Heavy Horse

[bucketlist]

Ford Mustang Mach 1 TTC 3420

Ford Mustang V8 ('99-'04) TTE** 3273

 

Crazy variance in classifications within the same year car regardless of where your CG is located IMHO!

 

Well, let's see... The GT had a 260HP 2-valve motor, and 12" brakes, while the Mach 1 had an under-rated 305HP motor, with heads sourced from the Cobra/Marauder, cams from Lincoln (used to give it a little more midrange torque), and a MUCH higher redline. Oh, and Brembo 4-pots, revised dampers (Tokico) and stiffer springs, too. Based on that, I can understand the upclassing, and honestly, I would say that TTC sounds about right.

 

Dave, I'm no expert but I think this is where some of the challenges exist. I realize this discussion thread is about the weight of the 05-10 Mustangs, sorry for the hijack. When comparing the 04 Mustang GT to the 04 Mustang Mach 1 makes it seem like the Mach is a "world beater" next to it's little brother the GT - but when that is used exclusively then the problem arises if we compare the 04 Mach 1 to the 06 Mustang GT.

 

I've driven both in DEs and would have to tell you that I felt the 06 handling was superior, the motor was comparable and the brakes were about the same (wasn't a heavy braking track - MSR Houston). Putting the Mach 1 in TTC because of 266rwhp and some Ford suspension bits doesn't look correct in that light to me. YMMV.

 

BTW, I really loved hustling my bone stock 06 Mustang GT around the race track on the stock BFG's, the car was a ton of fun. Wish I could have afforded to turn it into a race car! Ok, back to the original thread.

[TurboShortBus]

while the Mach 1 had Brembo 4-pots

The Mach 1s came with the same PBR 2-piston front calipers (13" rotors) and 1-piston rear calipers (10.65" rotors) that the Cobras did.

 

Mark

[Greg G.]

Any change in the weight of the Mustang will require an increase in base classing (ie. 7 point asterisk). Compare with the BMW M3 with B** classing, and Lexus IS-F that is headed for B* classing. So, you can take your points in weight reduction, or take a mandatory 7 point asterisk--seems like you might want to keep the option.

[Fair]

Don't forget +2 for the Brembos, along with any seemingly innocent exterior trim parts, blingy suspension parts, valences, spoilers, or spoiler deletes that are options above and beyond the base GT package (if you have them), etc. I know that there are several different options for the front valence now (per the thread over on C-C), and they will all cost modification points even if the performance improvement is negligible.

 

Mark (MarkMc26 on C-C)

I'm not adding +2 for factory equipped brakes. A huge number of the 2011 GTs came with the Brembo option package - so many in fact that Ford is running out of the parts to make them and stopped taking new orders for Brembo equipped cars until 2012. I literally know of nobody that is a car guy that bought a 2011 GT that didn't get this option package.

 

And you say the optional front and rear valance is more points? Really? Nah.

 

My car has an optional stereo... how many points for that? And what if I remove some badges - How many points?

 

This is starting to sound like the SCCA...

[kbrew8991]

Them's the rules, dude.

 

If you don't want to play by them put TTR on your car and run whatever you want as long as it has 4 "fenders" and passes safety inspection.

 

If this was SCCA you'd have to buy the super special option packaged car of the month to be competitive (and change it monthly too!) oh and you'd have to run it in a wheel to wheel racing class because that's all they have for track-based stuff

 

If you really just HAVE to run that stuff and run it points-free I'd ask for a spec line for some higher option package that includes what you've upgraded to better factory Ford stuff (I assume one of the CS or Boss versions will cover everything, right?). But I wouldn't be surprised to see it base classed an asterix higher and/or at a heavier weight to level the playing field.

 

Beware about purposefully running an illegal car. There's quite a bit of verbage in the ruleset and on the license app along the lines of "I'll follow all the rules or else".

