SCCA Solo 2 Stock Class / BMW Performance Options?

[jb2178]

So I'm pretty sure I know the answer but I want to make sure - does adding on the bmw performance options that could have been ordered when I puchased make my car illegal to run D-Stock?

I think it would have been a "dealer add-on" and not a factory option so that's the deal breaker, right?

[DriveHard]

I think you / we are ok .....

you can get most Performance parts, port installed, which is considered by the Manufacturer.

Also all parts are / were available in the New Car brochure

also awaiting any other comment

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by jb2178

So I'm pretty sure I know the answer but I want to make sure - does adding on the bmw performance options that could have been ordered when I puchased make my car illegal to run D-Stock?

I think it would have been a "dealer add-on" and not a factory option so that's the deal breaker, right?

You are correct sir, dealer installed accessories are NOT considered factory options and therefore illegal unless that particular modification is explicitly allowed in the rules.

[DriveHard]

Originally Posted by Xaeryan

You are correct sir, dealer installed accessories are NOT considered factory options and therefore illegal unless that particular modification is explicitly allowed in the rules.

SEE POST ABOVE YOURS. we posted at almost same time

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by DriveHard

I think you / we are ok .....

you can get most Performance parts, port installed, which is considered by the Manufacturer.

Also all parts are / were available in the New Car brochure

also awaiting any other comment

That's not the case. Use the term "factory" instead of manufacturer, and it becomes more evident when reading the rules:

Except for modifications authorized below, Stock Category cars must
be run as specified by the factory with only standard equipment as de-
fined by these Rules.

As you know, the port can't be construed as the factory.

It's a little more specified in this rule blurb:

Cars listed as eligible in and prepared to the current national Showroom
Stock Club Racing rules are permitted to compete in their respective
Solo Stock Classes. This does not include Showroom Stock cars with
installations of post-factory “performance packages” otherwise known
as “trunk kits.” Neither Showroom Stock nor Solo Stock cars are permitted to interchange preparation rules.

The context here is that Showroom Stock at one point allowed factory performance packages (not sure if they still do?), and they are clearly saying those cars are not permitted to use these kits in Solo Stock classes.

[DriveHard]

FROM SECTION 3.8 OF THE RULES

3.8 REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION
The entrant has the burden of proving that the vehicle conforms to
these Rules by the required documentation for the category/class, as
noted below. The required documentation should be considered as an
extension of these Rules.A. Stock, Street Touring, Street Prepared, and Street Modified – The official
manufacturer service documentation for the make, model, and
year of the vehicle as entered, if ever available to the consumer from
the manufacturer. Additional official manufacturer service documentation
for other years and/or models may also be required to cover
equipment and/or specifications authorized by update/backdate allowances.
Other official manufacturer documentation, such as the
owner’s manual, shop manual, parts catalogs, technical bulletins,
sales & marketing literature, or Monroney window sticker, may be
provided as supporting information. All manufacturer documentation
must be for non-competition purposes.

Would the red highlighted statement then make all the perf stuff ok as long as we had the sales brochure that showed all of this was available ?

[MarkR171]

Port installed options are NOT SCCA Stock legal.

[Amalfitano]

An easy way to look at this is what happened to the JCW mini's from 02-05. They are amongst the "excluded from stock" listings, simply because they were NOT actually in factory installed. Now JCW models ARE stock eligible because they are done at the same time.

I'm also pretty sure the BMW Performance items are through and through installed at the dealer, not truly at port then shipped to dealer.

Through the website entries at least, they list these as "accesory add-ons" and "contact your dealer for pricing" since it IS the dealer that installs them.

[DriveHard]

Originally Posted by Amalfitano

An easy way to look at this is what happened to the JCW mini's from 02-05. They are amongst the "excluded from stock" listings, simply because they were NOT actually in factory installed. Now JCW models ARE stock eligible because they are done at the same time.

I'm also pretty sure the BMW Performance items are through and through installed at the dealer, not truly at port then shipped to dealer.

Through the website entries at least, they list these as "accesory add-ons" and "contact your dealer for pricing" since it IS the dealer that installs them.

I Like the JCW kit analogy.. spot on...

I guess street prepared it is !!! ( FYI i track more than auto-x, i just aurto-x for fun so not a big deal in my case)

[MarkR171]

Originally Posted by DriveHard

I Like the JCW kit analogy.. spot on...

I guess street prepared it is !!! ( FYI i track more than auto-x, i just aurto-x for fun so not a big deal in my case)

You might want to look into Street Touring (STU) also. Street tires, any wheel size, brakes, suspension, exhaust, etc. With just a front sway bar and star specs, my car is very competitive in STU in my region already. I've put in faster times than the STU cars on some occasions this season too.

