group 3j

how do you read the engine specs seems pretty loose to me!

mactaylor wrote:how do you read the engine specs seems pretty loose to me!

3J is the old class, it is now Improved Production.

Cheers Col

yeah got the new regsl 3j- improved production.

I thought the idea of imp pro was to have alot of freedom in what you could do; with the exception that the same features of the car must remain; i.e. 4 cy boxer, steel body, torsion bars etc...

Sander your pretty much right how ever there are a fair amount of freedoms. As long as the engine is the same numbers cyclinders, configuration and make (i.e Toyota to Toyota, Nissan to Nissan etc) and it came out in some production car some where in the world then the engine is allowed. i.e An old Datto with an SR or Corona with 4AGE or a Gemini with a twin cam which came out in the Holden Apollo (Toyota Camry). Heads, exhaust and induction/ignition and capacity are free as to are brakes. If you want to know anything the guys on here who race VWs in the Imp Pro class would be more then willing to help. Send me a PM if you have any Q's.

Yeah - plenty enough freedom really.

Bout only real restriction that potentially a pain is the "block/case must be from original manufacturer".

Sides wrote:Yeah - plenty enough freedom really.

Bout only real restriction that potentially a pain is the "block/case must be from original manufacturer".

Yep

And how many run magnesium cases like they should??? (secret poll ... no names)

you could run a type 4 case as they came out in the 411 s which is a vw production car 👍😉

colin wrote:

mactaylor wrote:how do you read the engine specs seems pretty loose to me!

3J is the old class, it is now Improved Production.

Cheers Col

Colin, its still known as the 3J class but they have added the "improved production"

http://www.camsmanual.com.au/pdf/02_race/d.%203rd%20Category/RA29_Group_3J_2013-2.pdf

bat69 wrote:As long as the engine is the same numbers cyclinders, configuration and make (i.e Toyota to Toyota, Nissan to Nissan etc) and it came out in some production car some where in the world then the engine is allowed. i.e An old Datto with an SR or Corona with 4AGE or a Gemini with a twin cam which came out in the Holden Apollo (Toyota Camry).

Nathan, what engine case do you and the yellow beetle run ?

Look out

😂🤪🙅🤓😎😠😬😘

Craig, my PM's aren't sending, why don't you post your question here.

Anyway, my response is, I agree entirely, rules are rules. I'd love to hear what cases other cars are running.

If you can run a type 4 case in a bug in 3J then surely its ok to have an aluminium case for a type 1. Although it says it must come from the same manufacturer if the factory isn't making them anymore a replacement item must be ok.

Just peeked at the Formula Vee rules and even they can run the aluminium cases!

If it was my car in 3J I would be going the type 4 engine route; way more power and torque!

If I was running 3J, I would go mag type 1 all the way. Ali cases are definately not made by VW, just like Scat, Pauter, TF1 etc etc aren't.
To me if it's 2 litre, a Type 4 would be a step backwards, heavier, all torque and no power, smaller rev range, but for over 2 litre they make more sense as you can go crazy in displacement, although I'd probably still stick with type 1 for the higher rpm, cheaper more available components and bottom line, more power-weight (yes awesome power 'can' be made from type 4, but heads are VERY exxy)

matberry wrote:Look out

😂🤪🙅🤓😎😠😬😘

Heh heh... oops... did I cause all that ???

😊 😂 😊

My engine's built on an original VW mag case, which DB said checked out surprisingly well.

Not so much for the rules sake but more that ali cases are around 8kg heavier... and all at the worst end of the car to have extra weight.

Rules wise, well hey - rules keep evolving all the time, and from what I've seen in other classes it's all fine until you start winning and someone's prepared to poniy up the $$$ to protest.

😎

sander288 wrote:If you can run a type 4 case in a bug in 3J then surely its ok to have an aluminium case for a type 1. Although it says it must come from the same manufacturer if the factory isn't making them anymore a replacement item must be ok.

Just peeked at the Formula Vee rules and even they can run the aluminium cases!

FVee are OK because they specifically allow it, while for Imp Prod there's this catch line in there at the start...

"The entire vehicle must remain unmodified except for specific freedoms allowed in these regulations and
modifications necessary to comply with “General Requirements for Cars and Drivers”."

I agree that you should be able to run 'em tho if want to !!!

My engine is built on a mag case for IP and PRC. Though the alum case would be stronger, it not within the rules, but seems to be a common area to bend them.

