Adam Ginsberg Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 Great - I appreciate it greatly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Pryor1548534703 Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 Just a quick note on Lexan windshields from experience....they're not cheaper than stock. Our 3rd gens required only two replacements in over 12 years of different cars....currently there's a guy in Salinas that comes to you and installs a new windshield for $135 complete...never had to replace a rear hatch but the junk yards are full of them. The two 4th gen Camaros that we've used lexan in required replacement after two season....real bad discoloration and scratching (even using special spray)...and the windshield on the Lou Gigliotti car was so semi-transparent after 5 years that you could hardly see out of it, same for the rear...the replacement cost for the lexan front and rears were $325 each...it's not cheaper and is just one more cost factor that does not need to be added to CMC...keep it stock and cheap...hey, and as a lightweight myself I heartily endorse Brad's extra 100# provision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Graves1548534707 Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 Thanx for the info Mike. I've been cruising the #81 out on my 12-mile backroad circuit since removing the muffler, and the car backfires, pops, and makes all kinds of weird-ass noises. Especially, and mostly, when I get off the gas. Are these mostly noises that have always been there to some extent, and are just more noticable with the muffler off? And the more important question---Does this affect our mileage negatively? SURE does seem as though I'm ripping through fuel a heck of alot quicker. And this is only driving 6-tenths or so. Obviously this doesn't really affect CMC sprint races, but we're planing on running the 25-Hour T-Hill Enduro at the beginning of December, and I'd rather Not have to through the "Quiet-Box" back on. Sounds mighty Sweet without it. Thanx, Esse' #81... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg R. Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 CMC is a spec class and was designed to be cost-effective as much as possible. The formula works well and we are all evidence of that. I'm for minimal changes at most: Battery relocation-good Ballast-put it where you like Headers-no Corner weighting/screw jacks-no Weight penalties-increase; should be added to the weight at which you won. Meetings-show up or start last Points-take the green and get some points Weight-3100, 3200, 3300 Lexan-no Four races south, four races north and allow two full weekend's points to drop. Let's have fun racing and not tweaking on our cars! Greg Robinson CMC #12 Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted September 18, 2003 Author Members Share Posted September 18, 2003 Steve...the sounds you're hearing are totally normal. The more open the exhaust, the more pronounced. I wouldnt think this would affect mileage at all, but you should talk to someone that knows more (read: anything)about carbs. Greg...do you think we should just not allow shims, aka no adjusting corner weights at all? The way I look at it, if we allow that, then we might as well allow you to do it with a screw. Cost ends up being the same if you buy a threaded collar or a stack of different size shims. If we say no corner weight adjustment of any kind...well hell I'm good with that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsim Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 If we say no corner weight adjustment of any kind...well hell I'm good with that too.Spoken only as an engaged man can... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExRacer Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 To get the right ride height and compensate for sag et al, consult rule 8.36.5 "For all eligible vehicles except late model GM cars using springs defined in 8.36.41 above; Any spring spacers/shims may be used. The spacers may NOT allow adjustment of the installed height of the spring without spring removal." My car is so tweaked, I'd never get the right height without some adjustment . . . Maddog out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ginsberg Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Oh, something that came to mind about the battery relocation. 8.10. BatteryThe battery must remain in the OEM stock location. The battery must be of the same type, group size (i.e. 24F), and voltage as originally equipped and may not be modified. The battery must be securely held with a suitable metal battery hold down. The positive terminals on both the battery and any remotely mounted starter solenoids must be covered with a non-conductive shield. Since we all seem to be in agreement about battery relocation, we should continue to clarify the type of battery being used, ie - continue to use the stock battery, not a DynaBatt, etc. Opinions, suggestions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg R. Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Al-my main concern is for cost. Rear lower control arms with adj. spring perches are $379-399 for a Mustang. Corner weighting is fine and I think allowing the ballast to be placed where you need it takes care of that issue. I hear you on ease of adjustability but once you have the car set up why would you need to change it? I just think this is getting away from what CMC is all about. Greg Robinson CMC #12 Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ginsberg Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Al-my main concern is for cost. Rear lower control arms with adj. spring perches are $379-399 for a Mustang. Corner weighting is fine and I think allowing the ballast to be placed where you need it takes care of that issue. I hear you on ease of adjustability but once you have the car set up why would you need to change it? I just think this is getting away from what CMC is all about. You can buy just the adjustable spring perch for stock Mustang control arms very inexpensively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsim Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 And the GM equivalents? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg R. Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Adam-true enough the perches you speak of are inexpensive, but they also require modification of the stock lower control arm to work. The big question is why you would want to use a stock LCA? A-Sedan requires the use of a stock arm but even those guys are sending them in to have better bushings installed--not a cheap option. Many will box the stock arm as well for rigidity. This is an awful lot of work and unneccesary. Our rules allow replacement type LCA's with better bushings and much needed rigidity; going back to stock arms is a step backwards I think. Greg Robinson CMC #12 Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ginsberg Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Possibly because a cetain Texas racer is still using stock LCA's. There is always give an take to any modification. Depending on what resources you have available at your disposal will dictate costs. Installing different/better bushings is hardly an expensive option - it can be done in your garage with some basic hand tools. Boxing stock arms also isn't very expensive, but is time consuming. Again, depending on the resources at ones disposal. MM sells the adjustable perch for $139 a set. My primary point was if a racer is still using stock arms, he/she can modify them. If they'd prefer to step up to aftermarket, it's $250. The adjustable units are another $120 more, so IMO, the change isn't significantly expensive. Keep in mind - just because something is allowable in the rules doesn't mean a racer has to make a change. Certainly, a racer wants to be as competitive as possible, but that doesn't require a racer to make every modification allowed. Meaning, a racer, or car, maybe faster without a certain allowable mod. