2005 rules-open up AIX?

[Monroe]

I'll gladly carry 100lbs of ballast. Want to limit the class further, limit the gas to 87 octane. Hell, that is what I run now.

 

Hell the top AI guys out here are within a couple of seconds of me right now.

 

JWL has been over my car. It is a Mustang with the engine setback to the stock location of a gen4 Camaro. Front end is a SLA not unlike the new Griggs piece. My rear end is a 3 linked 9".

 

My car is not a tube frame car, but it does use the cage to augment the strengths and eliminate the weaknesess of the stock tub.

 

I'd sure like the opportunity to run even on a probationary basis with NASATX.

 

Thanks for your discussion and consideration.

 

Monroe

[racercosmo]

How about putting those ex WC Saleens in with a higher minimum weight?

Guy also mentioned that you specify a front percentage.

[Monroe]

There are only 6 of them and I'm the only one that might run in NASA. No danger of a herd of these showing up.

 

Weight & Balance. My car carries the same bias as a stock V8 Camobird.

 

If I run off and hide, throw some weight at me. My engine is so mild that I won't be hiding from anyone.

 

 

Monroe

[tacovini]

Looks like our founding fathers were thinking of allowing AS, WC, GAC, IMSA and other cars into AI. From the introduction of the existing 2004 rules:

 

This class is designed to field a large high-profile group of American musclecars and will unify fields of cars that currently race in other sanctioning organizations.

 

Probably safe to say that the majority of AIX cars existing now never came from other sanctioning organizations. Opening up AIX will get us closer to the original series intent.

 

-=- Todd

Posted as a racer.

[PAI Racing]

I am 100% supportive of seeing the AIX rules loosened up. I would think that getting back to the 2002 rules would be a step in the right direction. As I understand it, AIX was meant to be a class for tub chassis cars with nearly unlimited modifications. The only limit, as I recall, was that you couldn't move the floor or the fire wall.

 

although I have made ovetures in the dircetion previously, I don't know that I am behind AIX becoming a "catch-all class". Seems to me that the tube chassis cars and others all have a place to play in Super Unlimited/Super Production.

 

Personally, I'd like to see open wheel width, open transmission, open motor, open track width, open weight, open ride hight, open body material, open suspension, open tires, open aero and open seating at a Grand Funk Railroad concert... I would keep the limit on moving the firewall and the floor pan, but maybe allow for a percentage of it to be moved to facilitate exhaust routing, transmission location or suspesion.

 

Honestly, I'd like to see a poll of how many people actually own AIX cars and how many people actually race them. I have been to one event this year (and broke...). It doesn't seem like this would impact more than 20 people nation wide. I know on the west coast, there are never more than 3 AIX cars at the track at one time.

 

Heck, if we could come up with an open, sensible and stable rules package for AIX, I'd consider converting my '67 to full vintage and building something new and crazy... I already have the big wheels!

 

Sean

[Adam Ginsberg]

I disagree with adding more classes - it dilutes the series.

 

I do, however, agree with opening up AIX to allow former-WC pony-style cars into the series.

[SDR_John]

I think the fewer rules in AIX the better!!!

 

Rules I think should stay:

 

No tube frames.

 

Factory shell and subframe (sorry Sean) but modifying suspension/shock mounts is OK. Basically no tube frame front halfed cars.

 

I am open to allowing firewall mods, this will allow some of the WC cars in, but as to how much modification I don't have the tech to make a guess.

 

I like having a limit on transmissions, I think this one should stay.

 

DOT rubber or Spec tire (hopefully with contingency)

 

Other than that, like the AIX intention statement says, The Sky's the Limit.

 

John

[PAI Racing]

Aren't Mustangs allowed to run aftermarket K-members (or whatever they call that little tubular thing under the motor)?

[SDR_John]

Yeah but they have to hang it on that flimsy sheetmetal uni-body thing.

 

I am in favor of keeping our (non uni-body) sub-frames intact but allowing modifications to suspension pickups and what not.

 

John

[PAI Racing]

I think they call that flimsy sheetmetal thing a "Mustang"...

[swhiteh3]

Hmm.... Interesting how all the AI racers want to open up AIX, but all the AIX racers want to see it limited.....

 

So people who are not even running in the class want to see the existing racers get their butts kicked, and the existing racers want to keep themselves from becoming dinosaurs overnight...

 

Interesting, eh Chris G?

[SDR_John]

Hmm.... Interesting how all the AI racers want to open up AIX, but all the AIX racers want to see it limited.....

 

Not true at all. I run AIX and I also support a more sky's the limit attitude, with a few provisions (see above). Although I might be cutting off my nose to spite my face, I beleive in the idea of AI EXTREME above all. Win or lose.

