Open Inquiries
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Make clear in the rules that solicitiing a change in class for a driver at the track during an event is limited to conditions that CR specifies (language regarding those limitations needs to be debated by the CR rules team).
- Rule Committee Response: Currently under discussion with the Rules Committee.
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
Move the specifications of Rain lights to the III. Safety B. Equipment. rules section heading.
The Rain lights specifications are currently referenced under IV. Racing Rules. Rain Race. Rain lights.
While the requirement to use the rain lights is properly mentioned under Racing Rules, the specifications of Rain Lights should be mentioned under Equipment (or at least referenced), as any other important equipment/safety requirement, so as not to be overlooked. - Additional Comments: A racer new to BMW CR asked me (as PWR advocate) where to find the racing light specifications/requirement in the rules, as he had trouble locating it....
- Rule Committee Response: The rules committee will take this under consideration.
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
Make corrections to #16; ‘Window Nets’ to “Nets” to include the right side net as to the required certifications:
16. Nets
a. Expiration
i. SFI nets expire 2 years after the date of manufacture at the end of the month of manufacture as indicated on the label.
ii. FIA 8863-2013 nets expire 5 years from the year of manufacture on December 31st of the year printed on the net(s).
iii. Nets without a certification label shall be considered as expired and must be replaced.
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
2. Penalties will be assigned to racers as follows:
……….
c. Any driver issued a disqualification (DQ) for any race (fun or points) will forfeit all points earned at that event. - Additional Comments: It appears to me that this rule is not being applied. For example a number of drivers were penalized with a DQ at WGI (Sept 2022) for being underweight in one race. I noticed that points were awarded to the racers for the event. I am not necessarily advocating this rule, and I would suggest it be reviewed and/or clarified. For example: should the racer with a DQ in one race in an event (for example due to underweight) be penalized for the entire event which is what the current rule above states? Should there be a difference for a technical DQ versus a DQ due to a (serious) driver penalty?
- Submitter Name: Scott Stirling
- Request:
I am formally requesting that the rules governing fuel cell location be amended to allow for greater flexibility in mounting location. In addition, the rule change requestor seeks to align the allowable BMW CCA Club Racing fuel cell locations with other racing organizations and demonstrate that alternative fuel cell locations do not pose an increased risk to safety when appropriate precautions are taken. Proposed changes to the rule book wording and photographic support for the change rationale will be provided by email.
- Rule Committee Response: This inquiry is still under review. A final ruling is anticipated in advance of the 2023 rule book release.
General
- Submitter Name: Bruce Heersink
- Request:
Would like to see some wording in rulebook about how much a racer has to complete on a weekend to get a probation event signed off. Some discussion, we thought a finisher (so at least 51% of the laps) in 50% of the races.
- Rule Committee Response: This is under discussion and will be addressed in a future Rules update.
- Submitter Name: Mike Akard
- Request:
This also involves Sport classes, but Sport doesn’t effect me. FACT 1: the letters A, B, C, D, E, F, and G are virtually unused in Sport & Prepared classes. FACT 2: Virtually ALL MODERN ERA BMWs are Forced Induction as delivered to dealerships. FACT 3: Tuning is already “free” in Prepared. FACT 4: tuning of naturally aspirated cars in Prepared cars separates competition already. FACT 5: None of the longstanding Prepared (and sport) classes are adversely effected by any of the modern era BMWs because they are classed higher letters (or easily could be if they were to upset the existing class) FACT 6: MOD & PWR class cars are considerably more expensive to build & operate than Sport & Prepared class cars. FACT 7: The added expense of this major rules change will deter owners of modern era BMWs from participating in BMW CCA Club Racing…especially potential new race school students. FACT 8: at time of this writing, there are four cars entered in GP at WGI Sept race. All four are either ‘15 or ‘16 M235i race cars that would be required to move to either BM or PWR 3-5 class for next year requiring considerable additional expense to be competitive versus remaining in otherwise unpopulated G Prepared class…who does it harm to permit more of these cars to participate in this Prepared class or the appropriate otherwise unpopulated Sport class? So what if JoeBob has better tuning and dominates…every participant could invest in similar “free” tuning vs having to pay for a mod class level build. Who does that hurt other than the businesses that sell the parts that people would have to buy to be competitive in BM? Please seriously consider removing this example of MAJOR, overly expensive, RULES CREEP!
