2011 Mustang GT Time Trial Questions

[11gttt]

Couple of questions that I tried to research a little:

 

1) Since the mustang has a upper 3rd link; when I install a Griggs torque arm, does it add 2 or 4 points?

 

2) I am also changing the mounting point of the rear shock on the axle housing (not inverting). Any points?

 

3) When I move the rear shock mount it also lowers the rear LCA mounting point on the axle, not the chassis. Points?

 

4) Last one... My brake calipers are factory Brembo, but optional. Is that considered non OEM or +2 pts?

 

Thanks for all input.

 

I look forward to seeing you guys at the track.

 

Bryan Harrison

[soundguydave]

Couple of questions that I tried to research a little:

 

1) Since the mustang has a upper 3rd link; when I install a Griggs torque arm, does it add 2 or 4 points?

 

2) I am also changing the mounting point of the rear shock on the axle housing (not inverting). Any points?

 

3) When I move the rear shock mount it also lowers the rear LCA mounting point on the axle, not the chassis. Points?

 

4) Last one... My brake calipers are factory Brembo, but optional. Is that considered non OEM or +2 pts?

 

Thanks for all input.

 

I look forward to seeing you guys at the track.

 

Bryan Harrison

 

Oh, Boy.... I think Greg G's head just exploded...

 

Not official, but here's my take on it, speaking as a fellow S197 driver:

 

1) The torque arm is simple: +4, suspension rule #19.

2) Alternate lower mounting point for the shock, at least to me, would be no points under #43. Again, not official.

3) Lowering the LCA (trailing arm!!) mount point would be suspension rule #8, for a whopping 6 points.

4) The Brembo calipers are an option, and since the car's base classification (what is it, anyway????) is for a BASE MODEL, yes, you would have to take the 2 points.

[11gttt]

I know; I know.......overwhelming, but just trying to play fair.

 

Provisional classification is TTB.

 

What about the following rule instead of rule #8 about the trailing arms?

 

#12) Changing the orientation or design of an OEM mounting point or pick-up point of a control arm for a panhard bar

or trailing arms +1

 

Aren't I just changing the mount point of the trailing arm. Seems a bit extreme to add 6 points to get my trailing arms level after lowering the rear of the car. Especially since I'm already taking +4 for replacing the stockers!

 

I appreciate the quick response. Keep it coming guys. Thanks for the help!

 

Bryan

[soundguydave]

I know; I know.......overwhelming, but just trying to play fair.

 

Provisional classification is TTB.

 

What about the following rule instead of rule #8 about the trailing arms?

 

#12) Changing the orientation or design of an OEM mounting point or pick-up point of a control arm for a panhard bar

or trailing arms +1

 

Aren't I just changing the mount point of the trailing arm. Seems a bit extreme to add 6 points to get my trailing arms level after lowering the rear of the car. Especially since I'm already taking +4 for replacing the stockers!

 

I appreciate the quick response. Keep it coming guys. Thanks for the help!

 

Bryan

 

Trust me, I've been there, and done that... The OFFICIAL ruling is that the three-link suspension on the Mustang consists of all control arms, with no trailing links whatsoever. "Changing the orientation or design" would be something like rotating the mounting point 90*, or changing it from single-shear to double-shear. Doing what you want to do, dropping the mount point, will alter the anti-squat %, and potentially give you a bunch more traction than you have now. Thus, as it would confer a performance advantage over the base model, it costs points. The rules are written in about as generic a way as possible, so not all of them make sense to apply for every chassis. Does it make sense to "spend" +4 on LCAs on the S197? Not really. All you really need are some slightly less-compliant bushings. But, since nobody offers just bushings, you're backed into a corner and have to chose between the stockers and aftermarket complete arms. The good news is that the one points "fee" opens up ALL of the control arms, so you can go to FR500 parts up front if you want as well.

[drivinhardz06]

Provisional classification is TTB.

 

don't they make ~380+ RWHP and weigh 3600???

