mild M3 engine. I don't know what kindof power is available from a NA M3 with high compression, but I would bet he probably has us all by about 75+hp. We might need to look a little closer at his fuel injection.
Tom
09-16-2003, 11:32 AM
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 113
Good showing against those newfangled high tech high dollar cars. Maybe we can come up with a secret weapon to fight them - some alien technology like an anti inertial compensator or something.
09-16-2003, 07:11 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 646
Congrats Tom !!!
I see there were at least one other Z entered as well as your co driver.
Rumors have it that a ITS 325 ITs car was dynoed at 230 HP . I figure the 3 liter or the 3.2 liter would be some where in the 350 HP range in race trim.
Heck the new 3.2 liter is rated at 330 from the factory.
You get take any photos or videos we can see
Mike
I see there were at least one other Z entered as well as your co driver.
Rumors have it that a ITS 325 ITs car was dynoed at 230 HP . I figure the 3 liter or the 3.2 liter would be some where in the 350 HP range in race trim.
Heck the new 3.2 liter is rated at 330 from the factory.
You get take any photos or videos we can see
Mike
09-17-2003, 12:01 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 100
Pictures? Video? well... sure!
Not much of either but some. Here are the few FP pictures I took. Mostly in impound after it was all over but the crying and beer.
I also have some video shot from the roof and the fender with my semi cool spycam! (no sound though...) I'll post that as soon as I can.
Tom
First picture... John Anderson's Z (driven by his son Luke and Michael Tews). Tires are wrapped to keep them from picking up the big rocks that cover parts of the site
Not much of either but some. Here are the few FP pictures I took. Mostly in impound after it was all over but the crying and beer.
I also have some video shot from the roof and the fender with my semi cool spycam! (no sound though...) I'll post that as soon as I can.
Tom
First picture... John Anderson's Z (driven by his son Luke and Michael Tews). Tires are wrapped to keep them from picking up the big rocks that cover parts of the site
Last edited by tholt29; 09-17-2003 at 12:08 PM.
09-17-2003, 12:07 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 100
Under the hood of the BMW... I told them they needed more moving parts. Compared to all of the carb linkages the rest of us have this just looks naked. Take note of the CNC milled, black anodized engine plate spanning the front of the strut towers.
Last edited by tholt29; 09-17-2003 at 12:12 PM.
09-18-2003, 06:51 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 646
Thanks Tom for the awesome photos !!
It sure would be nice if everyone would pitch in and petition the SCCA to allow
carbueration and or injection of any kind
legal on the Z without the weight penalty.
At least you guys would be playing on the same tuning playing field. I know yu can get about the same Horsepower out of a
tripple set up as injection , but you don't get the ease of tuning they get.
One thing on that motor plate . The way its designed to attach high up on the strut tower. That sure does allow them to box out that front tower and stiffen the whole front . BRE did something like that with the
Roadster back in the 60's to stiffen the frame.
Wonder what its like driving on plastic rap under power Just a bit of Crisco on there and you got yourself a party.
Mike
It sure would be nice if everyone would pitch in and petition the SCCA to allow
carbueration and or injection of any kind
legal on the Z without the weight penalty.
At least you guys would be playing on the same tuning playing field. I know yu can get about the same Horsepower out of a
tripple set up as injection , but you don't get the ease of tuning they get.
One thing on that motor plate . The way its designed to attach high up on the strut tower. That sure does allow them to box out that front tower and stiffen the whole front . BRE did something like that with the
Roadster back in the 60's to stiffen the frame.
Wonder what its like driving on plastic rap under power
Just a bit of Crisco on there and you got yourself a party.Mike
09-18-2003, 08:39 AM
#12
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 113
So motor plates are legal? Interesting .... Next thing you know people will be cutting the frame off in front of the strut towers and fabricating tubular "radiator mounts".
I wonder if that BMW motor is set-back at all.
I wonder if that BMW motor is set-back at all.
Last edited by jburge01; 09-18-2003 at 08:42 AM.
