2005 rules-open up AIX?

[Grizlbits]

What did John Young run this year at Road America?

 

John Young did not race at RA this year, but he had a 1:29.? at Mid-O, about 5 seconds faster than my car.

 

Looking back at what JWL & I talked about at Mid-Ohio this year, AIX was made for exactly this reason. AIX was so that Mustangs did not have to run against 700 h.p., turbo, 2400# Porsches in SCCA running ITE. If we have to run against the newer WC cars it will end up being the same thing - except it will be 2004 WC Corvettes (again- especially if I can find one cheap in a couple years).

[racercosmo]

Chris, did you guys run M.O. with the Keyhole Chicane? Heinricy did a 1:33 at the Runoffs without the chicane. I'm not familiar with Mid Ohio, so I don't know how well times translate there. WCGT cars were in the low 1:40s at Sears Point this year and the fastest I've seen a T1 Vette go was 1:49 with Memo Gidley at the wheel. Well above the time a good AIX car could do. Still, any AIX car I've seen would be a few seconds behind a pro level GT car.

[Grizlbits]

Chris, did you guys run M.O. with the Keyhole Chicane? Heinricy did a 1:33 at the Runoffs without the chicane.

 

Yes the Runoffs, WC, & NASA all ran without the chicane at Mid-O.

 

Again, I welcome more cars in AIX. I keep hoping for even competition, and I don't think it will ever happen with unlimited H.P. for AIX. 5:1 hp for Mustangs, 6:1 hp Corvettes, maybe. Racing against Corvettes would require some hp/torque/tire rules that would be hard to administer and even harder keep the cars even remotely close.

 

I guess I don't even know what to suggest because few people are for the hp/torque in AIX. I guess I'll just sell my motor, and spend 15K for an 800 hp aluminum block 640 c.i.Donavan motor. - Really it wouldn't be that hard to do....

[Adam Ginsberg]

Again, I welcome more cars in AIX. I keep hoping for even competition, and I don't think it will ever happen with unlimited H.P. for AIX. 5:1 hp for Mustangs, 6:1 hp Corvettes, maybe. Racing against Corvettes would require some hp/torque/tire rules that would be hard to administer and even harder keep the cars even remotely close.

 

Chris - as previously noted, Corvettes aren't allowed in American Iron.

[ChuckMM]

I’d like to throw out an idea for consideration. My idea is to maintain the integrity of the floorpan in AI, even more so than is allowed in the 2004 rules. But allow more floorpan modifications in AIX. Along with those modifications would come a HP and torque to weight rule. This might dovetail in with the suggestion from others of having two AIX-type classes. In effect, the current rules stand (with clarifications) for AIX, but the second AIX class (I’ll call it AIX2 for now) would be allowed more radical chassis and suspension modifications than are now allowed in AI/AIX. But AIX2 would be HP and Torque limited, perhaps to 7 pounds per HP, and 6.5 pounds per foot-lb. of torque. Some more power than AI has, but less than some current AIX cars. In AIX2 a lot more creativity would be allowed in chassis and suspension modifications. AIX2 would not become the horsepower wars that AIX seems to be now.

 

Here are some possible changes to allow in AIX2

· Frames rails must be retained, but may be notched or reshaped for suspension clearance in localized areas.

· Wheelbase may be altered, either lengthened or shortened from the OEM dimension by up to 5 inches.

· Wheel widths of up 1/2” greater than the current AIX size are allowed.

· Suspension links may pass through the unibody for mounting purposes.

· Front fenders may be of a non-OEM material.

· Rear deck lids and hatches may be non-OEM material.

· Any method of flaring fenders is allowed.

· Track width allowed up to 1 inch greater than AIX rules allow.

· Engine setback is allowed, up to a specified amount. I do not know what to specify here, so suggest away.

· The firewall can be reshaped to allow engine setback and exhaust clearance only.

· Unlike AI, 1999-2004 Mustangs can use modified OEM, or purpose-built, IRS carriers, but the control arms must remain within 20% of the length of OEM control arms. IRS carriers must attach to the unibody at the OEM locations.

 

This would let the chassis and suspension people extend their creativity, but they would not have to invest huge dollars in engines to be competitive. Those that are into big horsepower can still indulge, but they will be limited on chassis and suspensions.

