Comments? I just received this bulk email (as did every other actively licensed racer.... Sounds that these were the areas that were found "out of compliance" for some of the racers at Mid-Ohio...

-----Original Message-----
From: makard@act-inc.com [mailto:makard@act-inc.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2005 10:36 AM
Subject: A Friendly Reminder

Dear Michael,

This is a bulk email to all active Racers. No reply is necessary.

After reviewing notes from Compliance Checks held at Mid-Ohio and the current
BMW CCA Club Racing Rulebook, I want to issue a friendly reminder concerning Stock,
Prepared, Modified, and Super Modified classed racecars to help prevent any confusion
before/during/after Compliance Checks at BMW CCA Club Racing events:



STOCK: (see Body/Chassis/Interior section on pages 21 & 22 of BMW CCA Club Racing Rulebook)

Headlights may not be removed.
Additional openings for ducting may not be added.
Non-Stock body panels, including those under the car are not permitted (except that replica aftermarket fiberglass front bumper/airdam is permitted on e30 m3 only).



PREPARED: (see Body/Chassis/Interior section on page 26 of BMW CCA Club Racing Rulebook)

Headlights may not be removed.
Additional Openings for ducting in areas other than air dam/spoiler/bumper cover or additional
coolers (transmission, oil, and differential) may not be added.
Non-Stock body panels, including those under the car are not permitted. (except that replica aftermarket fiberglass front bumper/airdam is permitted on e30 m3 only).


MODIFIED: (see Body, Chassis, Interior, and Windows section on page 28 of BMW CCA Club Racing Rulebook)

Non-Stock body panels are allowed (including fiberglass/carbon fiber bumpers, airdam, fenders, hood, decklid, and doors) but underbody aerodynamic aids are not permitted.
Stock underbody aerodynamic aids may be used and non-stock exact replicas of BMW oem parts
may be fabricated from other materials and may be used, but the racer is responsible for
providing proof that his/her non-stock, oem replica underbody aerodynamic aids were
offered from BMW on their particular model racecar.



SUPER MODIFIED:

Non-Stock underbody aerodynamic aids are permitted.

The SUPER MODIFIED class is intended for racecars where the modifications
exceed those allowed in the Modified classes and, additionally, for those
designated purpose-built, BMW-powered racecars which meet the eligibility
criteria. All Modified Class improvements are also allowed in Super Modified
class.


As always, the main rule for BMW CCA Club Racing is:

Unlisted Modifications - Any modification, adjustment, alteration of stock
items and/or installation of equipment or part(s) that provide a performance
improvement of any magnitude and are not specifically and purposefully
listed is NOT allowed. In other words, if the rules don't say you can do it
- DON'T. Drivers are reminded that they assume ultimate responsibility for
their racecar's conformance to all rules, regulations and specifications even
if they did not perform the work themselves. Every driver should insist that all
work done to and all parts installed on his racecar are accomplished in a
manner that ensures conformance with all applicable rules. Any modification
allowed at a particular level of preparation is allowed at all higher levels, i.e.
modifications allowed in stock class are also allowed in prepared, modified
and super modified.

The burden of proof is always on the racer in any racing venue. If any part is
questioned, racers themselves are expected to provide proof that the part is
indeed an OEM stock part. There are several ways to provide this
proof. One way is the oem BMW logo and/or part number on the actual part as
imprinted from the factory combined with a build sheet or factory service
manual listing the part on that particular model. The BMW ETK can also provide
a printout of stock underbody parts for the year and model. If your racecar
has body panels that don't clearly have oem BMW markings on the specific part,
it might be a good idea to keep a copy of the factory service manual and/or
ETK printout of any underbody aerodynamic pieces to provide proof that they
are indeed original BMW parts for the specific year and model of your car.

Please be certain to properly classify your racecar prior to the event.


Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Mike Akard
National Rules/Tech Operations Officer
BMW CCA Club Racing

Reminder:
BMWCCA Club Racing Web site address: www.BMWCCAClubRacing.com

snip "Additional Openings for ducting in areas other than air dam/spoiler/bumper cover or additional
coolers (transmission, oil, and differential) may not be added."

Since when can additional coolers not be added? Stock class rules section 1.J : Engine, transmission, and differential oil coolers are free.

Prepared class rules are even more explicit about ducting per Section 7.F:
Ducting to provide airflow to additional coolers (transmission, oil, and
differential) is permitted.

I'm hoping that Mike's interpretation of the rule book is simply skewed by his typing/english skills.

-Sean

This whole situation is getting very, very interesting.

I have a front spoiler that's been previously cleared for prepared racing that under Akard's interpretation is illegal. Doesn't matter since I'm not BMW racing but just a sign of things to come methinks.

IMO, fuck Akard's interpretation. I have nothing against him personally (never even met him), but this "intrepretation" bullshit is getting out of control.

The only thing that matters is the Rule Book and any official addendums to it. And if Nanci disagrees, and starts playing competing "interpretations" against each other, I suspect there will be a whole lot fewer BMW club racers very soon.

JMHO.

snip "Additional Openings for ducting in areas other than air dam/spoiler/bumper cover or additional
coolers (transmission, oil, and differential) may not be added."

Since when can additional coolers not be added? Stock class rules section 1.J : Engine, transmission, and differential oil coolers are free.

Prepared class rules are even more explicit about ducting per Section 7.F:
Ducting to provide airflow to additional coolers (transmission, oil, and
differential) is permitted.

I'm hoping that Mike's interpretation of the rule book is simply skewed by his typing/english skills.

-Sean

Not only that... but section 7A explicitly states that openings can be made for ducting to additional coolers. :dunno

I did not however know that front splitters were illegal in IP. Can anyone confirm that before I put one on? I know in stock class it says you can put in a front splitter that does not "exceed" LTW specs... what exactly is LTW spec?

As the shit storm continues........

snip "Additional Openings for ducting in areas other than air dam/spoiler/bumper cover or additional
coolers (transmission, oil, and differential) may not be added."

Since when can additional coolers not be added? Stock class rules section 1.J : Engine, transmission, and differential oil coolers are free.

Prepared class rules are even more explicit about ducting per Section 7.F:
Ducting to provide airflow to additional coolers (transmission, oil, and
differential) is permitted.

I'm hoping that Mike's interpretation of the rule book is simply skewed by his typing/english skills.

-Sean

Sean - I think the rules and Mike's words are consistent - it is the OPENINGS that are not allowed, not the ducting. A car was disqualified this weekend at Mid-O for having headlight scoops. This is an example of what is not allowed. You can not cut new openings - but you can duct air to any coolers or brakes, as long as it's not to the engine.

Clarification 05-02 - Ducting in prepared classes 12/14/2004
Request: I ask that the PREPARED Rule be clarified to allow ducting for any airflow or cooling purpose. Also consider whether openings in the hood or fenders should be allowed or disallowed.

Clarification: The rules are clear as written. You can duct to coolers. You cannot duct for engine intake air. You cannot make openings in any body panel/piece for cooling or any other purpose.

I think that's pretty clear.

-Mike

I have a front spoiler that's been previously cleared for prepared racing that under Akard's interpretation is illegal. Doesn't matter since I'm not BMW racing but just a sign of things to come methinks.

Krisko - how was it "cleared" for club racing? If you have a clarification that it's OK then is it posted to the club racing website? I didn't receive any notice to post a clarification about any spoliers - send it to me and I will post it.

I think that what is at issue here is the combination splitter/undertray that several people have had installed, and was found as non-compliant at Mid-Ohio. The rules indicate that spoliers and splitters are free, but that does not give the opportunity to extend the front lip back under the body as an undertray. I think that's what he's getting at here.

Not only that... but section 7A explicitly states that openings can be made for ducting to additional coolers. :dunno

See the rules clarification from 12/14/2004 about this - the rules and the clarification are such that you can duct from any existing opening but not create new openings. And, you cannot duct for engine intake.

Clarification 05-02 - Ducting in prepared classes 12/14/2004
Request: I ask that the PREPARED Rule be clarified to allow ducting for any airflow or cooling purpose. Also consider whether openings in the hood or fenders should be allowed or disallowed.

Clarification: The rules are clear as written. You can duct to coolers. You cannot duct for engine intake air. You cannot make openings in any body panel/piece for cooling or any other purpose.

I did not however know that front splitters were illegal in IP. Can anyone confirm that before I put one on? I know in stock class it says you can put in a front splitter that does not "exceed" LTW specs... what exactly is LTW spec?

Spitters are free in prepared, but I think that you need to see what the undertray is of the splitter you're putting on and that's what was at issue at Mid-O. Check out pages 20 and 26 of the rules.

p.20
Spoilers and splitters are free providing they do not exceed maximum
body width and do not exceed the factory body length by more than one
inch. Installed devices must be consistent with the spirit of the original
design of the car such as those presented by aftermarket sources. For
example, homemade panels attached to the car would not conform to
the spirit of the original design unless they emulate such a part, such as
splitter panel.

Spitters are free in prepared.

Really? How about swallowers?


:lol :lol :lol

Really? How about swallowers?


:lol :lol :lol


Only in Mod - you have to EARN it!!! :eyecrazy :eyecrazy

Only in Mod - you have to EARN it!!! :eyecrazy :eyecrazy


Could really open up a whole new meaning for "You cannot make openings in any body panel/piece for any other purpose."


:redspot :alright :buttrock

7. Body/Chassis/Interior
A. Openings in the front air dam/spoiler/bumper cover to provide for ducting
to additional coolers (oil, transmission, and differential) and are
permitted. Headlight removal for ducting is not permitted.

This does not imply that the openings have to be OEM so we are free to make swiss cheese out of said parts as long as they are for the purpose of ducting to a cooler of some type. I agree that the rules do not provide for "openings" in any other part of the car but it seems contraditory to rule 7.F which says ducting is free. Does the term "ducting" refer only to the hose or tubing that directs the air but excludes the part of the duct that opens to the exterior of the car? By this rule I guess a duct for driver cooling would be illegal if it did not open from the bumper/spoiler and duct to a cooler which could then be ducted to the driver.

The one and only standing DQ at Mid-OH was for a KP car which did not have highbeam headlamps installed. This was an E30 so it was logically presented that the missing headlamp created a duct directly to the intake, thus providing a performance enhancement. Plus, the rules a pretty clear that the headlamps cannot be removed. No one agrued, no one cried, no one fused. The rules are clear and so was the DQ.