[TurboShortBus]

I'm not adding +2 for factory equipped brakes. A huge number of the 2011 GTs came with the Brembo option package - so many in fact that Ford is running out of the parts to make them and stopped taking new orders for Brembo equipped cars until 2012. I literally know of nobody that is a car guy that bought a 2011 GT that didn't get this option package.

Sorry, Terry, but that isn't how the system works. The vehicles as listed in the TT rules are the base vehicles, sans performance options and extras. A 2011 Mustang GT with the optional Brembo package has an advantage over an otherwise identical 2011 Mustang GT with the normal brake package, which is where the +2 points come in. However, if all 2011 Mustang GTs came standard with the Brembo package, then it would be a different story.

 

And you say the optional front and rear valance is more points? Really? Nah.

As for the front and rear valances, "modifications is modifications," no matter if they are big or small. The bottom line is that the valence from the base vehicle has been replaced or modified, and there is no provision in the TT rules for "partial points" for small, medium, or large valence modifications (nor will there be), as nobody here owns a wind tunnel to verify the performance impact of every different aero part. The points are based on a car (not necessarily your car) that would gain the most from these modifications. Go big, or don't go at all.

 

Not taking points for these modifications will likely result in a DQ during tech inspection.

 

Are these points fair? Maybe so, maybe not, depending on your car and how it responds to these modifications. As another example that you can appreciate, I am considering building a Spec E30 car that can pull double-duty in TTE, but the +3 points for subframe bushings are enough to push the car from a high-points TTE car to a low-points TTD car, where it will receive beatdowns from the TTD competition here. So, as is the game in TT, I have to figure out the best places to spend points. "Recalculating..."

 

Mark

[sperkins]

[IGZOSTD]

Fair, Just take the points , quit crying and run the car and have a good time. If your running in Texas I know Ken will keep you honest so don't think you can sneak under the radar.

[hustler]

If this was SCCA you'd have to buy the super special option packaged car of the month to be competitive (and change it monthly too!) oh and you'd have to run it in a wheel to wheel racing class because that's all they have for track-based stuff

This month's GRM has a short read about how SCCA decided they will no longer assess "points" for aftermarket shift knobs, lol.

[kbrew8991]

Fair, Just take the points , quit crying and run the car and have a good time. If your running in Texas I know Sean Farrah will keep you honest so don't think you can sneak under the radar.

fixed - I'm just a customer these days (finally!)

[IGZOSTD]

Is that a new development Ken. And do you take any points for that modification ?

[Fair]

Fair, Just take the points , quit crying and run the car and have a good time. If your running in Texas I know Ken will keep you honest so don't think you can sneak under the radar.

(facepalm)... Well, I'm wrong once again. I had no idea that factory options dinged me in NASA

 

I really didn't think that factory installed brakes would count for modification points. Or that other factory options over the base GT counted... especially cosmetic pieces, or a wing delete. Very odd, lesson learned, and I'll spread the word. I was not trying to run illegally, I just thought this was an overzealous overreach of the application of the points rule. Now I know better.

 

Optional brake package is now +2

 

Funny thing - the SCCA has actually loosened up lately a bit on badges, shift knobs, wings/spoilers, and some other stuff lately. Weird. Maybe this is a balance thing... the SCCA loosens up on rules and NASA tightens up. The world is back in balance.

 

Here's the thing - We are building our '11 GT to fit within the SCCA "STX" class, which is the slowest of all of the Street Touring autocross classes when you look at the times at the Solo Nationals each year. Get's beat by 100 hp '89 Civics. The class is limited to 140+ treadwear / 265mm street tires, max 9" wheels, only factory available spoilers/wings/splitters, but we can use any shocks/springs, one form of camber adjustment only, minimum 25 lb seats, has to run cats within 6" of stock location... lots and lots of little rules to keep the car slow, cheap and emissions legal. Wildly popular category within SCCA. But with all of these new NASA point mods now, I could potentially build a TTS car if I did all of the legal mods in STX, and I'm easily going to end up in TTA if I do even most of what I had planned for this year. And it would still get beat by an '89 Civic around the cones, plus the car would get killed by the typical TTA and TTS competition - it will still be on freagin street tires, and relatively skinny ones at that.