 

One intent of this is to provide a place for the ex-World Challenge cars, so those with more knowledge of those cars than myself should make suggestions about how to include them. Their chassis would be allowed in, but with limited HP.

 

Actually, my intent is to have cars built to two sets of rules, AIX and AIX2, but there would still be one AIX class. Hopefully the more radical chassis modifications allowed under the AIX2 rules would create cars that would be competitive with the bigger horsepower of the AIX cars. I am not advocating creating another, separate class.

 

Just an idea.

[Guest]

· Unlike AI, 1999-2004 Mustangs can use modified OEM, or purpose-built, IRS carriers, but the control arms must remain within 20% of the length of OEM control arms. IRS carriers must attach to the unibody at the OEM locations.

 

Chuck it appears as though you are proposing that a modified IRS unit not be allowed to run in AI at all? Is this the case?

[RichardC]

I don't see any real purpose to splitting AIX up, there isn't many entries now, if it is split it just dilutes the attendance.

 

Richard.

[Jim P.]

I don't see any real purpose to splitting AIX up, there isn't many entries now, if it is split it just dilutes the attendance.

 

This is a misnomer - "splitting up" the classes will not reduce attendance - it will in fact improve attendance as more cars will be competitive against cars that are based on the same formula.

 

If you have 5 AIX cars out there now and add a class for the WC/etc. cars and they bring 5 AIX2/AIU cars you now have 10 cars out there all in the "American Iron" family and everyone, racers, spectators, etc. will be comparing laptimes no matter how you split it into 'sub-classes'.

 

It follows along the same theory as a famous movie... "If you build it, they will come..."

 

PS. The same holds true for vintage.

 

Posted as a racer who wants to race in huge fields with a variety of cars

[mwilson7]

The only problem with multiple classes running at the same time is that it confuses both spectators that show up because they see two cars that look the same that are in completely different classes. That is exactly why Grand Am combined GSI and GSII and STI and STII.

 

Part of the fun is actually having a large field of cars to race against as well. I don't think anyone wants there to be 5 classes with only 3 cars in each class. We already have three classes and that is enough. Adding more is just muddying up the water.

[Jim P.]

The only problem with multiple classes running at the same time is that it confuses both spectators that show up because they see two cars that look the same that are in completely different classes.

That is exactly why Grand Am combined GSI and GSII and STI and STII.

 

So... using your logic we should combine AI & AIX?

 

I still like the quote I heard on here where someone said:

 

"the difference between NASCAR and Road Racing is in NASCAR all the fans know the drivers and in Road Racing all the drivers know the fans!"

 

Part of the fun is actually having a large field of cars to race against as well. I don't think anyone wants there to be 5 classes with only 3 cars in each class.

 

That way everyone gets a trophy!

 

Seriously, you missed my point, if you add classes that would suit cars that would otherwise not be in American Iron then you are openning the series up to bigger fields - and bigger fields mean more fans

[Grizlbits]

"the difference between NASCAR and Road Racing is in NASCAR all the fans know the drivers and in Road Racing all the drivers know the fans!"

 

That was me, but I heard it from Bob Denton, who races in Midwestern Council & some AI here in the midwest.

 

Seriously, you missed my point, if you add classes that would suit cars that would otherwise not be in American Iron then you are openning the series up to bigger fields - and bigger fields mean more fans

 

I think instead of adding a class, give them 8.5 hp / weight, or lower minimum weight, or larger tires, or ? I agree I would love to see them run with us also, I just am entirely against adding classes. I feel it is the wrong direction, make them fit competitivly in an existing class, whichever class it may be.

[ChuckMM]

Whups, I had a small typo. I meant 1979-2004 Mustangs, not just 1999, as the current rules allow updating earlier Mustangs to the 1999 IRS.

 

The current rules state: “1999-current Mustang Cobra with factory IRS is allowed and updating of 1979-current live axle Fox Body or SN95 cars to factory IRS is allowed. “Factory IRS” is defined as the OEM installed carrier assembly and center differential.”

 

I do not see anything in this rule that allows modifying the OEM IRS carrier. I am in favor of at least maintaining the current rules restrictions on allowed modifications in AI. Let’s keep the AI rules as stable as possible for a while. I think that AIX is the better class for allowing more extensive modifications, and that is what I was talking about in this thread.