There were no other DQ's. A couple questions were rasied but there was no evidence presented that the cars were illegal. For example, it was commented that a couple splitters "appeared to extend to far under the car". As no one could say what "too long" actually was, there was no standing infraction.

The sad part is that we're getting all wrapped around the axle about technical compliance yet we're still a bunch of loose nuts on the track that should be spending more time worrying about being safe, racing clean, improving our driving skills, and having fun. No amount of technical compliance will keep me interested if the afore mentioned items aren't a priority for everyone on the track.

-Sean

Krisko - how was it "cleared" for club racing?

Clement Schmitt looked at my custom (really ghetto) spoiler at CMP and ruled it was legal for IP. I have no documentation to prove this fact, besides it was 'pre-Akard' so I'm sure Clement's approval is useless anyway.

I agree with Sean but I don't see why BMW can't enforce rules and stress safe driving or somehow improve the skills on the track. My main complaint about the enforcement is that Akard appears to be making wholesale changes to the rules as understood, ignoring recommendations or rulings of his peers (other officers who've held position longer than he has), and pissing of a whole bunch of people in the process. The silence on Nanci's part appears to be her approval of the direction of BMW CR.

7. Body/Chassis/Interior
A. Openings in the front air dam/spoiler/bumper cover to provide for ducting
to additional coolers (oil, transmission, and differential) and are
permitted. Headlight removal for ducting is not permitted.

This does not imply that the openings have to be OEM so we are free to make swiss cheese out of said parts as long as they are for the purpose of ducting to a cooler of some type. I agree that the rules do not provide for "openings" in any other part of the car but it seems contraditory to rule 7.F which says ducting is free. Does the term "ducting" refer only to the hose or tubing that directs the air but excludes the part of the duct that opens to the exterior of the car?

Actually the rules obviously seems inconsistent but I think that Mike Akard's interpretation is consistent with the intent of the original rule, and the official clarification from 12/2005 backs that up clearly. There actually seems to be a word or sentence missing from the rules you quote above, so that should end up being clarified the next go round. The official clarifications "expire" at the end of the year. If they are decided to be included in the rules for the next year, then the rules committee will publish that. If not, then it's back to square one.

The sad part is that we're getting all wrapped around the axle about technical compliance yet we're still a bunch of loose nuts on the track that should be spending more time worrying about being safe, racing clean, improving our driving skills, and having fun. No amount of technical compliance will keep me interested if the afore mentioned items aren't a priority for everyone on the track.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that safety must be stressed. However, I don't think we are "a bunch of loose nuts out there." I think that BMW CCA Club racing's strength is safety and the strict standards to which we hold new licensees. Our training programs, our rookie meetings, our drivers meetings always stress safety above all things. Obviously accidents happen, as sometimes they happen to good people. :(

However, BMW CCA club racing has never invested in compliance and it will be a painful process to move from point A (no compliance) to point B (reasonable compliance). There's no right way to do it - it will be painful. But you can't have zero compliance checks on cars when there are 100+ racers that show up for an event so we have to start doing it. Not everybody has to be friends with the people doing the checks, and the process has to be much better and have buy-in from all staff, and I'm sure that Mike Akard has a style that rubs many the wrong way, but I firmly believe this is a good direction for club racing to be moving in.

My main complaint about the enforcement is that Akard appears to be making wholesale changes to the rules as understood, ignoring recommendations or rulings of his peers (other officers who've held position longer than he has), and pissing of a whole bunch of people in the process. The silence on Nanci's part appears to be her approval of the direction of BMW CR.


Krisko, I have to disagree with you that Mike Akard is making changes to the rules as understood. I have never heard anything from him different than was exactly my understanding of the rules. Now, I may be reading the rules wrong myself, but I think that I have been over them with a fine tooth comb and always try to read the rules for the "intent" of the rule, not for "the most liberal possible interpretation" of the rule.

I think that Mike has class creep firmly in his sights, and where you start the fight against class creep is enforcing the existing rules to the letter and/or spirit. Where those two apparently conflict, we have a rules clarification process and a rules committee. So as I said above, I like and support what Akard's doing, although clearly his style seems to lose more friends than it makes.

So as I said above, I like and support what Akard's doing, although clearly his style seems to lose more friends than it makes.

And possibly more racers too. I won't do much BMW anymore just because I want to be competitive but even if I could run in prepared I'm not sure I'd want to. For me, club racing is more about fun and comeraderie than rule compliance at all costs. You might say that's obvious given my unique situation but I think anybody privy knows I did my damndest to stay legal.

I think there is honor among club racers and that expecting honesty is a better policy than casting accusations or examining cars for hours and hours. Maybe I'm just naive in thinking that but we aren't out there to win money or fame. If somebody needs to cheat to win then let Karma or sleeplessness take care of it.

While there's always been suspicion of the fast cars or the fast drivers, even vigorous examination won't make that go away apparently. So I ask what's the point of agressive inspections? Somebody has high compression in a legal car, but then you tell everybody about the compression insinuating that it's a cheater motor.

I just don't care for the direction BMW cr is headed. Regardless I hope to attend o'fest (head gasket, we'll see) so I can provide the CM winners a few bonus points. Oh yeah, if I win that M5 then I'll be selling my race car at a crazy crackhead price!

To your point Mike, "BMWCCA CR has never invested in rules compliance." Some how we've grown and prospered dispite an apparent disregard for the rule book. Don't get me wrong, I play by the rules. Anyone can check my car anytime they please. Other than Olsen (who supposedly retired) and Akard, who's driving this "need" for technical rightness? Seems to me like the intent of the system was to tech for safety compliance and to let the racers police each other for competitive items. Don't our officals have better things to do with the time they so kindly volunteer than try to call out cheaters?

Following are the 2nd and 3rd sentences of our rule book:

The primary emphasis is on clean driving and machinery preservation. This philosophy will be maintained by the application of common rules and procedures by the BMW CCA Club Racing Stewards at each event.

The intention is crystal clear that the officials and their use of the rule book are to support the primary emphasis of the program which is "clean driving and machinery preservation."

There's only money to lose and none to be made. Those looking to launch a pro career would be better served in a spec series. Might just be me, but I'm here for the fun and friendships. If my car wasn't in a ball, I'd be up to see you in a couple weeks where I would have certainly had a good time.

-Sean

And possibly more racers too. I won't do much BMW anymore just because I want to be competitive but even if I could run in prepared I'm not sure I'd want to. For me, club racing is more about fun and comeraderie than rule compliance at all costs. You might say that's obvious given my unique situation but I think anybody privy knows I did my damndest to stay legal.

Krisko - did you EVER do much BMW club racing? According to Clubracingstats.org you have done 3 races at 2 events. So saying you "won't do much BMW anymore" is a bit of a stretch. You are a very vocal member of the racer community and took the VERY COMMENDABLE step of identifying that you have non-compliant parts of your car, and correctly classed yourself in Mod. You are of course entitled to your opinion about Akard and had your back and forth with him on the club racing list in a very public forum, and nobody can undo that. But don't tar all of club racing with the brush that you were painted with when you said "I have been told my car is legal in IP so I'm going to race it there."

Bottom line is, if you think that club racing is about fun and comraderie you're right - that's why you can come and drive in Mod and be exactly the same place if you had different letters on your car. But you wouldn't be taking away points from people who had prepared their car to the rules as they stand. That's all that Akard and many other people are trying to do - to ensure a level playing field so that people are discouraged from liberally interpreting the rules. Until this year, people have been ENCOURAGED to liberally interpret the rules because they knew they'd never be called on it - that has to change or we can basically say goodbye to the class system as it is.

I hope to see you at VIR, headgasket or not. It will be a great event to watch or race in.

To your point Mike, "BMWCCA CR has never invested in rules compliance." Some how we've grown and prospered dispite an apparent disregard for the rule book.

Yes we've grown - and the program has been very successful. Instead of one car per class in the 90's (except JS which had lots) with everyone getting a window sticker, we now have multiple cars per class in each race. We have points and regional and national championships. We have people that travel all over the country going to different races - the premier and national events have done a HUGE job in promoting cross-region competition. This is all awesome and healthy and is propelling BMW CCA club racing to be the premier marque-specific CR organization in the country!

However, as organizations grow, they must change how they work. So saying "how we used to do it is good enough" doesn't apply when the organization and number of racers and especially participation (racer-races)has grown substantially. We need new processes for stewards. We need a clearer rule book. We need more volunteers to tech cars when there's a 70-car field vs. a 20 car field. We need consistency across events and across regions. Overall, we need to somehow find a good balance between the "honor system" and ad-hoc process we have gone with to date, and somehow removing the inventives for people to "get a little edge" on the competition when the're going for a regional or national championship because they know everyone will look the other way. It has to change, or the series won't be credible or viable at the size it has grown to.

Don't get me wrong, I play by the rules. Anyone can check my car anytime they please. Other than Olsen (who supposedly retired) and Akard, who's driving this "need" for technical rightness? Seems to me like the intent of the system was to tech for safety compliance and to let the racers police each other for competitive items. Don't our officals have better things to do with the time they so kindly volunteer than try to call out cheaters?.

To my knowledge, the board of the BMW CCA supports a movement to remove the "class creep" that is absolutely happening all around us. Scott Blazey and Louis Goldsman I believe support it. Nanci Maloney has said to me several times that she wants to eliminate rules creep and maintain the integrity of our class-based system. So the "need" for technical rightness as you call it is being driven by much more than Steve and Mike.


Following are the 2nd and 3rd sentences of our rule book:

The primary emphasis is on clean driving and machinery preservation. This philosophy will be maintained by the application of common rules and procedures by the BMW CCA Club Racing Stewards at each event.

The intention is crystal clear that the officials and their use of the rule book are to support the primary emphasis of the program which is "clean driving and machinery preservation."

There's only money to lose and none to be made. Those looking to launch a pro career would be better served in a spec series. Might just be me, but I'm here for the fun and friendships. If my car wasn't in a ball, I'd be up to see you in a couple weeks where I would have certainly had a good time

I agre with you that the focus is ALWAYS first and foremost on safety. But I think that the club racing staff and stewards and processes and rule book need to create a level playing field for people to compete in, and take AT LEAST SOME steps to see that the rules that you bother laying out in the rule book actually get followed. One thing that isn't happening is "application of common rules and procedures by the BMW CCA Club Racing Stewards at each event". This is something that needs to get developed as we go forward - I couldn't agree with you more.