 

John

[PAI Racing]

Funny, the stickers on my car say "AIX" on them too, and I support open rules.

 

Actually the restrictions that have been put in place over the past couple of years have been the cause of my somewhat diminished interst. I am dissatisfied with my car because it is a compromise now... I might has well make the changes and run AIV with it.

[racercosmo]

Sean, he's talking about people that actually race.

[mwilson7]

Where does that leave you Cosmo?

[ASC9099]

Being an owner of a former WC championship car, and reading the post here, I'd like to add my two pesos worth. My former WC Mustang, (Lou Giliotti's 1996 winning Saleen), has no place in any current racing venue, with the exception of ITE, (regional only), in SCCA, (oh thrill...), or SU in NASA. This car was one of six "commissioned" by Tony Johnson to be built so Saleen would have a chance at the championship. It is currently bodied with a 2002 Saleen body and runs a MOTEC M48 management system. Mike Judy of Fresno has a sister car to this one, only he never converted to the EFI that WC required in 2002, and I don't know where the other four cars are now. Paul Brown has a couple of ex-WC Mustangs and there are quite a few others out there, either mustangs or camaros/firebirds.

 

One thing I noticed in the postings is that someone suggested adding #100 of ballast to the cars to compensate for the set back engine. Old WC cars as well as Saleen SR's such as John Young's and the other two actually have the engine placed with the forward most spark no more than two inches behind the centerline of the upper ball joint. The motors are not set back 12 inches. My car actually has the forward most plug in line with the upper ball joint, which was mandated in 1995/96 by WC.

 

What cars like mine do have is a manufactured front clip. The other most important thing all of these old WC cars have in common is that they all weigh well over 3100 lbs. My car, with fuel and driver, is 3360 lbs., with 3100 being the 2002 minimum weight for the class, per the SCCAPRO VTS. (post race) This should put these cars at a distinct disadvantage weight-wise. Paul Brown's old HP Motorsports' "Psuedo-leen" SR, and his other old WC Mustangs have different front suspension components from the stock cars, but have a base weight of 3200 lbs. Almost all of the old WC Mustangs have firewall mods, mainly to accomodate the crossover headers that were the rage during that period.

 

These cars would be great additions to NASA's AI-X class. There are probably 15 to 20 of these cars around that ran WC from 1995 to 2002 and they are not camparable, or even allowed in the current WC GT class. If you feel that the additional car count would benefit your series, as well as, having some ex-Pro cars in the field, then I'd advise you to strongly consider making room for the old WC GT cars in AI-X. I think you'd find that they would be quite close to the times you run most places. A good example would be Paul Brown running his fiance's, (Carol Holfelder), current WC GT Mustang at Buttonwillow in the spring. His best times of 2:03: on the track that Ross and Guy Drier turned 2:01 should give you a good indication that the cars would not dominate the fields. That Mustang is relatively competitive in WC this year, is lighter, and more powerful than any of the older un-modified cars.

[PAI Racing]

Cosmo,

 

I'll assume that comment was a joke since you Griggs guys raced about as much as I did last year.

 

As I said, all of the restrictions on AIX sort of took the wind out of my sails. (Still for sale... 2x 18"x11.5" and 2x 18"x12.5" CCW's brand new never used!)

 

I think it would be fruitful if guys with current AIX cars, whether racing, underconstruction or in storage should sit down over a couple of beers and try to work through the rules. An casual enviroment which excludes recreational input might be more productive in determining what people want. I think that Slightly Dangerous John Very Dangerous John Lindsey and I will be at SEMA and I'd expect some of the other 15 AIX car owners would be there as well. Might be a good opportunity to discuss.

 

Sean

 

PS - I dig the "spark plug/ball joint" set back rule mentioned by ASC9099 (if that is your real name) and allowing tub modifications for exhaust and transmission mounting. Also kind of like the stock dash rule.

[ASC9099]

Sean,

 

ASC9099 is not my real name. I'd feel like an idiot if my parents named me that. That is two of the numbers that my cars run under in ASC. My actual REAL name is Steve R. Carvajal, and I 'm one of the directors for the ASC series this year.

 

I've had my WC Mustang since 2000, and competed in six WC events in 2001. (Serious learning curve there...)

 

WC has always maintained that they'd like the "production" cars to reflect the streetable versions of the cars. That is one of the reasons why teams like Audi, Cadillac, Porsche, BMW, and Chevrolet got involved with the series. My car still has the original, (if highly modified) dash cover, and in 2002 I had to re-do the exhaust to exit under the car, as opposed to out the right door previously, to comply with the stock production look SCCAPRO wanted. (right after I got all that done, SCCAPRO, (READ: MITCH WRIGHT), denied the chassis entry in the series any further.