Yeah Dave, look what you started..... 😂😂

I agree, for me the weight is the biggest criteria being over the rear axle line. I forgot to mention that new mag cases are still available so there aren't any excuses to be running aftermarket.

How come the number of thread views keeps going up but the racers aren't commenting??????
[edit] ali case racers aren't commenting. 😂

PAZZAN wrote:you could run a type 4 case as they came out in the 411 s which is a vw production car 👍😉

you could, but was the 411 commercially available to the public as a 'new' car in Australia with over 200 sold and registered in Aus ?

heads are meant to be original as well I think..I ran a mag case.... heads??? 😂

"4.1 General:
Subject to the limitations contained in 4.2 and 4.3(iii) below,the engine and components directly associated with its function are free. The crankshaft centreline as viewed from above must be parallel to that of the original engine."

Heads are 'free', so can be aftermarket and not restricted to original manufacturer.👍

Heads look free

"Subject to the limitations contained in 4.2 and 4.3(iii) below, the engine and components directly associated with its function are free."

and heads not mentioned below, they are free. In theory we could go to a custom made, twin cam, 8v head each side.

I wonder how this will play out with targeted scrutiny coming in? They'd have to prove it was aluminium and not mag... which wouldn't be easy for them

Shaun, proof is on the casting, VW or AutoLinea.....no brainer

good thread hey! sorry boys.

so v dub case 2ltr capacity who has a new idea of power production?

matberry wrote:Yeah Dave, look what you started..... 😂😂

I agree, for me the weight is the biggest criteria being over the rear axle line. I forgot to mention that new mag cases are still available so there aren't any excuses to be running aftermarket.

How come the number of thread views keeps going up but the racers aren't commenting??????
[edit] ali case racers aren't commenting. 😂

I run a VW AS21 mag case,
what other people use, well i couldn,t care less.
Ally case or VW, no big deal.👍

Cheers Col

yep I agree who cares what case your running ,ally is heaver but stronger I went through about 4 mag cases in about 12 years of competing...

matberry wrote:To me if it's 2 litre, a Type 4 would be a step backwards, heavier, all torque and no power, smaller rev range, but for over 2 litre they make more sense as you can go crazy in displacement, although I'd probably still stick with type 1 for the higher rpm, cheaper more available components and bottom line, more power-weight (yes awesome power 'can' be made from type 4, but heads are VERY exxy)

So would an oxy boxer be allowed?

1303Steve wrote:So would an oxy boxer be allowed?

I reckon this would be allowed.

No, because that motor was never fitted to a vehicle that was eligible for the class (refer to 4.2 (iv) (a) )........and it certainly has more than a few minor external castings (refer to 4.2 (iv) (b) )

That's how I read the rules...........happy for someone to give me their interpretation.

Good read. Cheers blokes. If you guys are choosing mag over ali, would you mind if you we're racing against a heavier case behind the rear axle???

Why wouldn't a wasser boxer be eligible for the class? It was sold to the general public in the numbers required and fits within the definition of a production car.

It wouldn't be that different externally with the exception of the water jacket instead of barrels; if you machine that off it looks heaps like a type 1 case

sander288 wrote:Why wouldn't a wasser boxer be eligible for the class? It was sold to the general public in the numbers required and fits within the definition of a production car.

It wouldn't be that different externally with the exception of the water jacket instead of barrels; if you machine that off it looks heaps like a type 1 case

which Australian sold vw 'touring car' was it fitted to ?

Craig Torrens wrote:

sander288 wrote:Why wouldn't a wasser boxer be eligible for the class? It was sold to the general public in the numbers required and fits within the definition of a production car.

It wouldn't be that different externally with the exception of the water jacket instead of barrels; if you machine that off it looks heaps like a type 1 case

which Australian sold vw 'touring car' was it fitted to ?

Steve Carters Bug! 😂😂😂

But seriously "touring Car" is an undefined term in the CAMS Manual of Motorsport; however, Production car is defined and a T3 (T25) fits into this definition which had the wasserboxer

"An automobile of which the production of a certain number of identical
examples within a specified period of time has been verified and which are
destined for normal sale to the public. In competition, such an automobile shall
retain the basic bodyshell, suspension and driveline components."

Go for it 👍

Craig Torrens wrote:Go for it 👍

I wonder what would have if I rocked up with a Van 🤓