And for the record, the reason that I am in club racing personally is the fun and the friends I have made. I never have a better time than when I'm at events. I love meeting and sharing beers with club racers - one of the best bunch of people I have ever met. That's why I decided to volunteer as webmaster - to help people enjoy CR like I do and have a richer experience doing it. I am looking forward to seeing the first ever 100+ car field at an event, and having almost 20 cars in my own class! It will be a BLAST!

Ensure a level playing field in CR? For what ... points? As I stated earlier, that's not what we should be about. The points are fluff. It's written (in bold even) in the points rules that our #1 objective is safety and the points system can be changed or terminated at any time if this objective is not held up.

As I see it, Akard's job isn't to police the racers - he is to help make sure the technical rules are fair and enforceable. It's the racer's responsiblility to keep things competitive.

-Sean

Sean, nothing having to do with rules enforcement can or would have a negative effect on safety. The two are not mutually exclusive.

How should the racers keep things competitive? What should a racer do if he feels that someone else has done something to their car that is not allowed by the rules? Nobody has ever protested in CR (maybe once) because you would be considered a pariah if you did. So somebody needs to do it.

It may be fun to race with one person (like you and me or you and Hamm) but if club racing can offer 10-20 racers in class with a consistent set of rules that is followed by all of those racers, then that's a good place to be in my opinon...

Krisko - did you EVER do much BMW club racing? According to Clubracingstats.org you have done 3 races at 2 events. So saying you "won't do much BMW anymore" is a bit of a stretch.

Kind of in poor taste to blatantly point out my bad luck at BMW races....for the record it's 3 races run in 3 weekends attended. And what's the point of bringing this up anyway. That fact that I'm a rookie means that I am entitled to less or no opinion?

Your take on this is symptomatic of a looming problem for BMW CR. At the end of the day I'm a customer and BMWCCA CR should be trying to earn my business. That doesn't mean 'anything goes' with the rules but you need clarification and a consensus on decisions. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to talk to a couple of BMW CR officers and be told a bunch of info then have every bit of that info disputed by one guy. I guess because Akard is more vocal, his version of events will stand and that's fine if Nanci supports it.

I built my car to BMWCCA CR I prepared specs (under built in many areas, cage and suspension mainly) and I planned to compete for SA championships. Along the way I discovered PBOC and GTS Challenge and I've had a blast with them. All I wanted was to take my car and go racing against identical cars (close anyway) and competent, fast drivers. NASA and PBOC are fun as hell and are trying to earn my business while BMWCCA has left a bad taste in my mouth, looks iffy lately and some of the driving looks iffier still. All these things considered, is my decision (and that of others) to run other series really that surprising?

But don't tar all of club racing with the brush that you were painted with when you said "I have been told my car is legal in IP so I'm going to race it there."

I am a rookie so help me out here. When a CR official tells me my car is legal, shouldn't I then assume it is? How did I 'tar club racing' by making that statement when I was legitimately told that my car was legal in prepared? And for the record, I've only 'tarred' Akard. His recent intimate involvement with CR means the tar that I and others are flinging at him will stick to BMW CR as well, as tragic as that is.

How should the racers keep things competitive? What should a racer do if he feels that someone else has done something to their car that is not allowed by the rules? Nobody has ever protested in CR (maybe once) because you would be considered a pariah if you did. So somebody needs to do it...

I agree - the protest process is the fastest way to make sure our rules are appropriately worded and enforceable. Just as our justice system in the USA leads to interpretation of the law, so should our protest system.

Imagine Mid-Ohio with no proactive Mike Akard, but with only reactive racers willing to protest. Imagine multiple protests filed, with a resulting investigation by those tasked to enforce the rules (the technical and competition stewards). Also then imagine clarifications being issued that outline the investigations, their findings and the resulting determination of the exact meaning of said rule. A few races like that and the rules would become much more clear. It's not bad to protest, in fact, in our current rule book, it's the ONLY way a racer can demand a rule be enforced. It is our duty.

If I am racing you, and I see something that I believe to be illegal on your car, I will approach you and discuss it with you. If you refuse my interpretation of the rule and you haven't convinced me otherwise, I WILL protest you and your car. If you see something with my car, I expect a similar process from you.

Kind of in poor taste to blatantly point out my bad luck at BMW races....for the record it's 3 races run in 3 weekends attended. And what's the point of bringing this up anyway. That fact that I'm a rookie means that I am entitled to less or no opinion?

No, you're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else. But when you say something like "I won't do much BMW any more", it is not like you have ever done much BMW, so this is not a change.

Your take on this is symptomatic of a looming problem for BMW CR. At the end of the day I'm a customer and BMWCCA CR should be trying to earn my business. That doesn't mean 'anything goes' with the rules but you need clarification and a consensus on decisions. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to talk to a couple of BMW CR officers and be told a bunch of info then have every bit of that info disputed by one guy. I guess because Akard is more vocal, his version of events will stand and that's fine if Nanci supports it.

You're frustrated because you are not following the official channels to get clarifications, then are surprised when personal conversations and heresay are not enough to back up a questionable or non-compliant part. BMW CCA Club Racing IS trying to earn your business - by providing a safe, fair playing field for all cars to compete in at many venues throughout the country. I agree that we need clarift and consensus on decisions and I am sure that process is going on right now - we are playing a game of catch-up because the rules have not been enforced for so long. And Akard is just one member of the rules committee and the staff, and a vocal one. But don't think he is alone in wanting to control rules creep.

I built my car to BMWCCA CR I prepared specs (under built in many areas, cage and suspension mainly) and I planned to compete for SA championships. Along the way I discovered PBOC and GTS Challenge and I've had a blast with them. All I wanted was to take my car and go racing against identical cars (close anyway) and competent, fast drivers. NASA and PBOC are fun as hell and are trying to earn my business while BMWCCA has left a bad taste in my mouth, looks iffy lately and some of the driving looks iffier still. All these things considered, is my decision (and that of others) to run other series really that surprising?

But Krisko, you OVERBUILT your car in one main aspect - your engine. You admit it, this is no secret. You have been forthright and open with this. The rules in this series and every other series are consistent - you must follow ALL the rules for a given class or you are not eligible to compete in that class. You can't pick and choose which rules you want to follow, just like the stewards cannot pick and choose which rules they want to enforce. I understand and have heard from people that it was never your intent to build a monster motor, but that you had two rebuilds fail and it drove you to this, so I'm sorry for you on that. But should you be allowed to compete in IP with a much more powerful engine than other people just because you meant well? Would that be "club racing trying to earn your business?" It's totally your choice where you spend your time and find the right level of competition for you. I hope as you get more racing experience with different organizations that you will see that checking for compliance is a very reasonable part of any credible series. If you want to just "run what ya brung" then there is a place for you in BMW CCA Club Racing - mod - but you may also find other series to be more to your liking and that's very reasonable. PBOC and GTS challenge and SCCA and and and are all good sources of racing competition and hopefully places for people to build racing BMWs and come play. Nobody's saying "run only with us or don't run at all". The 5 or 6 events per region may not be enough - there are plenty of other organizations to run with to pick up the slack.

Believe me - BMW CCA Club Racing IS DEFINITELY trying to "earn your business" and everyone else's business, but the club may be doing it differently than you think. You're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Since we (refering to Mike and I - I'm a slow typer so others may post before this) appear to be rambling at this point I guess I'll keep at it ...

It took 5+ hours to do a few cars at Mid-OH. How can we keep volunteers or racers if we subject them to this sort of misery? Did I mention it was raining? The results couldn't be posted until the next afternoon and a bunch of folks missed out on an awesome celebration for the 10th year of club racing that occured in the infield. The Buckeye chapter along with BMW NA rented the top floor of the only pavilion on the grounds and served food, drinks and had a big old happy 10year CR cake. All this as the DP and GT cars roared to life for the start of the Grand AM race.

I travel in small circles so I can't comment on the CR board's committement to rules enforcement or Nanci's distain for class creep. But the racers I talk to and hang out with don't seem too worried about it and all are very happy to go by the letter of the law. It might be hard to protest a friend but if I've approached said friend/competitor about a violation and it is ignored, I should protest cause the guy obviously thinks he's right and one of us needs too be set striaght.

I'm thinking about protesting Scott Berkowitz since a rookie shouldn't be applying so much pressure to the home crowd at Mid-OH. He must have some errant decals or something I can hang him with!

Cheers,
Sean

I am a rookie so help me out here. When a CR official tells me my car is legal, shouldn't I then assume it is? How did I 'tar club racing' by making that statement when I was legitimately told that my car was legal in prepared? And for the record, I've only 'tarred' Akard. His recent intimate involvement with CR means the tar that I and others are flinging at him will stick to BMW CR as well, as tragic as that is.

Unfortunately, that scenario is what has led to so much of the rules creep that has changed the rules over time. "The tech stewrd said it was OK" is only good enough to get your through whatever event that tech steward was in control of. If you have any question, you should always request a clarification or you are in risk of a single official simply being incorrect. That's why there are checks and balances in the rules system. And what Akard says is not the rule of law either, unless it is in writing as a clarification from the rules committee.

May I ask how you were "legitimately told that your car was legal in prepared?" Who said it, when and where? What was the person looking at? Was it a specific question about a single part or was it a general "is my car legal in IP?"

It took 5+ hours to do a few cars at Mid-OH. How can we keep volunteers or racers if we subject them to this sort of misery? Did I mention it was raining? The results couldn't be posted until the next afternoon and a bunch of folks missed out on an awesome celebration for the 10th year of club racing that occured in the infield. The Buckeye chapter along with BMW NA rented the top floor of the only pavilion on the grounds and served food, drinks and had a big old happy 10year CR cake. All this as the DP and GT cars roared to life for the start of the Grand AM race.

I agree that the process was broken at Mid-Ohio. That doesn't mean that it's a bad idea to do compliance checks. I think CR learned a lot from Mid-O, and will learn more from VIR, and Watkins Glen, and every future event. Mike Akard's role is a new one so there's no precedent or process. And there's clearly more work to be done to define the relationship between the compliance checkers/officers and the stewards of the meet (competition and tech stewards).

It's also unfortunate that there was a significant delay in posting results. But in every series the results can be posted as "preliminary" and not final until the results of any incidents or protests are completed. If only one person protested a car at an event, then the results wouldn't be "final" until that protest was heard and decided. in the case of a motor teardown, this could be days or weeks. Simply a fact of life and shouldn't be a real problem. I don't know why the results simply weren't posted as "preliminary" - that's another process that needs to be looked at and agreed.

