E92 M3 in SCCA Touring Class

[rzm3]

Originally Posted by Richbot

Ferrari F430 Challenge won the last two National Championship Runoffs in T1. That's not exactly 'vettes and vipers "dominating" so much as "losing" right? They are the most common competitive cars though.

The M3 is not and should not be competitive in T1, and never will be, even a GTS. Much better idea to find a formula that works for T2. To get to 3300lbs (weights are with driver) with a good cage designed for a 3300lb car, the interior will need to be stripped, which is against the philosophy of the class. Most LS3 'vettes aren't carrying much ballast to meet the 3450lb minimum weight with a cage and that's starting with a 3300lb factory curb weight. Better to look at a ~3650lb T2 classing, will be tough on brakes and tires but at least it'll be fast in the class. The EVO 9 (last year's National Champion) is already making close to 370hp and torque now, it's all wheel drive and still classed at 3480. Plus there's already a ready-made template for the E92 M3 in T2. 400+hp, V8, sedan, 18" wheels, 6-speed manual, independent rear suspension: the '06-'07 CTS-V. It won when it was campaigned (with a little factory support by GM). 3750 was the weight, it ate brakes and tires but it was fast in the class. Could probably get below that due to lack of torque (4.0l vs. 6.0l).

My point is that T1 is a pointless exercise. But, even if you can't get SCCA to class the car competitively in T1 (like I said, I would never allow the things you're asking for except the DCT), build the car. If you can drive (this is key, if you aren't driving the car to its potential the powers that be are typically deaf to any complaints about uncompetitive classing) and show that it's not competitive in T1, that'll make a re-class in T2 a really easy case to make.

I'll be writing a letter to get the GTS taken off the same spec line as the 4.0l M3 in T1, that's just BS. Luckily I wasn't dumb enough to submit a resume for committee membership this year or I might be one of the poor suckers reading the damn letters instead of writing them. Dodged that bullet.

Hey Richbot,

Thanks for the insights.

What you said exactly resonates with what I've been told from talking to people who compete in the SCCA, that the E92 (at current weight) is too strong for T2, and too slow for T1. It's kind of stuck in the middle which really sucks.

So based on your experience, what you would recommend is getting the car prepped as T1, show that it is not competitive, and use that data to request for the car to be reclassified? How reasonable is the T-SS board about these kind of changes?

Also, now that CRB just allowed the Mustang GT (5.0L 412 hp, 3650lb, 18x10 wheels, Brembo brakes, uprated springs and sways), do you think it is possible to re-class the M3 this year? Perhaps you could help me with that

As for the GTS parts, I don't really care for the wings and splitters, what I really want to use is GTS's suspension (higher rate springs and adjustable camber plates) and brakes. Based on current rules I can use GTS's suspension/brakes directly (or apply for an alternate that closely resembles it), and it would save me a lot of time because trying to develop a spring kit and then get it approved (like the TMS kit for E46) would take a lot of time...

Anyway more insights would really be appreciated.

Oh and I didn't mention the F430 Challenge because it's been re-classed to STO for 2011. I bet the Vette guys are super happy about it.

[Richbot]

You got it. Especially if you can prove the DCT isn't even competitive, as that's the "best of breed" in terms of outright speed. It might not happen for 2011 but I bet if you got a car built and completed enough races to show that the car was reliable and well driven, you'd be able to make a strong case for moving it for 2012. It seems the advisory committees are pretty progressive in finding ways to class newer cars, that's one of the goals of SS/T after all, giving newer cars a place for manufacturers to showcase their street cars.

I'll write a letter! The E92 M3 is definitely a close competitor to the 2011 GT, the independent rear suspension on the M3 really is a big advantage with stock spring rates but so is an extra liter of displacement...

