Terry, don't read it!

http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastrack/08-fastrack-apr.pdf

Mike

Sonf of a.... :mad

(haven't even read it yet, ha! just wanted to reply in less than 60 seconds) :D

FIRST POST!!!

So M3s in STU can run 285 tires they can't fit? Sweet.

STREET TOURING
• Mike Simanyi has been approved as Chairman of the STAC, and Chris Shenefeld has been appointed as a new member of this committee.

Once again, congrats mike.... (golf clap)

STREET TOURING
• The following rule change proposal has been recommended by the STAC and is being published for member comment:
o In 14.13, change the maximum tire size for 2WD vehicles (FWD and RWD) to 285 (ref. 07-438)
Son of a.... Which class is this for? STU??? Are they kidding me!?! :devillook

That is a GREAT idea if they can concurrently fix the FENDER CONTOUR RULES!!!!

http://www.vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/251478521_W7UNc-M.jpg

I've already mangled the paint on my M3's fenders to legally fit a 265, so what's another hour with a fender roller gonna do, make them more imperfect? Who cares (I literally was buying a new Eastwood fender roller when this was posted)

I'm all in! Give us the 285 and the fender mods needed to clear them and I'll bring our car right back to STU! :buttrock

Yes, its going to take a +40mm tire advantage to have a prayer of keepingup with the STEVOs at HPT.

Maybe it's a wink wink thing, they allow the tires AND overlook the fender contours. Who am I kidding.
Yes, congrats Mike!

I know what you guys are saying. I'm already getting rub both inside and out from the 265 Yokohamas... though it stops after the first 10+ runs on a set, having worn off the 1mm or so needed for clearance.

Mike

So what class was this rule change for? And what car for that matter? STS BMWs? :)

The heading for 14.13 is "STU".

Sorry, I was trying to funny. Failed as usual:)

Nice, that should help some of the non-AWD cars out...if they can fit them. Make sure to write in your proposals to the SEB on the fender modifications. I mentioned it in some feedback I sent in, but I am going to send it in as a proposal as well. My vote was no cutting of the fenders, but flaring would be allowed. The bad thing is, this could also help the EF civics fit the new 225/45R15 R1R's (they might fit perfectly as it is, but I know some people have had rubbing problems even with 205's at very low ride heights.)

Congrats once again on being the Chairman of the STAC, Mike!

I have already sent my letter supporting this addition (allowing 285mm tires to STU 2WD cars)... with the condition that they ALSO ALLOW FENDER MODIFUCATIONS NECESSARY TO FIT THESE TO AN E36 BMW! This is THE last 2WD car left in STU with even a remote shot at keeping up with the AWD turbo cars at HPT... so adding 285s doesn't help any other STU classed 2WD car that matters... :D

(sorry RX8 drivers, your numbers are too few!)

Tips for your letters to the Solo Events Board (SEB) on this issue:

Put in the title "Member comment for April FasTrack / Street Touring 14.13 change to 285mm max tires"
E-Mail it to "seb@scca.com"
Add your SCCA Member Number and year you joined at the bottom, along with your name and region
Please state what type of car and class you currently race, and if this rule would make you consider returning to STU (it should!)
Please also note that the 285mm tire allowance is useless without a fender allowance!


BMW racers: rally the troops and send those letters.

Thanks!

maybe this is a precursor to allowing the E46 M3 in STU????????

can the E46 fit more tire than the E36? We were thinking the 330 can probably handle 275's without suspension changes...

can the E46 fit more tire than the E36? We were thinking the 330 can probably handle 275's without suspension changes...

http://www.vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/188089599_Gajdp-S.jpg http://www.vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/245446386_ScFo9-S.jpg
18x10s and 265/35/18s look tiny on an E46 M3

Yes, E46 M3 can fit a 285 easily in the rear, and up front with a fender roll...

But screw those guys, we want the E36 M3 to have an allowance to make a 285mm tire fit!

hehehehe.... I keed, I keed! :D

Seriously, given the choice between the two with new rules allowing a 285mm tire and the leeway to make them fit, I'd pick an E36 M3 for lower weight alone. Still, I think the E46 M3 would be damn close on performance once fully prepped to the STU limits, and it would be a lot easier to get the 285s to fit that chassis...

edit: and I doubt the SCCA will ever allow the E36 M3 the leeway needed to make 285s fit in STU class

I have already sent my letter supporting this addition (allowing 285mm tires to STU 2WD cars)... with the condition that they ALSO ALLOW FENDER MODIFUCATIONS NECESSARY TO FIT THESE TO AN E36 BMW! This is THE last 2WD car left in STU with even a remote shot at keeping up with the AWD turbo cars at HPT... so adding 285s doesn't help any other STU classed 2WD car that matters... :D

(sorry RX8 drivers, your numbers are too few!)

np, we're all in BS now. :wavey

i think the 2wd 285mm allowance is a great idea for STU. i'm just not sure it will help the e36 m3 as the fender modding may get into SP mod territory, no? it also makes the proposed 2wd 265mm allowance for STX in the last fastrack make sense. by itself, i thought the STX allowance was pretty whacky.

maybe this is a precursor to allowing the E46 M3 in STU????????

That is already out for member proposal in the March Fastrack. If you support (or disagree) with the proposal, please write to seb@scca.com and be sure to include your membership number.

Thanks!

Mike

Congrats Mike on being named Chair of the STAC.

Just sent my email. While I'm don't run my M3 in STU on a regular basis, rules like this just don't make sense. Many (most?) of the 2WD cars classified in STU can't fit 285mm tires without fender modification. If we think we got it bad with M3s... think about the SRT4 ACRs - someone! Please think of the NEONS!

