Members Al F. Posted October 11, 2010 Members Share Posted October 11, 2010 By which comments? Did Todd have the front splitter rule confused? Sure, so did I by the way, but at least he had a pre-race tech schedule where this was discovered. Better there than in post race tech. Groups A and B where the only ones that did had this pre-race tech to my knowledge and it was Todd's idea. This is hardly the first time, nor will it be the last time that a given official has confused something in their noggin. Was the hood open Vs closed part of the dyno procedure changed during the event at a drivers meeting? Yep, but every driver was there and could've (should have!) voiced opposition if it mattered to them. My point is there is of course always room for improvement, but dont be too quick to throw the baby out with the bath water. Not that Todd resembles a baby...though he is bald and kinda soft... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidney Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 ...Was the hood open Vs closed part of the dyno procedure changed during the event at a drivers meeting? Yep, but every driver was there and could've (should have!) voiced opposition if it mattered to them. Not ALL of the AI racers were there as ALL of them did not attend the Nationals. This change has impact on ALL drivers in both CMC and AI and not just those that participated at Miller. You absolutely had no business changing this fundamental rule. While a NASA National Championship doesn't win one much more than a few Toyo bucks and some handshakes...whoever the winner is deserves the right to not have an asterisks next to his name. Sidney Franklin CMC2 #64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firehawkclone Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 By which comments? Did Todd have the front splitter rule confused? Sure, so did I by the way, but at least he had a pre-race tech schedule where this was discovered. Better there than in post race tech. Groups A and B where the only ones that did had this pre-race tech to my knowledge and it was Todd's idea. This is hardly the first time, nor will it be the last time that a given official has confused something in their noggin. Was the hood open Vs closed part of the dyno procedure changed during the event at a drivers meeting? Yep, but every driver was there and could've (should have!) voiced opposition if it mattered to them. My point is there is of course always room for improvement, but dont be too quick to throw the baby out with the bath water. Not that Todd resembles a baby...though he is bald and kinda soft... I still dont recall anything being said about a change to the dyno procedure in the meeting(doesnt mean it didnt happen though) i wouldn't have agreed to it for sure! We're going to need a court reporter at the next one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted October 11, 2010 Members Share Posted October 11, 2010 Dont jump to conclusions Sidney...the rule wasnt changed permanently, it was changed for that event by the participants of that event. Thats all. No implications for anyone/anywhere/anytime else unless someone puts it through the RCR process. We're going to need a court reporter at the next one! Now that is a great idea! Maybe we can get some of those college students that volunteered for the final races to volunteer with this as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeP-99Z Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I still dont recall anything being said about a change to the dyno procedure in the meeting(doesnt mean it didnt happen though) i wouldn't have agreed to it for sure! We're going to need a court reporter at the next one! Ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 A few very simple changes: Lets not continue to fumble over ourselves and the rules when a pro driver raises consers. And lets not continue to alter the rules so pro class and factory built race cars are legal. Examples: Bulletin change two weeks before naitonals, making the Boss R trans legal. I still can't find it listed anywhere for less then $7k. Rahagen has it listed for $8k Lets not fly off and mis quote splitter rules simply because a professional asks about the rules. Lets not alter Dyno proceedures because a pro doesn't like it. (hood deal) I'm on a roll. Lets not make Factory racing ABS systems legal. We are not Grand Am or World Challenge. Lets put a stop to making sure that anything Ford Racing builds or sells is AI legal. It doesn't matter how readily available the parts are, they are specifically designed for pro racing. Same for there factory race cars. Still don't know what to make of the national dyno situation, but lets not go there again. I left names out on purpose. I have no ill feelings toward any fellow AI competitor, but we are all equal. The reality is that this class, like nearly all of amatuer racing, is comprised of lower budget racers, who aren't interested or aren't finacially capable of competing at the pro level. Know you customers. Very few are going to run out and buy up all the Mustang challenge cars. We don't have the money. It's great if Grand am and world challenge or Mustang challenge guys want to come run with us, but they need to meet our rules, not the other way around. These opinions are mine, and not in anyway represent the mass'es of AI drivers who are scattered around this fine country. Unless of course, you agree with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T&A Racing Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 These opinions are mine, and not in anyway represent the