- Additional Comments: Use those unused letters (A,B,C,D,E,F, & G) to put these cars in competitive Sport & Prepared classes PLEASE instead of forcing every owner of most any modern era BMW to jump straight to BM or PWR level of prep from day one. It’s the right move for the program and resides perfectly within the spirit of BMW CCA Club Racing’s history and original focus.
- Rule Committee Response: This is in reference to a yet to be written 2025 rule. The current view of the rules committee is that newer FI cars will be allowed in a revised SPORT class with some restrictions. Otherwise FI cars are also welcome to race in both the MOD and PWR classes.
- Submitter Name: ryan white
- Request:
Every major racing organization has a rule that you are not allowed to “block” while braking. This is a clear safety issue and should be made very clear that the “1 move” portion of our rule book to prevent someone from passing does not apply if the lead car has begun braking / entered the braking zone.
- Rule Committee Response: No action taken by the rules committee. Blocking while braking is ill advised but rules prohibiting this are impractical.
- Submitter Name: Clyde Hill
- Request:
Several members of the BMWCCA/CR racing community, including officials and IP class members noted a considerable inconsistency in laps run by a new racer at CMP in October. I wasn’t there but when I read the Roundel coverage, it stood out that there may have been a classification issue.
The subject, Jon Kozlow, came from NASA ST4 and self-classed his car as IP and ran 3-4 sec faster than the IP class regulars. The top of the IP class is typically separated by 3-4/10ths and the rest of the weekend showed the IP class running consistent times to each other.
It seems there could be a classification error (refer to Sec 2) and based on the Process (sec 4), since BMWCCA officials noticed the same disparity, and the process for another racer to raise this type of issue is cumbersome and potentially not the best way to preserve the camaraderie, officials should investigate the classification of the Kozlow car based on the inconsistency and the variations allowed in the NASA ST4 class where the car typically runs.
Per rule, Sec. 4: An event participant “or organizer” may initiate a protest for the decision, act, or omission by the following for alleged violation of the rules.
- Additional Comments: NASA rules allow for many items that may not be obvious and would not be on the event tech or annual tech forms; such as non-OEM ECUs, allowable engine modifications, different tires, different cage rules... Per the NASA Rulebook for ST4 "6. Modifications (ST1, ST2, ST3, ST4) Unless listed otherwise, performance enhancing modifications are unlimited". ST4 is a power to weight class, however, as the subject driver ran in IP, not PWR, there was no requirement to submit dyno or build specifics. It is not lost on anyone in IP or onlookers familiar with class cars in IP, that when an IP car puts the remainder of the IP field down by 3-4 sec a lap and even beats Todd Brown in his M2 CSR in B-Mod, something is amiss. I feel a burden to elevate the concern and protect from any threat to the tight competitive racing that has been the hallmark of BMWCCA, even though it did not directly impact me.
- Rule Committee Response: This is not a rules request per se but rather a compliance question.
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Make clear in the rules that solicitiing a change in class for a driver at the track during an event is limited to conditions that CR specifies (language regarding those limitations needs to be debated by the CR rules team).
- Rule Committee Response: Currently under discussion with the Rules Committee.
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
Move the specifications of Rain lights to the III. Safety B. Equipment. rules section heading.
The Rain lights specifications are currently referenced under IV. Racing Rules. Rain Race. Rain lights.
While the requirement to use the rain lights is properly mentioned under Racing Rules, the specifications of Rain Lights should be mentioned under Equipment (or at least referenced), as any other important equipment/safety requirement, so as not to be overlooked. - Additional Comments: A racer new to BMW CR asked me (as PWR advocate) where to find the racing light specifications/requirement in the rules, as he had trouble locating it....
