Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

..... I have since heard it now has an RB30 with bigger single, but based on the results of lots of GTRs of late could have reverted to twins as last time i heard it out at PI it didnt sound like it was running a single.

Last time at PI (Oct 07) Sam told me it's standard capacity not 3ltr and with the bonnet up it had a single hanging off it.

Its basically a std GTR with bolt ons. Nothing special or too different from factory :) What is scary that the Racepace R33 has been bumper to bumper with the thing the one time i saw them on the track together. Big thing is R32 is a neat track only car. The RPM R33 is a damn road car with full interior, air con the works. Both are just very impressive cars

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Its basically a std GTR with bolt ons. Nothing special or too different from factory :D What is scary that the Racepace R33 has been bumper to bumper with the thing the one time i saw them on the track together. Big thing is R32 is a neat track only car. The RPM R33 is a damn road car with full interior, air con the works. Both are just very impressive cars

The car is far from a "std GTR with bolt ons". I guess its not possible to see all of the mods and development underneath the car. Keep a lookout for the times when it next hits the track.....they should be quite an improvement on the past times. :D

I know this is a GTR thread, but just to give the the quick Victorian GTR's some inspiration, Sam has run a 1min 29sec in a naturally aspirated M3 (about 240-250rwkw) at Winton. (This is one of his customers cars) :D

Edited by G_T_R
I know this is a GTR thread, but just to give the the quick Victorian GTR's some inspiration, Sam has run a 1min 29sec in a naturally aspirated M3 (about 240-250rwkw) at Winton. (This is one of his customers cars) :D

WOW, that's flying!!!!!

Are these BMW's road registered cars or race cars with stripped interiors/cage/slicks etc....

The car is far from a "std GTR with bolt ons". I guess its not possible to see all of the mods and development underneath the car. Keep a lookout for the times when it next hits the track.....they should be quite an improvement on the past times. :blink:

I know this is a GTR thread, but just to give the the quick Victorian GTR's some inspiration, Sam has run a 1min 29sec in a naturally aspirated M3 (about 240-250rwkw) at Winton. (This is one of his customers cars) :(

LOL...i know. I was being silly, most of the quick Vic GTR guys joke that their cars are pretty std. So was joking that Sams car is std.

I would love to know more about the M3. Doesnt Sam's GTR only do 1:31s? It was a while since i saw it run at Winton, so may have gone quicker since, but to get a 29 out of an NA M3? Thats the sort of pace you egt from most of the 996 Cup Cars in the state series, with the quickest doing 1:26s, but most of are in the 28s and 29s. So thats mega impressive from an M3

I remember speaking to Sam at PI last year and he was saying the problem with the GT-R's is mid-corner speed (due to weight) which is why the BMW is so much faster around Winton. He said the mid-corner capabilites of that car destoyed the GT-R.

I remember speaking to Sam at PI last year and he was saying the problem with the GT-R's is mid-corner speed (due to weight) which is why the BMW is so much faster around Winton. He said the mid-corner capabilites of that car destoyed the GT-R.

That explanation does not make sense to me, unless the Beemer is ultra light and the GT-R stock weight.

I remember speaking to Sam at PI last year and he was saying the problem with the GT-R's is mid-corner speed (due to weight) which is why the BMW is so much faster around Winton. He said the mid-corner capabilites of that car destoyed the GT-R.

Well considering the GTR is pretty stripped and probably weighs in the early 1300kgs, say maybe 1330kg and runs decent sized 17" rims and tyres. The M3 would want to have been on a dramatic diet, is it an E30 or E36? Because E36s are no lightweights to start with, a friend has stripped his and done some decent mods to his and he is still heavy, simply because BMW built the car the way they are. The Aus Spec E36 M3R was still 1290kgs. of course you can still get a fair bit out of that...

So anything is possible, but i would love to know more about the car. I did read in a BMW event review that Sams E36 did a 1:34 either last year or late 2006, as that is the pin up lap time for me and a rwd car at Winton. But G_T_R is saying it was a customers car so would be interested to know the differences between Sam E36 and this customers car as 5 seconds is a huge difference.

