Engine Question

[bsim]

so why not give the 4th Gen F-bodies the same opportunity?

Because the line has to be drawn somewhere, and this is it.

 

Someone wants to run an LS1, I'm sure AI will welcome them.

 

See, the great thing about having rules is that they get to be followed, not questioned. I know you realize that there needs to be a line. Or the next thing you know, CMC is allowing tube-framed Corvettes.

 

"Gee Brad, then it wouldn't be CMC!"

"I know, but back in 2005, we listened to the kids instead of being parents."

 

The rules are what they are. Can we PLEASE stop the teenage "why this, why that", and get on with building and racing cars?

[tacovini]

I'm thirsty...can I have a glass of water.

[Glenn]

 

Someone wants to run an LS1, I'm sure AI will welcome them.

 

 

he was saying swap the LS1 w/ an LT1 in a 98-02 F-body. and if i put an LT1 in my 98Z, it would be no different than my 95 CMC car, mechanicaly.

[Tony G]

Like Brad said,quit the what if syndrome.

Simple, read the rules and those are the rules,and if you always want to see what if and why,and then we change the rules to make you happy..then welcome to American Sedan which imploded.

The rules are the rules,so play by them.

Move forward please.

Tony Guaglione

National CMC Director

[Waco Racer]

I thought this was on open forum to discuss things related to rules. Some of the new drivers/owners weren't around when the class was formed and have some questions. It can be hard to move forward if you don't know where the class is coming from. Some of the things talked about in this thread would be more trouble than they are worth. Personally my intent is not to change rules, I just like asking questions about them. I was surprised when the 4th gen cars were classed in, but now I understand why. Questioning rules happens all of the time. I deal with it at the races and between the races. Believe me if I wanted to change a rule I would do more than post on the message boards. I like the rules the way they are right now, but I also believe that some changes will have to come in the future.

[bsim]

I like the rules the way they are right now, but I also believe that some changes will have to come in the future.

TRUE!

 

But as you note, QUESTIONING the reasoning behind the rules doesn't change them. REQUESTING a rule change might, but that's a different type of discussion that leans towards Todd's point of view.

 

I think the bottom line is that the rules are what they are, and we live with them. If you don't want to live with them you either run in another class, or request a change.

 

BUT:

• Don't expect ANY rule change in that current year.
  Don't expect that your request will be accepted.
  Don't whine about reasoning if it's not accepted.
  Enjoy the change if it does happen.
  And accept the answer, whatever the outcome, and move on.

[King Matt1548534716]

Despite all this posturing, the question I asked still has not been answered. Is it OK to run an LT1 in a 98-02 F-body? As I understand the rules, the late-style LS1 brakes and newer body components are legal within other provisions of the rules, so what is the answer?

[Al F.]

So, as of right now, based on the rules today, early GMs and late GMs are considered entirely different groups of cars. They may as well have been made by different manufacturers. The only mechanical updating/backdating is done by exception, within the rule for that specific mechanical item (brakes for example). This is why 305s are not allowed in 4th gens. Hopefully that seals that up.

 

There is no doubt rules need to be discussed, and that they need to evolve over time. Right about now though, given that we're in April, shouldnt all of us be concentrating on getting our cars ready for the next event??

[Waco Racer]

Right about now though, given that we're in April, shouldnt all of us be concentrating on getting our cars ready for the next event??

 

That's for when we get home, posting here is for while I'm at work

[bsim]

Despite all this posturing, the question I asked still has not been answered. Is it OK to run an LT1 in a 98-02 F-body? ... so what is the answer?

NO.

[Neil B]

[bsim]

It doesn't HAVE to make sense. Bottom line, if we were 'consistent' across the board - stock weights, no mods allowed what-so-ever, LS1 Z's wouold dominate. So, Mustangs get a lighter weight, GM's run restrictors, etc, etc, etc. INconsistency is done to even the playing field. That's what the rules are FOR.

 

GM guys can whine about weight, Ford guys can whine about power, and some 8 year old in Montana can complain he doesn't understand rule 8.1.3.

 

None of this changes the rules.

 

A rule question/clarification is "For the $700 shock limit, is that wholesale or retail?" because they might be different priced at certain vendors.