- Rule Committee Response: The rules committee will take this under consideration.
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Add clarification that license and medical validity must extend to the last day of any CR event requiring those credentials
- Additional Comments: reference VIR expirations
- Rule Committee Response: Q1 2023 Rules update will include wording that clarifies the expiration status of license and medical for an event. Page 3, Driver Eligibility.
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Eliminate reference to the SM class which effective with the ’23 season has been eliminated (current and future cars in this class are directred to the highest PWR class in the ongiong rule book for PWR which is PWR5 for 2023)
- Rule Committee Response: All references to the SM class will be removed from the rules in the Q1 2023 Rules update.
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Add clarification to the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty clause as shown below:
7d. Unsportsmanlike conduct (on or off the track, to include attempts to pressure decision making by race officals)
- Rule Committee Response: Language to make clear that unsportsmanlike conduct includes any attempts (by the racer or others representing the racer) to influence Stewards in the adjudication process. Included in Q1 2023 Rules update.
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Suggested rule change to require an automatic one-month probation period if a racer is unable to produce video footage following involvement in a contact incident
- Rule Committee Response: The 2023 rule book will be amended to require a one-race probationary period for racers who are unable to provide video footage when requested by an official.
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
2. Penalties will be assigned to racers as follows:
……….
c. Any driver issued a disqualification (DQ) for any race (fun or points) will forfeit all points earned at that event. - Additional Comments: It appears to me that this rule is not being applied. For example a number of drivers were penalized with a DQ at WGI (Sept 2022) for being underweight in one race. I noticed that points were awarded to the racers for the event. I am not necessarily advocating this rule, and I would suggest it be reviewed and/or clarified. For example: should the racer with a DQ in one race in an event (for example due to underweight) be penalized for the entire event which is what the current rule above states? Should there be a difference for a technical DQ versus a DQ due to a (serious) driver penalty?
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
1. Points will be awarded to eligible racers as follows:
…….
g. In the case of a dead heat for any position, the total points involved based on the number tied at the finish shall be divided evenly among those tied.
For example, if the dead heat is for second place involving two cars, the points from second and third will be added together and divided by two to obtain the points to be awarded for second place. Each driver would be awarded 17 points. There would be no third place points awarded in that race. - Additional Comments: Unless I am mistaken the example used under 1.g. is wrong (....."Each driver would be awarded 17 points"...). 2nd position is normally 7 points (without multipliers) and 3rd is 5 points. The total to that is 12 and half would be 6
- Rule Committee Response: No action - The rule book already defines the process for this situation.
- Submitter Name: Scott Stirling
- Request:
I am formally requesting that the rules governing fuel cell location be amended to allow for greater flexibility in mounting location. In addition, the rule change requestor seeks to align the allowable BMW CCA Club Racing fuel cell locations with other racing organizations and demonstrate that alternative fuel cell locations do not pose an increased risk to safety when appropriate precautions are taken. Proposed changes to the rule book wording and photographic support for the change rationale will be provided by email.
- Rule Committee Response: This inquiry is still under review. A final ruling is anticipated in advance of the 2023 rule book release.
Safety
- Submitter Name: Tim Bradford
- Request:
The rules for window imperfections/impairments.
- Additional Comments: All rule statements include the word "and" in 15.a.1-5, which basically states that if not all rules criteria met then any window damage is ok. Due to the wording, all rules 1-5 have to be met in order to let a driver know they are not allowed to race and windshield needs to be replaced. We currently have 4 cars that I inspected that would need to be replaced or Logbook entry to replace before next event if the correct wording was in the rules. I'm sure there are more cars that may meet this criteria if the rules were properly stated. I suggest all are changed to the wording of "or", and "and/or" in specific statement cases.
- Rule Committee Response: This is an error in the language of the rules. This has been corrected in the initial release of the 2024 rules.