Street Prepared is a completely different story though!

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by DriveHard

I Like the JCW kit analogy.. spot on..

Not sure how that's better than a rule that says, "cars must be run as specified by the factory", but I'm glad you're on track now.

Originally Posted by MarkR171

You might want to look into Street Touring (STU) also. Street tires, any wheel size, brakes, suspension, exhaust, etc. With just a front sway bar and star specs, my car is very competitive in STU in my region already. I've put in faster times than the STU cars on some occasions this season too.

Street Prepared is a completely different story though!

The Performance Brake kit unfortunately puts him out of STU and into BSP (no caliper changes in STU). So, BSP it is for him. (Not sure what the OP has though.)

[Amalfitano]

Looking at the Brake section calipers are in fact not mentioned...

This just seems weird based on some of the hubbub about big brake kits and the future ST changes and the jawing back and forth going on with some of the forums. I thought the allowance was *intended* for some common big brake kits, but obviously this allowance isn't really targeting. How many kits are just rotors with no caliper change? And how would the allowance for "larger" rotors make any sense if the caliper isn't changed as well?

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by Amalfitano

Looking at the Brake section calipers are in fact not mentioned...

This just seems weird based on some of the hubbub about big brake kits and the future ST changes and the jawing back and forth going on with some of the forums. I thought the allowance was *intended* for some common big brake kits, but obviously this allowance isn't really targeting. How many kits are just rotors with no caliper change? And how would the allowance for "larger" rotors make any sense if the caliper isn't changed as well?

It makes about as much sense as stock class allowing struts but not allowing springs in a class designed for basic modifications commonly performed on new cars. (Really? What's the ratio of cars people put lowering springs on vs. cars people swap just struts?)

Or allowing race tires in stock class, but requiring street tires in the street touring class (effectively making the upper stock classes faster than the street touring classes).

These have been up for debate many times, but it seems like trying to remove the writing from stone.

NASA's point based system is a far better and more modern way to address modifications, as it allows much better leveling of the playing field. Modifications are assessed points, and once you accumulate a certain number of points you are bumped a class. This means you could focus on the problem areas for any given car and conserve on other areas, without taking a massive class hit for any single modification.

[Amalfitano]

Does NASA even do autocross though? Last time i tried to search at least chicagoland, i didn't come across a single NASA autocross event, and it looked like there isn't a national organized NASA autocross effort. Though i accept i'm not the best interwebs searcher.

The reason it stands out more for me than the other points you highlighted is just that they put their foot in the door just a tiny bit. Race Tire version of STU is basically BSP, with bigger calipers, fender flares, boost and no cats. I don't think that's too much to gripe over. The shocks were described to be a "wear item", and with appropriately made springs, their wear is much less than dampers, so there's *almost* some logic there, but not quite apples to apples. Ride height has a lot to do with their "stock" decisions too i'm sure. Locally i think the PAX applies correctly for how *fast* cars are respectively.

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by Amalfitano

Does NASA even do autocross though? Last time i tried to search at least chicagoland, i didn't come across a single NASA autocross event, and it looked like there isn't a national organized NASA autocross effort. Though i accept i'm not the best interwebs searcher.

The reason it stands out more for me than the other points you highlighted is just that they put their foot in the door just a tiny bit. Race Tire version of STU is basically BSP, with bigger calipers, fender flares, boost and no cats. I don't think that's too much to gripe over. The shocks were described to be a "wear item", and with appropriately made springs, their wear is much less than dampers, so there's *almost* some logic there, but not quite apples to apples. Ride height has a lot to do with their "stock" decisions too i'm sure. Locally i think the PAX applies correctly for how *fast* cars are respectively.

Yeah, it's NASA-X. You are right, it's a lot less accessible than SCCA Solo, mainly because they seem to serve larger regions, so events may be longer distances away. My region only has one NASA location several hours away from me, while SCCA has three locations within 30 minutes of me. So I primarily autocross with SCCA.

My gripe is not over being disallowed race tires in STU; as you mention, that's what BSP is for. It's over being allowed race tires in Stock.
As for the wear items, SCCA stock has always allowed direct replacement of wear items, but only with OEM replacement parts. The strut replacement rule clearly gives a performance advantage. Using the same logic, we should be allowed clutch upgrades in stock as well. As for the ride height, just as they do with struts (which can alter ride height in this class) they could specify an allowance for springs (something like +/- 1.5" stock height would seem reasonable off-hand).

