Mooresport 468
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 21 Dec 2017 01:29 PM by  snakebit8
Move E36 M3 to STX?
 115 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 612345 > >>
Author Messages
Hank
New Member
New Member
Posts:


--
20 Sep 2010 08:09 PM

    Since a ST car won STX this year, maybe it's time to consider moving the E36 M3 to STX? Didn't the ST car prove that the leading STX cars are too slow?

    RobertoC
    New Member
    New Member
    Posts:49


    --
    20 Sep 2010 08:55 PM

    I think that the thinking process to state than "STX cars are slow" and “including the M3 on STX will fix it” has a flaw.

    First, if the only criteria used to make the statement that “the STX cars are too slow” is the 2010 National results of STX. 1 event is not enough data.

    Second, if it really was a problem, moving the M3 from STU (where it finished 22nd) to STX will not resolve it.

    (Using the same criteria) “Based on the same 2010 STU best M3 times”, the top 2 M3 would have finished in 21st and 31st positions on STX. That won't solve the (questionable) issue.

    Maybe the Civic that won STX was not on complete ST trim and used some STX allowances, or maybe Andy really drove better than the competition ;)

    Hank
    New Member
    New Member
    Posts:


    --
    20 Sep 2010 09:05 PM

    Andy has stated that his car was ST legal. I doubt that anyone would argue that the fastest M3s (no insult intended to those that did compete) were there. Most M3s, including mine, stayed home because they have no chance in the current STU class. My thinking is that a STU M3 is only marginally faster than the current crop of 325/328 cars in STX.

    The argument against moving the M3 in the past was that it was too fast for the class. Isn't is possible that the leading STX cars are "too slow for the class"? Having a ST legal car win STX suggests that this might be the case.

    redwhale240
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:310


    --
    20 Sep 2010 09:50 PM
    Hank wrote:

    Andy has stated that his car was ST legal. I doubt that anyone would argue that the fastest M3s (no insult intended to those that did compete) were there. Most M3s, including mine, stayed home because they have no chance in the current STU class. My thinking is that a STU M3 is only marginally faster than the current crop of 325/328 cars in STX.

    The argument against moving the M3 in the past was that it was too fast for the class. Isn't is possible that the leading STX cars are "too slow for the class"? Having a ST legal car win STX suggests that this might be the case.

    You just answered your own question. You didn't compete so you have no data to back up the statement that you could be marginally faster than the 325/328 unless your talking local but then you would need an apple to apple comparison between 100% prepped cars. And would you think it's a wise choice for them to move the car into STX to go marginally faster for buying and prepping a car the cost more in on all fronts?

    Butt Dyno
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:414


    --
    21 Sep 2010 04:53 AM
    Hank wrote:

    I doubt that anyone would argue that the fastest M3s (no insult intended to those that did compete) were there. Most M3s, including mine, stayed home because they have no chance in the current STU class.

    How many full bore STU E36 M3s have we seen at Lincoln in the two years nationals has been there?

    IanF
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:140


    --
    21 Sep 2010 05:57 AM
    In Philly we have a well prepped STU E36 M3 (pretty much a dedicated auto-x car). The owner wasn't sure if it was him or the car that wasn't competitive, so he had a VERY competitive STU driver (who ran a STU now BSP Evo 8) in our region do some runs in the car. Even that driver was not able to put up significantly faster times and was still not competitive at all against prepped and reasonably well driven Evos.
    AutoX Z
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:231


    --
    21 Sep 2010 06:22 AM
    I think the more logical answer would be to propose a rule change that carse elidgeble for ST and not permitted to run in other classes. The same would go for cars in STX not running in STU and so on. The problem with moving the M3 is that it is faster than all the other 325's and 328's. It would instantly render all of those cars non-competative and destroy the class. For now just accept that any 2wd car in STU is not going to be able to get it done and wait for the re-org to come.
    IntrigueGX
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:997


    --
    21 Sep 2010 06:35 AM

    STX just continues to be proved to be a mostly irrelevant class. I have changed my mind, the e36 M3s should not remain excluded from STX. They might seem to make some other STX cars irrelevant. They might also be 100 lbs heavier than a 325/328. The E30 and E36 M3s might be competitive with the ST Civics. A good argument could be made that some of the other specifically excluded cars would fit well with these too.

    I don't want to buy an overpriced 1980's car with a lack of safety features just to be competitive at autocrossing.

