Jump to content

2010 Rules Request - ABS


Recommended Posts

1) Name / Region / Car # / Contact Info (email or phone, etc)

David Algozine / Midwest / #12 / [email protected].

David- May I please plagarize your note and use this as the basis for my note to Todd as well? I'll add one thing:

4b) Will increase series competition because…Like most other cost cutting measures, it will increase the number of competitors by making the series seem more "in-reach" to HPDE'ers, as well as reducing one more piece of car complexity - making the cars easier to work on and more reliable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • robbodleimages

    12

  • nape

    12

  • D Algozine

    10

  • ST#97

    9

  • Members

[iMHO] American Iron is a series where aftermarket companies come to play, manufacturers test new product and the (somewhat) unlimited nature of the class is the most attractive part of the series. It is only limited by a driver's imagination and their ability to drive their own creations. If you start limiting the R&D parts and mandate that we must use archaic components then those who come along with a newer model car - with all of these items stock from the factory - will go elsewhere to race. Half of the thrill of American Iron is the creativity and ingenuity you see built into the cars. When I was at Miller I walked around to many of the American Iron cars just to see "how'd they do that?".

 

If you take away that creativity and ingenuity that makes American Iron so unique then you might as all be driving NASCAR/COT-Mustangs!

 

So for the record I am FOR ABS...(make it unlimited and you might see someone come out with a Megasquirt-ABS!)[/iMHO]

 

Jim Pantas

http://www.WildHorsesRacing.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tough situation. I agree any rule must be able to be enforced. I also agree we need to either allow any abs or not allow it at all. Allowing it makes people buy it and not allowing it makes those how have it get rid of it. Either way it'll cost some racer money.

 

Crazy idea? How about limit the rain tire size of the abs cars to take the advantage away? 245's? I'd say allow the non abs cars a bigger rain tire but toyo doesnt make the ra1 in anything bigger than a 275.

Link to post
Share on other sites
[iMHO] American Iron is a series where aftermarket companies come to play,
But where do you draw the line. This logic could apply to any new technology. I could argue for Traction control with the same logic. I could argue for superchargers with that same logic. I could argue against the HP/TQ rules with that same logic. I could argue for active aero, KERS, and whatever else I wanted to by saying that we should encourage aftermarket involvement and technology development. But there's a line somewhere, because that development costs money - FAST.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy idea? How about limit the rain tire size of the abs cars to take the advantage away? 245's? I'd say allow the non abs cars a bigger rain tire but toyo doesnt make the ra1 in anything bigger than a 275.
A narrower tire is not a penalty in the rain. In fact, it's often an advantage.

 

The only reasonable trade-off I can think of is a weight penalty OVER AND ABOVE the HP/TQ limit - somewhere around 150#. So a 3400# car would have the same HP/TQ limit as a 3550# car with ABS. This could be a permanant way to equalize the field, or a temporary measure until the grandfathering period is over.

 

Weight penalties would also be a good way to equalize (or grandfather on a temporary basis) other cost-savings measures, such as 14" brake rotors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The only reasonable trade-off I can think of is a weight penalty OVER AND ABOVE the HP/TQ limit - somewhere around 150#. So a 3400# car would have the same HP/TQ limit as a 3550# car with ABS. This could be a permanant way to equalize the field, or a temporary measure until the grandfathering period is over. Weight penalties would also be a good way to equalize (or grandfather on a temporary basis) other cost-savings measures, such as 14" brake rotors.

 

Holy crap, Scott and I agree, right up until he puked out the 14" rotor crap.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy idea? How about limit the rain tire size of the abs cars to take the advantage away? 245's? I'd say allow the non abs cars a bigger rain tire but toyo doesnt make the ra1 in anything bigger than a 275.
A narrower tire is not a penalty in the rain. In fact, it's often an advantage.

 

The only reasonable trade-off I can think of is a weight penalty OVER AND ABOVE the HP/TQ limit - somewhere around 150#. So a 3400# car would have the same HP/TQ limit as a 3550# car with ABS. This could be a permanant way to equalize the field, or a temporary measure until the grandfathering period is over.