From my post in the other thread (was reading that one before I saw this one):
I'll write a letter in favor of that, but not for the reason you might think. Personally, I don't think cutting the fenders on an ST car is a great idea. It's just too "racecar" for the category, IMO, at least for me.

BUT, 285s on 2WD is good for STU for the bigger HP cars. Maybe (maybe) an E46 M3 or Mustang or something can go fast on 285s (are there any good 285 tires? Haven't checked).

If STU gets faster and STX gets faster with 265s , maybe it will eventually mean the E36 M3 (on 255 or 265) will be a perfect fit for STX, where it should be. :cool

-Paul

From my post in the other thread (was reading that one before I saw this one):
I'll write a letter in favor of that, but not for the reason you might think. Personally, I don't think cutting the fenders on an ST car is a great idea. It's just too "racecar" for the category, IMO, at least for me.

BUT, 285s on 2WD is good for STU for the bigger HP cars. Maybe (maybe) an E46 M3 or Mustang or something can go fast on 285s (are there any good 285 tires? Haven't checked).

If STU gets faster and STX gets faster with 265s , maybe it will eventually mean the E36 M3 (on 255 or 265) will be a perfect fit for STX, where it should be. :cool

-Paul

The rules need to be changed so more extreme fender ROLLING can be done, not cutting necessarily. I don't have the quote now, but the rules as they are don't allow the fender contour to change enough as would be required to sneak wider (say 275s or 285s) tires in there.

But for whatever reason, glad you are on board:D

FWIW, my '96 328is DSP car was on 285/30's mounted on ASA wheels with way too much offset (35-ish IIRC) and stock fenders with a spit-ton of fender rolling (too cheap/broke for flares at the time!) and ran them successfully for a year and a half. Fender work looked very similar to Fair's in his pics. Of course, everyone was impressed with my 4-wheel "burnouts" around the course occasionally, and the right front fender had all the paint cooked off of it from where the tire liked to snuggle up against it during hard cornering, but I ran the car pretty damn low, and it did work! So don't be too quick to discount the possibility of making this work on an STU car! The 285/30 is a shorter tire than the 265/35, I believe, which also works in favor of making them fit. Not easily, but they will fit...sort of.

I'm sure more than one of you are out in the garage right now with your fender rollers and BFH's, researching the possibility...:alright

So don't be too quick to discount the possibility of making this work on an STU car! The 285/30 is a shorter tire than the 265/35, I believe, which also works in favor of making them fit. Not easily, but they will fit...sort of.

I'm sure more than one of you are out in the garage right now with your fender rollers and BFH's, researching the possibility...:alright

You *can* make them fit, if you're not limited to rolling the inside lip as ST rule 14.2.E states.

As your post points out, cheap "flares" created with a fender roller, hammer, bat, etc. can accommodate a very wide tire. This is exactly the point Terry makes as well.

Mike

The rules need to be changed so more extreme fender ROLLING can be done, not cutting necessarily. I don't have the quote now, but the rules as they are don't allow the fender contour to change enough as would be required to sneak wider (say 275s or 285s) tires in there.

But for whatever reason, glad you are on board:D

I don't know that I agree with this. I will NEVER go to the lengths that Terry and Mike have gone because my car is a STREET car. The rolling necessary to fit the 255s is within reason- my car has no evidence of actually getting rolled.

There is one of two sides to this:
My opinion can be discounted because I'm not willing to go to the lengths necessary to build a race car in a street car class. Or the rules are designed to allow street car builds a place to race without turning them into race cars.

-Jon

Jon,

That's *exactly* why the rules are written as they are. The problem becomes reconciling that with the other allowances that make an ST car nearly unstreetable.

My car doesn't show any visible signs of rolling either (just ignore the little bit of burnt paint from tire rub on the driver side.) I would *never* consider driving this car on the street though, nor would I consider driving a National-prepped STS Civic on the street. They'd rattle themselves apart, remove all your dental work and kill your front lawn too, just for good measure.

Any of the cars prepped for local events are easily driven on the street though. That's pretty much the nature of the beast. There's a clear difference between a car built to the limit of the rules vs one moderately prepped for local competition.

I happen to think that dichotomy works beautifully for the ST category. Crazy nutballs (me, Terry and a bunch of other Nationals types) can have fun and be creative, while the local competitor can set up a fun car with only a little bit more money than it costs to run competitively in Stock.

Mike

Yes, E46 M3 can fit a 285 easily in the rear, and up front with a fender roll...

Are the fenders the same between the M3 and 330? I guess I could see the M3 having much wider fenders...

Are the fenders the same between the M3 and 330? I guess I could see the M3 having much wider fenders...

E46 M3 has a lot more fender room than non-M E46...

http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/178816467_jDEuR-M.jpg
265/35/18 Yokohama AD07 on 18x10" D-Force LTW5 wheels = TIZZITE!

http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/191559468_tzhbz-M.jpg
265/35/18 Bridgestone RE01R on 18x10" D-Force LTW5 wheels = Tons of room, unrolled fenders

We have a new fender roller ordered and in route, just aching for the SEB to allow us to use it on our STU car. I'll roll those fenders and make that $384 (yikes!) Yokohama 285/30/18 tire fit! :buttrock

You *can* make them fit, if you're not limited to rolling the inside lip as ST rule 14.2.E states.

As your post points out, cheap "flares" created with a fender roller, hammer, bat, etc. can accommodate a very wide tire. This is exactly the point Terry makes as well.

Mike

http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/222126840_s556X-S-1.jpg http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/222126821_MSPiA-S-1.jpg

"Extreme Fender Rolling" with 285 BFG R1s on an E36... (a bimmerforums user)

http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/231481402_xAnpL-S.jpg http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/259168476_CXhDa-S.jpg

"Hammer Formed Fenders" and 285s on an E36 I did. A PDR guy later came back and smoothed out this "artwork" I performed (ha!) and it cleaned up very nicely; these fenders are being repainted now along with the roof (welded and 'glassed in the stock steel panel (http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/gallery/2343546_ofEpu#259167359)) so it might not look terrible once completed. Next time I'll use the fender roller and some heat gun action to do less damage to the finish.