mass'es of AI drivers who are scattered around this fine country. Unless of course, you agree with me. Well said Dave, I for one agree, with one small add, it's OK for the pro's to ask and no harm if they do, but we need leadership to maintain our direction and consistency even when they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy55 Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I still dont recall anything being said about a change to the dyno procedure in the meeting(doesnt mean it didnt happen though) i wouldn't have agreed to it for sure! I dont remember anything about the hoods off either. Maybe that's the drivers meeting i missed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbrown8439 Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 A few very simple changes: I'm on a roll. Lets not make Factory racing ABS systems legal. We are not Grand Am or World Challenge. Lets put a stop to making sure that anything Ford Racing builds or sells is AI legal. It doesn't matter how readily available the parts are, they are specifically designed for pro racing. Same for there factory race cars. I remember when World Challenge started and quite a few of the Mustangs were running Griggs and Maximum Motorsports parts. Would you have lobbied against them back then? I also remember the AI rules mentioning something about promoting aftermarket manufactures. Why should we exclude Ford Racing? Are we going to outlaw GM performance parts crate motors? I think I understand where you are trying to go with this but even Nascar is moving away from carbs and towards modern technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I also remember the AI rules mentioning something about promoting aftermarket manufactures. Why should we exclude Ford Racing? Are we going to outlaw GM performance parts crate motors? I think I understand where you are trying to go with this but even Nascar is moving away from carbs and towards modern technology. I don't mind modern technology, but factory R&D money can never be matched by the budgets of any amateur team (and probably the entire AI series racing budget). I agree that we can't stop progress and ABS is here to stay, but I'd rather not see Ford Racing ABS parts being legal. ABS is already an advantage and as a competitor who's chassis never had ABS, my car won't ever see it unless I can get ahold of the technology to re-program factory modules and a machine shop to custom make some tone rings. I'm also not a big fan of the Ford Racing 6-speed (T56R or whatever the new name is). The old top-dog, AI legal transmission used to be a Richmond 5-speed and you can buy a new one for $3500, used for quite a bit cheaper, and they could be made to fit any car in the series. Now, it's probably possible to put a T56R behind a SBC, but the price tag on it is more then I have in my engine, trans, clutch, and driveshaft plus a little. I'm not scared racing against it, but I don't want other competitors or newcomers believe that it's a necessary part to run fast in the series. The $5500 price tag (even with bell and shifter) made me puke a little. Knowing that I could buy a used Jerico, T101, SR1, or even a Mid-Valley NASCAR dog box for under that price makes me scratch my head. The fact that the trans rule was raised by $1000 a week before Nationals doesn't sit too well with me either. What's going to move next year? Wheel width? Ride height? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 A few very simple changes: I'm on a roll. Lets not make Factory racing ABS systems legal. We are not Grand Am or World Challenge. Lets put a stop to making sure that anything Ford Racing builds or sells is AI legal. It doesn't matter how readily available the parts are, they are specifically designed for pro racing. Same for there factory race cars. I remember when World Challenge started and quite a few of the Mustangs were running Griggs and Maximum Motorsports parts. Would you have lobbied against them back then? I also remember the AI rules mentioning something about promoting aftermarket manufactures. Why should we exclude Ford Racing? Are we going to outlaw GM performance parts crate motors? I think I understand where you are trying to go with this but even Nascar is moving away from carbs and towards modern technology. Not advicating outlawing the entire parts catalog, just the parts that didn't fit into the AI rules. Why should the rules be altered to allow the newest and best that ANY parts supplier offers? Besides these parts are specifically designed for the pro class of racing. I'm not against change or modifications, but this is a significant pace. Its not just new technology. Its latest, greatest versions, of some pretty expensive parts. As TJ said, we aren't afraid of them. I don't think these parts will dominate the series. The point is why does AI continue to amend rules to allow specifically Ford Racing pro parts? AI is already dominated by Ford cars, and it looks like the S197 is very popular. The other major point of the series is GM, Ford, Dodge, AMC slugging it out on the track. The major difference between the two dominant manufactures, Ford and GM, is that GM puts nearly all there R&D into the Corvette, which is not an AI car, and Ford has the Mustang. Ford does a great job of promoting and supplying good parts for the Mustang, but AI is not the venue to be jumping on board with everything new Ford has to offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I'm not scared racing against it, but I don't want other competitors or newcomers believe that it's a necessary part to run fast in the series. The $5500 