 

Weight penalties would also be a good way to equalize (or grandfather on a temporary basis) other cost-savings measures, such as 14" brake rotors.

 

Adding weight to ABS cars is stupid as you all have said it's only and advantage in the rain. The mentioning of adjusting Power/weight for ABS cars is even worse.

 

Personally, I'd like to see OEM brakes with open rotors 13" and smaller....however, what I see so far is that Most current racers in AI want to go even further and spend more money (not all of us can find/buy used parts) to develop their cars and it appears to be a "wallet" class.

 

Jeff, I could only hammer my brakes for about 3 laps before they faded terribly and AL has the data from Thursday's race/practice. feel free to ask him for it. TJ, it has rained at every TX event this year so I understand rain discussions, but again, CHOICES to not have ABS which is already allowed are CHOICES.

 

Essentially, what I see in most of these discussions tells me that I am done with AI nationally as the class is going in a direction I can't afford to go and still remain competitive.

 

Maybe we just decide on our own rules regionally that best work to increase car counts for our region. If we in TX want to keep ABS and 17's only, we will. If Mustang SS's should be in AIX, they will be moved to AIX. If we want to run Hoosiers in AI, we will make that happen too. All it takes is a reprint of last year's rules, an hour long meeting at our year end banquet, a few handshakes and printing a "TX addendum to the 2009 rules set." Problem solved. Or ST2 is always there with open arms and a tire contingency already on board.

 

Point being that the current AI rules set is too far "out there" and the series is shrinking as the perception from outside is "I have to spend $100k to build a competitive AI car, but I can built a top notch CMC2 car for about $12k". Which class do you think is going to grow? Why do you think GTS and ST are growing because BMW's cost less to build than Mustangs? Hell, I could build a competitive ST2 Vette for less than $30k...maybe?

 

My last vote and input is ABS=yes. Allow ANY Ford, Dodge, Chevy unit, located anywhere in the car....pretty much NO change to the current rules. If you want an FR500 unit, have at it. Just lose the 14" brakes and 18" wheels so I can have more people to race with in my region...we had 2 AI cars at the last race, one blew up in friday practice. I want 10-15 cars to race against...that is why I do this...not to piss away money or work on the car all the time. Guess that means I need to go to CMC2. Anyone want to buy my hooptie?!

 

 

Todd, yes...AL knows OUR stance about ABS in TX.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gbrown8439
Adding weight to ABS cars is stupid as you all have said it's only and advantage in the rain.

 

I'm pretty sure I already mentioned this but the FR system is an advantage in the wet and the dry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe we just decide on our own rules regionally that best work to increase car counts for our region. If we in TX want to keep ABS and 17's only, we will. If Mustang SS's should be in AIX, they will be moved to AIX. If we want to run Hoosiers in AI, we will make that happen too. All it takes is a reprint of last year's rules, an hour long meeting at our year end banquet, a few handshakes and printing a "TX addendum to the 2009 rules set." Problem solved.

 

Matt,

 

That attitude shuts down the fun we had at Hallett. Rules need to be National or face the consequences. I feel for you and especially if your car is too far gone to be returned to CMC levels but that is an option for you. If you don't want to spend/develop what it currently takes in AI, then jump to CMC where the rules are fixed and the car counts are higher.

 

Sidney Franklin

Formerly AI #64

Currently CMC #64

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Matt,

 

That attitude shuts down the fun we had at Hallett. Rules need to be National or face the consequences. I feel for you and especially if your car is too far gone to be returned to CMC levels but that is an option for you. If you don't want to spend/develop what it currently takes in AI, then jump to CMC where the rules are fixed and the car counts are higher.

 

Sidney Franklin

Formerly AI #64

Currently CMC #64

 

I totally agree, it's not a positive or good thing nationally, but there have been "under the table" deals regionally for years in CMC so a "fixed rules set" is "merely a guideline". Each region has got to do what it takes to keep car counts up and keep a class viable. If we can't bring enough cars to the track, our region can't afford to rent the track and loses money or raises our entry fees. We are already at $330 for a weekend in TX and the last event at ECR was probably a BIG loss for NASATX.