- Submitter Name: Ryan Kerfien
- Request:
Will a Joie of Seating Diamond seat be acceptable for club racing. See link below to the manufacturer’s website.
https://www.thejoieofseating.com/diamond-series-seat
- Additional Comments: I’ve been a fan of these seats for a long time and want to run one. Fully welded aluminum construction and superior fit!
- Rule Committee Response: This is covered in the existing rules.
- Submitter Name: Tom Tice
- Request:
Consistency and safety aspects of cars running with driver and passenger windows up.
- Rule Committee Response: The reference to FIA cars running with windows up will be removed from the sport class and added to the safety section in the Q1 2023 Rules update. Page 21
- Submitter Name: Ryan White
- Request:
Confirming that the same rule applies to reinforcement for Ballast as to a Fuel Cell where (location in rule book: B. Equipment, 29. Fuel system, a. 2) “Additional reinforcement may be added to support the fuel cell, but such reinforcement must not be attached to the roll cage in Sport and Prepared classes.”
- Additional Comments: For safety reasons additional reinforcement is often required to safely attach up to 50 lbs per ballast segment (often requiring multiple segments) in case of an accident. The reinforcement needs to connect to a structural part of the car, not just the passenger / spare tire wheel well sheet metal that is not designed to structurally support concentrated weight in case of an accident.
- Rule Committee Response: Existing rules are clear. No change required.
- Submitter Name: Eric Heinrich
- Request:
Rain lights – it might be wise to make the wording and requirements match what the other race series are doing.
Otherwise people are going to have to reprogram the rain lights for each series.
Keep it consistent is my recommendation.
- Additional Comments: SCCA GCR language: B. RAIN LIGHTS All cars shall be equipped with rain light(s) clearly visible from the rear. The rain light(s) shall be turned on when directed to by the Race Director or Chief Steward. 1. Non-Formula and Sports Racing cars shall utilize the original equipment red tail lights or the rain light described in 9.3.32.B.2 or both. 2. All Formula (open wheel) and Sports Racing cars shall be equipped with a red taillight of at least the equivalent illumination power of a 15-watt bulb. This light shall be mounted on the centerline of the car. Light assemblies shall be considered one light for the purposes of this rule, irrespective of the number of individual lamps the assembly may contain. FIA Technical List N 19 rain lights are recommended. 3. Original equipment tail light assemblies may be used. Light assemblies may perform both rain and brake light functions provided they have two distinct illumination levels. Lights that function as strobe lights are not permitt
- Rule Committee Response: Rule committee denies this request. There is no standardization across racing organizations.
- Submitter Name: Marc Thomaes
- Request:
Make corrections to #16; ‘Window Nets’ to “Nets” to include the right side net as to the required certifications:
16. Nets
a. Expiration
i. SFI nets expire 2 years after the date of manufacture at the end of the month of manufacture as indicated on the label.
ii. FIA 8863-2013 nets expire 5 years from the year of manufacture on December 31st of the year printed on the net(s).
iii. Nets without a certification label shall be considered as expired and must be replaced.
- Submitter Name: Bruce Heersink
- Request:
Would like rain light behavior change from on steady at all times to blink when brakes are off and steady on when brake pedal depressed. Logic is a steady on light doesn’t give trailing car any information if the driver ahead is on the brakes or not. Brake lights are not normally on all time to convey info to any driver behind them, why should a rain light be different? Blinking light gives car behind bro of where the car is, solid under braking gives info car is probably slowing. Much safer.
- Additional Comments: Would change this rule ASAP but have either as written or new rule allowed thru end of 2922 season. Me behavior required after Jan 1, 2023. Alternatively, it appears at least one nASA region has light behavior the opposite- steady on, blink while braking. Either would work, but the bottom line is the light behavior needs to be different when driver is on or off brakes.
- Rule Committee Response: This inquiry was approved with the final wording of the rule to be included in the 2023 rule book. The 2023 rule book has not yet been finalized. The 2023 rule book will be changed to require rainlights to be steady on when the brake pedal is depressed, and flashing when the brake pedal is not depressed.