E46 M3 has a lot more fender room than non-M E46...

265/35/18 Yokohama AD07 on 18x10" D-Force LTW5 wheels = TIZZITE!

hmm, so I'm guessing the 275 A6, which has a .4" wider section width would probably not work in DS... (Looks like that 328 has camber plates and coilovers?)

My co-driver last year was convinced it could fit, but we never decided to gamble the $1100 or so it might have cost to find out...

hmm, so I'm guessing the 275 A6, which has a .4" wider section width would probably not work in DS... (Looks like that 328 has camber plates and coilovers?)

My co-driver last year was convinced it could fit, but we never decided to gamble the $1100 or so it might have cost to find out...
The 1999 328 shown above has lowering springs only, no camber plates (and its "too low" at that). But the 265s and 10" wheels do not fit well on it at that ride height, no... does this mean the 275 Hoosier on a stock (7.5" wide?!) will work or not on an E46... no idea. Squeezing a big tire on a skinny wheel tends to make the overall section width narrower than if they were on the proper sized wheel.

I have never understood the fascination some Stock class racers have with running massively wide tires on narrow stock rims (the guys running 285s on an 18x8" RX8 wheel is my favorite) because I feel like they're just carrying around dead weight - much of the tire that isn't touching the ground, cupped and squeezed onto a narrow stock rim. I think its a case of one guy does it and goes fast so then lots of people do it, but does it prove worthwhile in testing? I dunno, but I tend to doubt it would.

Stock class? No thank you. :D

How about the type-R with a 275 tire on a 6" wide wheel. :eek:

I hope the 285 rule gets passed along with the ability to flare fenders. The 285/30/18 should be an awesome STU M3 tire. :cool Can you fit 18X11's? :D

I have never understood the fascination some Stock class racers have with running massively wide tires on narrow stock rims (the guys running 285s on an 18x8" RX8 wheel is my favorite) because I feel like they're just carrying around dead weight - much of the tire that isn't touching the ground, cupped and squeezed onto a narrow stock rim. I think its a case of one guy does it and goes fast so then lots of people do it, but does it prove worthwhile in testing? I dunno, but I tend to doubt it would.

Stock class? No thank you. :D

Yeah, it's just that we have no choice. =] I wish Hoosier or Kumho made a 255 or 265 17" tire, but it's straight from 245 -> 275.

Anyway, if you have a 10mm wider tire, and 6mm of that isn't touching the ground because it's sqeezed so bad, you still have an extra 4mm touching the ground, right? Now when the difference is 30mm, even if we only get 10mm of that, it's still more tire on the ground.

I run stock because I need my car to be a daily driver. I have a warranty, I need my girlfriend to be willing to ride in it with me, I need to be able to sell it easily when the time comes, and I attract enough police attention as it is. I imagine most other stock class folks have a similar set of reasons for needing more of a "compromise" car. Also better for driver development, less things to screw with, so less variability while learning.

ST is tempting, but two things keep me from it - the cost, and the aftermarket seats. The high spring rates would be rough, but I could live with that. And R-compounds, tough habit to kick.

And the local competition - Darryl Wrolson (6th place STX 325 at Nats) has Randy Williams co-driving his car this year. (last year he had Neal Tovsen, who took 2nd at Nats) I do pretty well in a competitive field in DS locally, so I'm pretty happy with that. I took 10th in overall PAX last year, but the difference between that and the Neal, Randy, or Pat Washburn 1,2,3 PAX crowd is still pretty large. I like my small pond, thankyouverymuch. =]

I would actually prefer stock class....IF I could afford to autox a stock class car AND a project type car....

An 07 Mustang, RX8, C4 vette, CS Solstice, or Mini in HS, GS would be IDEAL....

Yeah, it's just that we have no choice. =] I wish Hoosier or Kumho made a 255 or 265 17" tire, but it's straight from 245 -> 275.
On a stock E46 wheel (7"? 7.5"?) I'd be looking at the 245 tires, for autocross use. Remember: narrower tire gets heat sooner and a wider tire of the same diameter is always heavier. I just looked and yes the 245 is a solid 2 pounds heavier than the 275... and I suspect it could be more than that.


225/40ZR18, 20 pounds, recommended wheel width 7.5-9", 9.5" section width, 24.8" dia
245/35ZR18, 21, recommended wheel width 8.5-9.5", 9.8" section width, 24.7" dia
245/40ZR18, 21 pounds, recommended wheel width 8.5-9.5", 10.5" section width, 25.3" dia
275/35ZR18, 23 pounds, recommended wheel width 9.5-11", 10.7" section width, 25.2" dia

I'd even look at the 225 if the wheel width was under 8", but if its an 8" or 8.5" wide wheel, I'd go for one of the 245's (pick the best one based on gearing) without hesitation.

Anyway, if you have a 10mm wider tire, and 6mm of that isn't touching the ground because it's squeezed so bad, you still have an extra 4mm touching the ground, right? Now when the difference is 30mm, even if we only get 10mm of that, it's still more tire on the ground.
I dunno... you have to stop/accelerate that 2+ extra pounds into and out of every turn, heat up that wider tire and keep it hot, etc. The narrower tire on the same wheel can perform better in Solo. I've tested this time and again on ST and SP cars (running the same tire on a wider wheel or a narrower tire on the same wheel), and it rarely disappoints for Solo use except in odd situations. But I admit, "Stock" prep in a McStrut BMW is very odd - because you have way too little camber and wheel width and spring rate. :D I have run Stock classed cars a couple of different years but I always hate hate hate how screwed up they handle within the limits of Stock prep, and usually take them quickly to SP, SM or now ST and Prepared.