    Hank
    New Member
    New Member
    Posts:


    --
    21 Sep 2010 06:36 AM
    redwhale240 wrote:
    Hank wrote:

    Andy has stated that his car was ST legal. I doubt that anyone would argue that the fastest M3s (no insult intended to those that did compete) were there. Most M3s, including mine, stayed home because they have no chance in the current STU class. My thinking is that a STU M3 is only marginally faster than the current crop of 325/328 cars in STX.

    The argument against moving the M3 in the past was that it was too fast for the class. Isn't is possible that the leading STX cars are "too slow for the class"? Having a ST legal car win STX suggests that this might be the case.

    You just answered your own question. You didn't compete so you have no data to back up the statement that you could be marginally faster than the 325/328 unless your talking local but then you would need an apple to apple comparison between 100% prepped cars. And would you think it's a wise choice for them to move the car into STX to go marginally faster for buying and prepping a car the cost more in on all fronts?

    There is plenty of data that supports my assertion that the M3 is marginally faster. You can look at some of the national tour results from the last couple of years to see that. Look at the Finger Lakes NT this year where I did compete. I agreed with keeping the M3 out of STX to protect the 325/328 until I saw that an ST car won STX.

    Chiketkd
    New Member
    New Member
    Posts:


    --
    21 Sep 2010 06:39 AM

    AutoX Z wrote:
    I think the more logical answer would be to propose a rule change that carse elidgeble for ST and not permitted to run in other classes. The same would go for cars in STX not running in STU and so on. The problem with moving the M3 is that it is faster than all the other 325's and 328's. It would instantly render all of those cars non-competative and destroy the class. For now just accept that any 2wd car in STU is not going to be able to get it done and wait for the re-org to come.

    +1 On everything he said.

    Honestly, the bottom line is that we need more ST classes. These classes are all well-subscribed and are definitely resonating well with the membership. Personally, I'd like to see another provisional ST* class created to slot in between STX and STU in the re-org, with the target cars being the E36 M3 and 2.5L WRX (note the 2.5L WRXs have open front and rear diffs and are not competitive against the STI and Evo's in STU). Depending on how the class develops, STU also-rans could be added or any STX overdogs (if any become apparent as the class continues to develop).

    splash
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:960


    --
    21 Sep 2010 06:59 AM
    IMO, I wouldn't expect ANY sort of changes regarding what cars go where until the re-org happens and goes into effect for 2012... (unless we actually spend more than a year arguing about it, in which case, 2013...)
    talon95
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:1924


    --
    21 Sep 2010 07:37 AM
    Chiketkd wrote:

    Honestly, the bottom line is that we need more ST classes. These classes are all well-subscribed and are definitely resonating well with the membership. Personally, I'd like to see another provisional ST* class created to slot in between STX and STU in the re-org, with the target cars being the E36 M3 and 2.5L WRX (note the 2.5L WRXs have open front and rear diffs and are not competitive against the STI and Evo's in STU). Depending on how the class develops, STU also-rans could be added or any STX overdogs (if any become apparent as the class continues to develop).

    Makes the most sense to me to include all the cars that are in Stock and SP. It's quickly becoming the most popular category in Solo.

    Dave G.

    mwood
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2279


    --
    21 Sep 2010 08:07 AM

    AutoX Z wrote:
    I think the more logical answer would be to propose a rule change that carse elidgeble for ST and not permitted to run in other classes. The same would go for cars in STX not running in STU and so on. The problem with moving the M3 is that it is faster than all the other 325's and 328's. It would instantly render all of those cars non-competative and destroy the class. For now just accept that any 2wd car in STU is not going to be able to get it done and wait for the re-org to come.

    +2

    Further, AWD, whether on R comps or ST, can't be reconciled into a 2WD "skill set". Sure, you can find 2WD cars to run with the Evo or other AWD cars...with unacceptable amount of dependency on course and conditions. I hope the ST reorg does what the SPAC/SEB has been unwilling to do and carve out AWD as standalone. Anything else is a kluge.

    splash
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:960


    --
    21 Sep 2010 08:25 AM

    Are you suggesting a single AWD class to encompass everything from an Impreza RS to an EVO? Or do you want a separate set of AWD classes to go along with the set of 2WD classes?


    IntrigueGX
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:997


    --
    21 Sep 2010 08:42 AM

    mwood wrote:
    Further, AWD, whether on R comps or ST, can't be reconciled into a 2WD "skill set". Sure, you can find 2WD cars to run with the Evo or other AWD cars...with unacceptable amount of dependency on course and conditions. I hope the ST reorg does what the SPAC/SEB has been unwilling to do and carve out AWD as standalone. Anything else is a kluge.

    Yet the 2.5RS is an also ran in ST. It doesn't seem like AWD and turbo helps the WRX all that much either. 