 

Yes, my car is WAY too far gone to go BACK to CMC2 and I recently passed on running LT1 F-body for $1500 to build as a -2 car...seeing this discussion and the ones in previous years makes me regret passing on it although makes me want to sell mine and call "no joy".

 

Here's the deal gang, AI car counts are down...WAY down. Rumors I heard earlier this year is that they are down to 40% of what they were in 2008 and even then, they weren't that great compared to 2006 and 07'. We MUST cut the cost of entry into AI or that attractive CMC2 class is going to look like Spec Miata did a couple years ago with 40 car fields and a couple lonely AI cars up front. We MUST lose the bling, use a lot of cheap/stock parts, keep build costs down and get more people into the series and the "5 year plan to rein AI in..." is too long.

 

Regardless of what each of our feelings are about ABS, non-oem aluminum blocks, carbon this and that and 6 piston 14" alcon brakes with $350 tires....if we can't keep people racing in this series on a reasonable budget, those few of you that remain will just be buying your trophies and racing by yourselves...example? AIX. What's the difference between an X car and AI car? A turbo, ABS and Hoosiers????? That alone should tell you AI is too far "out there"....

 

This isn't about who has an advantage or whether or not you can police a rule...it's about how do we keep AI around before everyone jumps ship or stops boarding.

 

I can't be the only one with these concerns but if I am, then yeah, I don't need to be in AI anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, I'd like to see OEM brakes with open rotors 13" and smaller....however, what I see so far is that Most current racers in AI want to go even further and spend more money (not all of us can find/buy used parts) to develop their cars and it appears to be a "wallet" class.

 

Jeff, I could only hammer my brakes for about 3 laps before they faded terribly and AL has the data from Thursday's race/practice. feel free to ask him for it. TJ, it has rained at every TX event this year so I understand rain discussions, but again, CHOICES to not have ABS which is already allowed are CHOICES.

 

Putting an "OEM" line in the brake rule will increase costs at the same time it reduces them. Instead of being able to buy $160/ea Wilwood calipers that have $155/set pads that are .800" thick HB521U.800, we'll all have to use Mustang/CTS-V/Porsche 996/Evo Brembo calipers which cost more and have $290/set pads that are only half as thick at .585" (backing plate included in thickness, HB453U.585).

 

As far as being a wallet class, you didn't realize that in '05-'06 when people showed up with '05 Mustangs? You can't be angry at the guys with money. Like I said before, you just have to learn to do more with less if you want to stay at this level as people keep raising the bar.

 

Not sure how it is in TX, but up here, we probably wouldn't have the car counts to be able to afford the tracks if it wasn't for the "rich guy" in his new Corvette/Viper/Bimmer/etc running HPDE.

 

Essentially, what I see in most of these discussions tells me that I am done with AI nationally as the class is going in a direction I can't afford to go and still remain competitive.

 

What are you whining about? The chances that ABS is actually going to get voted out are slim but we might as well make noise so at least we can b*tch about it during the year instead of saying "We should've done XYZ."

 

Maybe we just decide on our own rules regionally that best work to increase car counts for our region. If we in TX want to keep ABS and 17's only, we will. If Mustang SS's should be in AIX, they will be moved to AIX. If we want to run Hoosiers in AI, we will make that happen too. All it takes is a reprint of last year's rules, an hour long meeting at our year end banquet, a few handshakes and printing a "TX addendum to the 2009 rules set." Problem solved. Or ST2 is always there with open arms and a tire contingency already on board.

 

Point being that the current AI rules set is too far "out there" and the series is shrinking as the perception from outside is "I have to spend $100k to build a competitive AI car, but I can built a top notch CMC2 car for about $12k". Which class do you think is going to grow? Why do you think GTS and ST are growing because BMW's cost less to build than Mustangs? Hell, I could build a competitive ST2 Vette for less than $30k...maybe?