price tag (even with bell and shifter) made me puke a little. Knowing that I could buy a used Jerico, T101, SR1, or even a Mid-Valley NASCAR dog box for under that price makes me scratch my head. Necomers sure,...but it looks like Tommy S. is looking to go get a bigger gun Hell, his lap times are right up there with the fastest, and he's thinking about how to beat Ford R&D. Just poking some fun, no need for a real response. Tommy, take TJ's advice. Freshen a few things up and get after it. Keep in mind that the three guys on the podium were all in S197 cars, but all three are pretty damn good drivers in very well set up cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 what fr500c parts do you want to outlaw? the s197 really cuts down on the need for a lot of aftermarket parts. i use the front lower control arms with the stock gt rear control arms. they dont offer a wizzy rear piece like the steeda watts link or anything. its just a panhard bar. the 2004 car had huge amounts of expensive aftermarket goodies from k member to torque arm and everything in between. the ford racing fr500c catalog is pretty slim. i dont understand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 what fr500c parts do you want to outlaw? the s197 really cuts down on the need for a lot of aftermarket parts. i use the front lower control arms with the stock gt rear control arms. they dont offer a wizzy rear piece like the steeda watts link or anything. its just a panhard bar. the 2004 car had huge amounts of expensive aftermarket goodies from k member to torque arm and everything in between. the ford racing fr500c catalog is pretty slim. i dont understand Specifically the Racing ABS system, and the Boss R trans ( or whatever the name is) , and the tow hook , And whatever Ford comes up with for next year. Get the idea Agian, I never said to outlaw the whole catalog, just the illegal stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 what fr500c parts do you want to outlaw? the s197 really cuts down on the need for a lot of aftermarket parts. i use the front lower control arms with the stock gt rear control arms. they dont offer a wizzy rear piece like the steeda watts link or anything. its just a panhard bar. the 2004 car had huge amounts of expensive aftermarket goodies from k member to torque arm and everything in between. the ford racing fr500c catalog is pretty slim. i dont understand Specifically the Racing ABS system, and the Boss R trans ( or whatever the name is) , and the tow hook , And whatever Ford comes up with for next year. Get the idea Agian, I never said to outlaw the whole catalog, just the illegal stuff. the trans for the boss r is not on ford racing. the fr500c trans is just a t56 with a sixth gear that anyone can build themselves. i didnt say you wanted to outlaw the catalog. i just asked since there is so little in the catalog what it was you didnt want allowed? so..its really just the abs. yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firehawkclone Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Well said. A few very simple changes:Lets not continue to fumble over ourselves and the rules when a pro driver raises consers. And lets not continue to alter the rules so pro class and factory built race cars are legal. Examples: Bulletin change two weeks before naitonals, making the Boss R trans legal. I still can't find it listed anywhere for less then $7k. Rahagen has it listed for $8k Lets not fly off and mis quote splitter rules simply because a professional asks about the rules. Lets not alter Dyno proceedures because a pro doesn't like it. (hood deal) I'm on a roll. Lets not make Factory racing ABS systems legal. We are not Grand Am or World Challenge. Lets put a stop to making sure that anything Ford Racing builds or sells is AI legal. It doesn't matter how readily available the parts are, they are specifically designed for pro racing. Same for there factory race cars. Still don't know what to make of the national dyno situation, but lets not go there again. I left names out on purpose. I have no ill feelings toward any fellow AI competitor, but we are all equal. The reality is that this class, like nearly all of amatuer racing, is comprised of lower budget racers, who aren't interested or aren't finacially capable of competing at the pro level. Know you customers. Very few are going to run out and buy up all the Mustang challenge cars. We don't have the money. It's great if Grand am and world challenge or Mustang challenge guys want to come run with us, but they need to meet our rules, not the other way around. These opinions are mine, and not in anyway represent the mass'es of AI drivers who are scattered around this fine country. Unless of course, you agree with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 The neither the Boss R1 or FR500C are close to a stock T56 with a better 6th gear. 03-04 Cobra T56 Gear Ratios 1st - 2.66 2nd - 1.78 3rd - 1.30 4th - 1.00 5th - 0.80 6th - 0.63 2012 Boss 302 Gear ratios 1st - 3.66 2nd - 2.43 3rd - 1.69 4th - 1.32 5th - 1.00 6th - 0.65 M-7003-T56R (Mustang FR500C race car) Gear Ratios 1st - 2.29 2nd - 1.61 3rd - 1.22 4th - 1.00 5th - .85 6th - .75 M-7003-BOSSR1 Gear Ratios 1st - 2.29 2nd - 1.61 3rd - 1.21 4th - 1.00 5th - .82 6th - .68 1978 Corvette Super T10 Gear Ratios 1st - 2.43 2nd - 1.61 3rd - 1.21 4th - 1.00 So, you can pay $5500 to have an overdrive and run a 4.10 gear or you can pay $1000-1500 and run a 3.40 gear. I'll keep the $4000 in my pocket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firehawkclone Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Im not wanting the new cars out. If you can build a new racecar, than you could remove the ABS, the 14" brakes and the 18" wheels. Otherwise we turn into a series of money. I did find a racing ABS for 12 grand. It is for a vette though. I was told two years ago on this forum to find the GM ABS engineer to reprogram my unit. Dude really! Really! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbrown8439 Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Im not wanting the new cars out. If you can build a new racecar, than you could remove the ABS, the 14" brakes and the 18" wheels. Otherwise we turn into a series of money. I did find a racing ABS for 12 grand. It is for a vette though. I was told two years ago on this forum to find the GM ABS engineer to reprogram my unit. Dude really! Really! I have been racing AI off and on since 2004 and so far the car with the most time and money invested in it that I have seen was a Fox body Mustang not a 2005+. If I remember correctly that car was also the fastest AI car at last years Nationals. I think we all have a tendency to focus on one part that has been allowed and lose sight of the huge amount of money that can be spent perfecting every little thing under the current rules. Go to a race shop and ask them to build you a car that takes advantage of every rule (or lack there of) and see what your quote is. If you were starting from scratch I bet the quote would be over $100,000. IMO, this is a money series right now, we just don't have anyone here spending what they could. I think what's saving AI now is that most of the people that have enough money to build a car to the limits realize that their money would be better spent in a Pro series not a local club race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I bought my transmissions used. I dont have $5k in the two of them combined and they are fresh. If you want one, get one. If you don't, its a free country. The ABS. I believe Dean Martin has correctly posted that while using Toyo's GT500 ABS is the correct choice, not the FR500 stuff. So, you point really is moot there. BTW....you are winning, right TJ? While walking uphill both ways, thru the snow pulling your race car trailer by hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I bought my transmissions used. I dont have $5k in the two of them combined and they are fresh. If you want one, get one. If you don't, its a free country. The ABS. I believe Dean Martin has correctly posted that while using Toyo's GT500 ABS is the correct choice, not the FR500 stuff. So, you point really is moot there. BTW....you are winning, right TJ? Sorry not buying the comment about the Fr500 abs. If it's not any advantage, then no one would care if it was excluded from the rules, as they read when the system first came out. So, lets just leave them out. FYI, most of us vocal guys know that these parts are not required to run up front. However, they initially didn't fit the rules, so why are rules being amended to allow them? Apparently, we all agree they aren't needed. But they are very expensive and exclusive to one platform. Used cost of parts don't get factored into this discussion. A pretty significant precedent is being set. Some of us don't care for the direction that is leads too. Greg is correct, an all out AI car can be very expesive. Many of us don't want the costs to continue to climb. Amending rules to include these type of parts just adds to the costs, and apparently, I'm told, they aren't needed to win. So what are they for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 amending the rules to grow with the passage of time is a good idea. ai rules requiring 17" wheels til the end of time will soon enough look as silly and unrealistic as scca as requiring 16" wheels and 12" brakes and a carburator. not now, but soon enough. ive said it before and got my head bit off, but maybe the current mustang and camaro should have their own class. then this argument would not be necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 BTW....you are winning, right TJ? While walking uphill both ways, thru the snow pulling your race car trailer by hand. I was barefoot too, you forgot that part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidney Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Dont jump to conclusions Sidney...the rule wasnt changed permanently, it was changed for that event by the participants of that event. Thats all. No implications for anyone/anywhere/anytime else unless someone puts it through the RCR process. Al, You're missing my point. I know the "Rule" wasn't changed permanently but that "Exception" does effect all of us. We expect that the National Champion has to follow the rules even if we're not there. For a handful of people to throw out a necessary part of the dyno procedure is wrong. Double that when the handful of people voting end up illegal on the dyno. The implication to all the CMC/AI drivers that followed the hood open rule item #6 during the entire year in their respective regions earned the right to expect the National Champion's car would be dynoed by the same set of rules. The National Championships is not ever the time to modify/change a rule as important as the dyno procedures. Hoods should have been opened and the results should have stood. Many other racers have been DQ'd for being over before and the Mustangs that blew over should have accepted they were playing too close and got caught. I'm sure this will never happen again and the National Champions next year at Mid-Ohio will be legal by a fair margin. Sidney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.