Jump to content

collinskl1

Members
  • Content Count

    103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

collinskl1 last won the day on April 28 2020

collinskl1 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

103

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Akron, OH
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I just picked up an Alpinestars GP Tech V2 for like half off, and have come to the same conclusion - way more comfortable than my old Oreca. It's a little snug in some areas, but balancing fit across my whole body, it's pretty good.
  2. I'm not 100% sure that this is forbidden in any rulesets, but having bends in the roll hoop such that it is not a single plane significantly reduces the cage's structural integrity - unless the bend is properly supported I suppose. Personally, I'd discourage it, and just cram the bottom feet into the cab corners and push the top as far backward against the window as you can.
  3. I don't think this is a valid assumption. That's like saying by making Back to The Future 3, they always planned on making a 4th, or that because there was a Mustang II, there will be a Mustang 3 someday...
  4. Goodyear is the parent company, and has nothing to do with Sumitomo. Years ago, there was a joint venture between GY and SRI, but that has since been dissolved. The only remaining vestiges of that are some Dunlop tires (which Goodyear owns) being produced by Sumitomo - Direzza Z3, for example.
  5. The UTQG treadwear rating system is not perfect - that's for sure. But there is no "cheating" going on by the manufacturers... most of the "200TW" class tires actually test significantly higher than 200 - like multiple times higher. The issue for motorsports usage of treadwear ratings is that the test is a road test, not a high slip angle and high heat environment like we use the tires in. The tires are stamped "200" because that's the marketing category that is most commonly used for motorsports. Also, durometer or tread compound hardness is not an indicator of traction performanc
  6. My first helmet was an entry level Pyrotect, which I wore for 8 years. It was ok, but would start to hurt my head once nearing two hours. Last year, I bit the bullet and bought a Stilo ST5 with integrated comms and I LOVE it. I wasn't dead set on the brand, and went to a local shop to try on several different brands and models... there are different head shapes and different helmet shapes. The Stilo fits me very well, and has different size pads for the inside to mix and match if required.
  7. Suggestion - how about just one thread for all transponders that gets bumped or updated with new content?
  8. Don't forget the noise part that we all love!
  9. This seems like a logical thought process to me, thanks for sharing. My interpretation is that the 318ti is NOT capable of platform swapping to the 6 cylinder BMW engines since the rear chassis components are incompatible. Is that line of thinking incorrect, and a team could platform swap the engine, use a fuel cell that’s 2 gal over the e36 coupe capacity, and leave the rear suspension as 318ti stuff? If not, I would propose that the “swap weight” for the 318ti be adjusted such that it ends up at the same VPI after swapping as those e36 factory offerings.
  10. I think the Gorilla Sticker car is swapped - anyone know what their claimed point structure looks like?
  11. From 4.6.1 under Platform Swap: "To qualify as a platform swap, all of the differing vehicle components must be swapped to match the new platform. This includes engine, transmission, differential, suspension, fuel tank, etc." The 318ti will accept the engine and trans from a coupe or sedan E36, but the differential, suspension, and fuel tank will not swap in. The back half of the car is entirely different from the coupe and sedan cars. I suppose and argument could be made for platform swapping a Z3 (E36/7) and 318ti though, as they share the same E30-like rear chassis and have
  12. Munich... wrong German city. https://www.automobile-catalog.com/car/1995/271100/bmw_318ti.html These guys list all 318ti fuel capacities as 13.7 gal.
  13. Interesting. I'm not aware of any year-year changes to "performance" items on the 318ti except the OBD1 M42 1.8L - OBD2 M44 1.9L engine switch between 95 and 96 model years.
  14. Well, I used Edmunds haha... I also have one that won't take 3 full gallon jugs from bone dry (including the filler neck) so it seems to jive. (all manual transmission) 1996 318ti - 13.7 gal 1996 318is - 16.4 gal 1996 328is - 16.4 gal Automobile-catalog.com lists the following (all manual transmission) 1996 318ti - 13.7 gal, weight: 2679 lbs 1996 318is - 17.2 gal, weight: 2976 lbs 1996 328is - 17.2 gal, weight: 2910 lbs
  15. The 318ti has a smaller fuel tank than the other E36 cars, and I know it is a unique geometry so it isn't swappable. To me, the question is whether or not the E36/5 318ti meets the intent of the rule for platform swaps or not with the rear suspension and other differences. If it does, why does it need its own line on the VPI chart now? If it is platform swappable or should use the highest platform VPI for a swap, it should have remained bundled on the E36 (M44B19) line of the VPI table with the "regular" E36 coupe and sedan 318i cars.
×
×
  • Create New...