 

Dude, I've run AI with 10.5", 12", and now 13" brakes and 16", 17", and 18" wheels. I tried fuel injection and I currently run a carb. I've been running stock PS but I've got to go to an aftermarket pump because the stock ones just don't work on hot days at 6500+ RPM. I ran a stock steering column, but then I built one. I used to run a stock dash, then I built one. I don't have a wing and a splitter, but that doesn't say I won't ever put one on the car. The rules are the MAXIMUM allowed, not what you have to have. Just because the rules allow something doesn't mean you have to do it to be fast. Sometimes changing one thing necessitates another. I'm sorry if you didn't look at the rules 3-4 years ago and realize that cars like Pat's were the intent of the rules. Pat pushed the rules as far as anyone yet and there's still room to move from his car, believe it or not.

 

Even with all the "unobtainium" on Pat's car, the things that made it go fast were the things you couldn't see. The time spent on fixing geometry issues is huge. I didn't get a chance to see the data, but I'd bet it wasn't putting 2 seconds on the field down the straight away.

 

Here's the deal gang, AI car counts are down...WAY down. Rumors I heard earlier this year is that they are down to 40% of what they were in 2008 and even then, they weren't that great compared to 2006 and 07'. We MUST cut the cost of entry into AI or that attractive CMC2 class is going to look like Spec Miata did a couple years ago with 40 car fields and a couple lonely AI cars up front. We MUST lose the bling, use a lot of cheap/stock parts, keep build costs down and get more people into the series and the "5 year plan to rein AI in..." is too long.

 

Where are they down at? Seems to be thriving in the MW and GL seeing as we've had 5-7 cars at almost every event this year. That's without Robin, Rusty, Dean Smeltzer, Jay Andrew and some other guys that ran the East Coast travel series this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy idea? How about limit the rain tire size of the abs cars to take the advantage away? 245's? I'd say allow the non abs cars a bigger rain tire but toyo doesnt make the ra1 in anything bigger than a 275.
A narrower tire is not a penalty in the rain. In fact, it's often an advantage.

 

The only reasonable trade-off I can think of is a weight penalty OVER AND ABOVE the HP/TQ limit - somewhere around 150#. So a 3400# car would have the same HP/TQ limit as a 3550# car with ABS. This could be a permanant way to equalize the field, or a temporary measure until the grandfathering period is over.

 

Weight penalties would also be a good way to equalize (or grandfather on a temporary basis) other cost-savings measures, such as 14" brake rotors.

 

Adding weight to ABS cars is stupid as you all have said it's only and advantage in the rain.

Who said that? Whoever it is has never been involved in the use of a "real" ABS system. You know, like the FR500C/S systems we all agree we can't police.

 

So although I completely disagree with you on ABS, I agree on the rotors. 14" brakes is just one more out-of-control cost item on the long list. Make those who insist they need it, for whatever reason, take a weight penalty for it.

 

FWIW, I have ZERO interest in local rulesets. It only makes cross-region competition difficult.

 

Finally, one more thing about ABS. As soon as you start seeing any aftermarket "tuneable" ABS units show up on the scene, then you might as well legalize traction control. Anything that can control the brakes can be used as traction control with just a little more invisible software. It's a slippery slope.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
Here's the deal gang, AI car counts are down...WAY down.

Not in the SE - AI is growing exponentially!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Where are they down at? Seems to be thriving in the MW and GL seeing as we've had 5-7 cars at almost every event this year. That's without Robin, Rusty, Dean Smeltzer, Jay Andrew and some other guys that ran the East Coast travel series this year.

 

5 to 7 cars isn't thriving in my mind, 10 would be a closer shot...but if we have 20+ field of CMC2 cars in TX next year I would NOT be surprised.

 

We have gone from 7 to 8 cars, to 1 or 2...4 at most and only 1 car that made every event, maybe 2.

 

So if each region is so vastly different in car count or what people want to spend...why not a regional rule set? (other than crossovers) Try taking an LS1 powered mustang to RM and see what class you race in!

 

I guess I am finding my answer....time to sell the car while it has some value left in it or part it out and use what I can on a new tub for CMC2?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So if each region is so vastly different in car count or what people want to spend...why not a regional rule set?

 

This absolutely blows my mind. The guys with the chassis that you have to spend a bunch of money on to make not handle like a dump truck (replace the K-member, a-arms, rear suspension, etc) are the ones complaining about controlling costs...