The beauty of it is, if you can't get the thing fast enough for Touring1 and it doesn't get reclassed to T2 (unlikely IMO, it belongs in T2) or you just don't want to deal with a lead sled M3 that eats brakes and tires (More likely) there's always the Super Touring class structure, NASA has a good class for the car, and CCA as well. Lots of places to play. Don't let the raft of fast cars in STO discourage you from showing up at an SCCA weekend with an STO M3, odds are good you'll be one of the fastest tin tops on track and probably on the podium in STO as there just aren't that many cars being campaigned in that class yet.

Fall Line is top notch, by the way. Some of people who hang around their paddock can be a little wank but the shop, the people, and the drivers are just freaking stellar and the machines they build are world class. MacNeil (of Weathertech) is a super nice and talented guy too, don't know if he's still racing out of their shop, but he's a very gentlemanly gentleman racer.

My letter:

The E90/E92 M3 (E90 is the sedan, E92 the coupe) from 2008 to present belong in Touring 2. There is already long-standing precedent for a vehicle of similar performance potential (sedan-based, V8, RWD, 400-ish hp, independent rear suspension with macpherson strut front), the
'06-'07 Cadillac CTS-V, at 3750lbs with a 6.0l engine. The E92 M3 carries a 4.0l engine, with a nearly 100ft/lb torque deficit to the 6.0l. More importantly, it carries a similar torque deficit compared with the 5.0l Mustang GT and 6.2l Camaro SS currently classed in T2. If nothing else, the M3 belongs in T2 at an equivalent weight to the indpendent rear suspension Camaro, if not lower due to the aforementioned torque deficit. I suggest 3625, which gives the car a great enough spread from earlier currently competitive BMW's (that have considerable suspension performance allowances) without making it laughably uncompetitive against the currently classed new pony cars.

I can't provide personally obtained dynos graphs but the 4.0l is not capable of the kind of class-legal power gains that the 6.2 and 5.0l are capable of, it is already an 8300rpm engine making over 100hp per liter of displacement and is not saddled with any major flow restrictions or ECU tuning issues except for the catalysts.

An 18x9.5" wheel would be sufficient (stock rear size) but an 18x10" would be more apprpriate considering the other cars in the class, with a similar 275/35 front and 295/35-18 or 305/30-18 maximum tire size.

Suspension allowances would not be necessary for the first spec line, though allowing the older cars to update to the current competition package suspension, which consists only of different dampers and shorter rear spring perches for a lower ride height, would prevent people from needing newer donor chassis to build a best-of-breed car. Considering the list of suspension parts allowed on the Mustang GT, this seems reasonable for the initial classing.

Brakes should be sufficient with good ducting and pads/fluid. There is always the option to allow an aftermarket two-piece rotor with better cooling capacity a'la C5 Corvette if this turns into a reliability/safety issue.

The car is way too slow for T1, even though there is a spec line for it, and right now a car that is not even offered in North America (the M3 GTS) is for some reason classed on the same spec line with the normal M3. The M3 GTS has a unique 4.4l engine that is not available in the normal M3, along with unique factory adjustable coilover suspension and aero, a unique brake package, weight reduction measures, etc. The GTS was only sold in very, very limited quantities (less than the Bugatti Veyron!) and costs the equivalent of an F430 Challenge, if one can be obtained at all. It does not fit the philosophy of the class to allow the GTS or allow a normal M3 to change nearly every part on the car relevant to on-track performance. Not to mention an M3 with a cage can't achieve the spec line weight of 3300lbs for T1 without completely removing the interior, another Touring no-no. Consider, for instance, the 3500lb E46 M3 coupe that barely makes weight once all the safety equipment is added, and starts out 150lbs lighter than the E92.

Thanks for you consideration!

