Anyone doing a STU build with the 135i?

Dave Mac · 09-03-2009, 10:34 PM

This "may" be legal for STU and DS since it is a port-installed item and not a dealer installed item. The technicality lies in the "port-install" since the car is not titled yet and thus the port is an extension of the factory. Often times the port is used to finish installing the country-spec parts on certain cars. This will need to be examined more extensively to make sure it is 100%. I'll be looking closer myself.

Dave

verlumpt · 09-18-2009, 09:03 AM

In the past port-installed is not considered stock at all. Did something in the rules change? I doubt that has changed, but if it has, please point me to where in the rules that was revised.

I.E. one can't get a host of TRD for toyota or STi bits on a subaru port installed just to make it 'stock class legal'.

Thanks - Jon

eltoshan · 09-18-2009, 09:42 AM

Quote:

STANDARD PART
An item of standard or optional equipment that could have been ordered with the car, installed on the factory production line, and delivered through a dealer in the United States. Port-installed op- tions provided by the factory are considered to be the same as those installed on the factory production line. Dealer-installed options or deletions (except as required by factory directives), no matter how common or what their origin, are not included in this definition. This definition does not allow the updating or backdating of parts.

Looks like port installed options are legit

verlumpt · 09-18-2009, 11:29 AM

what rule # is that from? if these are truly port options, then sounds legit, aside from the last sentence...

Quote:

This definition does not allow the updating or backdating of parts.

This means if you can't order it w/ the car then it technically isn't legal.

I.E. If you have a 2009 135i and the option wasn't offered on that year then it isn't legal for a 2009.

However if it is/was available to order during your model year, then you 'should' be fine. Again assuming this is a port installed and not dealer installed option.

That is how I interpret the rules.

eltoshan · 09-19-2009, 10:22 AM

I believe you are correct

verlumpt · 09-30-2009, 10:12 AM

So... aside from David... anyone else considering an STU 135i build for autocross?

With wheel selection improving, tire selection staying great, and proof that moving to Lincoln has brought the 2WD cars back into the mix, it sure seems feasible that a 135i could compete w/ the STievos.

Eddy@ApexWheels · 10-01-2009, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotcone.com

I would like a square set up, but I really think 275s (maybe 285s) will be needed, and I'm not sure it is going to be possible to get them on the front without a lot of rubbing...

All of the other STU cars at Nationals that aren't non-AWD will be on 275s at least, I've seen some on 285s. I can pretty much guarantee that 255s will not be enough.

Camber plates and coilovers will be my next mods.

275's would fit in the rear easily on the ARC-8 wheel

Here's a test of a 265/35 on a stock 135. I'll have pics of an NT-01 mounted this weekend. A street 285 could probably fit as well since the 275/35 NT-01 is wider then the 285/35 NT-05 samples I have. 285/30/18 would be nice

, it could just never be square without fender flares on the front.

As you know the front is the difficult end.

Here's an 18x9" et42 on the front of a stock 135. with a 245/40. It's basically touching the strut tube right now. we already know 255's can fit up front withe plates, but an r-compound or anything wider would just be really tough. How much are you willing/allowed to mess with the front fenders?

verlumpt · 10-02-2009, 09:15 AM

pp : I've been following and participating in your threads.. no worries... I'm advising david on setup and your wheels are on his list

gotcone.com · 10-02-2009, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by verlumpt

pp : I've been following and participating in your threads.. no worries... I'm advising david on setup and your wheels are on his list

That is correct... plan on getting my name on the group buy list here today

gotcone.com · 10-02-2009, 03:28 PM

I went with the 18x9 front / 18x9.5 rear set up... now to figure out what size tires will fit... really hoping for 255s in the front

larryn · 10-02-2009, 05:45 PM

Curious.. why did you go with the 9" wide for a 255? The 8.5" wheel is perfectly fine for a 255 (actually a BMW fitment), you get a slightly heavier wheel, and introduce the likely need for a 3mm or 5mm spacer.

MINI135i · 10-03-2009, 09:54 AM

Just for more added info:

I put a 235/40/17 Dunlop Z1 on a 17x8.5 Kosei next to a 255/35/18 Dunlop Z1 on a 18x8.5 and there was nearly undetectable difference in width!

Tells me the 255+ needs a 9, 9.5, etc. to really maximize the rubber. However, on the front of our cars that is a difficult proposition.