 

The six Saleens, AER's, HP Motorsports, and other Mustangs are all VERY similiar to the AI-X cars you are currently using, with the exception that most othe WC cars will not have nearly the motor you guys have. John Young's SR, which he has done a huge amount of development work on, does not make 550 HP. My guess is that Daffron's and Drier's cars make in excess of that. One of the other major difference I remembered, but don't know how AI-X rules are, is in the shocks. Most of the WC cars will have remote cannister JRZ type high $$$ shock package to make them more stable. If AI-X doesn't allow those type packages, that is an easy fix.

[PAI Racing]

Steve, I was joking about that being your real name. Generally even when I am being serious, I am at least partly joking, and vice versa. (Probably useful information for people who've never met me personally but have talked to me on this board).

 

Shocks are currently unlimited in AIX.

 

My car makes around that 550hp number (flywheel), but I don't have the suspension, rubber or brakes to back it up. Everything but the motor and trans is vintage legal on my car.

 

It seems to me that if 5 additional AIX cars showed up due to a loosening of the firewall rule, the class would nearly tripple in size (west coast). So, you'd be putting 3 cars at a potential disadvantage to gain 5 - 10 cars. And, if those 5 -10 cars don't show up, it is still going to be one of the original 3 that wins...

[mwilson7]

What about allowing these ex-WC cars in for 2005 on a provisional basis to see how they compare? I think we all would welcome the additional car count.

[racercosmo]

Sean, of course I am joking. As Mark mentioned, I've been in this discussion and I haven't steered a car in anger in over 2 years, and never in AI.

[swhiteh3]

Sure, we could benefit from the additional car count. No one is arguing that.

 

But these cars will still instantly make nearly every other AIX car uncompetitive. Changing the rules so that existing cars are suddenly uncompetitive is not the way to keep people in the series....

 

You said John Young's car made 550hp - which you mention is not nearly what we make?? Well, I've finished 2nd in just about every AIX event I've entered (aside of a few DNFs) and I make just barely 420rwhp. Chris Griswold and maybe Gene Borton are the only ones who make that kind of power.

 

Engine setback and a fabricated front clip are both MAJOR advantages. I'd love to see them out there, but the fact that they break several major rules means that the only fair way to do it is to give them something to even the field. The fact is, at most tracks, World Challenge cars are somewhere around 5 seconds per lap faster than the fastest AIX cars.

[Mean 69]

I guess I am a bit uncertain what the intent of the AIX series is really all about? Is it for manufacturer exposure? Fan interest? Low buck racers? Innovators? Fun (I am not so sure based upon this thread, looks like competitve issues)?

 

Though it is not a big time influence, yet, innovation (particularly for the early cars), CAN be influenced by the rules of the AI/X/V series. If you want more cars, and are trying to get the early ones to fill the field, lots of stuff needs to be very clear. And unwaivering, to a point.

 

Suspension: Both my 69 Camaro, and my 65 Mustang have rear leaf suspension, and I have modified them, to accept a link/coil-over setup. Is this allowed? In AI? Will it be abanoded in the rules if it works "too well," in the future? Case in point, quad-bind late Mustangs can use a T/A setup, ala MM, Griggs.

 

How about the front? Looking at my cars, it is clear that some reconstruction is necessary, kind of like the GR-350, and TCP setups use. If I go beyond those bounds, well, is that allowed? For how long?

 

What about track? Wheelbase? Weight? Weight distribution? Tire size/compound? Engine block material? Brakes?! Trans?

 

I know this is not an easy set of questions, especially given the depth of the field in AIX, but hell, am I to design something to work well against the current rules, only to be shunned next season? Umm, not interested.

 

Mark

[kurtborton]

Engine setback and a fabricated front clip are both MAJOR advantages. I'd love to see them out there, but the fact that they break several major rules means that the only fair way to do it is to give them something to even the field. The fact is, at most tracks, World Challenge cars are somewhere around 5 seconds per lap faster than the fastest AIX cars.

 

I don't really think engine setback is going to be as big of a concern as you're making it out to be. The engine in the #50 car sits in the stock location, yet we're at 50.4% front end weight...there's more than one way to skin a cat, and the rules allow it.

 

I also think professional drivers are what makes the difference in lap times from WC to AIX. When the #50 car ran at Hallet it had no problem running in front of the AER car (driven by the truck driver) a few seconds per lap....about the only time it's run decent all year.

 

I personally think AIX cars should be allowed to modify the firewall for exhaust clearance and engine setback. I vote for anything short of tube frame, and I also think it should be legal to mount suspension members to the roll cage.

[mwilson7]

Kurt,

 

Where in the rules does it say you can't?