 

Without a doubt in my mind, I could build my car again for <$20k in the exact same shape.

 

If I really turned into a penny pinching bastard and only counted 1 set of wheels, used a 10-bolt instead of a 9", no spares, stock steering column, I could probably do it for around $12k.

 

You know the comments I'm getting from people? "Oh, I thought you had to have tubular everything in the front end, all those Mustangs do."

 

All my crazy "race" parts are 10-20 year old circle track stuff...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you TJ, As I too could replicate my car with not a lot of dough. I started with a 150k mi shell and put in the basics. Carb'd 331, stock mustang front, stock car dash (that I built), Stock 8.8 rear with clutches-28 splines. I went the stock car mentality as well, first because it's cheap, second simple, thirdly because that's where I got my start. On top of that, These parts don't seem to fail at the speeds we're seeing. I'm not crazy about going 140 on stuff Ford engineered to go 70-80mph. I still can't have more than $20k in it, short of the consumables. I put Maximums rear stuff on simply because Mustangs rears on the sn95's stink, imo. My car didn't have the ABS on it any more when I bought it so "I" decided to leave it that way. Keeping it "simple". That's it, in a nutshell.

 

There's always going to be the "have's and have not's" anywhere or anything you're involved in. You just have to man up and find a way to beat those guys. I know I love driving away from the track having just beat the guys with the gazillion dollar hauler/ rig and megabuck car with my little POS and flat top trailer, IMO the series was designed to cater to the person who has not the most jack , but the most he can do with the resources available to them. If you're not happy with the rules as they are, I can't think there's any one restraining you with shackles to stay. So go run other series in some other sanctioning body and see how it goes, I bet you'll be back in short time. NASA, in it's short life has got most things figured out, I say Kudos to the rules makers/ enforcers of NASA. Don't forget to keep in mind that we are mostly all amateur racers having fun. If it's not fun for me anymore that's when I hang it up. I don't believe that Roger Penske will be knocking down any of doors to see our graying hairs tomorrow morning.

 

P.S. I don't care what ABS rule is enforced. I'll challenge myself to make it work one way or another, and have fun doing it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Red Tornado

I have been waiting to hear all persepctives before weighing in.

 

In general AI is there to showcase factory and aftermarket parts as a general rule in my mind. This season we have had more pro racers both racing and developing parts and cars for us all. This is nothing but good overall in the long run for everyone.

 

Rotor Size: guys no going back. I have smaller than max rotors and in our sprint races they arent a big issue. Now if we race for 2 hrs yes but we don't. It's all about progress and newer cars. Aftermarket places don't want to support fox bodies forever you know. I know this stings but it is true.

 

ABS: I was against this last year but after deep thinking I feel we should allow and let me tell you why. First off can you really police this? Second how awesome is it that Mustang Challenge cars are getting cheap and are easy entry points in to the series with little change. Yes it will help these guys in the rain but isn't newer cars or old cars outfitted with newer parts the goal of the series. Let's not be silly and ignore an excellent choice for many folks over the next few years as these cars will likly be in the $35k and under bracket damn soon consistently.

 

I agree AI is getting pricier due to alot of these things but only if you want every new playtoy and I am not firmly convinced they matter in a thirty minute race format series.

 

As for the AI fields being down, what planet have you been living on.

 

As for CMC and CMC2 growing that is great news.

 

Guys are series is a money and talent ladder to some extent.

 

CMC- cheap nearly stock inexpensive entry point.

American Iron - Middle expense with many aftermarket or advanced factory parts.

 

AIX- best money can buy.

 

We can't stop progress and development to keep our older cars competitive forever. The fact that a fox body and SN95 platofrm have won all AI championships except Robin's win last year certainly isn't saying the newer cars are crushing us all for sure.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Holster Maker

I agree with the Red Tornado.

 

I don't have working ABS, but can if I ever get it working or take it out. After 2 years of not working and several flat spotted tires, I finally learned to drive without ABS. Kinda fun actually, but that's the old unsafe days. I believe ABS could prevent a fatal injury or property damage and/or injury incident on the track. The tires it saves is worth it, besides a damaged car or injury incident.