- Submitter Name: Scott Stirling
- Request:
I am formally requesting that the rules governing fuel cell location be amended to allow for greater flexibility in mounting location. In addition, the rule change requestor seeks to align the allowable BMW CCA Club Racing fuel cell locations with other racing organizations and demonstrate that alternative fuel cell locations do not pose an increased risk to safety when appropriate precautions are taken. Proposed changes to the rule book wording and photographic support for the change rationale will be provided by email.
- Rule Committee Response: This inquiry is still under review. A final ruling is anticipated in advance of the 2023 rule book release.
Sport/Prepared
- Submitter Name: Daniel Mills
- Request:
The rules state that a wing my be mounted no higher than the roof line. If a wing is swan mounted, does that refer to the highest point of the airfoil, end plate, or the uprights?
- Rule Committee Response: The Wing Height can not exceed the roofline of the car except where the roofline extends to the rear for the full extent of the body. Then the Wing may be 3" above the roofline. The "Wing" is viewed as the sum of all of the components including mounting structures, hardware, and end plates and cannot be above the roofline.
- Submitter Name: Preston Landrith
- Request:
I just had a question about rules on what transmissions are allowed. I am currently looking at different specs to buy to start my bmw club racing journey and I was wondering if the car had to have a true manual or if an automatic transmission with paddles would be allowed? I’ve looked in the rule forms and wasn’t able to find anything. Thank you.
- Rule Committee Response: Transmission rules are specific to each class and are covered in the current rules.
- Submitter Name: Scott Stirling
- Request:
The participants of IS, the largest continent of sport class racers, request that the following wording be removed from the sport section of the rule book.
“Batteries must remain in their original location except for 2002 and E21 cars. E30 cars in which the battery was originally in the engine compartment may relocate the battery to the standard E30 trunk location.”
- Additional Comments: The IS class, via an email discussion, would like to request that battery location be made free. There were no objections to the discussion of the 16 active racers included on the chain. Rationale: Battery location is already free in both higher (Mod) and similar levels of preparedness (SpecE46) classes. Allowing this to be free does not increase the cost at all and allows racers better flexibility in setting up the vehicle.
- Rule Committee Response: This request was denied.
- Submitter Name: Scott Stirling
- Request:
The participants of IS, the largest continent of sport class racers, request that the following wording be removed from the sport section of the rule book.
“Bushing material does not include replacement of bushings with spherical bearings or rod ends, such as Heim ends, except as noted below.”
- Additional Comments: The IS class, via an email discussion, would like to request that bushing material be made free, including the replacement of bushings with spherical bearings. There were no objections to the discussion of the 16 active racers included on the chain. Rationale: This change would impact three areas in particular: the RTAB, the rear upper inner control arm, and the front CAB, and does not serve to increase costs or performance meaningfully. From a cost perspective, current legal upgrades in these areas total $284. The proposed allowance would only increase the cost to $593. This is an insufficient cost delta in a class where you can run a $8,000 differential. Regarding performance, the change to spherical would not shift the car's max potential, given the current performance and tire limitations, but rather would move the performance window. Freeing this up allows more flexibility in setting up the car and becomes less of a burden on compliance staff.
- Rule Committee Response: Elements of this request were accepted and details are included in the initial 2024 rules.
- Submitter Name: Jeffrey Traenkner
- Request:
Are PDMs allowed to replace factory relays, fuses, and harnesses? For instance, can I remove the fuse box from an IS car and utilize an AiM PDM32 in its place to control headlights, wipers, fan, etc.?
- Rule Committee Response: Currently the rules book is silent on the use of Power Management Distribution devices to replace fuses and relays in Sport class. In this case, the PDM devices are not allowed in the Sport class. The rules do say that the relays may be removed for "unused" components only.
- Submitter Name: John Holcomb
- Request:
Technical question regarding wing height: Do all parts of the wing (ie. swan top mounts, end plates, gurney flaps) need to be at or below the highest point of the roofline or just the wing airfoil itself? I’m fabricating new mounts to comply while moving from standard under mount to swan top mount uprights.
