I have a e36 ODBI 2.8 racecar, which I purchased already prepared. I've ran the motor for one year and it's starting to feel tired. Not knowing how many hrs are on it since the last rebuilt it's time for a fresh motor. I'm not sure if I should rebuilt the 2.8 or buy a stock 2.5 and rebuilt it. If I go with the 2.5 I can drop 95lbs per JP rules. Does anyone know if I can use the head, cams and software (already ODBI) from the 2.8 on the 2.5? I've been told the 2.8 and 2.5 engines use the same head.

Any help is greatly appreciated!!


Ryan

Before you do anything rash, you might want to have a quick dyno done and see what the power actually is. For a JP motor, you might not have to have a full rebuild, especially if it was not a fully tweaked prep motor.

M50 2.5's in WC, which pretty much only had headers, a tiny bump in Compression, and M3 cams, and tuning made 290+hp, and they lasted a pretty long time.

Before you do anything rash, you might want to have a quick dyno done and see what the power actually is. For a JP motor, you might not have to have a full rebuild, especially if it was not a fully tweaked prep motor.

M50 2.5's in WC, which pretty much only had headers, a tiny bump in Compression, and M3 cams, and tuning made 290+hp, and they lasted a pretty long time.

Except you can't bump the compression in prepared motors

Except you can't bump the compression in prepared motors

I know...I was just saying they are that spec and last pretty long, he might just need to refresh some stuff, not pay for a whole new motor.

Or even think about picking up an M3 motor and moving up a class ;)

I'm not even sure that an OBD1 2.8L motor would be legal in Prepared. Here is why:

OBD II equipped cars may retrofit engine electronics to the pre-OBD II
factory system which came on the same model and engine type.

Since the 2.8L motor was only offered in the E36 with OBD2, it seems it would render all 2.8L JP cars to require OBD2, am I wrong?

I'm not even sure that an OBD1 2.8L motor would be legal in Prepared. Here is why:



Since the 2.8L motor was only offered in the E36 with OBD2, it seems it would render all 2.8L JP cars to require OBD2, am I wrong?

Its legal. If you run the 328 weight in JP you can run a 2.8 OBDI, you couldn't run a 325 JP weight with a 2.8 OBDI.

Its legal. If you run the 328 weight in JP you can run a 2.8 OBDI, you couldn't run a 325 JP weight with a 2.8 OBDI.
It's poorly worded and should be rewritten.

Ryan...hey what's up man...long time:) hope all is well...I still remmember when you, me and Matt went up to Pocono in '03 for the DE there...good to see your racin' now...best of luck!:alright

Sunir

I'm not even sure that an OBD1 2.8L motor would be legal in Prepared. Here is why: Since the 2.8L motor was only offered in the E36 with OBD2, it seems it would render all 2.8L JP cars to require OBD2, am I wrong?

Yes it is legal. You would be taking advantage of the same rule that allows 3.2 OBD2 M3 to backdate to 3.0 OBD1 management in Prepared.

Yes it is legal. You would be taking advantage of the same rule that allows 3.2 OBD2 M3 to backdate to 3.0 OBD1 management in Prepared.

Not as I read it...the rules state "same model and engine type. In the case of the 3.0 and 3.2 liter M3's, the are both the same model (M3) and engine type (in-line 6). In the case of the 325 and 328, the are the same engine type, but NOT the same model (325 =/ 328).

Ryan...hey what's up man...long time:) hope all is well...I still remmember when you, me and Matt went up to Pocono in '03 for the DE there...good to see your racin' now...best of luck!:alright

Sunir

Hey Sunir, good to hear from you. What a great memory.....my first DE at Pocono!

Are planning to race at any events this year?

Ryan

Not as I read it...the rules state "same model and engine type. In the case of the 3.0 and 3.2 liter M3's, the are both the same model (M3) and engine type (in-line 6). In the case of the 325 and 328, the are the same engine type, but NOT the same model (325 =/ 328).

