E30 versus E36?

[kmchow]

I'm not sure if it applies to real (touring car) life, but at least in terms of model cars, it seems the E30 BMW is more sought after than the E36 BMW.

Do you guys think the E30 was more successful in touring cars than the E36? Or has E30's Group A history contributed more to it's respect than E36's largely ST/Grp N racing history? I've never had a chance to watch a Group A race so I don't know how exciting the racing was? But Group A eventually became Class 2 and finally ST? Doesn't the DTM owes it's existence to Group A as well?

[ghinzani]

E30 M3s are way better than E36 M3s but as I have an E36 325 I prefer then fanks!

[racer69]

Originally posted by kmchow
I'm not sure if it applies to real (touring car) life, but at least in terms of model cars, it seems the E30 BMW is more sought after than the E36 BMW.

Do you guys think the E30 was more successful in touring cars than the E36? Or has E30's Group A history contributed more to it's respect than E36's largely ST/Grp N racing history? I've never had a chance to watch a Group A race so I don't know how exciting the racing was? But Group A eventually became Class 2 and finally ST? Doesn't the DTM owes it's existence to Group A as well?

Not strictly true, Group A never became anything, and ST is Class 2, the FIA gave ST the name Class 2 Touring Cars. In the early days on ST in the BTCC (after 1990), some group A cars were allowed in (BMW M3 E30, Ford Sierra minus a turbo), but over time ST cars became purpose built cars based on a model, and of course there was the 2 litre NA limit, whereas Group A rules required cars looking like the road going cars, and pretty much being improved production racers, plus of course there were turbocharged Ford's, Nissans, Volvo, Maserati's and the V8 Holden Commodore's etc...After 1992 when Australia, Germany and Japan dropped the rules, no one else used them, as Britain had dropped them after 1990 and the ETCC finished in 1988.

DTM was run pretty much to Group A rules until 1993, just that they did away with a class format and used air restrictors and weight penalties to slow down the Sierra's and V8 Audi's, allowing the 2.5l Mercs and BMW's to be competitive. From 1993 the DTM changed to the 2.5 litre Class 1 rules, later adopted for the ITC, which went bust, with the DTM, at the end of 1996 due to wild costs.

To answer the original question, the reason an E30 M3 is more popular is probably because only 500 were built, as the first M3 was only built so it could compete in the 1987 World Touring Car Championship.

[kmchow]

Thanks for the detailed info racer69. OTOH, even though 500 (Group A??) E30s were built, I still think there are more E30s than (ST) E36s in existence then.

>but over time ST cars became purpose built cars based on a >model
>
What do you mean by this? Purpose built racecars? As opposed to Group A's non purpose built status? Sorry for all the questions. I've only heard of Group A, I sadly never got to watch a single race. Does anyone know any good websites dedicated to the history/results of Group A?

[racer69]

It's ok, happy to answer them.

Group A was a production based formula. The only way a car could race was if 5000 example's were built (although allowances were made for the Jaguar XJS and BMW 635csi), and things like engine capcities and so on were as the car was sold. eg... Holden had a 4.9litre V8 Commodore selling on the road, so they had to race a car of the same configuration. This meant there were classes, eg.. 0-1600cc, 1601-2500cc and over 2500cc.

Weight's were worked out on the capacity of the engine, while Turbo's had there engine capacity multiplied by 1.4 to work out their weight.

Also, if you wanted ti improve the car, eg..update shape, improve aero aids, bigger Turbo etc..you needed to build a further 500 cars in that configuration, this though led to the downfall of the category.

With ST, the homologation rules were a bit different. You had to build 25,000 cars of a particular shape, then from there everything was pretty free. Sequential gearboxes, aero aids and so on, only the base model had to be in common with the race car.

Hope you understand that, i'll try and give a bit more detail later and make it a bit more understandable, also i'll find a link to a website, i just can't remember the address at the moment, and i'll put some pics of the Group A cars up.

[kmchow]

So the Group A transmissions were production based, like the current ETCC's S2000 cars? But I agree that the 500 or even 5000 car rule is too low. For the record, because I have always associated Group A with the larger and more powerful cars (Sierras,M3s,240 Turbos), I have hard time swallowing cars like a Group A Honda Civic!!

[racer69]

here is a link to a website, history of the European Touring Car Championship - Group A Years

http://www.euronet.nl/users/in004021/Pages/part5.html

There is info. on the regulations, plus results of the years that the ETCC ran to Group A rules (plus every other year when it ran to different rules) plus rresults from the 1987 World Touring Car Championship.

You'll find plenty of car pics in there too.

[alfasud]

5000 cars for Group A made sense when it was mainly European marques with low volumes. Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Volvo and others might have difficulty producing 25,000 suitable cars of the same type. The 500 evolution models were the big problem..... but getting back to the subject, the E30 M3 was *the* M3, it was a homologation special built for the needs of racing, the winner of the 1987 World Touring Car championship and so many major touring car races around the world. The E36 BMW won races but mainly national level, rather than ETCC level events.