Richard Wiese
M3 owner, SRF racer, concerned citizen

[karussell]

try supporting your local BMW CCA clubracing series. Its a lot of fun, good people, and about as safe as you can make the sport. I have no qualms with SCCA of course, but keeping it in the family would probably help you measure against similar equipment. Also, if you are going to do all those mods to your car, in BMW CCA club racing rules you would be in a Super Mod class. The sky is the limit territory. $150K+ on the cars. The predominant winners now are E36's with turbo's running 650WHP that weigh just over 2000lbs. good luck with that. I suggest not modifying the car. run it in stock class. essentially just the safety pieces (which should be first mod for any track driven car), slightly stiffer springs/ shocks. you will learn a lot this way and not have to spend a bunch of cash to only have your mechanic trying to figure out why your car won't start up again in the pitlane.

[Richbot]

Bump - T/SS committee is going to recommend something to the CRB based on my letter, it could be to do nothing, it could be to reclass the car in T2, I don't know yet. But it should show up in the May Fastrack.

[Cruzer03]

Originally Posted by mastek

I'm down to 3430 lbs (no driver/no fuel) no rear seats, rear door panels, rear trunk liner and all my mods in the sig.
I was worried that the weight loss was going to mess with the great balance I'm enjoying at the track ... but she has responded very well to the weight loss. No adverse effect.

Now if I continue:
- Race Seats (-100 lbs)
- Moonroof delete (-50 lbs)
- Insulation (-50 lbs) although some claim 150 lbs. Total
- Navi and dash electronics and wiring (-50 lbs)
- Windshield (-70 lbs)
- 4 doors glass windows (-100 lbs)
- Rear Windshield (-50 lbs)

3430 - 520 = 2910 + race cage (150-200 lbs) = 3110 w/o fuel & driver
3110 lbs 380rwhp is what I'm hoping for.

Got pics?

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Richbot

Bump - T/SS committee is going to recommend something to the CRB based on my letter, it could be to do nothing, it could be to reclass the car in T2, I don't know yet. But it should show up in the May Fastrack.

Thanks for the effort and well reasoned letter.

Dave

[Richbot]

http://cms.scca.com/documents/2011%2...rack%20_2_.pdf

Looks like it's going to get in T2 at 3700lbs (this is preliminary version of May Fastrack technical bulletin)

Highlights:
Up to 295mm tires on 18x10's all around
3700lbs with driver (50lbs less than the IRS 6.0l CTS-V, 50 more than the stick-axle 5.0l Mustang this seems fair to me)
DCT allowed
No other spec line allowances at this time (none needed within the rules, IMO)

They still have the GTS classed with the regular M3 but I'll let somebody else write the letter to get that loophole closed. The 4.4 Wouldn't be legal unless it was in a real GTS anyway.

[Richbot]

Good call. Would be better to get a kit that fits under the more common 18's instead of CCW's or other customs, but still a good improvement.

Obviously transmission would depend on personal preference, I'd use a 6-speed and let somebody else be the DCT reliability guinea pig. Non-idrive carbon roof manual trans '08 with a few miles on it, send the engine to Kinetic for a freshening and call it soup.

My plan of attack for building one of these would be to take everything out that's legally removable, (seats, carpets, door and trim panels, air conditioning) which gets you to about 3250 dry. Overbuild the cage (have to use 0.120 wall DOM or Cr-Mo if you want to be really fancy so around 220lbs ish) and ballast up to minimum weight with about 2 gallons of fuel left in the tank. I bet it would have to carry around 100lbs of ballast with some drivers, but the nice thing about ballast is you can put it on the floor where it does the least damage. Not like some cars that can't even make their minimum weight under the rules. Car should make some good power with the allowed engine modifications (you can ditch the cats and use any tune you want as long as you maintain OBDII functionality)

I'd probably start with the 275/35-18 or 285/30-18 Hoosier in front and the 295/30 in the rear. You have some leeway from the spec tire so could use up to 315/30-18 Hoosiers, but that might be overkill

[RickyBobby]

Great work guys! I think an e90 M3 can dominate T2 even at 3700lbs.
Rldzhao, time to start the build

[Richbot]

This is usually the part where everybody looks at eachother and says "can't wait for somebody to build one" followed by cricket sounds.

I'm hopeful though. About half a dozen CTS-V's got built and they don't have nearly the following the BMW's do amongst club racers.