- Rule Committee Response: The Wing Height can not exceed the roofline of the car except where the roofline extends to the rear for the full extent of the body. Then the Wing may be 3" above the roofline. The "Wing" is viewed as the sum of all of the components including mounting structures, hardware, and end plates and cannot be above the roofline.
- Submitter Name: John Holcomb
- Request:
Technical question regarding wing height: Do all parts of the wing (ie. swan top mounts, end plates, gurney flaps) need to be at or below the highest point of the roofline or just the wing airfoil itself? I’m fabricating new mounts to comply while moving from standard under mount to swan top mount uprights.
- Rule Committee Response: The Wing Height can not exceed the roofline of the car except where the roofline extends to the rear for the full extent of the body. Then the Wing may be 3" above the roofline. The "Wing" is viewed as the sum of all of the components including mounting structures, hardware, and end plates and cannot be above the roofline.
- Submitter Name: Scott Stirling
- Request:
Request that the rule stating “E46 M3s are allowed to run ZF 5 speed transmission, model ZF320 sourced from other BMW models.” be equally applied to Sport class rule set as initially intended.
- Rule Committee Response: This will be added to the Sport Class Rules in the Q1 2023 update. P53
- Submitter Name: Ryan White
- Request:
Confirming that the same rule applies to reinforcement for Ballast as to a Fuel Cell where (location in rule book: B. Equipment, 29. Fuel system, a. 2) “Additional reinforcement may be added to support the fuel cell, but such reinforcement must not be attached to the roll cage in Sport and Prepared classes.”
- Additional Comments: For safety reasons additional reinforcement is often required to safely attach up to 50 lbs per ballast segment (often requiring multiple segments) in case of an accident. The reinforcement needs to connect to a structural part of the car, not just the passenger / spare tire wheel well sheet metal that is not designed to structurally support concentrated weight in case of an accident.
- Rule Committee Response: Existing rules are clear. No change required.
- Submitter Name: Ryan White
- Request:
Per seperate email, would ask the rules committee to revisit the minimum weight for H Class (HP/HS). It is currently 3142 for the E46 M3 platform, which requires all drivers who have prepared their car to the other regulations to run ballast, for some as much as 200 lbs. This much ballast is a safety risk (many lead blocks in multiple places on the car are a avoidable risk in an accident), is less attrative to racers in other series where the weight minimum is much less, and would provide environmental and cost benefits (i.e. brakes, fuel, tires) to the racers.
- Additional Comments: We have polled all racers who participated in 2022 BMW club racing and 1100% of all responses (11 of 13, 2 didn't respond) agreed that lowering the weight minimum would be advantageous to BMW club racing in the HP/HS class. The minimum weight suggested by most racers was 2970, with other racers requesting 3040 (NASA for a similiar car would be 3000 lbs). Please refer to my other correspondence which have documented this request in more detail and please contact me with any questions or clarifications. Thank you for making racing safer and more enjoyable for all the participants.
- Rule Committee Response: This request has been denied. However, the rule committee is now re-evaluating the entirety of the weight table and the methodology used to establish the weight table.
- Submitter Name: Ryan White
- Request:
lower the minimum weight to at or below 3000 lbs – currently at 3142 (same rules as current, including driver, fuel, etc.). I suggest lowering all other classes accordingly as many cars run with balast, but the E46 M3 platform has a particularly high minimum weight relative to how easy it is to remove weight from the chasis by taking the normal steps to prepare a racecar.
- Additional Comments: I must run nearly 200 lbs of balast currently to race with BMW compared to other associations. I agree we should make sure folks aren't increasing the cost of the build to reach minimum weights - in this circumstance no steps that add incremental costs to build and reduce weight have been taken. I have full glass in car, normal sized battery, no carbon fiber or any other exotic materials of any type. there is more weight that I can remove from the car and haven't. This additional weight is not only becoming impractical in terms of how much weight I can add physically and safely, the additional weight is not only hurting performance relative to other race series, it's widening the gap between classes (modified) which pushes folks to spend incrementally on major modifications. It also increases the cost of maintaining the car with brakes, tires, etc. I believe making this change for multiple classes will make BMW racing more competitive in attracting other racers as well.