For autocross I am thinking of picking up the rear Apex wheels (18x9.5) with a 275/35/18 Dunlop Z1 and then keeping the 17x8.5 kosei's up front with a 235/40/17 Dunlop Z1, because remember they are almost as wide as the 255's on a 8.5. They also only cost $133, compared to $216 for a 255. And the Kosei wheel is lighter and cheaper, so you get a double whammy on the upside.

Car will look a bit funny with different size and wheel brands but this will be an autocross setup only. Although, if you really look at our cars closely you will see that the rear visualy holds more wheel size than the front, so it might not be that bad. With ability to fully adjust coilovers / springs / swaybars, I think I can work out the tire size descrepancy too.

We shall see....

Eddy@ApexWheels · 10-04-2009, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MINI135i

Just for more added info:

I put a 235/40/17 Dunlop Z1 on a 17x8.5 Kosei next to a 255/35/18 Dunlop Z1 on a 18x8.5 and there was nearly undetectable difference in width!

Tells me the 255+ needs a 9, 9.5, etc. to really maximize the rubber. However, on the front of our cars that is a difficult proposition.

For autocross I am thinking of picking up the rear Apex wheels (18x9.5) with a 275/35/18 Dunlop Z1 and then keeping the 17x8.5 kosei's up front with a 235/40/17 Dunlop Z1, because remember they are as wide as the 255's on a 8.5. They also only cost $133, compared to $216 for a 255. And the Kosei wheel is lighter and cheaper, so you get a double whammy on the upside.

Car will look a bit funny with different size and wheel brands but this will be an autocross setup only. Although, if you really look at our cars closely you will see that the rear visualy holds more wheel size than the front, so it might not be that bad. With ability to fully adjust coilovers / springs / swaybars, I think I can work out the tire size descrepancy too.

We shall see....

A 17x9" ARC-8 already exits. If the wheel doesn't touch the strut tube, then you wouldn't even need a spacer for that sized wheel since the tire would have an ever so slight stretch. the 245/40/18 didn't rub the strut tube but was super close. so a narrower profile tire should be an easier fit. with a 42mm offset it's only about 4mm more aggressive on the outer edge then the K1's. And a 9" wheel would widen the contact patch vs. the 8.5" wheel with the same tire.

below is a 235/40/17 RA1 on 17x9" wheel for example

17x8.5" et40 will be available sometime next year

cpt97m3 · 10-06-2009, 08:57 PM

Has anyone found an aftermarket tune that doesn't change the boost so would be STU legal? Seems like most of the change the boost.

gotcone.com · 10-07-2009, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryn

Curious.. why did you go with the 9" wide for a 255? The 8.5" wheel is perfectly fine for a 255 (actually a BMW fitment), you get a slightly heavier wheel, and introduce the likely need for a 3mm or 5mm spacer.

I have found that having that staggered of a set up greatly increases the amount of understeer the car has. I switched from the stock staggered wheels set up to a square (8.5" all around, 255 rear / 235 front) this year and noticed a decrease in understeer. Which BMW used the staggered setup intentionally to induce more understeer for this reason, or at least that is my understanding...

Although I would be able to tune around this some, I would rather not have to, or at least not have to as much... plus I don't think the additional weight is enough to worry about, at least not at this point...

gotcone.com · 10-07-2009, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cpt97m3

Has anyone found an aftermarket tune that doesn't change the boost so would be STU legal? Seems like most of the change the boost.

I'm hoping to get a custom tune of some kind... from where, I don't know...

larryn · 10-07-2009, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotcone.com

I have found that having that staggered of a set up greatly increases the amount of understeer the car has. I switched from the stock staggered wheels set up to a square (8.5" all around, 255 rear / 235 front) this year and noticed a decrease in understeer. Which BMW used the staggered setup intentionally to induce more understeer for this reason, or at least that is my understanding...

Although I would be able to tune around this some, I would rather not have to, or at least not have to as much... plus I don't think the additional weight is enough to worry about, at least not at this point...

I get this, but aren't you still going to run a staggered setup? Save some weight and get the 8.5" front. the 255 tire will fit fine, and you will not need spacers.

FWIW, I currently run a V710 square setup and have run staggered and square Star Specs. Add some camber and the 255/275 staggered is insignificant.

cpt97m3 · 10-07-2009, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotcone.com

I'm hoping to get a custom tune of some kind... from where, I don't know...

Let me know if you find a solution!

gotcone.com · 10-08-2009, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryn

I get this, but aren't you still going to run a staggered setup? Save some weight and get the 8.5" front. the 255 tire will fit fine, and you will not need spacers.