I run stock because I need my car to be a daily driver. I have a warranty, I need my girlfriend to be willing to ride in it with me, I need to be able to sell it easily when the time comes, and I attract enough police attention as it is. I imagine most other stock class folks have a similar set of reasons for needing more of a "compromise" car. Also better for driver development, less things to screw with, so less variability while learning.
Granted, for a "one car to do it all" car, Stock sometimes makes the most sense. Still, my wife has daily driven our E36 M3 prepped for STU with spring rates that most people shun for the past several years... it was prepped enough to trophy twice and win Ladies twice..? It wore tires beautifully (in street and competition use) and was a blast to drive on the street.

But a warranty? Nope. Hanchey had already taken care of just about every wear item on the car and its been trouble free for the past ~40K miles of street use - other than one flat tire and one abused Odyssey mini-battery that was "crying for help" for a year past its expected lifetime, its never let us down. (knock on wood!) Some folks don't want to work on their car, and keeping it 100% stock is sometimes the best way to avoid issues when new, but as BMWs age they all have the same "issues".

One more point: The cost for custom valved 3-way monotube adjustable shocks that are Stock legal but that "add spring rate" can be daunting... it can cost more than a complete, competitive STU suspension for a BMW. Not every winner in Stock goes to $5000+ shock extremes, but some do. Generally Stock prep should be cheaper than STU or STX, until you factor in your R compound tire budget. The costs begin to get worse as you chew through those Hoosiers at a rapid clip with no front camber, while the STX and STU folks churn along on their "street" compounds, even shaved ones, lap after lap with better tire wear. So ST_ prep might cost more initially but the cost-per-run is going to be a lot lower.

ST is tempting, but two things keep me from it - the cost, and the aftermarket seats. The high spring rates would be rough, but I could live with that. And R-compounds, tough habit to kick.
The fixed back seats can be a nice weight break, but personally my best finish in STU at Nationals (2nd in 2006) was with the stock 63 pound M3 seats. We had 19 pound Sparcos in the car in 2005 (6th) and again 2007 ("not a trophy", heh). I don't think the seats played a big role in any of those results, of course, but given the choice I'd always do lightweight seats in an ST_ car if budget allows. They give you a lot more feedback through your butt/back, and this mod drops a solid 80 pounds of weight. These are plenty comfy for me, but you do lose access to the back seat.

Some folks have turned ST cars into unbearable cars for the street. Ours... yea, its louder (exhaust) and firmer (the 750# rear spring rates are about 3X the stock rate) but its plenty streetable to us with the shock valving at full soft. If we didn't run 18" street wheels/tires it would probably be nicer still. We are running the stock 14" wheels and tall sidewall tires on the street for our STS prepped E30 and its pretty nice, even with 600# spring rates. Sidewalls always help.

OK, that's the extent of my tirade against Stock classes. :stickoutt

edit: as for R compounds being hard to "quit"... I can agree there. Its been 3+ years since I ran in a car regulary with R compounds, and now getting out of the XP car with 305mm gumballs and into the STS car with 195 Bridgestones... it is a pretty big change.

But I admit, "Stock" prep in a McStrut BMW is very odd - because you have way too little camber and wheel width and spring rate. :D

It is an odd beast, for sure. I think I was doing something wrong with my pressures at the end of last year, as the wear on the outside corner of my first set of A6's was rather dramatic. Gonna have to shoe polish it up for a few events this year.

Granted, for a "one car to do it all" car, Stock sometimes makes the most sense. And for one car to do it all, nothing beats a BMW, IMO. (well... maybe an STi...)

One more point: The cost for custom valved 3-way monotube adjustable shocks that are Stock legal but that "add spring rate" can be daunting... it can cost more than a complete, competitive STU suspension for a BMW. Not every winner in Stock goes to $5000+ shock extremes, but some do.Yeah, stock only allows double adjustables, and there's really only one double adjustable choice for the E46 non-M, so pretty well all of us spent our $1900 on TC Kline modified Konis. Some people go with yellows, and I think those can still win trophies, but the DAs are pretty useful I've found, especially in the rain.

Generally Stock prep should be cheaper than STU or STX, until you factor in your R compound tire budget. The costs begin to get worse as you chew through those Hoosiers at a rapid clip with no front camber, while the STX and STU folks churn along on their "street" compounds, even shaved ones, lap after lap with better tire wear. So ST_ prep might cost more initially but the cost-per-run is going to be a lot lower.I did the calc, and assuming my mechanic is very generous with his rates, it would cost me about $8,000 to bring my car from DS to STX. That's after the $3k I've spent for DS, and without going to any extremes. $8k buys a lot of Hoosiers. (or a whole Miata! Or an upgrade to an S2000...)


The fixed back seats can be a nice weight break, but personally my best finish in STU at Nationals (2nd in 2006) was with the stock 63 pound M3 seats. That was when STU was rather young, correct? I'd probably go with lightweight seats that are still adjustable, but that 80lbs is pretty big. As I said, we have some top-level competition locally, so to compete locally here really does require national-level prep. I'd be running against a 2600 lb 325...

If we didn't run 18" street wheels/tires it would probably be nicer still. I'm surprised, after your discussion of weight & heat vs. width, that you stick with the 18's. Why not 17's? The 17" wheels and tires are both lighter, though you lose that extra 10mm the 265/35/18's will give you. And that's just for 10mm, think that tradeoff is worth it for 30mm? Wish I had the money to test.