Forget going fast , safety is the key for having it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
RWinchester199

i agree with Chris. this series is about showcasing american muscle, why would you want to limit it to old technology? that doesnt show progression at all. as for abs i dont have it on my car but i think its a big help in preventing accidents in the wet and dry. and if you want to keep costs down, limiting car damage is one of the best ways to accomplish this goal. racing is never cheap no matter what class you are in anyway. Also, the old stuff that is out doesnt work on the new stuff as well as the new products so why should we be forced to take a step backward. let the series evolve with the times, and let cmc worry about their own rules. what difference does it make if they have more cars then us? if you want to play cheaper go to cmc. i guarantee nasa doesnt care if AI is down, if another series like cmc is up on cars. as long as they have people showing up to play they are going to be happy. pick the class you can be competitive in/ can afford to race in and have fun like the rest of us.

 

also if you want to raise car counts go to the tracks people want to drive. example the east coast series was awesome all year at the two i was able to race there were 15-20 cars because they were tracks people hadnt been to that they wanted to experience. the same tracks at the same time each year may be causing people to find better things to do with the money it takes to show up and be competitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that a fox body and SN95 platofrm have won all AI championships except Robin's win last year certainly isn't saying the newer cars are crushing us all for sure.
You've got your facts wrong. So far it's Fox, Fox, S197, S197. We all know that foxes and S197's are far superior to SN95's anyway

 

A few other random thoughts:

 

14" brake rotors have been legal since 2003. Check a rulebook once in a while.

 

Try going out and buying ANY decent off-the-shelf brake kit for a S197, putting 17" wheels over it, and making track width without changing a bunch of suspension parts to pull the spindles in. There were two options to allow S197's to be able to use commonly available kits-- give them even more track width, or give them 18's. More track width just gives more advantage to a car that is already much wider than anything else except a GTO. The 18" tire is the same width, same OD, weighs more, and an 18" wheel will be heavier than a 17" wheel of similar construction. 18's are NOT a competitive advantage, it simply lets people build S197's with commonly available parts.

 

I am extremely against the idea of making any concessions in the weight/power rules for different configurations, like weight penalties for ABS, etc. This opens up a can of worms that we DO NOT want to go down. As soon as that happens, there will be constant whining and negotiation on the subject-- just how much weight should ABS cars get? Should one platform get a weight break over another? I don't have a wing, can I get 100# instead? EFI cars should get 10hp less because they are more tuneable, blah, blah, blah. This will ruin the whole thing. As much as we all like to whine about who has an unfair advantage (me included ), the fact is that our relatively simple ruleset-- we all run the same width spec tire, we all run the same hp/tq ratios-- has created some amazingly close cars and racing. Every time I have a race start with a bunch of AI cars and we motor down the straight neck and neck I'm reminded just how effective this ruleset is. Let's not even consider screwing this up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bluefirepony
The cost of a few hundred dollar ABS unit (or the no cost factory supplied unit) is nothing compared to the rules hit from last year when 18" wheels and 14" brakes were allowed - that was a $10,000 hit (which I don't plan on taking anytime soon).

 

and yes, I am on the side that says keep ABS.

 

I have TC turned off - franky I find it get's in the way.

I will remove the factory ABS if that is what everyone decides to do but I think there should be a grace period in 2010.

I'll submit my thoughts in the requested format

 

For my S197:

18x9.5" 5zigen FN01R-C wheels = $1100

AP Racing 4 piston calipers with 14" rotors = $1800 (and that also included rear rotors and both front/reard pads)

Ok, lets add $100/tire more than 17" tires since the price point is definately higher and assume I run 3 sets per year (which I don't) - that's another $1200 over 17" tires.

That's $4100 - no where near $10k. [ edited for math ]

Is it more than $0 - yes, but I did NOT have to do it.

Does it make the car more competitive?

I think so.

But then again so does my knowledge of suspension geometry and my amazing braking skills

 

How many of the AI cars on the podium at Nationals were running both 18" wheels and 14" rotors?

