Rule Proposal: Remove Displacement Rules for GTS4

[daytonars4]

1- The proposed addition or change

Remove CC restrictions from GTS4

 

2- The reason behind the proposal

The rule doesn’t make any sense considering the other cars allowed in the class. Currently 997, 991, and even RSR’s would be allowed in the class since they are 4.0l or less. There is no question that these factory built race cars which originally sold for $150k+ pretty much represent the top end of the attainable race cars for GTS. With those cars being allowed it’s not logical to exclude E46 M3’s with S62 swaps, of which there are a least 2 in Midatlantic

 

3- Documentation supposing proposal

I don’t have any documentation. E46 S62 cars have been competiting against E46 S54 and S65 cars for all of 2017 in ST3 without any major competitive shift occurring. With how the current GTS rules and formula takes torque into account, there’s no justification for excluding S62’s from GTS4.

 

4 Signature

Lawrence Gibson

GTS2

Midatlantic

[focusedintntions]

I support this. CC restrictions in those classes is silly.

[mikew968]

i support removing GTS4 CC restrictions.

[mcdonaldsracing]

Yep, this is a good one!

[D_Eclipse9916]

I support this rule change as well.

[mjmccoy]

This is no different in any other class. Displacement limits make no sense in general.

[Zach H.]

I support this rule as long as we stop factoring torque then

[Michael G.]

mjmccoy,

 

There is a difference between 1, 2, 3 and 4. Without available compliance tool, it is very easy to claim electronic de-tune for the high displacement engines (even stock ones), to drop to the lower class. 4 is already high enough, so is not subjected to a drastic de-tunes.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat Dir.

[Eric W.]

In support of this.

 

I know the WHY of it all (perception, etc etc) and dont necessarily agree that there was really any advantage with S54s in GTS2, but given compliance issues, impound issues, etc, Ill give that a pass for now.

 

But like mentioned, GTS4 is heavy power, not really detuning anything. CC limits and "cost cutting" doesnt come into play when people are running stroked out engines w/ sequentials

 

-Wonger

NASA Mid-Atl GTS/ST

[mjmccoy]

In support of this.

 

I know the WHY of it all (perception, etc etc) and dont necessarily agree that there was really any advantage with S54s in GTS2, but given compliance issues, impound issues, etc, Ill give that a pass for now.

 

But like mentioned, GTS4 is heavy power, not really detuning anything. CC limits and "cost cutting" doesnt come into play when people are running stroked out engines w/ sequentials

 

-Wonger

NASA Mid-Atl GTS/ST

All things are relative.

R8LMS (and by extension the Huracan GT3) is legal for GTS. Worse yet, the M6 GT3 as well as now there is boost compliance in play. All would be detuned quite heavily for GTS4 since adding ~1000 lb of ballast wouldn't work. Only thing currently preventing that would be the displacement limits.

 

And we also think that a 2L turbo GDI motor like the N20 would be (displacement wise) eligible for GTS1, but an E28 535i would be GTS3 or above by displacement? And the E34 540 and E39 540's should all play in GTS4 since GTS3 and GTS2 displacement limits are still in play?...

 

The displacement limits "protect" some of the slightly old technology from the new technology, for now, but at the cost of penalizing the old technology. Unless the goal is to pigeonhole people into building a specific car for the class to simplify scrutineering, I'm somewhat lost as to the actual goals in most of the attempts at bounding the classes.

 

The issues are either perception (can't fix that without explaining the data and physics) or actually people cheating (which can be shown by data... but we need to explain the data and physics).

[Michael G.]

Michael,

 

Hopefully, by the time all those new cars you mentioned will start coming to race with us - we will have the compliance devices in place and the displacement / force induction limits will not be a factor any longer. By now, we primarily deal with the old technology that does race currently.

 

Michael G.

Nat GTS Dir.

[doclouns]

I would support this....

[Partee Racing]

1- The proposed addition or change

Remove CC restrictions from GTS4

 

2- The reason behind the proposal

The rule doesn’t make any sense considering the other cars allowed in the class. Currently 997, 991, and even RSR’s would be allowed in the class since they are 4.0l or less. There is no question that these factory built race cars which originally sold for $150k+ pretty much represent the top end of the attainable race cars for GTS. With those cars being allowed it’s not logical to exclude E46 M3’s with S62 swaps, of which there are a least 2 in Midatlantic

 

3- Documentation supposing proposal

I don’t have any documentation. E46 S62 cars have been competiting against E46 S54 and S65 cars for all of 2017 in ST3 without any major competitive shift occurring. With how the current GTS rules and formula takes torque into account, there’s no justification for excluding S62’s from GTS4.

 

4 Signature

Lawrence Gibson

GTS2

Midatlantic

 

Completely agree with Lawrence's proposal. I would only add that S62/E46 swaps are very common, less expensive and easier than more exotic S65 swaps, and are closely analogous to what BMW Motorsport/PTG actually used in race versions of the E46.

 

Peter S. Partee, Sr.

ST3

MidAtlantic

[focusedintntions]

The more we''ve thought and talked about the cc restrictions the sillier they seem. We don't check engine displacement at the track. Anybody that see's a motor just assumes that internally it is what is claimed from the factory. How do we know there aren't any detuned stroker s54's in gts3 ? Doug brought up a good point about wanting to build a 2.9L s54. Technically that motor would be legal for gts2 b/c it's not specifically banned in the rules and would be under the displacement limit. Do we have the tools to check these things? Are people actuallly checking? Is there a clearly defined procedure GTS officials would be using for this? Clarification in the rule sets of all these scenarios should be addressed.

[Michael G.]

Chris,

 

Actually, measuring the displacement on the S54 and alike engines is pretty simple and do not require teardown or special tools by knowing the bore and measuring the crank. There are also special tools available, which are in use by SCCA and BMWCCA, but we didn't consider investing into, simply because we didn't have the need. If we will see number of cars going the route of lowering displacement, we can employ either of the methods.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat Dir.

[daytonars4]

So for clarification, does this mean a destroked S54 is legal for GTS2? .... On another note, interesting to see a 2.0l GTS1 legal RS3 win ST3 West Coast Championships. Makes all this seem a little silly.lol

[Michael G.]

Lawrence.

 

In the GTS displacement Rule, there is no list of particular engines outlawed. Only two engines mentioned as a guide, in the original stock configuration, for clarification purposes. So, yes it is legal. But if the claim of the lowered displacement will be found not true - the consequences might not be pretty.

In regards to RS3 - the same car was registered for GTS3 and run on Friday - was DQ for being underweight and didn't run after that mainly due to the schedule conflicts of race groups being too close to each other. It is a beautiful, professionally built car, and built to run faster, not slower, so yes, technically could of run in ST4 as well. And again, we are not discussing ST Rules here.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat Dir.

[daytonars4]

I asked about destroking before I sold my GTS2 e36 S54 and was told no. Wish this had been clarified before

 

I wondered why the RS3 dropped out of GTS3. Do you happen to know what the RS3's dyno at? Just curious and I haven't seen that info anywhere.

[Michael G.]

Sorry for misunderstanding. I thought we discussed the issues of measuring the displacement in that context then,

I have his claimed numbers for GTS trim, but we didn't run him through the impound Dyno since he didn't come back to run on Saturday / Sunday. I know he was on the Dyno for ST though, but he was running different set up for ST3. I will get to my files later today.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat Dir.