- Rule Committee Response: This request was denied on the basis of the broader compilations it poses to the club racing Official Vehicle Specifications.
- Submitter Name: Ryan White
- Request:
Please confirm that any E46 transmission can be used (i.e. 5 speed) rather than the 6 speed the M3 comes with. I support this flexibility as the cost of the 6 speed transmission is nearly 3x the cost of the 5 speed transmission and has significantly more weight. gears 1 through 5 are identical in both transmissions so there is no performance advantage other than the weight savings,
- Additional Comments: I belive it is very prudent to prevent keeping the mainteance costs and car weight unnaturally high when savings and performance can be achieved.
- Rule Committee Response: This inquiry was approved with the final wording of the rule to be included in the 2023 rule book. The 2023 rule book is now in place with this rule update.
Mod/SuperMod
- Submitter Name: Daniel Mills
- Request:
The rules state that a wing my be mounted no higher than the roof line. If a wing is swan mounted, does that refer to the highest point of the airfoil, end plate, or the uprights?
- Rule Committee Response: The Wing Height can not exceed the roofline of the car except where the roofline extends to the rear for the full extent of the body. Then the Wing may be 3" above the roofline. The "Wing" is viewed as the sum of all of the components including mounting structures, hardware, and end plates and cannot be above the roofline.
- Submitter Name: John Holcomb
- Request:
Technical question regarding wing height: Do all parts of the wing (ie. swan top mounts, end plates, gurney flaps) need to be at or below the highest point of the roofline or just the wing airfoil itself? I’m fabricating new mounts to comply while moving from standard under mount to swan top mount uprights.
- Rule Committee Response: The Wing Height can not exceed the roofline of the car except where the roofline extends to the rear for the full extent of the body. Then the Wing may be 3" above the roofline. The "Wing" is viewed as the sum of all of the components including mounting structures, hardware, and end plates and cannot be above the roofline.
- Submitter Name: John Holcomb
- Request:
Technical question regarding wing height: Do all parts of the wing (ie. swan top mounts, end plates, gurney flaps) need to be at or below the highest point of the roofline or just the wing airfoil itself? I’m fabricating new mounts to comply while moving from standard under mount to swan top mount uprights.
- Rule Committee Response: The Wing Height can not exceed the roofline of the car except where the roofline extends to the rear for the full extent of the body. Then the Wing may be 3" above the roofline. The "Wing" is viewed as the sum of all of the components including mounting structures, hardware, and end plates and cannot be above the roofline.
- Submitter Name: Scott Reiman
- Request:
Eliminate reference to the SM class which effective with the ’23 season has been eliminated (current and future cars in this class are directred to the highest PWR class in the ongiong rule book for PWR which is PWR5 for 2023)
- Rule Committee Response: All references to the SM class will be removed from the rules in the Q1 2023 Rules update.
- Submitter Name: Tom Tice
- Request:
Consistency and safety aspects of cars running with driver and passenger windows up.
- Rule Committee Response: The reference to FIA cars running with windows up will be removed from the sport class and added to the safety section in the Q1 2023 Rules update. Page 21
- Submitter Name: Ali Salih
- Request:
I’d like to recommend a rule change for MOD class to allow for alternative materials for driveshafts, such as carbon fiber.
- Additional Comments: This change will allow for carbon fiber driveshafts to be legal and help reduce weight in chunkier late-model BMW Chassis cars. E series, F series, and on. BMW F8x M3 and M4 have already adopted the CFRP driveshafts in the early models, then only changed it back to steel due to unrelated emissions requirements in the EU that enforced smaller diameter, which made CFRP unstable. In racing, we do not have the same limitations and CF shafts available are durable for any racing conditions, even drag racing. This change will allow MOD cars to save weight and offer better protections against the driveline parasitic harmonics while allowing relatively cheaper performance options.