The BMW E30 Group A and E36 Super Tourers were ~940 kgs, that's with all steel panels and the cast iron bottom end 4 cylinder engines (2.3, 2.5 and 2.0 litre). The all alloy engines were lighter and the cars carried ballast as a result. The weight distribution was a perfect 50/50 and CoG was VERY low. It's not always the absolute weight that matters, it's where that weight is concentrated.

Cheers

Gary

Just to clarify......it is an E36 M3, na 240rwkw, customers car but driven by Sam and it is probably the same car that Roy mentioned doing a 1:34 in 2006. The car has seen quite a bit of development (ie the 5 sec inprovement at Winton)by SM Motorsport and there is still a bit more to come.....as with his own GTR. :)

Just to clarify......it is an E36 M3, na 240rwkw, customers car but driven by Sam and it is probably the same car that Roy mentioned doing a 1:34 in 2006. The car has seen quite a bit of development (ie the 5 sec inprovement at Winton)by SM Motorsport and there is still a bit more to come.....as with his own GTR. :)

That's an awesome effort, just as quick as his GTR...

Pretty sure he's done a 1:29 in the GTR???

To go from a 1:39 to 1:34 is a good effort. To go from 1:34 to 1:29 is a huge achievement. Hats off to Sam, he obviously knows how to screw a hell of a lot from a saloon. Its basically race car stuff.

I would lvoe to have the knowledge and money to throw the book at an R32 GTSt. I personally think its a greta platform for a 1050kg animal :D

Hmmm, there is nothing magic about a M3, twoWD will lose every time to fourWD, everything else being roughly equal. I'm calling, ummmm, 'misinformation', maybe for commercial reasons, not unusual :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Please ignore I found the right way of installing it thanks
    • There are advantages, and disadvantages to remapping the factory.   The factory runs billions of different maps, to account for sooooo many variables, especially when you bring in things like constantly variable cams etc. By remapping all those maps appropriately, you can get the car to drive so damn nicely, and very much so like it does from the factory. This means it can utilise a LOT of weird things in the maps, to alter how it drives in situations like cruise on a freeway, and how that will get your fuel economy right down.   I haven't seen an aftermarket ECU that truly has THAT MANY adjustable parameters. EG, the VAG ECUs are somewhere around 2,000 different tables for it to work out what to do at any one point in time. So for a vehicle being daily driven etc, I see this as a great advantage, but it does mean spending a bit more time, and with a tuner who really knows that ECU.   On the flip side, an aftermarket ECU, in something like a weekender, or a proper race car, torque based tuning IMO doesn't make that much sense. In those scenarios you're not out there hunting down stuff like "the best way to minimise fuel usage at minor power so that we can go from 8L/100km to 7.3L/100km. You're more worried about it being ready to make as much freaking power as possible when you step back on the loud pedal as you come out of turn 2, not waiting the extra 100ms for all the cams to adjust etc. So in this scenario, realistically you tune the motor to make power, based on the load. People will then play with things like throttle response, and drive by wire mapping to get it more "driveable".   Funnily enough, I was watching something Finnegans Garage, and he has a huge blown Hemi in a 9 second 1955 Chev that is road registered. To make it more driveable on the road recently, they started testing blocking up the intake with kids footballs, to effectively reduce air flow when they're on the road, and make the throttle less touchy and more driveable. Plus some other weird shit the yankee aftermarket ECUs do. Made me think of Kinks R34...
    • I do this, I also don't get the joke  
    • Return flow cooler will be killing you I reckon. You can certainly push more through a low mount setup but they're good numbers for a stock looking engine bay.  Mine made 345rwkw (hub) at 22psi on 98 with a "highflow" on a stock manifold but it's a long way from a normal high flow or standard engine. I used one of those Turbosmart IWG-75's and it was great with the Motec running closed loop boost with pressure being applied to both sides of the diaphragm. 
    • Hey man do you have pic of adaptor plate by any chance I need to match up the bolt holes as my gearbox adaptor plate ones are way off the only bolts of starter motor are matching thanks 
×
×
  • Create New...