I think Bob Clark was using 275's on the front of his 330 at Nationals. I would say that indicates 275's won't fit in the rear, but he also toes out the rear, so he may have been doing it for more rotation. I don't feel like my car needs any more rotation, I'm usually trying to get the rear to settle down. =]

It is an odd beast, for sure. I think I was doing something wrong with my pressures at the end of last year, as the wear on the outside corner of my first set of A6's was rather dramatic. Gonna have to shoe polish it up for a few events this year.
The outside will always wear badly in a Stock classed BMW... unfortunately that is "normal". You can't get enough negative camber to prevent this. If you are wearing the fronts well in a DStock BMW, you are going slow. ;)

And for one car to do it all, nothing beats a BMW, IMO. (well... maybe an STi...)
Err... two of my last choices in Stock would be strut suspended cars with not enough camber range. I'd rather do Stock in a Lotus or C5 Z06 Corvette, maybe an AStock S2000, Solstice Turbo, Cayman, or (gasp) BStock RX8 (although I owned and hated one of those in the past - that Genesis Rotary motor just stinks). All of these cars can still get good alignments in Stock legal form. McStrut STI and BMWs, not so much... but they do fare much better in SP/ST/SM once you can fix that major shortcoming.

Yeah, stock only allows double adjustables...
Well... yes and no. You can have two knobs but still add additional (and adjustable) Nitrogen pressure. Section 13.5 part A of the 2008 Solo rules (http://www.scca.com/documents/Solo%20Rules/2008_Solo_Rules_2.pdf) explains it better (page 65). You can even have remote reservoir shocks as well - this is explicitly allowed in 13.5 E. And some of the top Stock competitors have figured out why this helps...

...and there's really only one double adjustable choice for the E46 non-M, so pretty well all of us spent our $1900 on TC Kline modified Konis. Some people go with yellows, and I think those can still win trophies, but the DAs are pretty useful I've found, especially in the rain.
Well there's other choices, if you look hard enough... :devillook

We can make AST4200 coilovers into a stock legal E46 shock. We've done this on a few other car models for Stock class. Its not as inexpensive as the TCK kit, of course, but the AST is a real monotube double adjustable shock with 8-10 times the Nitrogen pressure of any twin tube. With custom AST4100-RR shocks, you'd get remote reservoirs, too. See how shocks can get a little wacky and expensive in Stock?

I did the calc, and assuming my mechanic is very generous with his rates, it would cost me about $8,000 to bring my car from DS to STX. That's after the $3k I've spent for DS, and without going to any extremes. $8k buys a lot of Hoosiers. (or a whole Miata! Or an upgrade to an S2000...)
Wow... what is that $8000 buying? You could sell most of your DStock wheels/suspension for a bit of that, too. Shocks+Plates, 17x8 wheels are relatively cheap, 245 tires ST too. Limited Slip upgrade is probably where you get hit in the wallet, I suppose. Seats ($1500), battery ($90), cold-air ($50-100), + cat-back (custom) is the rest. A lot of that is less helpful than the core "shocks+plates+wheels".

I'm surprised, after your discussion of weight & heat vs. width, that you stick with the 18's. Why not 17's? The 17" wheels and tires are both lighter, though you lose that extra 10mm the 265/35/18's will give you. And that's just for 10mm, think that tradeoff is worth it for 30mm? Wish I had the money to test.
I didn't know what your Stock wheel size choices were in that car - assumed you had to use 18" wheels to get some optional Performance Package or some such thing. If you could get 17" wheels of the same width and not lose something important, then yes, I'd do that.

I think Bob Clark was using 275's on the front of his 330 at Nationals. I would say that indicates 275's won't fit in the rear, but he also toes out the rear, so he may have been doing it for more rotation. I don't feel like my car needs any more rotation, I'm usually trying to get the rear to settle down. =]
Toes OUT the rear? Of a BMW? Wow, that's just wacky. :D The things you Stock class guys have to do to de-pig-i-fy your cars...

Err... two of my last choices in Stock would be strut suspended cars with not enough camber range. I'd rather do Stock in a Lotus or C5 Z06 Corvette, maybe an AStock S2000, Solstice Turbo, Cayman, or (gasp) BStock RX8

For sure better stock class cars, but worse daily drivers. That's what I meant, when you need a car that's good at doing a lot of things - commuter, grocery getter, autocross, and track, a BMW (of most any stripe) or an STi are good choices.

Well... yes and no. You can have two knobs but still add additional (and adjustable) Nitrogen pressure. Section 13.5 part A of the 2008 Solo rules (http://www.scca.com/documents/Solo%20Rules/2008_Solo_Rules_2.pdf) explains it better (page 65). You can even have remote reservoir shocks as well - this is explicitly allowed in 13.5 E. And some of the top Stock competitors have figured out why this helps...

Interesting, care to share the secrect? ;)


We can make AST4200 coilovers into a stock legal E46 shock. We've done this on a few other car models for Stock class. Its not as inexpensive as the TCK kit, of course, but the AST is a real monotube double adjustable shock with 8-10 times the Nitrogen pressure of any twin tube. With custom AST4100-RR shocks, you'd get remote reservoirs, too. See how shocks can get a little wacky and expensive in Stock?

So if the Koni/TCK will keep my car planted for 10 minutes at full rebound, what's the advantage of something with 8-10 times the pressure? Sell us Terry, sell us!

Wow... what is that $8000 buying? You could sell most of your DStock wheels/suspension for a bit of that, too. Shocks+Plates, 17x8 wheels are relatively cheap, 245 tires ST too. Limited Slip upgrade is probably where you get hit in the wallet, I suppose. Seats ($1500), battery ($90), cold-air ($50-100), + cat-back (custom) is the rest. A lot of that is less helpful than the core "shocks+plates+wheels".