 

A rule question is not "Why can't I put IRS on an F-body?" because it says in the rules that you can't.

[King Matt1548534716]

Since I don't see Brad Simpson listed in my current rule book as a CMC Director, I will wait for a more official ruling on my question, which is whether or not an LT1 (not an LS1) is legal in a 98-02 F-body.

[Boudy1548534717]

Well, I've learned alot from this discussion. Just not sure what...

 

I think I'll change my signature to, "Da Rules Is What Day Is."

 

Boudy

[bsim]

I will wait for a more official ruling on my question, which is whether or not an LT1 (not an LS1) is legal in a 98-02 F-body.

 

I guess you need a director to point this out?

4. ELIGIBLE MANUFACTURERS/MODELS

Manufacturers:

Ford Motor Company

Eligible Ford makes and models:

1979-95 Ford Mustang 5.0 V8 (Cobra models excluded)

1979-86 Mercury Capri 5.0 V8

1996-03 Ford Mustang 4.6 V8 (Cobra models excluded)

General Motors (Early GM)

Eligible Early GM makes and models:

1982-92 Chevrolet Camaro (all submodels with 5.0L V8 motors eg – RS, Z28 etc)

1982-92 (all submodels with 5.0L V8 motors eg Formula, Trans-Am, WS6 etc)

General Motors (Late GM)

Eligible Late GM makes and models with 5.7L V8 motors

1993-97 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 excluding SS

1993-97 Pontiac Formula, Trans-Am, excluding WS6

 

Hmmm, no mention of 98+ GM's is there?

 

If it's not IN the rules, then it's OUT. How much more 'clarification' do you need?

[mitchntx1548534714]

Brad can you explain what the differences are between a 93-97 and 98-02 are other than cosmetics and the motor?

[mitchntx1548534714]

Like Brad said,quit the what if syndrome.

Simple, read the rules and those are the rules,and if you always want to see what if and why,and then we change the rules to make you happy..then welcome to American Sedan which imploded.

The rules are the rules,so play by them.

Move forward please.

Tony Guaglione

National CMC Director

 

So we are supposed to sit down, shut up and be happy with what we're fed? How is that moving forward? It looks more like standing still ... what happens in 2006 ... 2007 ... 2010?

 

If this kind of rules discussion is not welcomed, maybe this whole portion of the site should be deleted.

 

Dealing with the future of the series should be on everyone's mind ...

 

Just an observation ...

[bsim]

Body parts

LS1 v. LT1

Associated intake/exhaust

Wiring/computer

Front brakes

Sway bar size

Suspension rates/valving

 

I think that's about it.

 

But, it doesn't matter if they're identical except for badging. The rules say you can't have one.

 

Want one this year? Run AI.

 

Want one NEXT year? ASK for a rule change.

 

Simple as that.

[tacovini]

Come on guys.

This isn't the place to request exceptions to the rules.

I've said it before, we're open to discuss anything but the items that are not in the rules really deserve a phone call to your regional or national CMC director to discuss reasons on both sides. We're not even in the rules revision season.

 

As far as I can tell all the folks that are posting already have cars and motors and the whole debate is theoretical.

 

Lets turn this into a positive, and if you'd like, start a new thread about all the amazing similarities between 94-97 Camaros and the 98-02 Camaros. Without any bashing of the rules or the ethnic heritage of the folks that work on them, you might even get some folks to listen and get educated! Heck, Richard may even chime in with a thought or two...

[mitchntx1548534714]

Body parts

LS1 v. LT1

Associated intake/exhaust

Wiring/computer

Front brakes

Sway bar size

Suspension rates/valving

 

I think that's about it.

 

But, it doesn't matter if they're identical except for badging. The rules say you can't have one.

 

Want one this year? Run AI.

 

Want one NEXT year? ASK for a rule change.

 

Simple as that.

 

Well thank you ... I don't really think you read my question though. You just seem to have posted thinking you know what I said.

 

OTHER THAN MOTOR AND COSMETICS, what's the difference?