- Rule Committee Response: This inquiry was approved with the final wording of the rule to be included in the 2023 rule book. The 2023 rule book has not yet been finalized.
SPEC
- Submitter Name: John Gardner
- Request:
Add the option for BMW factory race cars with built-in FIA rain lights be allowed to run with BMW CCA Club Racing if the rain lights are programmed to flash at 4 hertz and solid on with braking.
- Additional Comments: This addition would still allow the safety required for a rain light in this series without negatively affecting any other racers. Currently four M2 CSR cars have been programmed to run this way and other factory race cars could make this change optionally.
- Rule Committee Response: This request was accepted by the Rules Committee. Details are included in the initial release of the 2024 rules.
- Submitter Name: Steve Liadis
- Request:
7) Tires and Wheels
a) Tires
i) BMW Club Racing reserves the right and intends to specify a M2 SPEC class tire
(Brand, Model and Size) at some point in the future. Warning: It is anticipated that
the 2024 M3 Spec rules will require the Yokohama race slick, size 280/650-18, medium
compound as the Spec dry tire. - Additional Comments: I request specifying a M2 SPEC class tire be delayed until the 2025 Season. Specifying a tire at the beginning of the season does not allow the racers the ability to use up tires left over from the 2023 Season. The decision on the tire should be made early in the previous season so we can use up our supply of tires and start voluntarily using the Spec tire. That way none of our tires will go to waste. Additionally, there does not seem to be any advantage of running one brand of tire. The purpose of specifying a tire was to lower the cost of the tires or providing contingency awards. I feel that requires more study. My concern with the Yokohama tire is that there is only one source for purchase and the cost of shipping from California. Thank you for your consideration.
- Rule Committee Response: This request was considered and a M2 SPEC class tire will be required for the 2nd half of the 2024 season. Details are in the initial release of the 2024 rules.
Power to Weight
- Submitter Name: Greg Miceli
- Request:
PWR2 Greater than or equal to 13 and less than 16
- Additional Comments: I'd request this be modified to match NASA GTS2 which currently has a 13.5 limit for DOT approved Tires.
- Rule Committee Response: This request is denied. The PWR class is not intended to precisely align with any other specific class or classes. It is intended to be broadly appealing to a range of existing race cars from multiple other race organizations. Any attempts to re-align the PWR classes to one specific organization will result in a worse fit for cars from different organizations.
- Submitter Name: Greg Miceli
- Request:
Declared WHP must be at least 85% of the manufacturer’s published HP(crank).
- Additional Comments: I would like to be able to run my E36 bodied S54 powered car in PWR2, however this rule results in a minimum hp of 285 and subsequently a corresponding minimum weight of 3700 lbs before modifiers and 3820 with aero present. Removing this rule would allow a detune to run this at a more reasonable competition weight. There are currently no such restrictions in GTS so removing this rule would allow more crossover cars.
- Rule Committee Response: This request is denied. The 85% rule is in place specifically to dis-allow extreme de-tuning which results in a flat torque curve. Flat torque curve tunes provide an unfair advantage compared to cars running with their engines unrestricted.
- Submitter Name: Greg Miceli
- Request:
Aerodynamic improvements – any purposeful change to the entire profile of a car’s
body/chassis that deviates from the factory delivered, street legal, base car configuration
will be assessed a LBS:WHP modification of -0.5 - Additional Comments: I would request those WITHOUT aero improvements be given +0.5 mod factor to better align the series LBS/WHP Ratio to NASA GTS to promote further crossover of cars. For example, PWR3 is "Greater than or equal to 10 and less than 13" and GTS3 is 10.0. As aero mods are allowed in GTS by default, the ratios would be closer if they matched and aero was not penalized in PWR class.
- Rule Committee Response: This request is denied. The PWR class is not intended to precisely align with any other specific class or classes. It is intended to be broadly appealing to a range of existing race cars from multiple other race organizations. Any attempts to re-align the PWR classes to one specific organization will result in a worse fit for cars from different organizations.
You can submit an inquiry for the Rules Committee to review here.