 

Left: I guess the optional rear wing (cosmetic) now adds points. Right: Optional front grill insert adds points as well

 

Oh well... I said I'd build this thing toward STX class and just run it in whatever NASA TT class it falls into. Proves once again that its impossible to build one car to run competitively in both SCCA and NASA.

 

And yes, Ken O will keep me honest... he already told me that the optional brakes would be +2. I told him he was nuts, but apparently he was right.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Guest

[kbrew8991]

He was referring to a different Ken but same result

 

You can build fine for both, you just need to be smarter about your build and to understand this ruleset as much as you understand the ST_ ruleset. For example if they're just cosmetic body pieces why change them at all? Surely if they don't help at track speeds they won't help at autocross speeds either

 

KB, whos car with wisely selected PTE parts would also do well in ITA (an SCCA class )

[Fair]

... if they're just cosmetic body pieces why change them at all? Surely if they don't help at track speeds they won't help at autocross speeds either

Well, because they're pretty. Mostly I was going to do everything I could legally do for aero within STX, to prove a point about new wording on their 14.2.F aero rule there, but now I have to think twice.

 

I inadvertently ordered a car with the optional, zero cost "wing delete", so I guess I have to take points for that now. Otherwise I'd have to add the base GT wing to not take points.

 

Left: Base GT wing. Right: Wing delete

 

Oiy, a whole new set of variables we have to crunch. I guess I need to go back and look at the Ford website for he '11 GT - which has changed significantly since I ordered my car, lots of new options - to see what's included in a base '11 GT again (now).

[TurboShortBus]

Terry, this is all covered in the rules and on the classification forms. For example (bold/underline are exactly as they appear on the forms):

 

Proceed to calculate your vehicle’s modification points assessment for up-classing purposes. Fill in the blanks with the

number of modification points assessed for each item that affects your vehicle. You may leave the lines blank next to

modifications that your vehicle does not have. Proceed to Page 2, and calculate all modification points’ assessments, then

fill in total points below. ALL Factory Options and Parts Not on the Base Trim Model Must Be Assessed Points!!!

The key words here are, "base trim model."

 

Hell, I want to remove the OEM rear spoiler from my 2004 Mustang GT, because it's ugly and does nothing. But, under the TT rules, it would be seen as a modification to the "base trim model" (since all 2004 Mustang GTs came with a rear spoiler), and it would not be worth any amount of points. Even the "wing delete" option would be assessed points. So, I get to keep the wing, but I understand why.

 

Mark

[Varkwso]

... if they're just cosmetic body pieces why change them at all? Surely if they don't help at track speeds they won't help at autocross speeds either

Well, because they're pretty. Mostly I was going to do everything I could legally do for aero within STX, to prove a point about new wording on their 14.2.F aero rule there, but now I have to think twice.

 

I inadvertently ordered a car with the optional, zero cost "wing delete", so I guess I have to take points for that now. Otherwise I'd have to add the base GT wing to not take points.

 

Left: Base GT wing. Right: Wing delete

 

Oiy, a whole new set of variables we have to crunch. I guess I need to go back and look at the Ford website for he '11 GT - which has changed significantly since I ordered my car, lots of new options - to see what's included in a base '11 GT again (now).

 

 

Our 2008 Shelby GT (not the GT-500) has tons of useless point mods (fascia, wing delete, etc.) under NASA rules. But the car looks cool, drives great and competes very well in its class in SCCA AX. Building to two sets of rules results in compromise or setup changes.

[IGZOSTD]

Fair, you should check with Greg on the wing delete. I know when I ordered mine I got the wing delete and never concidered it a mod from the base model as its just a choice you have in the base trim package. It still is a base model wing or not, every purchaser has that choice when ordering .

I don't know if BMW still does this but you used to be able to order an M3 or M5 without the badging.

[Greg G.]