Speaking of class creep, how did dive planes every get allowed in prepared?? Seems odd that so many things were being pushed back yet dive planes were added last year.

Wouldn't it be ironic if the request originated from one of the only cars I've ever seen in CR with them who is now in mod anyway? Mike, do you have access to the rules change requests so this can be determined?

-Sean

Sean - I don't know anything about dive planes and am not on the rules committee. I wasn't party to the discussion and don't have any access to the information. Mike Akard wasn't on the rules committee then either so if you're thinking of him then I don't think that's the right way to be looking. Mike more often pushed the envelope of the rules to show that they needed clarification.

No, you're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else. But when you say something like "I won't do much BMW any more", it is not like you have ever done much BMW, so this is not a change.

Did you not read this in an earlier post from me?

I built my car to BMWCCA CR I prepared specs (under built in many areas, cage and suspension mainly) and I planned to compete for SA championships.

I've since decided that having fun is more important than pursuing regional championships. Besides, I wouldn't exactly be a favorite to win anything in 'mod'. Your tone is very condescending whether you realize it is or not and is likely indicative of BMW CR.

You're frustrated because you are not following the official channels to get clarifications, then are surprised when personal conversations and heresay are not enough to back up a questionable or non-compliant part.

In the midst of the regime change and numerous open issues who knows how to get an answer. I think most would agree with me that if a tech steward approves of your splitter that you don't need to get it reapproved event after event if the rules haven't changed...it's assinine to expect someone to do so. I'm not going to file anything official with BMW CR because I don't want Akard to get another shot at me...I know what the result will be anyway.

But Krisko, you OVERBUILT your car in one main aspect - your engine.

It was built to the rules as they were understood by engine and club racing experts. And just because Akard thinks the internals are all forged and lightened doesn't mean they are. He emailed me that his conversations with Sunbelt (to build him an engine) and Sunbelt's past work led him to believe my engine is illegal...he's full of crap. Nothing like hard evidence to back up his case. :rolleyes There are a dozen or more engines similar to mine in IP but I was the only dumbass that talked about my pistons.

Believe me - BMW CCA Club Racing IS DEFINITELY trying to "earn your business" and everyone else's business, but the club may be doing it differently than you think.

It is definitely a strange approach BMW CR is going with...replacing confusion and doubt with outright disrespect for it's racers.

May I ask how you were "legitimately told that your car was legal in prepared?" Who said it, when and where? What was the person looking at? Was it a specific question about a single part or was it a general "is my car legal in IP?"

You have PM.

My thinking is that a position of this nature should not be held by an active racer, especially a racer with the history of Mike Akard, a man who at one time or another has had issues with a lot of racers. Conflict of interest is my concern. He can claim all he wants that he is unbiased and so on, but his actions have shown otherwise.

Mike Akard wasn't on the rules committee then either so if you're thinking of him then I don't think that's the right way to be looking.
I didn't name anyone. Just seems if a prepared racer was pushing hard to get them then we'd see a prepared car racing them this year. Like I said, pretty odd.

Mike more often pushed the envelope of the rules to show that they needed clarification.
Hey that's my excuse if I bend the rules. And I don't belive it for one minute, especially since Mike has so openly reminded us that if the rules don't explicitly say you can do it, then you can't.

-Sean

Kinda of like the rule making Ground Control rear camber arms legal after it was made known that Mr. Gilbert himself had a set on his car even though they weren't legal at the time. Remember that Mike?

I'm thinking about protesting Scott Berkowitz since a rookie shouldn't be applying so much pressure to the home crowd at Mid-OH. He must have some errant decals or something I can hang him with!

Cheers,
Sean[/QUOTE]

Oh sure, pick on the new guy. Do you know how much time I spent in the wind tunnel working on getting the exact spot to place those composite decals :D All I can say is I've been involved in Club racing for a grand total of 2 months. I met Sean, Paul, Marc, Len, Dave, and Dick at Putnam in June. In that short time I have developed a friendship with all the guy's in IP, especially Sean, Paul and Len, and am thrilled that I can somewhat compete. I really don't know what people have done or not done to their cars. I do know that I am having a blast racing with all of them, no matter where I finish in the race, and to me that's what the whole experience is supposed to be about. :blueball

Kinda of like the rule making Ground Control rear camber arms legal after it was made known that Mr. Gilbert himself had a set on his car even though they weren't legal at the time. Remember that Mike?

Ummmm - excuse me Damion? I requested a formal clarification from the rules committee just like anyone else, submitted a picture and description of the part, and I received an official clarification from the rules committee and posted it on the website. You can see it on the website. Had the clarification come back that they were illegal, I would have taken them off my car and would have bought a set that were legal by whatever reason they were deemed illegal. So they are legal, were legal, and always have been legal. Clarifications are not CHANGES in rules, they are CLARIFICATIONS of existing rules.

What makes you say "even though they weren't legal at the time?" The problem is you are using your own or someone else's interpretation of the rules to say what is legal and illegal, not the "official" interpretation found through the correct channels.

Maybe if people used the official channels more often, instead of interpreting the rules as they see fit, a lot of these issues wouldn't exist.

Clarification 05-04 Ground Control rear lower control arms for E36 M3 in prepared class 2/20/2005
Request: Are the adjustable rear lower control arms as supplied by Ground Control for the E36 M3 allowable in prepared classes?
Clarification: Yes, the lower rear control arm as supplied by Ground Control is legal in prepared.

Clement Schmitt National Tech Steward/BMW Club Racing

Check out this thread which was the reason I sought the clarification. I thought it was legal and said I had them on my car, someone suggested it might not be, so I submitted a request and it came back legal.

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=311654

I'll quote what I said then: "...when people comment on the internet lists about what is and isn't legal is often NOT consistent with the people who actually determine these things..."

Regards,
Mike

PS - I love the tone Damion - thanks.

But Krisko, you OVERBUILT your car in one main aspect - your engine. You admit it, this is no secret. You have been forthright and open with this. The rules in this series and every other series are consistent - you must follow ALL the rules for a given class or you are not eligible to compete in that class. You can't pick and choose which rules you want to follow, just like the stewards cannot pick and choose which rules they want to enforce. I understand and have heard from people that it was never your intent to build a monster motor, but that you had two rebuilds fail and it drove you to this, so I'm sorry for you on that. But should you be allowed to compete in IP with a much more powerful engine than other people just because you meant well?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but can we please stop pretending that Krisko has an "overbuilt" motor. Some are making it sound that his motor is making power because it is built far and beyond the Prepared class rules, when it simply isn't true based on anything Krisko has said publicly.

Is Krisko's motor legal as the rules have now been interpreted with regards to the definition of the word "configuration" as it applies to valve reliefs in the pistons? No. That said, the motor, as I understand it, could be made 100% legal and make the exact same power (technically it could make more since the compression would be slightly higher) by substituting the current pistons for duplicates that have "stock" depth valve cuts in them.

As the rules stand, you can build a very powerful motor in IP/HP. Krisko, save for his valve cuts being a couple mm too deep, and Randy, now with pistons with legal valve cuts, have both done it.

For the record, when reading the Prepared class piston rule, I see no basis for CR stating that the valve cuts must be stock depth based on the Webster's definition of the word "configuration"...but that's another topic entirely.

E. All pistons must be factory replacement spec and match factory dome, dish, valve relief configuration, ring geometry, weight, wrist pin height; compression must meet factory replacement specifications. A maximum of .040 (1mm) overbore is allowed. Compression ratio may be changed only within the tolerances effected by resurfacing for trueness.

con·fig·u·ra·tion n.
1 a : relative arrangement of parts or elements

I see nothing with regards to size in the definition of configuration. Unless someone can find where BMW lists the factory replacement spec for valve cut relief depth, I see no basis for ruling any cut "too deep".

Unfortunately, that scenario is what has led to so much of the rules creep that has changed the rules over time. "The tech stewrd said it was OK" is only good enough to get your through whatever event that tech steward was in control of. If you have any question, you should always request a clarification or you are in risk of a single official simply being incorrect. That's why there are checks and balances in the rules system. And what Akard says is not the rule of law either, unless it is in writing as a clarification from the rules committee.


I'm not involved with BMWCCA CR, nor do I see myself in the near future so maybe this opinion will be taken as a view from a pure outsider with no bias(or maybe I'll be told to sod off :stickoutt ). But I think this statement shows why people are getting irritated with this whole debacle.

The rulebook should be written so clearly, containing dimensions and constraints for parts that now have an extremely vague explanation. I also think examples next to some rules might also help. Language is an imperfect way to communicate, so sometimes you might try to define what you really mean by "configuration" or "ducting." Does "ducting" include the hole on the outside of the bumper/bodywork? Does that mean you can run 1,000 ft of hose underneath hood of your car as long as it doesn't open up to the incoming airstream? etc.

Does "configuration" include dimensions and placement? Maybe through a protest or a ruling someone can measure a stock piston and come up with a depth, placement and width for the valve reliefs.



Don't take this as an attack, because it's not. I just know if I were in these guy's situations, I would really want a clearer set of rules if I was going to be "grilled" everytime I came off the track. A simple sentence that uses the "interpretation" of one word to completely define the rule governing a part/function of the car is just too vague and people are going to/already have gotten irritated when they get on the short end of the stick of that "interpretation."


I know you guys have limited resources, so you can't measure a whole car, but if you get a protest or make a ruling on a part, there should be something SUBSTANTIAL. Not "it looks" and no "appear to be." There should be something like, valve reliefs were 0.100" deeper than stock pistons and had an incident angle 10 degrees shallower on the outside of the piston in addition to having 0.200" more width. Obviously a ruling on something like "headlight missing" when the rules specifically require it being there(and even if they don't say that, it should be understood that you can't go willy-nilly removing stuff, especially when there is a clear benefit), but anything technical in nature such as what "configuration" means to a part should really be defined once it becomes an issue. To continue to allow someone, or even a committee of people to "interpret" every inspection as they see fit is just poor form.

Most guys that are into BMW CR are probably pretty savvy business men, so I think that's why you're seeing them a bit "up in arms" about the policing of their hobby. They want something firm and substantial. I guarantee you 99.999% of the guys out there want their car to be 100% legal, and go to great pains to make sure it is. The problem with the current situation is how you can do so when you really don't have a firm rulebook, but instead have a book with a load of vague verbage and are having it being actively enforced at the discretion of a select few.

The rulebook might have been totally adequate for the sport 10 years ago when there was little to no enforcement of the rules, but times are changing in BMW CR, and so should the verbage and intent of the rules which are now being enforced.