Actually I found the diff to be less than I expected. Here's the breakout:
diffsonline diff: $2800 + install: $200
springs: $400
(I'd likely keep my DA shocks)
camber plates: $300
wheels: $1200
tires: $1280
(I was pricing based on your setup of 18x10 & 265 yok's, would be probably $500 cheaper with 17")
spring perches: $60
seats: $800
chip: $370 - conforti (Bimmerworld? Dinan?)
intake: $150
exhaust: $750
total of $8310, assuming I can do all the install work myself, which I can't, though it probably wouldn't take more than $300-500 between my mechanic and friends.

If we subtract $500 using the 17" wheels and tires, and assume I can get the exhaust custom-done for $350 (I was thinking dinan, as that would give me the closest sound to stock, for daily driver duty) we're down to the bargain basement build of $7410 + some labor, or about $8k. True, I could probably sell my stock class wheels and tires for around $1,000-$1,500. So we're down to only $5,910 if we're optimistic. (+ some labor)

Toes OUT the rear? Of a BMW? Wow, that's just wacky. :D The things you Stock class guys have to do to de-pig-i-fy your cars...

Heh, well I think it's kind of silly as well, I'm usually trying to get it to go in the other direction... but then his co-driver took home a trophy at Nats, and I... well... didn't. =]

Well, for example, you can get a top spec diff from Metrix without the polished internals or finned cover for around $1600-$1800. I believe Dan @ Diffsonline builds a high quality product but I couldnt justify the large price difference between a Metrix diff which are also well reviewed and the Diffsonline diff.

You could cut a good 1400 dollars of your budget by going with a metrix motorsports rear diff.

argh, beaten to the punch!

^^^ You could cut a good 1400 dollars of your budget by going with a metrix motorsports rear diff.

Agreed. My diff went bad and I bought one from Metric Mechanic (rebuilt) but this time went with a 3-disc instead of the stock 2-disc variable limited slip. Take corners and sweepers in an auto-x in my M3 feels good!

Price? $1,511 out the door!

sweet, I'd never heard of Metrix!

Damn you guys, keep taking away my excuses...

I don't know that I agree with this. I will NEVER go to the lengths that Terry and Mike have gone because my car is a STREET car. The rolling necessary to fit the 255s is within reason- my car has no evidence of actually getting rolled.

There is one of two sides to this:
My opinion can be discounted because I'm not willing to go to the lengths necessary to build a race car in a street car class. Or the rules are designed to allow street car builds a place to race without turning them into race cars.

-Jon

Jon,

That's *exactly* why the rules are written as they are.
Crazy nutballs (me, Terry and a bunch of other Nationals types) can have fun and be creative, while the local competitor can set up a fun car with only a little bit more money than it costs to run competitively in Stock.

Mike

Mike, are you suggesting a move toward a "do what you have to do to the fender make the tire fit" rule?
I gotta side with Jon here, allowing aggressive fender re-contouring (basically flaring) is outside the spirit of ST. The current rule allows rolling the lip, and the fender always gets a little bent, but allowing out-and-out flaring is a bit much. If the car is new enough to have value, it would be severely decreased by that allowance. ST is supposed to be for street cars, I drive mine on the street (carefully, I live near Philly), and the spring rates I run are in line with other M3s (tho not up with Terry's 700+ lbs/in). If one wants to mod the fenders enough to run crazy tire sizes, then Street Prepared is the place to do it.

From the book:
"The Street Touring category of vehicle modifications is meant to fit
between the current Stock and Street Prepared categories. This
category provides a natural competition outlet for auto enthusiasts
using affordable sports sedans equipped with common suspension,
engine, and appearance modifications which are fully legal and
compatible with street use anywhere in the country."

And Street Prepared's fender rule:

"15.2 BODYWORK
A. Fenders and bumpers may be modified for tire clearance. This
includes the portion of a hood which serves as a fender/wheel
well, where applicable. This does not permit modifications to
the chassis or bodywork inboard of the vertical plane of the hub/
wheel mounting face (at rest, with front wheels straight ahead).Flares may be added although tires may extend beyond the
bodywork. Replacement of complete hood, flared fenders, or
quarter panels is prohibited. Plastic and rubber wheel well
splash shields may be modified for tire clearance and for installation
of fender flares as allowed herein."


285s are fine for 300+ HP 2WD STU cars that can fit them with the current rule. Changing the rules to make the E36 M3 into a racecar to compete with 300+HP AWD street cars is not a good idea. Just class it properly, against the regular WRX in STX, and be done with it. :)

-Paul

Yeah, well those of us in 325/328's aren't exactly thrilled to have the M3s show up and take a dump on us.

Yeah, well those of us in 325/328's aren't exactly thrilled to have the M3s show up and take a dump on us.

Understood. I don't think there are enough ST classes to fairly class the popular cars as is, but I don't see the add-more-classes movement taking off anytime soon.
So, aside from the last sentence in my previous post, do I make sense to you?
Or to put it in STX terms, do you think an E30 M3 should flare the heck out of the fenders to fit 265s?

-Paul

I agree with you on the fender rolling, just not throwing the M3's into STX. I don't think the WRX drivers are too happy about the idea considering Bryce Meridith placed 2nd last year in a 328is.

Mike, are you suggesting a move toward a "do what you have to do to the fender make the tire fit" rule?
I gotta side with Jon here, allowing aggressive fender re-contouring (basically flaring) is outside the spirit of ST. The current rule allows rolling the lip, and the fender always gets a little bent, but allowing out-and-out flaring is a bit much. If the car is new enough to have value, it would be severely decreased by that allowance. ST is supposed to be for street cars, I drive mine on the street (carefully, I live near Philly), and the spring rates I run are in line with other M3s (tho not up with Terry's 700+ lbs/in). If one wants to mod the fenders enough to run crazy tire sizes, then Street Prepared is the place to do it.