That is how I see it. As much as I'd love to put a 2.8 in my 325is, I'd rather not do it and find out it's illegal.

i think the 2.8 should have a ridiculous weight penalty, same with the 2.5 liter cars. And now i see that a 330 performance package is JP, great soon there will be 260hp cars in JP


This might all change i will have to wait till VIR to see, the car was tired last season and now has a fresh motor built to the limits of the JP Rule book as well as the rest of the car. I will see how it fairs against the 6sylinder cars there to really make my decision on how even they are but from what i saw last year they had an advantage.

The s14 powered cars just dont have the torque to keep up with a 6 cylinder car out of slow corners. Great example Oak Tree at VIR, many times have i got a run on 6cylinder car but by the middle of the straight they go on by. Why? because they are far more aerodynamic and have similar power is not more and alot more torque. The E30 might corner better but that isnt enough to make up for the difference in the cars ability to come off a corner. The cars are not that evenly matched and things could be done to make them more competitive. I know E30's hold most of the track records for JP, but that could be simply the driver. I recall Lytle running something around a 1:25.xxx at Summit in his car, which is on the pace of EM cars, I think a well prepared JP E30 M3 with a good driver can surely do a 1:25.xxx but you will have to drive the wheels off of it and you better bring your balls because your going to need them.

The E30 M3 is the class leader over the E36 in JP if properly prepared and driven. The E46 330 will be the class leader should folks choose to develop them to the limit over the coming seasons.

Andrew - Why exactly do you think the E30 is such a JP underdog? How much time have you spent at the track doing nothing but testing spring rates? Alignment? Shock valving? What sort of data acquisition are you running? My guess is that there are multiple seconds left in your E30 from setup alone. Then, add a little power and some more driving experience and we're talking a MUCH faster car.

What sort of "things could be done to make them more competitive"? Keep in mind, it's on a magnitude of nearly impossible to fit EVERY BMW into a class and have it be competitive without making a class for every car. Making changes to individual cars in order to "make them more competitive" would require a rulebook 300 pages long and a full-time paid technical staff.

they are very closely matched and currently aside from a few people there arent many well prepared e36 JP cars, or well driven either one.

we havent had the oppurtunity for adjustment because there wasnt any on the car. Everything was well crap. We know that there is likely 1-3 seconds still on the table for me to find. I still dont know how to go through Nascar Bend or Hogs pen, not even close. Christ youd probably laugh if you saw incar of me in those corners. All i am saying is that if an is E30 m3 prepared to the fullest extent of the rules and an E36 is prepared to the fullest extent of the rules, and the same driver gets in and drives those cars and does some work in the end of the day i think the E36 has the potential to be the faster car at most tracks. the E30 is clearly not the under dog, but i also think that not enough people have put the time and effort into the E36 325/328 to make it everything it can be. Where the E30 has been in it so long that people have tried everything.

We also know is that we didnt gain any power from last year. The car should be capable of faster times, with more driving experience faster times should come as well. Like i said i will know more on this subject at VIR, if we make it.

you as well as anyone knows that having a little extra power at VIR especially can really make a difference, Look at your video from O'fest with Clay. Im not sure what kind of numbers he is making but hes clearly got more power.

.... but i also think that not enough people have put the time and effort into the E36 325/328 to make it everything it can be. Where the E30 has been in it so long that people have tried everything.


There are some pretty well developed ITS cars in that respect as far as a similar classes E36. Thier for sale prices show this pretty well.

As for the E30...people are still trying new stuff :)

i think the 2.8 should have a ridiculous weight penalty, same with the 2.5 liter cars. And now i see that a 330 performance package is JP, great soon there will be 260hp cars in JP


Andy what basis do you have for this? Most people would say the E30 M3 is the car to have in JP. Obviously this is debatable and I haven't seen any JP E36 cars that are developed to the extent of a full on ITS car within the JP rules. I agree the 330 will eventually be the car to have (the performance package is in I by the way not J). But in club racing I haven't seen any evidence to support your statement. There might be more potential in the E36 and definitely in the 330 but that is the way it is but show me an E36 325 in JP that looks like an overdog right now. Also the way cars are classed in BMWCCA there is not an intention to make every car equal.

...I agree the 330 will eventually be the car to have (the performance package is in I by the way not J)...

No, the 330 PP is in J, which probably only really matters in Stock as the bigger cams, shorter diff would help in Stock but it carries a weight penalty in Stock.