[kbrew8991]

welcome to time trials - if you mod it from OEM, better mod it very well...

[obzezzed350]

Provisional classification is TTB.

 

don't they make ~380+ RWHP and weigh 3600???

 

I think he has a regular Mustang GT, not the Shelby.

[drivinhardz06]

I think he has a regular Mustang GT, not the Shelby.

 

the '11 has the new 5.0L coyote motor

 

395 RWHP on this test

 

maybe it's a pre-prod ringer

 

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/03/inside-line-dyno-tests-the-2011-ford-mustang-gt-50.html

[TurboShortBus]

We already know about this:

19) Add torque arm +4

 

The S197 cars come OEM with a Panhard bar, so you won't take points to add one (as is typical for Fox/SN95 cars that add torque arms). However, if you are upgrading the stock Panhard bar, then:

18) Replace or modify an OEM panhard rod or Watt's link +2

 

When adding a torque arm to a car that does not have one in its OEM configuration, don't forget about this:

9) Relocation of rear suspension mounting points +6

 

Are you adding subframe connectors so you will be able to attach the front torque arm crossmember, as is typical with many Mustang torque arm kits? Don't forget this, either:

28) Add or modify other chassis stiffening devices or fabricated parts (such as lower strut braces or lower arm braces (with greater than two attachment points), subframe connectors, subframe braces, subframe mounts/bushings, etc) +3

 

You could be looking at as many as 15 points for just the modifications above.

 

Although it was mostly written for Fox and SN95 Mustangs, refer to (applicable portions of) the last clarification at the bottom of this link:

http://www.nasa-tt.com/Rules/p2005_articleid/30

 

Here's a tip: Just because the modifications are available doesn't mean that they will be helpful in Time Trial.

 

Mark

[Trevor57]

If this car weighs 3600 lbs. and is on a 265 dot tire thats +.8 mod factor. so it would have to make less than 380 peak RWHP or get bumped to TTA.

[SNAKBITN]

The car should be about 350rwhp if total is 412hp at the flywheel.

[11gttt]

We already know about this:

19) Add torque arm +4

 

The S197 cars come OEM with a Panhard bar, so you won't take points to add one (as is typical for Fox/SN95 cars that add torque arms). However, if you are upgrading the stock Panhard bar, then:

18) Replace or modify an OEM panhard rod or Watt's link +2

 

When adding a torque arm to a car that does not have one in its OEM configuration, don't forget about this:

9) Relocation of rear suspension mounting points +6

 

Are you adding subframe connectors so you will be able to attach the front torque arm crossmember, as is typical with many Mustang torque arm kits? Don't forget this, either:

28) Add or modify other chassis stiffening devices or fabricated parts (such as lower strut braces or lower arm braces (with greater than two attachment points), subframe connectors, subframe braces, subframe mounts/bushings, etc) +3

 

You could be looking at as many as 15 points for just the modifications above.

 

Although it was mostly written for Fox and SN95 Mustangs, refer to (applicable portions of) the last clarification at the bottom of this link:

http://www.nasa-tt.com/Rules/p2005_articleid/30

 

Here's a tip: Just because the modifications are available doesn't mean that they will be helpful in Time Trial.

 

Mark

 

 

So should you really have to add the 6 pts for relocation of rear suspension mounting points on adding a torque arm since rule 19 says 4 pts for adding a torque arm?

 

Also I this came to me.... If I lower the axle mounting point on my rear lower control arms, do I need to add the 6 pts for relocation of rear suspension in rule 9?

 

Then, if I do both (t/a and re-locate rlca's) do I just take the hit one time? I would assume so, but just asking.

 

Is it possible to have 10 total points replacing my rear LCA's with solid bushing non-OEM units and moving the mounting point down on the axle with rule 7) 4pts and 9) 6 pts??? Wow...that's a lot of points for control arms. I might have to come up with some other way to make this work. Might as well do the t/a as indicated above if we just take the points one time.

