DISCUSSION CLOSED: Allow engines from other manufacturers

[JSG1901]

Type

Modification to an existing rule

 

Existing rule section (if applicable)

For all GTS cars, the engine and the chassis must be of the same marque (e.g., a Porsche may use any Porsche badged engine). For the purposes of these rules, the engine is defined as the block.

 

Swapping engines between different chassis made by the same manufacturer is allowed, but swapping engines of a marque different than the chassis manufacturer is specifically not allowed.

 

Cars which competed with an engine from a different manufacturer than the vehicle's chassis in at least one GTS race prior to 11/07 may continue to race with that same configuration. However, such cars may not switch to another engine of a different manufacturer except one made by the manufacturer of the original vehicle. For instance, a Porsche which competed prior to November 2007 with a Chevrolet engine may be changed to use a Porsche engine but may not be changed to use a Ford engine.

 

 

Proposed change

Remove all of the above wording from section 5, "Car Modifications."

 

Reason

My reasons behind recommending this rule change are several. First, there are already many cars, fully accepted as GTS-compliant vehicles, that were delivered from the factory with engines made by manufacturers other than those of their chassis.

 

The Porsche 914-4, for example, used a Volkswagen engine.

 

Merkurs used Ford engines.

 

Recent Opels use GM's Gen II engine block.

 

From 2001-2006, the MINI Cooper (which, for whatever reason, we allow in GTS) used an engine made not by MINI but, instead, by Tritec; an engine which was also used in some Chrysler models. Beginning in 2007, the MINI began using the Prince engine, jointly developed by BMW and PSA Peugeot Citroën. In neither case was the engine of the same manufacturer as the chassis.

 

So, my first reason for believing we should allow engines to be of different manufacturers than those of the chassis is that this is ALREADY BEING DONE. In fact, in this world of shared platforms, components, and parts among manufacturers, this will be happening more and not less in the future.

 

Secondly, GTS is a series that's all about individual initiative and creativity. Our open rule set specifically and intentionally encourages drivers to try new things with their cars. We regularly see and accept GTS teams adding wings and aerodynamic devices, reprogramming throttle maps to improve low-end horsepower, and making significant modifications to body or suspension, all in an effort to be more competitive. Why, then, should we limit the choice of engine?

 

Third, it's my belief that this rule draws an inconsequential and unneeded line in the sand and, by doing so, unfairly limits some marques' drivers' options more than others'.

 

For instance, the BMW E30 driver hoping to move up into GTS3 or higher has an almost endless list of possible BMW engines from which to choose. Four, six, eight, ten, and twelve-cylinder engines are available (although the twelve probably wouldn't fit) and, realistically, the motors from several generations of M3s are available cheaply and can be easily swapped in.

 

So, BMW drivers have a wealth of options.

 

But what options are there for drivers of other marques? For instance, Porsche drivers who hope to add more power or reliability or to move up in classes in the same way? Those choices there are few and far between for the non-boxer motored cars, like 944s.

 

944s are an important consideration because there are a plenty of them out there, many that are already racing cars (think Spec 944) and that would make wonderful GTS3, 4, or 5 cars if they just had more power.

 

The only real engine uprade options within the Porsche family are (1) a highly-stressed normally-aspirated 944 motor, which is expensive to build and will likely prove to be a bit of a hand grenade to operate; (2) a 951 (944 Turbo) motor, which is both highly-stressed and has not proven to be terribly competitive due to its significant turbo lag; (3) a 928 V8, which won't fit (it's too wide); or (4) the Cayenne/Panamera V8s or V6s, both of which are heavy, terribly expensive to modify, and for which there are virtually no performance parts available.

 

All of which means there is really no realistic Porsche-engined upward path for 924/944/951/968s as we look down the road, despite the fact these cars are (1) cheap to buy, and (2) wonderful to race.

 

And yet, there is a world out there full of Chevrolet LS-series engines. Lightweight, powerful, inexpensive to build and modify, and for which performance parts are plentiful. Oh, and yes, they fit easily into the nose of a 924 / 944 / 951 / 968. And, a lot of other cars, Porsche and otherwise.

 

Both Ford and Chevy V8s have been successfully put into 914s for many years. LS engines have been put into 911s and 928s, Boxsters and Caymans. We have seen some wonderful 944/Chevy V8 builds for NASA cars around the country, and I can't think of any reason for us to be relegating these cars to run in PT or ST or some other catch-all class. They most naturally fit in GTS, despite their non-conforming engine blocks and I, for one, would much rather have them running with us.

 

I strongly believe this rule serves no useful purpose for the betterment of GTS. It restricts both creativity and options and is particularly limiting to driver/owners working on tighter budgets. At a time when we should be trying to find ways to encourage more people into the GTS ranks rather than fewer, I think the limit on engine block manufacturer is both silly and counterproductive.

 

 

Proposed new wording

All three of the paragraphs quoted above should be deleted.

[disasterman]

I know at least one potential vehicle added in the Great Lakes if this happens!