FWIW, I currently run a V710 square setup and have run staggered and square Star Specs. Add some camber and the 255/275 staggered is insignificant.

Yes, It still will be staggered setup, but putting a 255 on a 9" wheel versus a 8.5" wheel will result, in all actuality, less stagger. As was mentioned above, a 255 on a 8.5" wheel gives a nearly undetectable width difference over a 235 tire on that same wheel.

larryn · 10-08-2009, 05:27 PM

I'll agree to disagree.

You are 100% correct that there are variations from tire brand/models though. I've seen similar fitment variations from size to size as well, but the exact same 255 on the 9" versus the 8.5" wheel will have virtually no discernible difference in contact patch (both shape and size), not taking into account crazy tire pressures.

I think you'll have FAR more variation because of fluctuating tire pressures as the fronts heat up quicker than the rears on a run. (and even that is nearly undetectable)

Totally your choice though, and I was just curious.

verlumpt · 10-09-2009, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryn

Curious.. why did you go with the 9" wide for a 255? The 8.5" wheel is perfectly fine for a 255 (actually a BMW fitment), you get a slightly heavier wheel, and introduce the likely need for a 3mm or 5mm spacer.

less stagger in both tire and wheel width will handle better.

Amalfitano · 03-23-2011, 10:23 AM

I wish they used a better definition than "contour".

A car isn't one contour, it is many contours.

"Fenders may not be cut or flared but the inside lip may be rolled to
gain additional tire clearance. (The outer fender contour may not be
changed.)"

A contour does not by itself define its pitch relative to another contour.

[IMG] http://www.1addicts.com/forums/album...ictureid=23369 [/IMG]

I understand their intent is that the red line stays the same, the blue line stays the same, and disallow doing something that would push that fender out to the green line.

–noun
1.
the outline of a figure or body; the edge or line that defines or bounds a shape or object.
2.
contour line.

If it’s a series of contour lines, so long as point a) where the red line touches the blue line out to point b), our edge that defines the outer fender from inner fender, so long as those lines are of an “equal elevation”, or flat, it’s still a contour line.

There’s no doubt they want a blue line fender, not a green line fender. But that contour is a 3-4in strip from the front bumper back to the side skirt. In its self-contained world, it wants a flat edge a) to edge b) to be a series of contour lines. If it’s pitch is changed, that’s just how it relates to other contours, not it’s own self-contained world.

I don’t plan on going this far, it’s just an example of how wording could open up interpretation VERY easily.

09-03-2009, 10:34 PM	#23
Dave Mac Private First Class 1 Rep 122 Posts Drives: Join Date: Aug 2008 iTrader: (0)	This "may" be legal for STU and DS since it is a port-installed item and not a dealer installed item. The technicality lies in the "port-install" since the car is not titled yet and thus the port is an extension of the factory. Often times the port is used to finish installing the country-spec parts on certain cars. This will need to be examined more extensively to make sure it is 100%. I'll be looking closer myself. Dave
	Appreciate 0 Quote

09-18-2009, 09:03 AM	#24
verlumpt at apex, on throttle 2 Rep 41 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Gretna, NE iTrader: (0)	In the past port-installed is not considered stock at all. Did something in the rules change? I doubt that has changed, but if it has, please point me to where in the rules that was revised. I.E. one can't get a host of TRD for toyota or STi bits on a subaru port installed just to make it 'stock class legal'. Thanks - Jon
	Appreciate 0 Quote

09-19-2009, 10:22 AM	#27
eltoshan Private First Class 24 Rep 175 Posts Drives: BSM M4 Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pittsburgh, PA iTrader: (1)	I believe you are correct
	Appreciate 0 Quote