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just discussing the issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmc38camaro Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 All, I would like offer a different perspective on weight jacking and more generically on at the track tuning of our cars. If I step back and look at what makes CMC fun, two things come to mind. First, it is the close competitive racing and the chance for any of us to win on any given weekend. The second things is that CMC is a fun supportive group. Of course their are many reasons for great group chemistry, but a lot of it gets down to us helping each other out and sharing information. Ok so what does this have to do with tuning... the more we open the rules to allow for at the track tweaking, the farther apart the group will move as people try to protect their speed secrets. Look around the paddock at the next race, we will be hang around together, helping each other out and generally having a good time. Now look at some of the other series, these people will be thrashing on their cars to tweak out that last tenth and for the most part will be working as independent teams and not as one big happy family. Let's keep these cars simple. I don't want us to evolve into a series where you need to show up with a big crew and lots of equipment to be competitive. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsim Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Good point Mike... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg R. Posted September 19, 2003 Share Posted September 19, 2003 Agreed Mike. I have the same concerns. Are you running for Governor? Adam-No worries! I ran last year with stock LCA's as well. I was thinking of the Global West stock arm rebuild for $284 with spherical bushings. Greg Robinson CMC #12 Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted September 19, 2003 Share Posted September 19, 2003 You guys are right on target. At this point I say no changes for next year after reading all of your comments. If you want to screw around with all these things than join A/I. Bottom line is CMC is what it is, because of the rules that are set forth. I don't see any of the above changes helping us out in anyway. Lets do the 3100/3200/3300lbs rule and do a points attendance change and go from there. Everything else looks useless to me at this point. Batterys may be cheap to move, but also cause a potential safety hazard. I think the more that's changed the more we suffer. I hate changes when everything is so good now. I will still listen, but so far I can't see any improvements. Thanks, Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted September 19, 2003 Author Members Share Posted September 19, 2003 Excellent executive decision making Tony. At the end of the day, the changes we are talking about are all small potatoes anyway. Mike, you brought up an excellent point. Now, about those 14" rotors and six piston calipers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmc38camaro Posted September 19, 2003 Share Posted September 19, 2003 I log on all set to reply to Greg's running for govenor comment with something along the lines of there not enough power or money associate with that role, but running for Tony's job is not out of the question. Then along comes Tony showing real leadership on the rules discussion. There is no way I would want to run against Tony. Carry on Tony. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted September 19, 2003 Share Posted September 19, 2003 Thanks guys. I just started to see it go out of hand ( which was kind of fun)and said wait a minute here ...let's stop right now. I saw the makings of American sedan all over again...no way CMC will ever go down that road. Keep CMC the way it is,and until you guys kick me out..then this is the way its going to be! Thanks for your support, and I will continue to support this awesome group! Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady in Nomex Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 Just some thoughts about the idea of splitting the races 4 north and 4 south. There will likely be some northern CA CMCers like myself who will have trouble making all the southern CA events (and vice-versa), so there will no doubt be some attrition in attendance. If there is as much interest in CMC as I think there is north and south perhaps there can be two CMC divisions, north and south, running mostly separate events and also some coinciding events. I think this would help keep CMC strong by keeping attendance up in both sides of the state. Just an idea for those of us who are not as able to travel as much. The above idea is probably something to consider in the future as I don't think SoCal has the numbers of CMCers to pull that off just yet. I know the interest is potentially there and we are always hearing about cars being built and people coming up through HPDEs to become CMCers. Perhaps a better idea would be to poll CMCers to find out where most of us live and base the location of the races on that. Majority should rule and the closer the majority live to the races is a big factor in keeping attendance up. At least IMHO. We could also just poll everyone and ask them if they are interested in a 50/50 split of the races or keeping the format mostly northern CA as it is now. Again, majority rules and I will not complain if most folks want the 50/50 split. Thanks for reading! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 Julie. CMC will never have a S.Cal/N.Cal split. Attendance is a major deal for CMC ,and that's why we get what we have at each race. The easy way to deal with it is with the drop system,80% of the races count, this way you can go to 6 race weekends and still be in top points. I would never want to split up the Northern guys with the Southern ones,this would kill what we have. I can see us with 30 cars on the grid in the near future. I want to make it fair for both ends of the state, so when I do the schedule for next year,we will be looking what will be best for everyone. Tony Guaglione Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsim Posted September 22, 2003 Share Posted September 22, 2003 Good deal - I like not splitting us up. 2 races in another area are doable - 3 and 4 are pushing it, but not impossible. For us southern folks, Sears dates look like big ones to make. For the northern guys, the California Speedway date should be a 'not miss'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ginsberg Posted September 22, 2003 Share Posted September 22, 2003 Can we revisit the battery move? Please? Pretty please?? Or should I keep my mouth shut? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted September 22, 2003 Share Posted September 22, 2003 Adam, We are all going to get together at our next event and talk about the inexpensive changes(yes batteries too).. Just want to make sure that we keep it cheap and simple for next year. I will keep you posted,and your doing a great job back there and would like to get together with you guys sometime! Tony Guaglione 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.