If the car comes with a wing, and you "modify" it by deleting it, you take the points.

[IGZOSTD]

Greg , when ording a new Mustang there is a box you check for wing delete. Your not taking anything off. The car comes without it. It is still the Base model Mustang. I did it because the OE wig is ugly.

[TurboShortBus]

Greg , when ording a new Mustang there is a box you check for wing delete. Your not taking anything off. The car comes without it. It is still the Base model Mustang. I did it because the OE wig is ugly.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are taking something off of the base vehicle as it is typically equipped from the factory without any interference from option boxes; you're just having somebody do it at the assembly line instead of doing it in your driveway.

 

Mark

[IGZOSTD]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are taking something off of the base vehicle as it is typically equipped from the factory without any interference from option boxes; you're just having somebody do it at the assembly line instead of doing it in your driveway.

 

Mark

 

 

Mark, Thats realy not the case here. I guess you just don't get it . Its still the base GT Mustang, with or without the rear spoiler. Its not part of any package, they don't stop the line or jump through any hoops. They offered this because they knew some would like it and some would not. If I were to remove the rear deck spoiler then #1 there would be big holes in the deck lid and the car wouldn't be the way Ford built it (if it was indeed a Ford). and #2 I see it as just an option like the color of the paint. If I was to check rear spoiler delete then as I took delivery of the car it would be the way Ford built it . So thats not realy the case , but we all see the ski in a little different color.

I'll go with what ever the rule says as the TT class I run in now is not affected by this. This one seems a little out there.

[Varkwso]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are taking something off of the base vehicle as it is typically equipped from the factory without any interference from option boxes; you're just having somebody do it at the assembly line instead of doing it in your driveway.

 

Mark

 

 

Mark, Thats realy not the case here. I guess you just don't get it . Its still the base GT Mustang, with or without the rear spoiler. Its not part of any package, they don't stop the line or jump through any hoops. They offered this because they knew some would like it and some would not. If I were to remove the rear deck spoiler then #1 there would be big holes in the deck lid and the car wouldn't be the way Ford built it (if it was indeed a Ford). and #2 I see it as just an option like the color of the paint. If I was to check rear spoiler delete then as I took delivery of the car it would be the way Ford built it . So thats not realy the case , but we all see the ski in a little different color.

I'll go with what ever the rule says as the TT class I run in now is not affected by this. This one seems a little out there.

 

 

If you do not check any boxes how does the car come from Ford? Understand now?

[TurboShortBus]

If you do not check any boxes how does the car come from Ford? Understand now?

If no option boxes are checked, then the car will show up with a rear spoiler. This is how the base vehicle is supplied.

 

Mark

[RelentlessGSX]

This is getting a little off topic. Now, I've never ordered a brand new car, so forgive me, but when purchasing a new Mustang, you have to make certain selections; trim, car color, etc. I assume the car color is not considered an option, is it? I know that sounds ridiculous, but if you are simply selecting the color and in the same way requesting your GT to not come with a wing/spoiler, is it considered an option? Do you actually have to check under an "options column" to remove the wing?

 

The spirit of the TT rules (I assume), in regards to factory "upgrades / options" is to create a level playing field. If you remove a wing/spoiler (which by factory definiton is supposed to improve handling/looks), you'd be simply hurting yourself (per the claims of the manufacturer) by removing it. Why would someone have to take a modifications point for basically reducing the performance of their car? I mean, by implication, if you are charged points for remvoing a (factory) valance, spoiler, etc. then we're saying the car would perform better without it. Is that the belief?

 

Again, not here to argue or be difficult, just trying to understand the reasoning behind taking points for removing factory performance options. Thanks for your time.

 

-Bill

[jason]

Why would someone have to take a modifications point for basically reducing the performance of their car? I mean, by implication, if you are charged points for remvoing a (factory) valance, spoiler, etc. then we're saying the car would perform better without it. Is that the belief?

Removing a spoiler could increase the top end speed. Different effects on different cars. So...you take points.