I obviously won't be affected if CR goes either way, but I thought maybe an outsider's opinion that's free from a lot of the politics and drama that always comes with such hobbies might be useful in some capacity. Plus I've had me a bit o' wine tonight and am bored waiting for F1 qualifying to come on. The blue Frenchies need to get their butts whooped on again, and I don't really care who does it!!!

If the rulebook came through as a patent application at work, most of it would be slammed with a 112 (vague and indefinite) :stickoutt

I dont see why people would feel bad protesting. Solo2 guys do it all the time and if your car is legal or you can back up your modification, you really shouldnt be concerned.

With that said, can anyone tell me if the MAX Velocity splitter is legal or not before I put this on? I had an incident w/ a tirewall a long time ago which pretty much took out my front underside (porkchops, etc) and my plan was to replace this all with the MAX Velocity since it covers most of what the stock components covered. If it's not legal, then Im going to have to plan on buying some stock parts soon.

My thinking is that a position of this nature should not be held by an active racer, especially a racer with the history of Mike Akard, a man who at one time or another has had issues with a lot of racers. Conflict of interest is my concern. He can claim all he wants that he is unbiased and so on, but his actions have shown otherwise.


coughcough Has Anyone Measured Siccardi's Rear Wing? coughcough

coughcough I'll Bet Akard Didn't coughcough

:lol :lol :lol

On a more serious note: Mike G., I love ya, man, but it is probably not smart to appear to sneer down your nose at a rookie club racer who will begin to look elsewhere for racing opportunities. If anything, CR needs to bring in more rookies, not drive them away. I am not passing judgement on Chris' claims, since i have zero knowledge. But all of CR should sit up & take notice when new racers decide to leave. Remember, 99% of the iceberg is below the surface...

I don't have a dog in this fight, but can we please stop pretending that Krisko has an "overbuilt" motor.

Thanks Bryan, thanks not only for getting my back but making a coherent, passionate argument for where I'm coming from. No other racing org is so damned passionate about valve relief depth, including SCCA world challenge and club racing and Grand Am. Having said that, BMWCCA has every right to have a problem with my valve reliefs but it's rather silly. I know for a fact I could rebuild my bottom end and be legal but I simply don't care enough anymore to spend $2000+ fixing a perfectly fine motor. I think Sunbelt would be willing to pick up part or all of the cost but I won't make them do that. I'm happy with the support they've given me and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them to anybody.

I see nothing with regards to size in the definition of configuration. Unless someone can find where BMW lists the factory replacement spec for valve cut relief depth, I see no basis for ruling any cut "too deep".

I could use this logic to force BMW CR to prove my engine is illegal. How can I violate a spec that isn't clearly defined? But Akard would drag me through the ringer and my engine might magically fail on me after the inspection and rebuild. If I were capable of tearing down and rebuilding my own engine I would press the issue.

My thinking is that a position of this nature should not be held by an active racer, especially a racer with the history of Mike Akard, a man who at one time or another has had issues with a lot of racers. Conflict of interest is my concern. He can claim all he wants that he is unbiased and so on, but his actions have shown otherwise.



It must be Sunday b/c I've just heard the gospel ;)

Sean - I don't know anything about dive planes and am not on the rules committee. I wasn't party to the discussion and don't have any access to the information. Mike Akard wasn't on the rules committee then either so if you're thinking of him then I don't think that's the right way to be looking. Mike more often pushed the envelope of the rules to show that they needed clarification.


Geez Mike, you're starting to seem like Akard's mouthpiece on this thread.

He's got a big enough mouth as it is...

I think what a lot of us are getting at here is that we welcome more compliance checking provided the whole process doesn't kill the fun of being at the track...and we would be much less vocal and critical if the person in charge of it: a)didn't have a conflict of interest; b) treated people with respect; c) conducted him/herself professionally; and d) wasn't such a f'ing prick.

To say for Mike that he pushed the envelope to shine light upon the weakness of rules and enforcement sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. I think he just wanted to push the envelope just b/c he can...he likes everything big...his tires, his flares, his wing, his Renegade, his mouth, his shadow, his everything....

I think some of us are overdosing on Akard and its worse than crystal meth...

Refute away, my friend...I'll be on the Cape the rest of the week and won't be around to read it :alright :redspot :lol :buttrock :cool :stickoutt :) :buttrock

Krisco I don't understand what you are complaining about? If your engine isn't legal than it isn't legal. Because you made a mistake (having deeper valve cuts) BMW should change the rules? It doesn't matter if it makes your car faster or not if it is not legal for the class you want to run in than fix it or stop bitching. You can bad mouth Mike all you want, but the bottom line is that in the long run someone needs to do what he is doing. Otherwise there should be no classes at all. You may not like the way he is doing it, but BMW Club Racing asked him to take this job right? So they must have a reason for this. Maybe he could be nicer about it, But I think no matter who it is it is a tough job. My thought is that they want people to follow the rules. They must have felt that there were to many cars that were not legal. If you got 2nd and discovered that the guy who won was not legal then you wouldn't care? Of course you would. Club racing is about the people and friendships, but it is racing isn't it? We all want to win otherwise we could just do driver schools. I also agree that there should be more protests. That is the only real way to make people follow the rules and level the playing field. The racers themselves have to take it into there own hands. I think we should give Mike and club racing a chance before we just jump ship.

-Rick

Krisco I don't understand what you are complaining about?

I originally wasn't commenting on my engine but it always seems to come back to that. I don't like Akard and many others don't as well apparently, that's what I was complaining about. You're right though, I'm over pistongate and talk about my engine.

Thanks for snagging that hood for me by the way.

coughcough Has Anyone Measured Siccardi's Rear Wing? coughcough

coughcough I'll Bet Akard Didn't coughcough

:lol :lol :lol



Actually,.... coughcough Mr. Siccardi's wing is 1-2inches LESS than the width of the widest part of the car (fenders) ;) SO.... coughcough Akard or anyone could have measured it, and can measure it on the new car as well, it's LEGAL and effective.

Jon

Actually,.... coughcough Mr. Siccardi's wing is 1-2inches LESS than the width of the widest part of the car (fenders) ;) SO.... coughcough Akard or anyone could have measured it, and can measure it on the new car as well, it's LEGAL and effective.

Jon

Jon, what new car do you speak of that you have these days? Is it the same yellow one you are driving these days or is it a new beast? ;)
_Matt
#052 DM

Jon, what new car do you speak of that you have these days? Is it the same yellow one you are driving these days or is it a new beast? ;)
_Matt
#052 DM

I'm building a new E30 car. It's the shortest path to get going again. Randy Mueller's incident at Mid Ohio last weekend totalled my yellow car.

Jon

Damn....I wasnt aware of that. Sorry to hear. Any pics of what was left of old yeller?? When do you expect to get going again??

I sense we're at a turning point in CR.

I don't have the background, or the years of experience that some of the
racers on the list do, nor can I claim to have been in on the ground floor when they had the first races.

But, I can say that my heart is pure in the sense that what I love about the
CR group is the people, the friendships, the joy of teaching new comers
tricks, helping people out at the track, and passing on the lessons I've learned from people that have taken the time to help me in the past. I even have to admit that I've come to appreciate the points system that lets me meet face to face racers from across the country that I would never get a chance to hang out with and share the track with. What a pure sense of joy I honestly felt at Mid Ohio (despite my neck and back spasms) at putting some faces to the names....

I saw an interesting glimmer of hope at the Mid Ohio race. A couple of
people made an earnest effort to try and implement some rules inforcement. They spent a lot time and effort, and didn't do this for money, for personal profit, or to benefit their own business in the long term, or to beat other people at the track in their own groups...at least that was my impression.

There were originally going to be 4 DQ's at the event, and that number got
reduced for a variety of reasons that I have minimal knowledge of, nor do I want to stir the pot and create more gossip than there already may be. My
understanding is that in some professional series, you can make a lot of money even if you finish low on the totem pole, and its "Worth" it to cheat, not to mention if you win. Here guys, its ego and points, and perhaps, I suppose some credit to the builders and suppliers of parts for the car if they've got their name on the side..... but it really defeats what I believe to be spirit of CR to have non-compliant cars out there.

I was personally thrilled when I saw Mike Akard's post (whether copied here
or direct, I don't recall, nor care) that was titled "Friendly Reminder". I
almost wonder if that may not be the type of seed that needs (or needed) to be planted after every race where cars are teched, and that perhaps we need a warning system like that. If a racer is told at the race that they were about to be DQ'd, it sends a serious message, and that racer knows well that they risk that next event if they don't bring the proper support or documentation to the next race to VERIFY compliance. I'd even propose that the reason for near-DQ be published on the time sheets or on the web, so that fellow competitors can choose to put their money up at the next race, and gamble that the racer in question has not fixed the problem, or gone to the effort to find proper documentation.

It does not have to say anything more than "insufficient documentation was
available at that event to support modification, xyz, and in the future, a
decision may be made pending that documentation" This is very fair, it skirts the issue of whether they were cheating, and puts the proper onus on the racer to prove that they're OK for the next race. It also gives the racer a chance to ask others for advice, ask their supplier why they thought it was OK, and as witnessed on the CR bring up intelligent disucssions about back-dating, part numbers and such.

We've been over this a thousand times, its the racer's personal responsibility to bring a compliant car to the track.

Stock BMW parts are dirt cheap at junk yards. ANYONE that is paying gas
money these days to go to the track can likely take off their boy racer go fast goodies that are not compliant, put back the right parts, or switch race groups to be compliant so that in the off season they can rebuild whatever is
expensive to be compliant in the group they want to race with. This is a hobby of luxury for every damn one of us, and we know it. Is there anyone here who honestly feels that if they don't come race with BMW CR that they can't put food on their table to feed their family? I hope not. I really hope not.

I hope that I have not personally offended anyone on the list with this note.
I also honestly feel that people that may have bought parts they can't use
have very easy and wonderful ways in this day and age of electronic message boards, forums, ebay and such to sell off parts to driver school participants who can use them, and that they won't lose too much money on it. In fact, its a wonderful way to make new friends, help friends out, and teach others about our racing group.

As much as I hate to admit it, even an engine that is "non compliant" has
quite a bit of value to the right person, and even if YOU might not be able to
use it in the class you built if for, their maybe someone who was racing behind you, or read about you that would love to buy it, and race it in the next class up, just wanting to go fast, and not giving a damn about the sticker on the side of the car.