In prepared, you can swap out the cams and diff (so no benefit to the PP) and since the later e46 330s came with a 6 speed (much like the e30 guys using a dogleg tanny) the all e46 330 guys can retro fit a 6 speed. So again no advantage to the ZHP car.

The only real benefit is quite few early ZHPs came without sunroofs!

Vince

thats what im saying, most e36 are also ITS which is restricting them in a few things I think. If they did the type of development on a e36 like they did with an e30 the e36 would be a very fast car. but the money to do that isnt worth it when you can just drop an S50/S52 in it and go mod

No, the 330 PP is in J, which probably only really matters in Stock as the bigger cams, shorter diff would help in Stock but it carries a weight penalty in Stock.

In prepared, you can swap out the cams and diff (so no benefit to the PP) and since the later e46 330s came with a 6 speed (much like the e30 guys using a dogleg tanny) the all e46 330 guys can retro fit a 6 speed. So again no advantage to the ZHP car.

The only real benefit is quite few early ZHPs came without sunroofs!

Vince

Thats very interesting because I could have sworn it was put in I when the rules were first published this year, because I specifically checked for that model since I've been trying to get that car classed for over a year now. I think they did the right thing though keeping it with the other 330s.

And hey Andy if you really want to get the best car for J I just noticed the E90 330xi has a power to weight of 14.22. 4 Wheel drive anyone? :D

thats what im saying, most e36 are also ITS which is restricting them in a few things I think. If they did the type of development on a e36 like they did with an e30 the e36 would be a very fast car. but the money to do that isnt worth it when you can just drop an S50/S52 in it and go mod

I think you are confusing development (i.e getting a car optimally setup and tuned with the parts it has or can have) for just bolting on better go-fast parts (like cams). As far as I know, no one has truly developed a JP E30. No one I've seen at the track spends the time perfecting the springs rates, alignment, setup, aero, brakes, dyno time, etc. On the other hand, because of the competitiveness of the ITS class, those cars are very much developed. Either the drivers themselves, or shops like Bimmerworld, have spent a lot of time with the cars. The optimum setups and tunings have been worked out.

Again, how many test days have you spent doing nothing but turning knobs, making alignment changes, changing wing angles and splitter lengths, and gathering data? Until you've spent some time doing that, your car certainly isn't developed. As a rule, very few cars in BMW CCA are developed...most folks take the "bolt it on and hit the track" approach. If they need more speed, they bolt on another part.

When someone actually spends some time developing a car and the driver, it shows. Look at the way Randy dominated IP races last year...his straightaway speeds weren't that much, if any, faster than other IP cars according to the data gathered at VIR, yet the car was dominate with all of the same suspension parts that everyone else can buy for their own IP car. Heck, we haven't spent a lot of time dialing our new suspension in yet, but look at the way we ran laptimes with and beat some much more powerful cars at O'fest with only 260 rwhp.

Based on the horsepower numbers, a fully developed E30 and E36 JP car should be quite competitive with each other. The E30 will have advantages in some places and the E36 will have advantages in others. The E30 is certainly no underdog though based on the weight/horsepower alone.

I know E30's hold most of the track records for JP, but that could be simply the driver. I recall Lytle running something around a 1:25.xxx at Summit in his car, which is on the pace of EM cars, I think a well prepared JP E30 M3 with a good driver can surely do a 1:25.xxx but you will have to drive the wheels off of it and you better bring your balls because your going to need them.

yup, 1:25.xx at summit with an underdog its prepped car. :D however, i recently did some research and the summit jp record is actually held by an e30 m3 at 1:24.xx.

we may see some faster e36 jp cars soon. there are a number of us with its prep cars that are looking to convert to full on jp spec instead of running with scca.

well, unless we all just go over to nasa instead because bmwcca cr isn't very scca its friendly right now......

I think you are confusing development (i.e getting a car optimally setup and tuned with the parts it has or can have) for just bolting on better go-fast parts (like cams). As far as I know, no one has truly developed a JP E30. No one I've seen at the track spends the time perfecting the springs rates, alignment, setup, aero, brakes, dyno time, etc. certainly no underdog though based on the weight/horsepower alone.