09-18-2003, 07:37 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 100
Yep...Engine plates Are allowed... Motor mounts are wide open as are torque suppressing devices. This would probably constitute both. Now as for the location of the engine... Relocating is not allowed and knowing who built the car I doubt they would do that.
Now as for the location of the engine... Relocating is not allowed and knowing who built the car I doubt they would do that.
09-23-2003, 11:36 AM
#14
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 113
I wonder though if the rule is mean to apply to moving the engine slightly rearward (as opposed to relocating the the engine behind the driver or in the passenger seat area). I wonder if there has ever been a protest to test the interpretation of the rule.
--John B
--John B
09-23-2003, 04:44 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rickreall, OR
Posts: 116
Actually you can do an engine setback as part of the GT rules carry over for prepared. My hillclimb car runs in FP with a weight penalty. GT rules allow you to create a tube frame double a-arm car, or one with struts, or you can have have a live axle.
The weight penalty wasn't as bad as it sounds as I can balance my car side to side with the penalty and play with a 2 to 5 percent rear weight bias. My engine is set back to so that the number one spark plug is on the front axle center line, which is about 8 to 9 inches.
T
The weight penalty wasn't as bad as it sounds as I can balance my car side to side with the penalty and play with a 2 to 5 percent rear weight bias. My engine is set back to so that the number one spark plug is on the front axle center line, which is about 8 to 9 inches.
T
09-23-2003, 06:46 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 646
Hey Guys,
Look at the picture of that Bimmer and find plug number 1 . I would say its center line with the spindle . Also look at the firewall. Does that look like a stock set up to you guys ?? I am just trying to stir up a little talk here.
Look at where the Z's engine sits in the engine bay. I would say the spindle is close to mid engine on the L motor .
Tube ... Randy AKA GTZilla still has his IRS in GT2 . His car was built before the rules changed , and was grandfathered in.
Also GT2 is on probation for not enough entries at the Events.
Mike
Look at the picture of that Bimmer and find plug number 1 . I would say its center line with the spindle . Also look at the firewall. Does that look like a stock set up to you guys ?? I am just trying to stir up a little talk here.
Look at where the Z's engine sits in the engine bay. I would say the spindle is close to mid engine on the L motor .
Tube ... Randy AKA GTZilla still has his IRS in GT2 . His car was built before the rules changed , and was grandfathered in.
Also GT2 is on probation for not enough entries at the Events.
Mike
09-24-2003, 07:51 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 100
I don't see it Mike... Looks to me like #1 on the BMW is about 6" in front of the axle. Look at the center line of the 1st intake runner. Being a 4 valve, the runner should be centered on the cylinder. We need to talk to that photographer to have him take better shots in the future!
Tom
Tom
09-24-2003, 09:06 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rickreall, OR
Posts: 116
Hmm, I'm confused. What do you mean about GT-2 going away. Are you talking about GT cars no longer being legal in soloII or GT going away as a class in road racing?
The last GT rule book I have is from 2000 so when did the GT rules change. At that time you could convert any car to double a-arm front and live axle rear. Or you could use the stock type suspension, which is what I did.
Oh well, it's just a parts car anyway. The EMOD car is what I really intend to run.
T
The last GT rule book I have is from 2000 so when did the GT rules change. At that time you could convert any car to double a-arm front and live axle rear. Or you could use the stock type suspension, which is what I did.
Oh well, it's just a parts car anyway. The EMOD car is what I really intend to run.
T
09-24-2003, 09:21 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 646
Tube80,
GT2 the SCCA class is on probabtion right now , because of low turnout at races. I think they have a year or two to increase their numbers at races to keep it at the Run Offs.
Randy is using a partly tube framed car . Front half only and the IRS .
Mike
GT2 the SCCA class is on probabtion right now , because of low turnout at races. I think they have a year or two to increase their numbers at races to keep it at the Run Offs.
Randy is using a partly tube framed car . Front half only and the IRS .
Mike
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bookmarks