In the past, I've posted that we should not use the word 'cheating" in these
discussions, and I still feel that way. I believe I had suggested that there
were better alternatives. I'm beginning to think, and its not necessarily
fully formulated, that what we really need is a list posted of cars that were
checked with their driver present that "lacked proper documentation". This does not need to be put in the log book, but that's a possibility too, but it opens up the door for really fixing the problem without calling someone names.

If I build a crazy cooling duct that is 3 feet wide and one inch tall under
my car that covers the space between my ltw factory splitter and goes back to the subframe...while sending air out to my brake rotors, I'd expect someone to tell me that they don't think that its really a cooling duct, and I'd better find a factory part that looks an aweful lot like that if I don't want to move to super mod. In a similar way, if I build a 4 foot wide by 3 foot wide
custom fuel cell box that totally creates an aerodynamic bottom to the back of my car that is WAY, way more than the flat spot that the original spare tire well occupied, I'd expect someone to say something.

If I go to MAShaw, and order their duplicate LTW splitter in CF or FG or
whatever, and show that its identical in shape and size to that which came on my car, I can justify putting that on the front....I can come up with a photo and part number to prove its OK. If I put the 95 PTG ex-BTCC touring car bumper I bought on ebay a year ago on my car, with its full CF aero package trim, adjustable splitters and wear pads for crashing corners.....I don't expect to stay in mod....

If there is anyone left on the list that is not totally pissed off at me, I
would like to add the following announcement as well. I just brought in
another 20 footer, and have some stuff for sale. Some may be spoken for, some not, but all email will be answered as quickly as possible.

1 S14 2.3
2 S50B32 engines
2 S50B30 engines (probably spoken for)
3 E36 5 speed gearboxes (and some drive shafts)
3 E30 CR dog leg gearboxes
5 E36 Euro 6 speeds gearboxes (some drive shafts)
2 full sets of euro E36 front and rear suspensions, one with diff too.
A couple of Euro catalytics and mufflers, a SS straight pipe or two

I have not gotten the entire bill for transportation and packing. I believe
that the bombings in europe and some other trade issues made this a lot more
expensive than I bargained for. I try to sell complete packages, but what I
have done in the past is to make the first come first serve policy mean that if
I only have one part, it goes with the first engine package. I have several
people that can furnish references for how I do business, and I have tried very hard to support people with advice when it comes to putting these in and what to anticipate as problems. I would like to point people to Jon Siccardi's site especially for transplant questions as he has some really neat harness parts for transplants if thats what people seek out, in addition, he has experience with it as well.

This is of course a long note, and i doubt anyone has read this far through it....but one never knows. I thought it was appropriate to comment on since I was there at Mid Ohio, enjoyed the weekend and was around the tech shed for many of the discussions as I lent some tools and instruments to help out.

Alex Lipowich, CM 08 xyobgyn@aol.com etc etc etc....

:eek: dang Alex...seems like you write a novel each time you post here or on the list lol :D :stickoutt ...but that's cool, I like reading what you have to say as there's some good insight there:)

Randy Mueller's incident at Mid Ohio last weekend totalled my yellow car.

Jon

What?! I am assuming Randy's car is fine, but it sounds like he must have indirectly caused you to crash Old Yeller. Please tell us more as I am getting tired of all of this Akard talk...

Scott

I know nothing about the Randy/Jon incident but I was under the impression that both cars were repairable. That makes two cars destroyed at MO...you guys are bumming me out man!

Good luck Jon, you'll just apply lessons learned to build an even faster car.

I heard about the incident. There is video too. Who got the 13/13?

Link to video?

I heard about the incident. There is video too. Who got the 13/13?


Jon got the 13/13, Randy didn't have anything levied against him. It was in front of everyone on the front straight and there didn't seem to be much debate as to who was at fault.

:eek: what happened in th incident? Is it likely both Randy and Jon will have their cars ready in time for VIR? Seems like MO took out some cars that made up the list for VIR :( ...anyhow, with all the changes that CR is going through, I'm sure VIR will be another learning experience...

With all this drama perhaps fights will begin in the padocks soon... :redspot

With all this drama perhaps fights will begin in the padocks soon... :redspot

Riley needs an ass whoopin', that's for sure.

lol...I can just see that :D ...blood shed in the paddock! total anarchy and tools flying everywhere :eek: :D :stickoutt

Riley needs an ass whoopin', that's for sure.

The only one that I am afraid of is Akard... :help :lol

The only one that I am afraid of is Akard... :help :lol


paddock fight...I dunno, Akard is a pretty big dude! :eek: :D :stickoutt

paddock fight...I dunno, Akard is a pretty big dude! :eek: :D :stickoutt

We can take him Sunir (when I say we, I mean you and me and pretty much everybody in the paddock).

Ok ok ok....I'll stick up for Akard. I like the guy. He might be hard to get to know, but a helluva a nice guy once you get to know him.

the one time I met him he was nice to me also (this was last April '04 at VIR...I dunno if he was racing or not but I was chatting with Jon Seccardi whaen he introduced me to Akard), that was last year...I personally don't have anything against him, we chatted for a bit and he seemed cool...from my understanding though such is not the case for some other racers who seem to be upset with him. :dunno...I don't have a dog in this fight as some would say...

the one time I met him he was nice to me also (this was last April '04 at VIR...I dunno if he was racing or not but I was chatting with Jon Seccardi whaen he introduced me to Akard), that was last year...I personally don't have anything against him, we chatted for a bit and he seemed cool...from my understanding though such is not the case for some other racers who seem to be upset with him. :dunno...I don't have a dog in this fight as some would say...



My first and only contact with him, he was a fucking prick so that's how I got started with him. I've heard others had similar experiences while others had experiences to the contrary so i guess it depends on when/where/why you ran into him...

I like Akard simply because he is just about the only racer whom when I stand next to them, I feel petite. And realize guys I am 6'4" - 290. :eek:

Yes, I think we should keep him around just to make me feel ok. :)

He has never been anything but nice to me, but then again, he and I are from the South, and we Southerners don't mix to well with you Yankees. Seems we had a conflict about 150 years ago that centered around North/South relationships. Remember? :)

Everyone I've paddocked with has had a problem with the guy, I've had problems too. At Road Atlanta I had a 3 person crew to refuel 3 cars coming in over 10 minutes, we had one spot in the pits. Akard pulls into our spot just as I'm coming in, crew had to move everything about 50'. Not cool when your guests have a bad time and it's an officer of club racing providing that bad time (well, future officer). Akard also got into it with a racer buddy of mine that almost resulted in contact on the track.

I like Akard simply because he is just about the only racer whom when I stand next to them, I feel petite. And realize guys I am 6'4" - 290. :eek:

Yes, I think we should keep him around just to make me feel ok. :)

He has never been anything but nice to me, but then again, he and I are from the South, and we Southerners don't mix to well with you Yankees. Seems we had a conflict about 150 years ago that centered around North/South relationships. Remember? :)



Jon: I must have a lot in common with you...I'm 6'3", 270 and I'm Southern myself...but it'll take a lot more than that for me to gravitate toward Mount St. Akard...

My first and only contact with him, he was a fucking prick so that's how I got started with him.

Nice touch. Must be the New Yorker coming out. :alright

Everyone I've paddocked with has had a problem with the guy, I've had problems too.

And you've paddocked at HOW MANY BMWCCA club races?

I've never seen Mike do anything other than offer the shirt off his back to other racers who needed help, parts or whatever.

But then I understand how a guy with 2 races could be an expert on nearly everything he talks about.

But then I understand how a guy with 2 races could be an expert on nearly everything he talks about.

I never claimed to be an expert, just sharing my experience. I am decidedly not in the minority when I share bad experiences with Akard.

Why assault two members in back to back posts...is this you Akard?

So calling a guy "a **ick" isn't an assault?

Saying that "everyone" you know had a problem with Akard when you have the most minimal exposure isn't an assault?

I'm just saying that my experience with Akard is more extensive and I've never seen the side that you claim "everyone" has seen. That's highly improbable.

FWIW, I think Mike's size is a bit intimidating and I think it taints some people's opinion of him. He's undoubtedly a smart ass, which might well be misinterpreted, but that means he fits in pretty well with this group !!! :cool

Again, sharing my minimal experiences. I've paddocked with exactly 4 racers over two weekends that Akard was at and everyone of them had a negative experience that weekend or a history with Akard.

Should I disregard my personal experiences and everything I've read in the last year and think that Akard is an a-ok guy? I'm over this...I'm putting Akard into the 'pistongate' file in my brain, never to be worried about or spoken of again.

Didn't say that ... I simply said you made a verbal assault.

Easy to say "I know 15 guys who think "Krisko" is a jerk". 'Course, that's not true, but you'd never know that if I just posted the statement without any factual support. If you're gonna get personal, you better back it up with some specifics, IMHO.

You're entitled to your opinion. No problem with that at all. I'm just saying if you're gonna share it with supposed experience/testimony, then get specific or can it and keep it to yourself.

And ... NO ... I'm not Akard.

BTW, I don't think "pistongate" is quite over yet. It seems the 'clarifications' issued by Clement aren't legit since he didn't take them to the Rules Committee. The rules state clearly that the national technical steward only communicates the ruling, but the ruling HAS to come from the whole committee.

Pistongate is over for me. If/when I run BMW again I'll be in mod. If I were to run and do well in any IP race it wouldn't mean much because of all the accusations. The only way I would run IP is with a block change and short of a failure in that dept. that won't happen.

And I know who you are...welcome back. And I publicly apologize for my comments regarding Akard. As a gentleman racer, my recent behavior hasn't been very gentlemanly.

Apology gleefully and readily accepted.

Next topic !!! :)

Didn't say that ... I simply said you made a verbal assault.

Easy to say "I know 15 guys who think "Krisko" is a jerk". 'Course, that's not true, but you'd never know that if I just posted the statement without any factual support. If you're gonna get personal, you better back it up with some specifics, IMHO.

You're entitled to your opinion. No problem with that at all. I'm just saying if you're gonna share it with supposed experience/testimony, then get specific or can it and keep it to yourself.

And ... NO ... I'm not Akard.



Listen, Steve, for Krisko or anyone to say that they know 15 people who think Akard is a jerk is a definite understatement. I don't know why each person who has a negative opinion of Akard has that opinion, but I do know that I have a specific reason from a specific incident. While that incident may have been brief and/or out of character for Akard (as you and your clique would probably claim), I can only go by what he gives me to go on.