Nope, I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm only commenting to encourage a little thought & dialog, and since it generated your response my comment had the intended effect.

But I have to point out: rolling the inner lip does not allow the fender to be bent. Your comment above states otherwise. I had my fenders rolled by a body shop. They're as thin as the two pieces of metal folded against each other can be, and they're legal. (Though the section where the paint was burnt off by a bad rub isn't pretty...)

Mike

Yeah, well those of us in 325/328's aren't exactly thrilled to have the M3s show up and take a dump on us.
How much does your car weigh? I suspect I could have my car at 2800lbs easily for STX trim, perhaps maybe even 2750. An M3 is easily going to be 150lbs over that for only 40hp?

How much does your car weigh? I suspect I could have my car at 2800lbs easily for STX trim, perhaps maybe even 2750. An M3 is easily going to be 150lbs over that for only 40hp?


Don't know...haven't had a chance to weigh it but my car doesn't have lightweight seats, but I honestly cannot see how an M3 could weigh so much more. Sound deadening?

At least the M3 can utilize a 3.23, whereas 328's need a custom 2.93 limited slip.

Well the M3 has heavier/beefier brakes, rear subframe, more interior stuff, harder to find without a sunroof, slightly heavier engine, etc. It all adds up.

Nope, I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm only commenting to encourage a little thought & dialog, and since it generated your response my comment had the intended effect.

I thought as much.


But I have to point out: rolling the inner lip does not allow the fender to be bent. Your comment above states otherwise. I had my fenders rolled by a body shop. They're as thin as the two pieces of metal folded against each other can be, and they're legal. (Though the section where the paint was burnt off by a bad rub isn't pretty...)

Mike

I meant when using the common fender roller method the fender usually bows out a tiny bit, and that much is usually overlooked. I know you know what I meant. :)

-Paul

I don't think the WRX drivers are too happy about the idea considering Neal Tovsen placed 2nd last year in a 325is.

Fixed that for ya...

I agree with you on the fender rolling, just not throwing the M3's into STX. I don't think the WRX drivers are too happy about the idea considering Bryce Meridith placed 2nd last year in a 328is.

As mentioned, that was Tovson, but how do the WRX drivers feel about getting KILLED by a WRX? :D It was not the E36's that beat most of the WRX's at nationals, it was the drivers in them. Fenter showed what a great driver in a well setup WRX can do. :eek:

I thought as much.



I meant when using the common fender roller method the fender usually bows out a tiny bit, and that much is usually overlooked. I know you know what I meant. :)

-Paul

I know what you meant, but others may easily misinterpret your comment. I want to be perfectly clear: there is no allowance to move anything other than the inner lip. If one rolls their fender and has any other effect, it's not legal.

"Usually overlooked" does not mean legal, and I certainly wouldn't want to go to the effort and expense of showing up in Topeka, earning a top trophy and losing it due to a protest on that violation.

That's the crux of Terry's comments on the subject. He believes aggressive fender rolling, moving the *outside* of the fender, should be permitted to accommodate the maximum tire allowed in the class. In the case of STU, where wheels are unlimited, this can have all kinds of unintended consequences.

Discuss amongst yourselves... :D

Mike

How much does your car weigh? I suspect I could have my car at 2800lbs easily for STX trim, perhaps maybe even 2750. An M3 is easily going to be 150lbs over that for only 40hp?
EXACTLY.

Some of the STX E36 cars are under 2700 pounds... I saw some weighed at Nationals. The M3 will be a good bit heavier than that for an advertised "40hp" (with only 500-700 cc of displacement more than the 325). The STX mods equalize out everything else, but the M3 has some heavier bits that can't change.

http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/202224420_o6YBG-S.jpg vs. http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/photos/202226379_ZFqDw-S.jpg

Our STU prepped 1997 M3 was 2948 lbs at race trim in 2007 at HPT, with the A/C installed and all typical ST prep (lighter exhaust, seats, wheels, battery, rotors, etc). Some of the 1995 M3s (several differences) and with no A/C could get lighter than that (2850 at best), but the A/C has to go back in for 2009.

Our STU prepped M3 has only ever cracked 224 whp on the chassis dyno. There's several M50 powered STX classed 325's showing 200 whp dyno numbers. So the hp diff isn't even as much as they like to think...

The E36 M3 belongs in STX. If we were to run an STX car we'd have to really think hard about using an M3 over a proven and significantly lighter 325. If we didn't already have a well sorted but "class-less" E36 M3 sitting in the shop, I would buy an E36 325 5-spd car for an STX build, with NO hesitation. Well, after I convinced myself it could beat a WRX that had the same size tires and a lot more power... ;) (since a WRX won the class 2 years in a row. By a lot.)



Whatever you think about the E36 in STX, please send in your votes to allow all 2WD cars to have a max tire bump to 265mm for STX! Leaving the AWD turbo cars on the same max tire width is ridiculous. Send your letters to seb@scca.com, and include your membership number.

Thanks!

There's several M50 powered STX classed 325's showing 200 whp dyno numbers.



REALLY? Bryce's car made 179 rwhp and the car Tovson drove made way less than that according to him. Have you heard of multiple STX 325's making that kind of power? I am almost there, but I have not seen any others even close. Many of the DSP guys do not even make 200 rwhp. Most 90% prepped STX E36's will make less than 185 rwhp IMO.

Anyway...separate topic. :D

EXACTLY.

Some of the STX E36 cars are under 2700 pounds...

Um, are you serious?? If so, let me know which ones so I can figure out how to drop over 50lbs from my DSP machine. Leonard's car with the tiny 15x10 wheels wasn't even under 2700 and he had no sunroof to boot.