[DBeck]

Isn't that blurring the lines to PT/ST? I like the existing rule. Against.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

I know of a whole mess of Boxsters (think same type of engine but Japanese) that would be built for GTS2/3/4 if this happens. Would steal a lot of PTC/PTB/ST3 cars...

[Eliminator]

Scott,

I'm in favor. Top reason: Increase the number of competitors. HP/Wt (honorable mention to Ft/Lbs.) is all that counts and who cares how it's delivered. If it can be done for less using an LS, then bring it. Let creativity and hard-core engineering thrive, making it part of the battle and not to mention, part of the fun.

D. Pedri

[Eric W.]

For. Mainly so John Khoury can race with us

[Luke P.]

Neutral about this. IMO kind of defeats the spirit of the class.

[PrecisionChassis]

IMO, I think it should read "Any German engine in any German car". I'm not sure if I would agree with the idea of allowing an LSx in a 944/928, or even a Subaru engine in a Boxster (which I had until a few months ago), but I see no reason why a Porsche with an Audi engine shouldn't be allowed. I mean, that's basically all a 944 is anyway. For example, an Audi V8 in a Porsche Boxster The Boxsters/Caymans use an Audi 5 and 6 speed transaxle anyway. Why not allow the engine too. The two companies are so closely related anyway. There's no way I would have any interest in racing a Boxster with a Boxster engine in it though... or any other Porsche M96/97 based engine. Those things are garbage, but the chassis are GREAT! It does seem like the BMW's have an unfair advantage with all of the different engine options that they have available to them. From 100hp on up to 500hp on stock engines. There's nothing stopping me from putting an S85 V10 into an E46 M3 with GTR spec suspension/body work, but for some reason I couldn't put an S54 into a Mercedes 190?

[gjkasten]

Against. For the simple reason it is the German Touring Series. Not the German (Body but whatever you want under the Hood) Touring Series.

 

Probably not a good reason, but just my initial reaction.

[minibeast]

Against

"German" Touring Series

 

Mark Bivings - Florida

GTS3

[Luke P.]

Actually, you guys make good points. My personal conclusion -

 

For: I'd support allowing cross engine swaps between Audi / VW / Porsche where the relationship exists. Whether it's some 16V contraption in a 944 or a VR6 in an Audi

 

Against: I don't think non related swaps (S54 / LS1 / EJ20) allowed in every chassis is right though, leave that for ST.

[UKRBMW]

Against

 

In the end this is something that has come up over and over again. Ultimately everybody always agrees it messes with the "spirit" of GTS.

[hamflex]

It sounds cool, ls1 in my e36. The only issue is, lets say a bunch of people do swaps and the following year this rule changes again and people are faced with having to swap back or move to ST.

[UKRBMW]

This used to be allowed and cars built back then were grandfathered in.

 

Frankly, think of it like this. There is another rule proposal right there to ban throttle by wire because of detunes and cheating. Now imagine an LS1 or LS6 in your BMW putting out exactly 350hp and 350 torque. What other BMW engine can offer this? Maybe an S65 or S62 - costing 3-4 times as much. Run this for a year and I imagine there will be a lot of people complaining again.

[scottbm3]

NO !

 

 

 

-Scott B.

[J Smith]

Against. There are other classes where these types of cars can run. They do not belong in GTS.

[hamflex]

This used to be allowed and cars built back then were grandfathered in.

 

Frankly, think of it like this. There is another rule proposal right there to ban throttle by wire because of detunes and cheating. Now imagine an LS1 or LS6 in your BMW putting out exactly 350hp and 350 torque. What other BMW engine can offer this? Maybe an S65 or S62 - costing 3-4 times as much. Run this for a year and I imagine there will be a lot of people complaining again.

 

 

Exactly right! As much as I would love an ls1 in my car, I am against this...

[jvanhouten]

Against.

 

Not in the spirit of the GTS.

[Bhicks]

Love my 951; hate the turbo lag. I'm for.

[bmwjoon]

No.

 

As far as the mini cooper goes its a special case because it gets to race in CCA.

 

Rules shouldn't be based on the exceptions.

[dweymer]

Against.

 

I do however like the "any german engine in any german car".

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Against.

 

I do however like the "any german engine in any german car".

Agreed. This is logical to me.

 

Honda Challenge 2 allows basically any combo Honda/Acura engine in any Honda/Acura with restrictions on what can be done to the engine as well as a minimum weight the car must make due to that engine combo.

[JoeMag]

Naaaa... Let'm run in other series.

[PrecisionChassis]

Again, I agree that if you have a German car with a non-German engine, you should not be allowed to run in GTS. That's exactly what the ST class is for. But, it seems logical that as long as you use a German chassis with a German engine, there should be no reason why you can't run in GERMAN Touring Series.

[Maynor]

For but I get the "spirit" of a GTS series.

 

For. Mainly so John Khoury can race with us

 

Where's the "Like" button?