[SM#80]

Long time reader, first time poster -

This is my third season racing with SCCA (one year with NASA prior). As you might have guessed by my screen name, I run in the Spec Miata class; however Fall-Line MS preps my car, as well as a bunch of different M3 variants and other cars, so I can talk somewhat knowledgeable about the subject.

First, one of the FLMS customers (7.0 Joe) tried running an E92 in T1 during the 2009 season. I know his car has the 4.4 litre Dinan stroker motor. I do not know what the car weighed, but it was not competitive against the Vipers/Vettes. I have been looking to get into a T2 car for this season and when talking with FLMS, they said SCCA was going to allow the E92 in T2 this year, but with the stock motor and more weight (most of this has been covered so far I think). As of a few weeks ago the E92 that FLMS prepped for Joe is for sale. The car is pretty much perfect in every way. The price is much less than the build cost, but still $. I think with the OE motor and some small suspension tweaks it would be competitive... That is, if it was a level playing field. The Mustang 5.0 was given a lot of room by the SCCA for this season- brembos, wider rubber and a few other things that will make it tough to beat this year. Unfortunately, the politics that make up the SCCA carry too much weight and my feeling is that it won't be until after the Mustangs clean house at the Runoffs that the SCCA will start to take things away or add things (weight).

With all of that in mind, this past weekend I bought a 2005 E46 M3 that I will be running in T2 this year. A couple of things helped with the decision:

1. I think it will take me a number of races to be competitive in T2, so it won't hurt as much if I get beat by the Stangs this year.

2. The cost of the car will be 1/2 (if not more) of the cost of the E92 previously mentioned or the build of a Stang.

3. I hate Mustangs, so if I can beat one in an M, that would be nice.

Anyways, that's what I know. Oh and I just picked up an '09 M3 this weekend. So I went from no M3, to 2 M3s in a few days! HA

[rzm3]

Did you buy the white (with blue stripes) E46 M3 from Houston by any chance?

[SM#80]

No, I bought a FLMS customer car- Laguna Seca blue #66

[rzm3]

Cool. Post some pictures when you can!

[Richbot]

SM 80: Congrats on the buy! T2 is a cool class IMO. One can never have enough M3's...

But I have to disagree on the car's competitiveness. Nobody ever won a race without showing up first, and that's usually the biggest hurdle. If nobody shows up with an M3, then nobody will win with one. Don't blame politics, the people who write the letters get the rules written. If I hadn't written a letter to get the car classed in T2, who would have? Would it be classed in T2 right now? I don't know. The Mustang 5.0 just came out, the M3 came out 3 years ago. Where is everybody? It's an expensive car to race, that's where. I know I'd rather race a Formula Continental for what amounts to the same budget between purchase/build price and running costs...

As for the weight, I think it's fair. It's only 50lbs heavier than the stick-axle Mustang, and most of the allowances on the mustang are factory parts. The M3 can get lighter and ballast up which is an advantage. It's 50lbs lighter than the more powerful CTS-V which has IRS. If you're talking Runoffs, the stick axle is a big liability at Road America where the car needs to be able to accelerate over the rumbles and curbing at track-out. They have the same tire and wheel width allowed, practically speaking, and the M3 can barely fit the tires allowed under the rules (295+20mm = 315). The ducting allowance should allow some braking issues to be resolved and what can't be resolved can be fixed with a spec line allowance, and Richard already has his foot in the door.

So, is it politics, or is it that more people want to race Mustangs than M3's? I think it's the latter. And I think you're going to need to get a really good 5+mph run on a 2011 Mustang coming out of T14 at Road America just to be able to stay within 5 carlengths by the braking zone for T1 in that E46...

[SM#80]

Richbot,

Good info. I agree that the 5.0 will go through a testing phase, but based on what the car was given by the SCCA, it will be tough for the E46's to keep pace, UNLESS..the SCCA decides to reduce the weight of the E46's, which will probably happen eventually.