 

There is a significant speed differential between AI and AIX cars. My proposed AIX2 class is not intended to create another class at yet another speed range. I would like the AIX2 cars to be in the same speed range as the AIX cars are.

[Mean 69]

Chuck, you mentioned that you felt that you'd like to see less floorpan modifications in AI, even though there is a thread on that subject, I wanted to respond here by pointing out that doing so would make it VERY difficult for the early leaf sprung cars to be modified. The only option I can see is a Torque arm, like you guys use on the late models. I plan on offering my three link commercially in the near future, and it requires cutting the driveshaft tunnel, obviously, so this would immediately make my idea outlawed in AI. Probably won't have too much influence on my decision, but it could, as well as have potential impact to others trying to enter the fray.

 

No one answered my previous post, but my question remains: what is the purpose of AI/AIX? I really doubt that the series will ever draw a crowd other than the grassroot type folks, there isn't money to be paid out, to me it is all about guys competing in a hobby arena. If much more interest happens in AIX, then it would make sense to consider something like Chuck's suggestion, in fact I think it is a good one. At this point though, it seems to me that there are two different approaches. AI trys to baseline the cars as evenly as possible so this series is really about driver talent, at least predominantly. AIX, to me, seems the other way around. The competition in this series is more about who can make a better car. Clearly, this is not the exact case in either series, but it feels to me that if you want to show your skills as a driver, go to AI, as a car builder, you'd go to AIX. If this logic holds, then the rules should be pretty liberal in AIX.

 

One of the concerns I have heard is one of cost, but I don't think you need to spend a bundle to make a really awesome AIX car, especially if you do alot of the fab yourself taking cues from other proven designs. Sean on this board bought a killer 18 degree headed motor, all in, for less than I am spending on my hot street/track motor, because he bought it used. And building an 800 HP rocket with "decent" suspension doesn't immediately mean that it will be completely dominant, especially if the hero behind the wheel can't drive that type of car.

 

I'm rambling a bit, but in the end it seems to me that if you are a driver, go to AI, if you want to build a better mousetrap, go to AIX and let the rules allow you to show creativity. Certainly this should be the case until the field gets stacked.

 

Mark

[PAI Racing]

Maybe I am a little caught up in the details, but what I took from that message is "Sean... can't drive." We all know its true, but do you really need to "out" a dude like that?

 

I agree with Mark and would like to add that there really should be a class for people who like to spend money. Not being a smart ass, but those guys are out there. Look at Frank Emmitts SCCA Super Production Vette (not an AIX car) on the West coast.

 

If you don't want to blow the dough, build a better mouse trap yourself, buy used parts or run a cheaper class. Seems simple.

 

Sean

[Mean 69]

Crap, I didn't mean it like that, I just re-read it. 'Twasn't my intention, and besides, your motor doesn't make 800 HP anyways! Sorry, I'll buy tomorrow to make up for it.

 

M

[Monroe]

Oh well. Maybe 2006 they will "open up" AIX.

 

Good luck in the new season guys.

 

Monroe

[Admiral]

Sorry to see this Monroe, I sure thought/hoped they'd allow your WC car into AIX.

 

I do hope to see you at the track somewhere/sometime in 2005, maybe have a few beers and something dead cooking on the fire!

[Guest]

Oh well. Maybe 2006 they will "open up" AIX.

 

Good luck in the new season guys.

 

Monroe

 

Hey monroe at least you didn't build a better mousetrap only to have them make it illeagle for the next year....

[Monroe]

I'm pretty bummed.

 

Anyone looking for chassis #3 of 7, I'm ready to get out of racing.

 

Screw it. The pain outweighs the pleasure by too large a margin.

 

I wish you all the best and a safe season.

 

Monroe

[mwilson7]

Monroe,

 

Why don't you see if the Region will let you run on a trial basis? I can't see what harm it would do. Given the other AIX cars that I have seen I don't see what advantage you could possible hold.

[Mean 69]

Monroe, can you not run the car in the Super Unlimited class for this year? My laptop has an issue with adobe so I can't open the rules right now, but I thought this class was pretty much open to "all else," even though it doesn't seem to be very well populated either.

 

M

[Keith]

This car should be able to run SU. We had an ex-Terry Labonte Winston Cup car run SU in an event earlier this year. He ended up in our run group...