First impressions last...especially when everything relevant and subsequent to that first impression seem to confirm.

is this perhaps the humble beginnings of "akard-gate" :devillook ... sorry just had to...;) :stickoutt

I've never seen Mike do anything other than offer the shirt off his back

that would be a mighty big shirt :D :stickoutt ...akard is a big guy

Steve I think the thing between Krisko and akard go back to earlier in the season starting with pistongate and continuing through perhaps...

since akard became an officer in CR, seems like others have taken issue with him...that's been the scoop...

this is not to say akard is this or that...I'm sure racers out there have had good expieriences with akard...like I said before I met akard once and had a conversation with him and he was a nice guy to me...I have no problem with him...

The last two CR I've attended have been both in some ways. CR is a lot like our great Country of America.

It ain't perfect, but its one of the best things going. This presumes that you want to race a bmw with your friends in an environment that is meant to be safe for cars and people, and provide an even field for competition in the spirit of being gentleman.

Like America, if you don't like it you're free to bitch and moan, you're free to step up to the plate and try and improve things, or you're free to leave too.

(rant on)

We've got a ton of irrregular, inconsistant problems with rules enforcement in our group.... I've been affected by it, some of my best friends have been affected by it. It matters to some people, not at all to others. But I have to admit I'm pretty sick and tired of the name calling and bashing of people on line. For g-ds sake, Mike Akard didn't really WANT that postion, but he was willing to to put his money(ie time) where his mouth was. He stepped up to the plate, volunteered his time, drove all the way up to MO without a car to race, mind you, to donate his time and energy to something he felt passionate about, enforcing rules. Just how many people do you guys think are out there willing or able to donate that kind of time to CR?

We've got some serious problems in this group. Hell, I admit that at Putnam for example, I rear ended a fellow club racer... I felt horrible about it... I expected him to be through the corner before I ever got there as I planned that turn at the start of that back straight...and perhaps, if the owner of the car had been driving it, as i assumed, the car might not have been there, instead, I misjudged, and the driver of the car, who was renting it for the weekend, for the first time in an 02 race car, wasn't lapping at the pace of the owner....and i hit him pretty well...I got trapped behind him as Sicardi took the inside away... My fault. I didn't get 13-ed on it. I felt pretty bad about it. (in fact, I paid to have the car fixed)... There I benefitted from our inconsistancies....but....I'm still sore about having lost my licence and getting it back on appeal from 3 years ago in a sequence of events that still ticks me off in the way it was handled.... it goes both ways. Neither was right probably.

At Mid Ohio, I saw a beautiful, expensive large flat undertray on a prepared car. I wish I could use it on my mod car... but its illegal in mod too! That was a new friend of mine. There simply is no BMW part that it matches remotely. An old friend of mine was told his pistons were not legal. Rumour is that they had already passed tech in another group, and we couldn't pass a rule that overturned their ruling. One of my good friends charged into a corner hard with 2 other cars, and his car is totalled. I imagine that he had gotten frustrated by defensive line taking from the car ahead of him, that wasn't even in his class... while he was trying to chase down an inclass car, and had an inclass car on his tail.... yet another friend stayed on the throttle pretty hard, shifting gears up, instead of slowing down and waiting for a dangerous situation to resolve.... Appearances are certainly that that otherr driver made a pretty common mistake trying to get back on the track.... it certainly looked like he was steering back on the track in the video, yet apparantly, that was ruled a mechanical? That's rumour, and I may be wrong on that. What a mess!

Hey. I live in a glass house. I nearly took out half the field at Mid Ohio a few years ago the first time I tried slicks and they were too cold to grip in turn one.... I'm still thanking Wayne for not T-boning me! The rain has not been gracious to me at Mid Ohio, and frankly, even this last race, I probably shouldn't have been out there with my neck the way it was, but I slowed down twice on the track to avoid rear ending the tail end of chaos and ended up weaving between the remains instead of being a part of them.

Krisko, you know, I talk to Mike probably 2 or three times a week sometimes. Never once in the past 6 or 8 weeks has your name come up. This idea in your head that he has it in for you, or hates you is so g-d damn silly, you have no idea how it makes you look yourself for going on and on how he's a jerk and out to get you. What he's concerned about on a daily basis is the direction that CR is going in.... the utter disregard that seems to exist for enforcing rules, the utter disregard some racers have towards self responsibility in reading the rules and accepting that "just because others do it", or because "they don't see the advantage", or "so and so told me it was OK" is good enough to account for noncompliance.

Bryan, I was very surprised at your comments about piston configuration. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the huge value in cutting deeper valve reliefs. You can make up the compression decking the head or using a thinner gasket and not get caught, you are less likely to drop/bend a valve with those crappy hydraulic valves, you can spin higher with more safety margin... come on... get with it. There are tons of reasons that they are better, or they wouldn't have made them that way in the first place! Hello? Am I the only one who doesn't think that whole discussion is stupid already?

We have complete dissarray in the CR ranks even apparantly at the steward level where we can't all agree on the relatively simple concept of "owning a corner because you're there first" (even if you leave the inside open and take the DS line) vs "You do have to leave racing room if someone ducks in and can make a turn on the inside stick, even if they were't first there". We actually can't get our stewards to agree on this issue, how the heck are we gonna enforce ontrack issues this way? We have enough issues in CR with respect to rules, that we could better use our energy discussing those rules and ways to clarify them, rather than picking on the few people willing to try and enforce them in some capacity.

I have always applauded Nancy and her hard work for CR in T&S and all that she does. I hope she can come down hard and make it clear that it does matter if we read the rules and follow them.

I somehow knew that when we introduced points, and national champions that we'd lose our way, even if we built numbers up. We'd probably do better adapting a NASA GTS policy of wt vs power and invest in portable dyno's and scales.


(Rant off)

Alex Lipowich CM until he buys the bimmerworld splitter, then Super Mod if I can install a fuel cell at the same time. (we need to change that rule btw)

Hello? Am I the only one who doesn't think that whole discussion is stupid already?

Why are you bringing up a week old thread then?

Very well said.



The last two CR I've attended have been both in some ways. CR is a lot like our great Country of America.

It ain't perfect, but its one of the best things going. This presumes that you want to race a bmw with your friends in an environment that is meant to be safe for cars and people, and provide an even field for competition in the spirit of being gentleman.

Like America, if you don't like it you're free to bitch and moan, you're free to step up to the plate and try and improve things, or you're free to leave too.

(rant on)

We've got a ton of irrregular, inconsistant problems with rules enforcement in our group.... I've been affected by it, some of my best friends have been affected by it. It matters to some people, not at all to others. But I have to admit I'm pretty sick and tired of the name calling and bashing of people on line. For g-ds sake, Mike Akard didn't really WANT that postion, but he was willing to to put his money(ie time) where his mouth was. He stepped up to the plate, volunteered his time, drove all the way up to MO without a car to race, mind you, to donate his time and energy to something he felt passionate about, enforcing rules. Just how many people do you guys think are out there willing or able to donate that kind of time to CR?

We've got some serious problems in this group. Hell, I admit that at Putnam for example, I rear ended a fellow club racer... I felt horrible about it... I expected him to be through the corner before I ever got there as I planned that turn at the start of that back straight...and perhaps, if the owner of the car had been driving it, as i assumed, the car might not have been there, instead, I misjudged, and the driver of the car, who was renting it for the weekend, for the first time in an 02 race car, wasn't lapping at the pace of the owner....and i hit him pretty well...I got trapped behind him as Sicardi took the inside away... My fault. I didn't get 13-ed on it. I felt pretty bad about it. (in fact, I paid to have the car fixed)... There I benefitted from our inconsistancies....but....I'm still sore about having lost my licence and getting it back on appeal from 3 years ago in a sequence of events that still ticks me off in the way it was handled.... it goes both ways. Neither was right probably.

At Mid Ohio, I saw a beautiful, expensive large flat undertray on a prepared car. I wish I could use it on my mod car... but its illegal in mod too! That was a new friend of mine. There simply is no BMW part that it matches remotely. An old friend of mine was told his pistons were not legal. Rumour is that they had already passed tech in another group, and we couldn't pass a rule that overturned their ruling. One of my good friends charged into a corner hard with 2 other cars, and his car is totalled. I imagine that he had gotten frustrated by defensive line taking from the car ahead of him, that wasn't even in his class... while he was trying to chase down an inclass car, and had an inclass car on his tail.... yet another friend stayed on the throttle pretty hard, shifting gears up, instead of slowing down and waiting for a dangerous situation to resolve.... Appearances are certainly that that otherr driver made a pretty common mistake trying to get back on the track.... it certainly looked like he was steering back on the track in the video, yet apparantly, that was ruled a mechanical? That's rumour, and I may be wrong on that. What a mess!

Hey. I live in a glass house. I nearly took out half the field at Mid Ohio a few years ago the first time I tried slicks and they were too cold to grip in turn one.... I'm still thanking Wayne for not T-boning me! The rain has not been gracious to me at Mid Ohio, and frankly, even this last race, I probably shouldn't have been out there with my neck the way it was, but I slowed down twice on the track to avoid rear ending the tail end of chaos and ended up weaving between the remains instead of being a part of them.

Krisko, you know, I talk to Mike probably 2 or three times a week sometimes. Never once in the past 6 or 8 weeks has your name come up. This idea in your head that he has it in for you, or hates you is so g-d damn silly, you have no idea how it makes you look yourself for going on and on how he's a jerk and out to get you. What he's concerned about on a daily basis is the direction that CR is going in.... the utter disregard that seems to exist for enforcing rules, the utter disregard some racers have towards self responsibility in reading the rules and accepting that "just because others do it", or because "they don't see the advantage", or "so and so told me it was OK" is good enough to account for noncompliance.

Bryan, I was very surprised at your comments about piston configuration. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the huge value in cutting deeper valve reliefs. You can make up the compression decking the head or using a thinner gasket and not get caught, you are less likely to drop/bend a valve with those crappy hydraulic valves, you can spin higher with more safety margin... come on... get with it. There are tons of reasons that they are better, or they wouldn't have made them that way in the first place! Hello? Am I the only one who doesn't think that whole discussion is stupid already?

We have complete dissarray in the CR ranks even apparantly at the steward level where we can't all agree on the relatively simple concept of "owning a corner because you're there first" (even if you leave the inside open and take the DS line) vs "You do have to leave racing room if someone ducks in and can make a turn on the inside stick, even if they were't first there". We actually can't get our stewards to agree on this issue, how the heck are we gonna enforce ontrack issues this way? We have enough issues in CR with respect to rules, that we could better use our energy discussing those rules and ways to clarify them, rather than picking on the few people willing to try and enforce them in some capacity.