I actually just got a call and, as of today, the E92's are in T2 @ 3,700 lbs. The interesting thing though, is that there an M3 GTS will also be allowed in the class at 3,700 lbs, even with the 4.4L motor and all of the other bits. Now, if you can get a GTS, it seems like that would be the car to beat.

I guess what I was trying to say by bringing up the politics side is that, possibly, the SCCA wanted to see a new performance standard set for the T2 class and they were happy to make the 5.0 the new standard. Once hard evidence is provided to the SCCA that the 5.0 (and possibly the E92's) have a considerable advantage over the rest of the T2 cars (including the E46's), then changes will be made. The change that I think and hope will happen, is the the SCCA will try to bring all other competitors up to the new performance standard, which is great bc that means faster cars. And I like going faster Personally, I would like to have a lighter E46 that eats up tires/brakes less than a heavy 5.0 or E92... I think.

As far as allowances for the 5.0, they are allowed Brembos - I am guessing Ford does not use Brembos on stock 5.0's, but correct me if I am wrong.

I also think there was some miscommunication between tire sizes for the E92 and E46, but such is an internet forum.

I am all for the increased competition, just hoping the SCCA can create some parody sooner (say the Sprints) rather than later (Runoffs).

Oh, and FLMS is currently building 3 5.0 T2 cars and they will have a number of E46's running as well. They plan to collect as much data up to and from the Sprints and send a letter to the SCCA explaining how to create an even playing field.

[Richbot]

I agree I think the 5.0 was allowed to re-set the performance benchmark in the class based on a popular car that will be faster than the current cars as it's classed. Cars that can be sped up, will be if somebody makes a case (Which means showing up and collecting data to submit), cars that can't be may be moved to T3 and a new performance standard set for that class. Right now SSB and T3 are WAY too close in performance and class philosophy IMO, and I think there's an effort to make T3 faster, T2 much faster, put some of the current T3 cars back in SSB or disallow them from T3 and possibly drop SSC entirely or replace it with the B Spec class.

The GTS thing has me scratching my head as I know the T-SS committee and CRB are aware that it is not available in the states and that most of the parts are impossible to get. But if it stays in there, all of the parts on the GTS may be legal on a regular M3. Aero, brakes, etc. So even if the engine is unobtanium, an M3 with GTS brakes and aero might be doable. I'd have to read the rules again to understand for sure but I believe if they're on the same line they can share parts, and the GTS and regular M3 are on the same line.

We'll see if somebody calls them on it.

Brembos are available from the factory as part of an option package on the Mustang GT. Two of the 5.0's I've seen on the street had them.

[SM#80]

Originally Posted by rldzhao

Cool. Post some pictures when you can!

Here are some quick pics I took this weekend from my blackberry. I had a SM race that day, so only took out the T2 for a few laps, and the track was wet and I was on slicks. Either way, it felt more peppy that I thought it would. Should be fun.

[Richbot]

Heh, I think I may have hit that car at Blackhawk before...it was just a little love tap

[SM#80]

Originally Posted by Richbot

Heh, I think I may have hit that car at Blackhawk before...it was just a little love tap

You going to Blackhawk in May? I might just have to return the favor

[Richbot]

I have an SRF now, you might see my old spec miata at autobahn once in a while the guy who bought it from me is a member there, so hit him. I'll be on the nurburgring during the double national at Blackhawk, darn it all

[VSmotorsports]

Wow a lot going on in this tread. We actually are going into our second season in SCCA T2 with our E46 M3. Last year was full of E46 M3's and Z4m's with tight competition. However if what I hear is true about the 3 mustangs racing in T2 most likely some of the weight is going to need to come out of the E46 M3 to keep up.

I'm happy the E92 M3 is in T2 though. This was our next build and we have been looking what we want to build it towards as it had no real place to be competitive till now. It may take some time this year in T2 to get the playing field right but in the end I think the E92 is in the right place in.