Matt Murray

Hey Rad, good thing you're not biased. LOL

Actually that group is a good mix. Certainly the Cayman, 911 40, or the Boss might get it done. Even a well prepped C5 too. Sadly the M3 is a bit porky and the 1M is an unknown.

Tell ya what, get me a ride in a 911 40 and we'll go head to head with you in the Cayman. LOL Winner buys the wine.

knfeparty

Well my girlfriend wants a shot at ASL...what I really need is some wheels/tires and a tow vehicle.

I already have some konis but have not gotten a FSB yet. I also need to email the SCCA about allowing the IMS Bearing mod in stock class. Obviously not a performance mod but it would disqualify you at nationals, especially if you won.

Matt Murray

Trailer hitch on the 911 pulling a Trailex Tire Toter. I own one. I am leasing it to a GT-3 owner (who apparently has sold the GT-3 for a Cayman).

Not knowing what the IMS deal is, if it is like the old 911 tensioners of the seventies, though no performance advantage, they are not legal. If it is a TSB from PCNA, then it is legal.

sjfehr

Isn't the IMS issue rather moot in this case, since aggressive driving properly lubricates the bearings and dramatically decreases failure rate? I thought the cause was pinpointed to be largely a result of underdriving the cars- the one thing Porsche didn't test, and that autocrossers don't typically do.

Matt Murray

IMS stands for? (International Motor Speedway?)

Aggressive? Naw, just driven on Sundays.

Grantsfo

Hey Rad, That FP boxster owes lots of successful development to you! Thanks again for all your tips. Erik didnt do too much more to the car other than put bigger taller A6's under the car. Slight spring change to go back to A6 from my slick setup. Have to say you were right about taller tires as the car pulled fine!

With a 2.7 liter built motor in that car next year I cant see anyone in FP touching a driver like Vivek or Erik if he were to drive it. Heck with more power even somone like me could potentially get into the trophies in that car. Just need to find somone who can build a M96 race motor from a 2.7 block!

kjchristopher

I was there, just not in the Porsche.

Matt Murray

Apparently. Nice ride (if the one in your avatar).

Grantsfo

Here is my slow butt on West course

NJ-GT

Grant, I'm glad every tip worked out. Your ex-Boxster needed tall tires, as it was running out of gear frequently, and A6 works great at Lincoln. It is great you got the chance to drive at Nationals in your own creation.

I couldn't make it this year, despite of having two very competitive cars. When I have the time, I don't have the car, when I have the car, I don't have the time.

I would rather run the Boxster at 1,900 lbs with a 2.5 and keep working on making it lighter. A 2.7 adds too much weight, and when cars are that light, 100+ lbs become very noticeable on handling, and traction becomes a new problem. Erik should put one of those big spoiler, it is going to help a lot on such a light car.

PedalFaster

You won't get an allowance for the IMS mod. Even if the 911 IMS mod isn't a performance improvement, they've never made reliability allowances for specific cars in Stock in the past, and are extremely unlikely to start doing so now. It's even more unlikely that they'd allow engine bearing changes for all cars, as that would open an expensive, performance enhancing can of worms.

So -- write your letter if you want, but have realistic expectations going in.

knfeparty

I can think of one reliability enhancement allowance: rear shock mounts on E46 BMWs. It is legal to install upgraded rear shock mounts like those made by TC Kline on e46 BMWs in stock class. This was due to the common failure of these mounts which resulted in shocks popping up into the trunk right through the carpet. There are a few more exceptions but they usually only make them for really popular cars.

Seeing as the SCCA actively sets the rules to make sure that porsches and other "fancy" cars can't be competitive in a class (like not allowing Porsche in any street touring class with the recent STR exceptions, thanks a lot), they will probably shoot down any request to get an exception. And porsche releasing a TSB admitting that there is a Intermediate Shaft Bearing instant-engine-death problem on its beloved 911, well that would be equally preposterous.

Grantsfo

You havent seen the last of me on FP boxster builds. I wanted to start fresh and build a dedicated AX car this time. Likely going to start next year on serious FP build with no compromises. Cage on my first car was road race cage as I thought I might do some EP driving in the car. I learned a lot from this car that I will do differntly with dedicated AX car. I'm going to likely build that elusive 1900 lb Boxster next. Probably less than 1900 lbs so I can balast the front. Erik I think is stuck with 2100 lb car due to fact he will run it as an EP road race car as well. We were 140 lbs overweight at Lincoln. 2.7 makes sense for him. As he can switch motors from 2.5 for EP to 2.7 for FP.

PedalFaster

Sort of. There's no E46-specific rule; there was a clarification to the pre-existing rule published indicating that some changes to the mounts are allowed. From Appendix F:

I think we're agreeing on the core point, though -- it's very unlikely that there will be an allowance made for changing the 911's IMS bearing.