I have always applauded Nancy and her hard work for CR in T&S and all that she does. I hope she can come down hard and make it clear that it does matter if we read the rules and follow them.

I somehow knew that when we introduced points, and national champions that we'd lose our way, even if we built numbers up. We'd probably do better adapting a NASA GTS policy of wt vs power and invest in portable dyno's and scales.


(Rant off)

Alex Lipowich CM until he buys the bimmerworld splitter, then Super Mod if I can install a fuel cell at the same time. (we need to change that rule btw)

(Why are you bringing up a week old thread then?)

I don't read in the forum every day, or every night, so perhaps I broke some unwritten rule about posting, and timeliness. As it happens, I heard from a friend that someone had posted some video that included an audio portion that had my car going by, and I wanted to hear it. (if any readers knows where it is, or who posted, let me know in a PM!) When I check in, I'm always curious about threads that I have read in, and posted in. Sunir had made a post in this thread since I had checked, in, and as I read through what has accumulated since I last posted, I kind of sorta got fed up.

Every time I go to the track with you guys I want each and every new racer I meet to be on my list of new friends. Thats generally the way I regard everyeone I've met through BMW CR. People are taking this rules enforcement way, way too personally. I don't (and we shouldn't) actually judge ANYONE morally or whatever if their car is non-compliant..... its how that person reacts to being made aware of the non-compliance that defines them, and THAT I suppose may be subject to some judgement I guess.

I finally got to meet James Posig in person, what a blast, it was great to put a name to the face. Do I like him less as a new friend because he was told he was missing headlights and had a non-conforming part under is car? Not one little bit! I assume he's a big boy and isn't out their ranting about how CR hates him and picks on him. I met Mark and consider him a new friend too, I don't dislike him because of his splitter, hell, I'm envious, but i assume he's not going to show up at VIR with it unless he runs SM.....If he were in C mod with that splitter, and I had chased him all over the track on saturday, just barely hanging on to his tail and having just a little bit less than he did.... I'd probably run over to his car afterwards.... go on and on about how much fun that had been, but I'd also probably be taking a peek at his car... and hell, if I saw that splitter I'd also tell him he ought to change the little sticker on the side of his car on sunday, or I'd protest him....As Jon Holder posted earlier in the thread, he'd WANT to be told, and expects to do the telling as well. We could police ourselves on some of these obvious issues. It doesn't take a genius to spot some compliance issues.

There are great examples of how this should work all around us. Larry Wright used to routinely kick my ass in CM.... as my car shed weight and developed, I slowly got closer to his and pierre's times. All along, I knew that Larry was running a really slick aluminum underbody aero part. But you know what? I wasn't on his tail chasing him down....not even close...so I don't think that was the reason he was beating me. Jack Money and I are good friends. When Jack bought that car, and before it, we talked about it a lot, and I know that car well... its a GREAT car... but part of that conversation was, that I was going to come gunning for him, and, even if I hadn't beat Larry in that car, I could take a shot at the car itself one day... and I warned Jack that I felt the undercar aero was illegal. Jack has long since removed it. The car is still wicked fast.... but Jack did the right thing and removed it before it became an issue. Tom Mauk built a really great motor for his car.. its pistons are just shy of being legal for JP. He knows it. The difference still puts him at a disadvantage compared to a full all out assault on a JP engine....so he could try and rationalize that he's still down on power compared to other JP cars... but he did the right thing, he moved to mod rather than bitch and whine about how it didn't make THAT much of a difference and other people were still going faster than him. He's pretty much angry that he had to make the move, but it is what it is. He's not going to try and change the rules in CR to accomodate his having made a mistake.

When I talk to successful racers about how they got where they are, it seems that G-d is in the details, whether they are driving style, or working hard and set up and aero. Little things do make a difference. I'm quite certain Larry's car was faster with that part or they wouldn't have kept it on there while he was racing Pierre. At the time, it was up to Pierre (I think) to decide how he felt about it..... for all I know, Pierre had is own crap under his car, and felt that it wasn't worth bringing up. If Jack were to narrowly beat Akard at VIR with that part on it, and Akard protested Jack, it wouldn't mean that Akard disliked Jack in the least... it has no bearing on it even. I know for a FACT that Mike would protest me if I showed up with undercar aero and was bumper to bumper with him at any point......he's even told me that! Doesn't make him a bad guy.

In my opinion, this forum could be hugely helpful in the following way...If Mark for example had read this note, and thought I was simply wrong when I pointed to his splitter being non-compliant in mod (not to mention prepared) he could respond right here in the column with a simple post saying...

"Hey Alex, read your post, and if you look at the M-Tecknic version of the 1994 whatever, you'll find a clone of the part I'm using..here's a photo of my splitter from the bimmer world catalogue next to a copy of the ETK part I'm talking about.... see? its pretty obvious that this part is JUST like the factory splitter on that model. "

If he did that I'd of course publically apologize for being wrong, and say:

"I'm sorry, I was looking at the bimmerworld catalogue, and they show the LTW splitter on that page too, and they're so different, and I thought that the LTW splitter was the biggest factory varient out there...but i was wrong"

THAT would be constructive discussion about the rules...not hateful, spiteful embarassing to CR talk about who hates whom. Mark shouldn't think I'm out to get him, or dislike him, or think he's a cheater. Same as Jack and I are still great friends, and he doesn't feel that I was out to get him. That's simply not the case, in fact, I've spoken to Mark a few times since the race, and I think he's a great guy, and look forward to seeing him next time we're at the track. I haven't discussed his splitter with him because he's not in my class, and he's not out there making a fuss and defending it or making hateful statements about people trying to help out. I assume he knows he's got a problem to solve, and he's working on it. It would be a shame if he took this note and was mad at me when its a clean and simple discussion of compliance and rules.. not a personal insult.

Alex Lipowich

Bryan, I was very surprised at your comments about piston configuration. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the huge value in cutting deeper valve reliefs. You can make up the compression decking the head or using a thinner gasket and not get caught, you are less likely to drop/bend a valve with those crappy hydraulic valves, you can spin higher with more safety margin... come on... get with it. There are tons of reasons that they are better, or they wouldn't have made them that way in the first place! Hello? Am I the only one who doesn't think that whole discussion is stupid already?

Come Alex...don't misrepresent what I said. I never said his motor SHOULD be legal. I only provided a couter point to those who pretend that it is somehow far and above what is very possible with a motor that is built within the current interpretation of the valve relief rules for Prepared. In the end, a legal motor will make the same amount of power...the standard has been raised.

I also pointed out that I don't believe the rules are clear on valve relief cuts. Other race enginer builders I've talked to take the same interpretation that Kriko's builder took as well. Please re-read my post above:
http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4862161&postcount=39

I readily admit that Krisko's motor is ILLEGAL based on the way that BMW CCA has interpreted the rule that they wrote. But, I've also seen Krisko constantly attacked and called a cheater by fellow racers even though he is simply caught out by a rule that is unclear and was misinterpreted by his engine builder. Rules are pushed in racing...that doesn't always make someone a cheater.

I like Mike Akard. He's always been a great guy to me for as long as I've known him (3+ years now). Truthfully, from my viewpoint, he attacked Krisko online for "pushing" the unclear valve relief rule even though he did essentially the same thing only weeks earlier with his "rolled" fenders. When it was Krisko, he treated the situations as if the valve relief rule was absolutely clear and that Krisko was somehow trying to pull one over on Club Racing by having "obviously" illegal pistons. I simply don't believe it was that "obvious" much like Mike didn't think his fenders were "obviously" illegal. Both men believed they were legal based on the way the rules were written, both men made their arguments for their modifications on the club racing SIG, and both men moved their cars to CMod when they were ruled illegal by CR.

So yes, the motor is technically illegal and should not be run in IP. I have no problem with that. BUT, other racers need to understand that Krisko's motor would run the exact same way and make the exact same amount of power with "stock" sized valve reliefs. Does that make it legal? NO! But for those who want to say that some motors are "simply making too much power to be legal", I think they have something else coming. Randy, and others, are and will be building perfectly legal motors (under the current interpretation) that will make as much or more power than Krisko's motor.

The new pistons that Sunbelt has produced are claimed to make a LOT more power, rev a lot higher, and still run on a bone stock motor (read: stock springs, valves, and valve reliefs). As I've said multiple times, Krisko's motor is still illegal...but the new high power Prepared legal motors are something the rest of the IP'ers are going to have to get accustomed to.

"Hey Alex, read your post, and if you look at the M-Tecknic version of the 1994 whatever, you'll find a clone of the part I'm using..here's a photo of my splitter from the bimmer world catalogue next to a copy of the ETK part I'm talking about.... see? its pretty obvious that this part is JUST like the factory splitter on that model. "

If he did that I'd of course publically apologize for being wrong, and say:

"I'm sorry, I was looking at the bimmerworld catalogue, and they show the LTW splitter on that page too, and they're so different, and I thought that the LTW splitter was the biggest factory varient out there...but i was wrong"

Seems there's a huge problem with the rules for E36 M3's...in one portion, splitters are declared FREE. A few paragraphs later, splitters for E36 M3's are limited to LTW configuration. In other words, it seems you could drop a M3 motor in a 325 chassis and have your splitter be "free" in Mod, but if you run a M3 chassis, you are limited to LTW configuration. Or is the car determined by it's motor?

E. Spoilers and splitters are free providing they do not exceed maximum body width and do not exceed the factory body length by more than one inch. Installed devices must be consistent with the spirit of the original design of the car such as those presented by aftermarket sources. For example, homemade panels attached to the car would not conform to the spirit of the original design unless they emulate such a part, such as splitter panel. Dive plates are prohibited.
1. Spoilers, splitters and airdams provide aerodynamic effect by altering airflow direction.
a. Splitter – An aerodynamic piece which is parallel to the ground and attaches to the bottom of the front bumper cover or airdam.

G. E36 M3s - Front splitters are permitted but must not exceed the factory M3 LTW configuration.

Further, since the LTW splitter modifies the underside of the vehicle for aerodynamic purposes, it would seem to be illegal anyway based on the following rule. Or, perhaps the underside starts at a certain place? If so, where?

H. Modifications to the underside of the vehicle for the purpose of
improving aerodynamics are not allowed (e.g., diffusers).

It seems the splitter rules are all o