 

Someone earlier had mentioned subframe connectors to mount the t/a crossmember, but the s197 body does not require subframe connectors to mount the crossmember. The frame rails run the full length under the car unlike the fox body.

 

Thank you to the contributors!!!!

[TurboShortBus]

So should you really have to add the 6 pts for relocation of rear suspension mounting points on adding a torque arm since rule 19 says 4 pts for adding a torque arm?

Please refer to the "clarification" link that I posted above.

 

Also I this came to me.... If I lower the axle mounting point on my rear lower control arms, do I need to add the 6 pts for relocation of rear suspension in rule 9?

Correct; you are relocating a rear suspension mounting point.

 

Then, if I do both (t/a and re-locate rlca's) do I just take the hit one time? I would assume so, but just asking.

Correct; once you move any rear suspension mounting point, you take the points for it, so you might as well move all of the rear suspension mounting points, since they won't cost any more points.

 

Is it possible to have 10 total points replacing my rear LCA's with solid bushing non-OEM units and moving the mounting point down on the axle with rule 7) 4pts and 9) 6 pts??? Wow...that's a lot of points for control arms. I might have to come up with some other way to make this work. Might as well do the t/a as indicated above if we just take the points one time.

Again, just because the modifications are available doesn't mean that they will be helpful in Time Trial.

 

Someone earlier had mentioned subframe connectors to mount the t/a crossmember, but the s197 body does not require subframe connectors to mount the crossmember. The frame rails run the full length under the car unlike the fox body.

Good deal; no subframe connector points in that case.

 

Are you at the point where your car "needs" all of these parts? This may not be an exact apples-to-apples comparison, but the Continental Challenge (formerly Koni Challenge) GS Mustangs don't run anything too fancy back there, and they seem to get around tracks fairly well. But, if you prefer to stimulate the economy, you can drop the car off at Griggs or Maximum Motorsports and have them build you a seriously fast, fun car.

 

It is my advice that you resist the urge to spend yourself into a higher TT classification where you could run the risk of not being competitive. Put a few well-chosen suspension parts on the car as it sits (tires, springs, and shocks; note that things like throttle bodies and mufflers that only yield a couple of rwhp are not worth the points), take advantage of as many no-points modifications as possible, and see where it shakes out. You can always modify the car in the future, as you accurately determine its needs.

 

As an example, I am running very few aftermarket parts on my TTD 2004 Mustang for 2 reasons: 1) cost containment and 2) because the relatively minor gains from most aftermarket parts at this level will move me up into TTC where the car will not be competitive.

 

Mark

[Trevor57]

A good deal of TTers end up replacing parts with oem after quickly realizing they are not making the car faster. Try to think of how much each part with affect lap times.

[11gttt]

Thanks again for all the input and clarification.

 

I agree with you on keeping points to a minimum and am trying to keep points low, but maximize them at the same time especially if you are going to move up one class.

 

I am discussing all options with Bruce Griggs and trying to figure it all out. I'm starting with the basic small mods like wheels, tires, brake pads, c/o struts and shocks. I'll hit the track and tweak on it little by little then.

 

Can't wait to get back on track. Hopefully see some of you there!

 

Bryan

[Varkwso]

I think he has a regular Mustang GT, not the Shelby.

 

the '11 has the new 5.0L coyote motor

 

395 RWHP on this test

 

maybe it's a pre-prod ringer

 

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/03/inside-line-dyno-tests-the-2011-ford-mustang-gt-50.html

 

 

You looking to up the counts in TTA

[11gttt]

 

You looking to up the counts in TTA

 

 

Yep, headed for TTA with a couple of buddies.

[brkntrxn]

 

You looking to up the counts in TTA

 

 

Yep, headed for TTA with a couple of buddies.

 

 

Good, I'd love to see that. Especially since I sold a highly modified 99 Cobra to run a stock C5Z06 in TTA/ASP. I am still a Ford guy at heart...

 

 

-Kevin