09-30-2009, 10:12 AM	#28
verlumpt at apex, on throttle 2 Rep 41 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Gretna, NE iTrader: (0)	So... aside from David... anyone else considering an STU 135i build for autocross? With wheel selection improving, tire selection staying great, and proof that moving to Lincoln has brought the 2WD cars back into the mix, it sure seems feasible that a 135i could compete w/ the STievos.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2009, 09:15 AM	#30
verlumpt at apex, on throttle 2 Rep 41 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Gretna, NE iTrader: (0)	pp : I've been following and participating in your threads.. no worries... I'm advising david on setup and your wheels are on his list __________________
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2009, 03:28 PM	#32
gotcone.com Private First Class 22 Rep 170 Posts Drives: 2008 BMW 128i Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Papillion, NE iTrader: (2)	I went with the 18x9 front / 18x9.5 rear set up... now to figure out what size tires will fit... really hoping for 255s in the front __________________ 2008 BMW 128i \| 2006 Mitsubishi EVO IX \| 1995 BMW M3 \| 1987 BMW 325is Gotcone.com: Autocross/Rallycross Photos & more
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-02-2009, 05:45 PM	#33
larryn Lieutenant General 2146 Rep 10,176 Posts Drives: '97 332ti, '21 X5 45e, '16 GT4 Join Date: May 2005 Location: Seattle iTrader: (2)	Curious.. why did you go with the 9" wide for a 255? The 8.5" wheel is perfectly fine for a 255 (actually a BMW fitment), you get a slightly heavier wheel, and introduce the likely need for a 3mm or 5mm spacer.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-03-2009, 09:54 AM	#34
MINI135i Second Lieutenant 139 Rep 268 Posts Drives: 2019 M2C and 2013 FR-S Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Phoenix, AZ iTrader: (2)	Just for more added info: I put a 235/40/17 Dunlop Z1 on a 17x8.5 Kosei next to a 255/35/18 Dunlop Z1 on a 18x8.5 and there was nearly undetectable difference in width! Tells me the 255+ needs a 9, 9.5, etc. to really maximize the rubber. However, on the front of our cars that is a difficult proposition. For autocross I am thinking of picking up the rear Apex wheels (18x9.5) with a 275/35/18 Dunlop Z1 and then keeping the 17x8.5 kosei's up front with a 235/40/17 Dunlop Z1, because remember they are almost as wide as the 255's on a 8.5. They also only cost $133, compared to $216 for a 255. And the Kosei wheel is lighter and cheaper, so you get a double whammy on the upside. Car will look a bit funny with different size and wheel brands but this will be an autocross setup only. Although, if you really look at our cars closely you will see that the rear visualy holds more wheel size than the front, so it might not be that bad. With ability to fully adjust coilovers / springs / swaybars, I think I can work out the tire size descrepancy too. We shall see.... Last edited by MINI135i; 10-13-2009 at 05:49 PM..
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-06-2009, 08:57 PM	#36
cpt97m3 AutoXer 34 Rep 683 Posts Drives: 2009 135i Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: So Cal iTrader: (2)	Has anyone found an aftermarket tune that doesn't change the boost so would be STU legal? Seems like most of the change the boost. __________________ 2009 135i, Alpine White, 6MT, M-Sport, iDrive, iPod/USB, Heated Seats, Premium Sound, BMW Assist
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-08-2009, 05:27 PM	#42
larryn Lieutenant General 2146 Rep 10,176 Posts Drives: '97 332ti, '21 X5 45e, '16 GT4 Join Date: May 2005 Location: Seattle iTrader: (2)	I'll agree to disagree. You are 100% correct that there are variations from tire brand/models though. I've seen similar fitment variations from size to size as well, but the exact same 255 on the 9" versus the 8.5" wheel will have virtually no discernible difference in contact patch (both shape and size), not taking into account crazy tire pressures. I think you'll have FAR more variation because of fluctuating tire pressures as the fronts heat up quicker than the rears on a run. (and even that is nearly undetectable) Totally your choice though, and I was just curious.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-23-2011, 10:23 AM	#44
Amalfitano Second Lieutenant 15 Rep 269 Posts Drives: 2009 135i STEP, Future //M2012 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Chicago iTrader: (1) Garage List 2009 135i [0.00]	I wish they used a better definition than "contour". A car isn't one contour, it is many contours. "Fenders may not be cut or flared but the inside lip may be rolled to gain additional tire clearance. (The outer fender contour may not be changed.)" A contour does not by itself define its pitch relative to another contour. [IMG] http://www.1addicts.com/forums/album...ictureid=23369 [/IMG] I understand their intent is that the red line stays the same, the blue line stays the same, and disallow doing something that would push that fender out to the green line. –noun 1. the outline of a figure or body; the edge or line that defines or bounds a shape or object. 2. contour line. If it’s a series of contour lines, so long as point a) where the red line touches the blue line out to point b), our edge that defines the outer fender from inner fender, so long as those lines are of an “equal elevation”, or flat, it’s still a contour line. There’s no doubt they want a blue line fender, not a green line fender. But that contour is a 3-4in strip from the front bumper back to the side skirt. In its self-contained world, it wants a flat edge a) to edge b) to be a series of contour lines. If it’s pitch is changed, that’s just how it relates to other contours, not it’s own self-contained world. I don’t plan on going this far, it’s just an example of how wording could open up interpretation VERY easily.
	Appreciate 0 Quote