I think the closest you'll see is maybe John Paton spending time and money developing his JP E30 M3. During O'fest he changed rear springs and picked up a couple of seconds I believe. 2.13.XX is what I recall as his fast time and he knows there's more there. He's currently down on power though, or was back then.

-Carlos.

Heck, I only remember folks taking tire temps in the pits maybe 2-3 times EVER during a BMWCCA CR weekend.

Reminds me of something funny...I did see a guy recording tire temps with a laser pyro in the paddock at the most recent VIR Tarheel Chapter DE. Keep in mind, he's IN THE PADDOCK (not the hot pits), using a laser pyro, and he had just completed the standard DE cooldown lap! :)

Reminds me of something funny...I did see a guy recording tire temps with a laser pyro in the paddock at the most recent VIR Tarheel Chapter DE. Keep in mind, he's IN THE PADDOCK (not the hot pits), using a laser pyro, and he had just completed the standard DE cooldown lap! :)

:lol

did that include the standard de "drive around the paddock for 5 min to cool down the brakes so the rotors won't warp"?

Not as I read it...the rules state "same model and engine type. In the case of the 3.0 and 3.2 liter M3's, the are both the same model (M3) and engine type (in-line 6). In the case of the 325 and 328, the are the same engine type, but NOT the same model (325 =/ 328).

if you are calling an m3 with a 3.0 and a 3.2 the same model, then how by a simple name change can a 325 not run with a 328, per the rules.

they are still a 2 door e36 chassis, just with a obd ii system and the 2.8L engine. therefore, same model.

Sounds like someone needs to submit a rules clarification request. :D

if you are calling an m3 with a 3.0 and a 3.2 the same model, then how by a simple name change can a 325 not run with a 328, per the rules.

they are still a 2 door e36 chassis, just with a obd ii system and the 2.8L engine. therefore, same model.

Umm...because in the case of the 3.0 and 3.2L M3 both are M3's where as a 325is and 328is are not the same model(not chassis) as per the way the rule is written.

Infact, you could almost take it a step further and say that a 3.2L motor could not use OBD1 fuel injection because it is an S52 and the 3.0 is an S50?

Sounds like someone needs to submit a rules clarification request

I would do it but I do not have my club racing license. It would be nice to know before I build my car whether I can do it or not.

Sounds like someone needs to submit a rules clarification request. :D
there already is one related to this but i don't think it is specific enough to address this issue....

Use of an OBDI harness with an OBDII engine 1/23/06

Request: In prepared class, is the use of an OBDI harness with an OBDII engine allowed?

Clarification: As stated in Prepared Class, 1. Engine, D.:
“OBD II equipped cars may retrofit engine electronics to the pre-OBD II factory system which came on the same model and engine type.” While there are some restrictions depending on which combinations are chosen, generally, yes, retrofitting OBDI electronics and engine harness in place of OBDII electronics and engine harness is allowed.

based on my interpretation of the rules (and also taking the clarification into acount), since there was never an obd1 e36 328, you can't convert to obd1...i think this case falls into the "While there are some restrictions depending on which combinations are chosen" area ;)

Infact, you could almost take it a step further and say that a 3.2L motor could not use OBD1 fuel injection because it is an S52 and the 3.0 is an S50?

i guess that would come down to the interpretation of the term "engine type" in the rules...does "engine type" mean configuration (ex, I6 vs others) like Bryan mentioned earlier or does it mean specific engines (ex, S50 vs S52, etc)?

I sent a message off to someone on the CR committee to double check on this before I start the process of building my car.

The answer I was given is YES, you can do the 2.8L with OBDI. You of course must run the 2.8L weight, even if the car was a 2.5L.

My understanding of the wording, is that it's meant to be something like Model = Chassis, Engine Type = S or M designation.

So basically, you could take a 318 chassis, drop in a 2.8L, keep everything within JP rules and still be OK, because once you pull the engine and gut the car, there's not much diffence between them and based on that line of converting to OBDI, I'm guessing it was done to Allow it, as Everyone knows that there are no OBDI and OBDII motors that are really the same.

You of course must run the 2.8L weight, even if the car was a 2.5L.

If you choose a 2.5L you can apply the engine swap rule and classify based on the engine/model/year the 2.5L originally was designed for. That allows the car to run 2.5L JP weight.