autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Stock class reclassings

To: "'Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com'" <Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com>,
Subject: RE: Stock class reclassings
From: Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 09:55:52 -0700
Thanks for the additional link, Andy!

My initial data came from :  http://www.artglenn.com/bmwm3/   (choose
'Engine')

0-60: 6.9
1/4:  15.2@92

A link there shows 7.1 and 15.4 (from European Car magazine)

Weight indeed appears more than the 26xx that I'd seen.  Still one of the
lighter cars in the class :-)  

BTW, I see that in the April Tech Bulletin
(http://www.scca.org/news/tech/seb/0400.html):


ITEMS REFERRED TO THE APPLICABLE COMMITTEES

SCAC: Move the BMW M3 (E30) from AS to GS (Slater, ref. 00-011)

Did I miss the chance for input, or is it just the case that some cars are
moved w/out it (not that that is entirely bad, btw.)

Kevin McCormick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com
> [mailto:Andrew_Bettencourt@kingston.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 8:57 AM
> To: Kevin McCormick
> Cc: team.net
> Subject: RE: Stock class reclassings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From : http://www.bimmers.com/m3/spotter/dimensions.html
> 
> E30 M3 specs
> Weight:  2735
> 0-60:  7.6
> 1/4:  15.7
> 
> AB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com> on 07/06/2000 11:07:31 AM
> 
> Please respond to Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com>
> 
> To:   "team.net" <autox@autox.team.net>
> cc:    (bcc: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston)
> 
> Subject:  RE: Stock class reclassings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given that the E30 M3 is listed in Stock 5 (and is moving to 
> GS next year -
> does anyone remember when that was put up for member input? - 
> I must have
> flaked and not seen that) I think that will be even faster 
> than the Type-R.
> 
> Just from gathering info from the web (however accurate that 
> is :-) it looks
> like the E30 M3 is missing the one thing that all G-Stock 
> cars have - an
> Achiles heel.  Follow me for a second:
> 
> Type-R - FWD, No torque, narrow wheels.
> DSM cars - Narrow wheels, heavy.
> E36 BMW, Audi A4 - Heavy, big (relatively)semi-soft.
> Prelude Type-SH - FWD, heavier than a Type-R.
> 
> The E30 M3 has:
> 
> RWD
> 192 hp, 170 torque.
> 0-60 in 6.9, but that requires a shift since second is good 
> only for 56.
> 15x7 wheels.
> Weight - 2500-2600 as far as I can tell.
> 
> Was it several years ago that Bob Tunnell beat all the MR2 
> Turbo, 944, etc.
> at Wendover in one of these critters?
> 
> And indeed I _am_ biased, but at least I admit it!
> 
> Kevin McCormick
> 1997 GS Integra Type-R
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff Cashmore [mailto:cashmo@spec-rx7.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 6:07 AM
> > To: team.net
> > Subject: Re: Stock class reclassings
> >
> >
> > > I think that if the classing goes through there are gonna
> > be alot of neons
> > > going up for sale.  Looking over last year's results the
> > only neon that
> > > posted a faster time than the type R was Mr Mark Daddio.
> > The rest of us
> > > mortal neon drivers would get creamed.
> >
> > So it's ok to get creamed by Mark Daddio in a Neon but not
> > Bob Endicott in a
> > Type R?  What's the difference?
> >
> > > Also keep in mind that there is still more speed to be had
> > out of that ITR
> > > while the neon has had all of it's development.  Maybe I'm
> > wrong but there
> > > are alot of neon drivers out there who are not going to be
> > served by this
> > > reclassing.
> >
> > And if the new Neon is faster than the old you're not going
> > to be served by
> > Chrysler either.  I'm getting the idea that the SCCA likes to
> > shake things up
> > every 5 yrs or so.  The Rx7tt had it's day in the sun and so
> > has the 95-99
> > Neon.  I like them both because they're relatively cheap and
> > they'll still be
> > competative.
> >
> > Jeff Cashmore
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>