    AutoX Z wrote:
    I think the more logical answer would be to propose a rule change that carse elidgeble for ST and not permitted to run in other classes. The same would go for cars in STX not running in STU and so on. The problem with moving the M3 is that it is faster than all the other 325's and 328's. It would instantly render all of those cars non-competative...

    They already all are non-competitive. STX is faster than ST, just the fastest cars (Civics) are never prepped for it. The existing ST/STX structure makes the Civic dominate in both classes. It makes less sense to ban the Civics from the faster class than it does to ban them from slower one. It is just silly to not allow the E36 M3 in STX. It fully meets all the other requirements for the class and has only shown to be slower than the ST Civics (not a real STX Civic which has yet to be developed fully.)

    cbailey
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:206


    --
    21 Sep 2010 09:39 AM

    I find it marginally amusing when several people who don't run STX come out and say "STX is too slow" when they really mean, "I am driving too slow for STU but might feel better going slow in STX."

    Seriously, if you think the M3 is "marginally faster" than STX cars, then you answered your own question about why it shouldn't be moved since you would immediately disenfranchise a large number of car owners. The premise that another class' speed has anything to do with needing to make STX faster is absurd. And your self-serving conclusion doesn't serve the already large STX class, just M3 owners.

    STX was the third largest class at Nationals this year, and the largest ST* class. There were a large number of BMW's which would be displaced by a smaller number of more expensive M3's. Not broken; do not fix.

    Mooobunnny
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:170


    --
    21 Sep 2010 09:47 AM
    cbailey wrote:

    I find it marginally amusing when several people who don't run STX come out and say "STX is too slow" when they really mean, "I am driving too slow for STU but might feel better going slow in STX."

    Seriously, if you think the M3 is "marginally faster" than STX cars, then you answered your own question about why it shouldn't be moved since you would immediately disenfranchise a large number of car owners. The premise that another class' speed has anything to do with needing to make STX faster is absurd. And your self-serving conclusion doesn't serve the already large STX class, just M3 owners.

    STX was the third largest class at Nationals this year, and the largest ST* class. There were a large number of BMW's which would be displaced by a smaller number of more expensive M3's. Not broken; do not fix.

    Very well said Chris!

    The E36 M3 will NOT be moved to STX in my opinion.

    Nationals this year was not typical for several reasons. The 325's and 328's can outrun the civics. You cannot use one event as a benchmark. The ST cars are, in general, better prepped than the STX cars and have had more development time.

    Chiketkd
    New Member
    New Member
    Posts:


    --
    21 Sep 2010 10:16 AM

    cbailey wrote:
    STX was the third largest class at Nationals this year, and the largest ST* class. There were a large number of BMW's which would be displaced by a smaller number of more expensive M3's. Not broken; do not fix.

    Agree 100%. Why fix a class that's working so well? And the reason why classes like STX (and STR) are so well subscribed is b/c there's no clear overdog. Whether you have a BMW (E30/E36/E46), RX8, WRX or even an ST civic you have a shot at being on the top spot with some good driving. Heck, many haven't expected you to do as well as you have in an RSX Chris. I also feel a well-driven turbo mini has a solid shot at being in the trophies (and I'm sure there are many cars I'm leaving off -- 5.0 Mustang, Cobalt SS turbo...)

    Hank
    New Member
    New Member
    Posts:


    --
    21 Sep 2010 10:49 AM
    cbailey wrote:

    I find it marginally amusing when several people who don't run STX come out and say "STX is too slow" when they really mean, "I am driving too slow for STU but might feel better going slow in STX."

    This is just flame bait and I should resist, but... You might have no idea who I am and to assume that "I am driving too slow for STU" is ridiculous. I understand that drivers in STX will come to the defense of cars in that class, but your assumptions are just silly.

    sjrife
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:521


    --
    21 Sep 2010 11:03 AM
    Hank wrote:

    This is just flame bait. You might have no idea who I am, but to assume that "I am driving too slow for STU" is ridiculous. I understand that drivers in STX will come to the defense of cars in that class, but your assumptions are just silly.

    ....but you posted...

    [quote]Most M3s, including mine, stayed home because they have no chance in the current STU class.

    You are not authorized to post a reply.
    Page 1 of 612345 > >>


    SPS 88x31 Button G-Loc Button
    Vorshlag 88x31 Button Mooresport Button
    Sunoco 88x31 Button
    Woodhouse Motorsports

    Advertise on SCCAForums.com and reach thousands of visitors per day!

    SafeRacer FREE SHIPPING over $99

    Shop for Pirelli tires at Tire Rack. blank



    Sunoco Bottom 468x60 Banner