The E36 car had a very nice six cylinder engine, but BMW choose the four cylinder for the E30 M3 as the six would have made it too front heavy for racing. This is a car that raced as light as 960kg - the E30 M3 was *not* a big car!
http://www.euronet.nl/users/in004021...87%20Cars.html

The long crank of the straight six would never have allowed the RPM's of the four cylinder car. The E36 M3 was for selling to people who wanted to own (and be seen driving) a M3, but the E30 model was the racer. That's not to say the E36 M3 was a bad car.... if you are travelling long distances you probably don't want a rorty four cylinder engine and large capacity four's aren't known for their smoothness.

But as a collectors car or for track days or post historic race meetings.... for me there's only one choice. Pity I can't afford it.

kmchow.... you should not try to swallow Honda Civics, they are bad for the digestion :-) But smaller classes always had their place, particularly in European racing where most people do not own a large expensive car.

[kmchow]

Thanks to all those that have been bringing me up to date on Group A. Yeah, it doesn't seem like there have been many championship winning V6s in touring cars. The Mondeo is the only one I could think of at the moment.

It maybe legal, but I thought I recall the Mondeo was running the Mazda V6, even though it was badged as a Zetec?

But back to the Honda Civic Group A comments, I am under the impression that hathbacks are largely relegated to "cup/one make series" for touring cars. In rallying, WRC for example, hatchbacks are more common.

Over here in the US, it seems wagons/estates are the rage this year. Too bad there aren't any wagon or minivan touring car series for that matter!

[alfasud]

V6 Touring cars......

Well before the M3 (E30) came along, Alfa Romeo GTV6 was a consistant winner in Group A 2.5L class.

After the first few years of DTM (2.5L ITC class 1), the races were dominated by V6 cars, Merc V6 was based on 90degree V8 block with new crank and 2 cylinders chopped off, the Alfa 155 had a 24v V6 plus 4WD and Opel had a 75degree(?) V6 built by Cosworth based on F1 technology and probably no GM parts whatsoever!

Mondeo was allowed to use a Mazda based V6 because 2L touring car rules said you could use any engine with the same number of cylinders (there were V6 Mondeo's) as long as it was from the same company (i.e. Ford). Ford was selling rebodied Mazda 626 as Ford Telstar in Australia and New Zealand. I'm sure they used the same or similar engine in some Ford in the USA, so were allowed to call it a "Ford" engine!

The main advantage of V6 over same capacity 4 cylinder engine is higher RPM are possible but if you are limited to 7500rpm, who cares? Why not use the lighter 4? In Fords case, their 4 cylinder engines were such cr*p, they went for the Mazda based V6.

And for those with real long memories, there were the 24V V6 Cosworth Capri's in 1970's Group 2 ETCC.

[kmchow]

Actually, in the NA, there are no Mazda powered Fords, except for early 90s Ford Escorts.

I thought that by 2000, with extensive help from Cosworth, the V6 engine problems/issues were largely solved?

But I recall reading that Ford did semi-develop a 4 cylinder every BTCC season in order to "be on top of 4 cylinder racing engine technology". But nevertheless, they continued to stick with the V6. I guess it would have looked bad to switch to a 4 cylinder.

I recall they also abandoned 4WD for their Mondeos in the STW. Anyone recall what happened to those Fords?

[audia4]

Originally posted by kmchow

I recall they also abandoned 4WD for their Mondeos in the STW. Anyone recall what happened to those Fords?

they were wrecked

[alfasud]

Originally posted by kmchow
Actually, in the NA, there are no Mazda powered Fords, except for early 90s Ford Escorts.

Well unless someone hunted them all down and exterminated them , I expect there might still be a few Ford Probe's left in NA.....

http://www.performanceprobe.com/text/info/history.htm

[kmchow]

Oh yeeaah, I forgot about the probe. But sedan wise, the Escort was as close as we could get. And I believe the next generation mid size Ford will also have the base engine be a Mazda one while the larger one will be Ford based.

Have people seen the new '03 Mazda 6 mid-size sedan? I think that car will make an excellent S2000 (Super 2000 rules) touring car!!!

[alfasud]

Originally posted by kmchow
Have people seen the new '03 Mazda 6 mid-size sedan? I think that car will make an excellent S2000 (Super 2000 rules) touring car!!!

Sounds interesting, do you have any pictures (link?) of the new Mazda?

Getting back to the North American Escort with the Mazda engine, did this have the same chassis as the European Escort? I know that in New Zealand (and I think also Australia), Ford sold a car based on the Mazda 323 chassis, engine and running gear, but with Ford body panels and called the Ford "Laser".

There were performance versions (Similar to Escort XR3i) and even a Ford version of the Mazda 323 4WD Turbo (Mazda homologation special for group A rallies).

Was the NA Escort with the Mazda engine also based on a Mazda 323 chassis?

Sorry, I guess this is getting a bit off topic for a discussion of BMW M3 E30 and E36.

[kmchow]

Check out the new Mazda 6!!
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/previ...0/article.html

That's one good thing about globally build/sold cars, we all have the same car and discuss on the same level. Wouldn't it make a killer S2000 touring car??



Alfasud, email me privately at kmchow@sfu.ca for private discussion.