I'm being stubborn here voicing my opinion, so don't take this as a direct argument against you - I can't tell you how many people I've taken to autocrosses who were discouraged by the class they were put in because of nothing more than lowering springs or an air intake. Or those who were in stock class and didn't even stand a chance against cars shod with race rubber. Albeit, I autocross for fun and not competition (well, except with my immediate buds), so wherever my car falls, it falls. But what I'm getting at is that with a point based system I wouldn't have to worry about getting my car setup the way I want it on the street, but then being dumped into the F1 WDC for racing. ;-)

Check this out if you're interested: http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/n...-X_Classes.pdf

They have a nice, short, and easy checklist style sheet here for classing your car as well, something I wish SCCA would provide (but I do instead! see my sig. ;-) )

[Amalfitano]

No attack assumed

And to get back to the OP and anyone else autocrossing with some of the performance bits...

The performance springs are not stiff enough for what you'd want in say STU class, and the dampers are not ridiculously firmer, the ride height is what, 10mm? technically that's within the rulebook for Stock (in no case more change than 1"), and thus far with no camber change. I'd be an advantage, but probably not as *fast* as say AST 5300's and a good Front Sway Bar.

Especially if your local region has an open Street Tire class, i'd run in D Stock without much hesitation, especially if you're just learning and you're not in the trophies. As you get better, you may then want to consider classing appropriately, but especially as a learner with mods that aren't producing ridiculous advantage, i wouldn't worry about it. Locally, people don't tend to protest, and unless suddenly you become the ringer week to week, I don't think it's hurting anyone. That wouldn't fly at a national tour event, or even your divisionals, but i don't quite see the harm. And if your club throws street tires with the r-comps, you especially don't have to feel bad about the minor improvements.

This isn't a knock on the BMW Performance package per se, but it's a street setup. I know it's called "Street Touring", but you'd want 600 lb springs up front in that class. If i'm not mistaken, the Performance springs are twice OEM, which is still what, 300? And the dampers aren't adjustable, and really, its the Camber that kills the car more than anyone one other factor (short of maybe the LSD )

[Amalfitano]

I also tried re-checking, NASA midwest doesn't bother with NASA-X events by the look of it. Just TT track events. Though if i'm wrong i'd love to know. By the look of it, i'd bump only one class

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by Amalfitano

No attack assumed

And to get back to the OP and anyone else autocrossing with some of the performance bits...

The performance springs are not stiff enough for what you'd want in say STU class, and the dampers are not ridiculously firmer, the ride height is what, 10mm? technically that's within the rulebook for Stock (in no case more change than 1"), and thus far with no camber change. I'd be an advantage, but probably not as *fast* as say AST 5300's and a good Front Sway Bar.

Especially if your local region has an open Street Tire class, i'd run in D Stock without much hesitation, especially if you're just learning and you're not in the trophies. As you get better, you may then want to consider classing appropriately, but especially as a learner with mods that aren't producing ridiculous advantage, i wouldn't worry about it. Locally, people don't tend to protest, and unless suddenly you become the ringer week to week, I don't think it's hurting anyone. That wouldn't fly at a national tour event, or even your divisionals, but i don't quite see the harm. And if your club throws street tires with the r-comps, you especially don't have to feel bad about the minor improvements.

This isn't a knock on the BMW Performance package per se, but it's a street setup. I know it's called "Street Touring", but you'd want 600 lb springs up front in that class. If i'm not mistaken, the Performance springs are twice OEM, which is still what, 300? And the dampers aren't adjustable, and really, its the Camber that kills the car more than anyone one other factor (short of maybe the LSD )

+1. With the exception of a few regions (I think Mark said his region was real anal retentive and fought him about the alignment pins), they're not big enforcers for smaller things. Just as long as you're not stepping on someone else's toes because of it - for example, beating another 135 legally in that class without said modification - they (particularly the driver) might get chapped about that and ask you to re-class. For the most part, people are there just to have fun.

[cpt97m3]

Originally Posted by Xaeryan

The Performance Brake kit unfortunately puts him out of STU and into BSP (no caliper changes in STU). So, BSP it is for him. (Not sure what the OP has though.)

Not to get too much off topic, but SCCA STU AutoX does allow caliper changes as long as the number of pistons is equal or greater, so the performance brake kit would be legal for STU.

[Xaeryan]

Originally Posted by cpt97m3

Not to get too much off topic, but SCCA STU AutoX does allow caliper changes as long as the number of pistons is equal or greater, so the performance brake kit would be legal for STU.

I stand corrected, not really sure how I missed that one.

[jb2178]

Hmm, thanks guys - I didn't think I could add on the performance suspension and still run stock - my region pro's basically said the same thing but I thought I'd ask. Basically it looks like wheels and hoosiers is the best thing I can do and still run stock, after that koni adjustables but that's pretty much it.

[Amalfitano]

"Brake calipers and mounting brackets may be replaced provided they
bolt to the standard locations and the number of pistons is equal to or
greater than standard."

I have no idea how i didn't spot this part of the passage... guess i'm getting old