[kblackav8or]

I know folks want to keep the rules simple and some have the means to run first class equipment. Not all of us do. My car is slightly outside AI in terms of brakes and suspension stuff but currently would not bust the power to weight ratio limitation. I have been building toward compliance with AIX to have a class to race in. I think any car run should have spent some time on public roads during it's lifetime and still have a VIN on it somewhere. Call me crazy, mine is still licensed and more or less street legal. The difference after you remove the forward lights is likely about 10 pounds. I like the rules to be something like they are now with some adjustments. I want to tie my upper and lower 3 link into my cage if not directly, at least indirectly so I am not scattering shredded 34 yo sheet metal all over the track. As far the engine goes? There are some tricks that might not be in the rules that maybe should be OK. American Turbo 4's? V6's? I watched a car powered by an older Ford 4 liter V6 from Busch(?) racing from 10 years ago or so go out and clean clocks at a Porsche club event in Texas. A carbed V6 was making about 550hp. 2.3 turbo Ford parts aren't terribly expensive and the Roush cars years ago were making obscene amounts of power, a more sane level could be very completitive and allow someone to move the weight around legally. There were tons of V6 and I4 Camaro's and Mustangs out there. Leaf spring cars should be able to come through the floor in the back. No other realistic way on a 30+ yo car to get a competitive suspension that I can see. I would also like to see some more variety. There are some mid-size types out there that could probably be competitive. A mid-80's T-bird can be lightened up alot, probably within striking distance of some of the Mustangs. They are pretty aerodynamic as proven by the fits Chevy went through in the lat 80's and that one could go over 210 with something close to the stock shape. OK that is alot. I think there is plenty of innovation that doesn't give someone a unfair advantage or cost a mint to do plus keeps it fun. If you really want to move the engine around, buy a car with a bigger engine compartment. If we go the other way and allow more extreme examples you get stuff like this

http://www.robisonracing.com/pages/1/index.htm

Very cool but out of the AIX league. I don't think there is an AIX car that will touch that on a straight away. Horsepower is not mentioned but Torque is over 700 though...

[PAI Racing]

Kevin,

 

Thanks for the link. I have been trying to get a better look at that car for about 2 years now, but never run SCCA so never get the chance to see it.

[kurtborton]

I know folks want to keep the rules simple and some have the means to run first class equipment. Not all of us do. My car is slightly outside AI in terms of brakes and suspension stuff but currently would not bust the power to weight ratio limitation. I have been building toward compliance with AIX to have a class to race in. I think any car run should have spent some time on public roads during it's lifetime and still have a VIN on it somewhere. Call me crazy, mine is still licensed and more or less street legal. The difference after you remove the forward lights is likely about 10 pounds. I like the rules to be something like they are now with some adjustments. I want to tie my upper and lower 3 link into my cage if not directly, at least indirectly so I am not scattering shredded 34 yo sheet metal all over the track. As far the engine goes? There are some tricks that might not be in the rules that maybe should be OK. American Turbo 4's? V6's? I watched a car powered by an older Ford 4 liter V6 from Busch(?) racing from 10 years ago or so go out and clean clocks at a Porsche club event in Texas. A carbed V6 was making about 550hp. 2.3 turbo Ford parts aren't terribly expensive and the Roush cars years ago were making obscene amounts of power, a more sane level could be very completitive and allow someone to move the weight around legally. There were tons of V6 and I4 Camaro's and Mustangs out there. Leaf spring cars should be able to come through the floor in the back. No other realistic way on a 30+ yo car to get a competitive suspension that I can see. I would also like to see some more variety. There are some mid-size types out there that could probably be competitive. A mid-80's T-bird can be lightened up alot, probably within striking distance of some of the Mustangs. They are pretty aerodynamic as proven by the fits Chevy went through in the lat 80's and that one could go over 210 with something close to the stock shape. OK that is alot. I think there is plenty of innovation that doesn't give someone a unfair advantage or cost a mint to do plus keeps it fun. If you really want to move the engine around, buy a car with a bigger engine compartment. If we go the other way and allow more extreme examples you get stuff like this

http://www.robisonracing.com/pages/1/index.htm

Very cool but out of the AIX league. I don't think there is an AIX car that will touch that on a straight away. Horsepower is not mentioned but Torque is over 700 though...

 

I'm pretty sure all those things you listed are legal...

and you may be surprised at what's coming out in AIX in a few of the regions now.