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys,

This is way way way off the subject, but I stumbled across this forum in a search for knowledge and information regarding ABS systems. And although its not a race application, from the posts that I read, someone on this forum likely has the practical answers I need. I don't want to disrupt your discussion anymore than necessary or get you off subject, so since I had to register as a user to post to the forum, anyone that cares to share their knowledge can send me a personal message and I will check both private messages and this thread. Thanks in advance for any insight anyone can offer.

I'm a buy' em cheap and drive' em till they die backyard grease monkey since before I had a driver's license in the mid 80's and most of my vehicles have been hundred dollar beaters before the days of standard equipment ABS brakes so I have never had a need to know about or troubleshoot ABS until now. I understand how the basic system operates, my question revolves around component compatibility and interchangeability from one model year to the next and after reading your discussion about race rules regarding OEM vs. aftermarket ABS this seems the place someone may have answers . I bought a 95 Ford van from a fellow on ebay that was downright dishonest about the condition and problems the vehicle has. Most of which weren't discovered until after he took my money and hightailed it out of there before I could say but, but, but.... So I am making the best of it and trying to put humpty dumpty back together without breaking the bank. One of the issues is the ABS brakes. Although not something that I feel will prevent me from safely operating the vehicle(never had ABS growing up)but would be a nice feature for a fullsize van on slippery roads and I do have an acquaintance that scraps vehicles for a living. Since all he really saves is the driveline and side glass I can get parts for next to nothing if I can be flexible and get to it before it goes to the crusher.

I know there are one, three and four channel systems so barring that difference the question is: With exception of mounting brackets and line fittings are ABS brakes a generic enough system where the base unit, ECU and sensors are pretty much the same and interchangeable from one Ford product(Ford/lincoln/mercury)/product line(sedan to van etc.) to the next for a given range of years? Or at the very least would a pump unit and ECU(assuming it is independent from the drivetrain/body ECU) from say a large Ford sedan or fullsize SUV function properly with the sensors from a van? Logic would say yes as I understand it the sensors are nothing more than magnetic pulse counter/trigger, and would seem a large company would want to keep tooling and manufacture costs down by using the same equipment and making sensors all the same but then again...We are talking about companies that sometimes keep trying to reinvent the wheel or compete against themselves for reasons of the unknown. Anyone have any practical experience or insight on this matter? Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know there are one, three and four channel systems so barring that difference the question is: With exception of mounting brackets and line fittings are ABS brakes a generic enough system where the base unit, ECU and sensors are pretty much the same and interchangeable from one Ford product(Ford/lincoln/mercury)/product line(sedan to van etc.) to the next for a given range of years? Or at the very least would a pump unit and ECU(assuming it is independent from the drivetrain/body ECU) from say a large Ford sedan or fullsize SUV function properly with the sensors from a van? Logic would say yes as I understand it the sensors are nothing more than magnetic pulse counter/trigger, and would seem a large company would want to keep tooling and manufacture costs down by using the same equipment and making sensors all the same but then again...We are talking about companies that sometimes keep trying to reinvent the wheel or compete against themselves for reasons of the unknown. Anyone have any practical experience or insight on this matter? Thanks again

 

The easiest thing to do in your situation would be to get ahold of a Hollander interchange book and see what crosses over. The cheap way to do this, is to go to Autozone.com, enter both vehicles, and see if the part numbers match.

 

Single channel ABS is rear-only ABS on Ford vans. The tone ring is bolted to the posi with the ring gear bolts and the sensor sticks through the rear end housing. Three channel ABS is the single system with the addition of both front brakes. The tone rings for these are cast/pressed into the back of the rotor. Four channel means that each wheel has it's own individual sensor and the ABS can manipulate the brakes individually wherever it wants.

 

Gotta help out another van man: Used to tow with a 2000 E-150, currently a 2006 E-350.

 

PM me with any other questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Red Tornado

I thought Ross was driving something different so my bad.

Wasnt Pat L. in a fox body though?

 

I guess I was saying the rules seem to be working pretty well so far and evolving with the cars being made by the factory seems to be a plus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...