-Mikr

Um, are you serious?? If so, let me know which ones so I can figure out how to drop over 50lbs from my DSP machine. Leonard's car with the tiny 15x10 wheels wasn't even under 2700 and he had no sunroof to boot.

-Mikr

Wouldnt things like much smaller wheels and what not contribute to that? We run 18x10s and yours are not even the lightest available - I would imagine 17x8s should be able to be at around 14lbs a wheel. I realize that's not 50 lbs, but maybe other things like this?

Re: power output, I believe 200rwhp is possible with a DSP build, not so on an STX build (no M50 manifold on the 328).

Wouldnt things like much smaller wheels and what not contribute to that? We run 18x10s and yours are not even the lightest available - I would imagine 17x8s should be able to be at around 14lbs a wheel. I realize that's not 50 lbs, but maybe other things like this?

See that's my point, Leonard had 15x10s which can be had for ~15lbs with lighter Hoosiers. Along with no sunroof and a kart passenger seat, no radio, no cruise control, no driver's airbag, maybe loss of seatbelts and everything else, even he wasn't below 2700. So how in the hell does an STX car get below that?

-Mike

Um, are you serious?? If so, let me know which ones so I can figure out how to drop over 50lbs from my DSP machine. Leonard's car with the tiny 15x10 wheels wasn't even under 2700 and he had no sunroof to boot.

-Mike

Okay Mike, let's get on it:

Let's see... I think you already don't have a sunroof, so that 35 lb reduction is irrelevant.

Brakes should save you about 15-20 lbs... but that's just out for proposal in SP so never mind.

Umm... AC. Did you remove the stuff inside the dash? The little radiator piece, mounting hardware and plumbing to it (not the heater core) weighed in around 5 lbs if I recall correctly. Problem is you have to dismantle the entire dash, your garage and your neighbors lawnmower to get to it.

'91 dash without the passenger airbag? That's probably good for 5-10 lbs of weight savings.

That 13 lb lightweight battery (if you use one in that range)? It's 9 lbs overweight. Just don't believe what you read about nano-Lithium Ion batteries. They explode, just without all the flames.

Hmmm... a cloth rear seat could knock out a couple pounds.

And then a miracle occurs and your car floats across the scales. 2699. :D

Of course, most of that stuff isn't valid in STX... but I'll guess you already knew that.

Mike

Heh, yeah I know I've got that weight to lose (Sunroof, wheels, some more AC parts, super lightweight battery, cloth interior), but the issue is that there's no way I could see a STX 325 being lighter than DSP 325. I think Fair's being a little over the top in how much difference there is between an M3 and a 325.

PS: Maybe if you inflated the tires with helium and drained ALL the fluids from the car (oil and gas included :))

I run one quart of oil in my engine, and I have all the blood sucked out of me by vampires before each run. I am LIGHT:)

Sorry, back on topic. Regardless, I agree with Terry, send your letters!

The lightest STX E36 I saw at Nationals was 273X, but I did not see one of them weigh.

The lightest STX E36 I saw at Nationals was 273X, but I did not see one of them weigh.
2730... that's within the range I'm talking about. I don't think all STX E36s are that light, of course, but they can be. They don't have to run foglights, for instance... :D

If someone can't get a DSP car can't make 200 whp, they should sell their tools. :D A DSP 325 has a more power potential than an STU M3.

2730... that's within the range I'm talking about. I don't think all STX E36s are that light, of course, but they can be. They don't have to run foglights, for instance... :D


I need to find out if they were available without foglights. I think the earlier ones were, but I am not sure about the 95's. I know all 96' and later have to have them.

Ehh... I have heavy headlights and splitter anyway. I will try to get a weight on the car very soon. There is still another 30 lbs to come out with the seat, but I think I may put the A/C back in for this year.

Can the fogs only be pulled if you revert to a option package where they were not available?

Can the fogs only be pulled if you revert to a option package where they were not available?

That is correct.

The lightest STX E36 I saw at Nationals was 273X, but I did not see one of them weigh.

I was 100 lbs over that at Nationals, after all our runs were done. The low fuel light had just come on, if I recall correctly.

My AC is removed though.

Mike

So... since I can't figure it out myself, I'm just gonna ask:

Why are the rx8s not more competitive in STU? They can fit 275s right? And they're significantly lighter, better chassis, more mid-enginedy.

Are there just not enough people campaigning them?

So... since I can't figure it out myself, I'm just gonna ask:

Why are the rx8s not more competitive in STU? They can fit 275s right? And they're significantly lighter, better chassis, more mid-enginedy.

Are there just not enough people campaigning them?
Why are they slow in STU? The Renesis rotary motor sucks.

What works in Stock doesn't always work in ST pr SP. :dunno

Why are they slow in STU? The Renesis rotary motor sucks.

What works in Stock doesn't always work in ST or SP. :dunno

The RX-8's great strength in stock is their suspension and light weight. In ST, neither area sees a substantial benefit and they don't see much improvement in torque or hp.

Compare that with other STU cars and you'll see a considerable difference. The fact that the Evos and STIs aren't exactly dominant in AS and the M3 is a distant runner-up in BS suggests their stock configurations have some weaknesses.

For all three, the improved ST suspensions are far more capable than stock and, for the Evo and STI, they gain massive amounts of torque and power from ST allowances. An M3 improves over stock a bit, but probably not more than 5%-10%.

Not that it's a meaningful comparison, but my stock S52-equipped M coupe put down 219 hp and 226 tq at the wheels in stock form. My S50 M3 is 226 hp and 211 tq. (Note: tested on different dynos in different counties and different years.)

Mike

Torque. The Rx-8 has none. My wifes Mazda 3 digs out of a corner harder than my Rx8 did. That hurts to admit...