 

body panels - cosmetic

 

96-97 is an OBD2 car just like 98-02. The com port changed on the 99, but that is just a serial cable difference. My research has also shown that the code in the 97 F-car PCM is almost identical to that used in the '97 "Vette ... and LS1 equipped car. Similarly, a 92 speed density set up is used on a 93 LT1 motor

 

Intake is part of the motor ... however how air is sent to the motor is drawn from the same place, underneath the car in front of the radiator. exhaust is open save for stock manifolds. Ever looked closely at 94-95 OEM exhaust manifolds and the stockers on an LS1? About the same prot sizes ...

 

Front brakes are allowed for back dating, so that is a non rules issue

 

Sway bar sizes .. the same. SLP offered a hollow 35mm, but it has shown that the metallurgy yields almost the same roll rate as the stock 32. All cars, V6 through SS/WS6 had a 19mm rear bar except for 93 rear 1LE which is 21mm.

 

spring rates and shock valving is open under the rules. SLP offered some strange Bilstein revalving on a suspension upgrade that has also proven to be junk

 

So, other than the mystic "rules" there should be no reason why an LT1 motor in a '98-02 wouldn't be OK. They are, in essence, the same car. From the firewall back, 83-02 are the same basic car. Just minor changes.

 

I guess this is where the frustration lies in that catch-all rule of "if it isn't in the rules, then no", lies. It just doesn't apply in EVERY case. and it is drawn like a six shooter in an ole west gunfight.

 

And waiting till a December to open up rule change suggestions is silly.

 

Noone is advocating a midseason rules overhaul. That would be absolutely unfair. I think all anyone would like is a reasonable discussion about a FEW issues, not "it's my way or the hiway".

 

That causes ill will amongst this band of brothers. I certainly don't want that and am not here to cause it, even though Adam thinks so.

Edited April 16, 2005 by Guest

[King Matt1548534716]

items that are not in the rules really deserve a phone call to your regional or national CMC director to discuss reasons on both sides.

 

Why not have these discussions in an open forum like this for the entire community of CMC racers to see? It avoids a lot of confusion and redundancy and puts the official answers on the record so everybody is on the same page. Personally, I would rather have all rulings coming from one source rather than potentially varying regional interpretations.

[Glenn]

items that are not in the rules really deserve a phone call to your regional or national CMC director to discuss reasons on both sides.

 

Why not have these discussions in an open forum like this for the entire community of CMC racers to see? It avoids a lot of confusion and redundancy and puts the official answers on the record so everybody is on the same page. Personally, I would rather have all rulings coming from one source rather than potentially varying regional interpretations.

 

Matt - you and me are thinking the same. my only goal here was to "trick" them into posting what needs to be added into the rules to avoid these very type of threads.

 

Brad - last i checked, no-one was going around and checking VIN's on the CMC cars. so who's to know if my chassis is a 93 or an 02? the front fenders and nose will interchange, as will the K-member and motor. once thats done, the remainder of your list of difference's is moot as all those items fall into the update/backdate/allowable modifications. so again, whats the difference w/ having an LT1 in a 98-02 F-body?

i have a buddy that will give me a 98 chassis that has been stripped to the last nut and bolt. a free chassis is the best chassis to start w/ as it meets the intent of what CMC is all about - cheap racing. so i should have to pass on this free chassis and spend what i have to in order to find a 93-97 chassis even though there is no differance between the 2 once the motor has been removed? i dont need you to show me the rule again as i'm not debating the intent/interpretation of that rule. more the narrow thinking that it wouldnt be legal because "we" say so. i say if the parts are the same, let them be used.

 

 

why is it we have no F-body experts serving as a director? or is Al F. the expert? no dig @ Al, just wondering out loud.

[Adam Ginsberg]

why is it we have no F-body experts serving as a director? or is Al F. the expert? no dig @ Al, just wondering out loud.

 

According to the "Series Info, Rules, and Contacts" page, 3 of the 5 West Coast directors are F-body drivers:

 

Don Trask ( 4th gen ), Al Fernandez ( 4th gen ), and Mike Plum ( 3rd gen ).

 

Tony used to race an F-body, but quickly came to his senses.

 

Now...let's go race!

[Boudy1548534717]

I've held off as long as I can. This is starting to read like other forums that I no longer participate on. Endless bickering about things that:

1) Won't change.

2) Won't really matter if they did.

3) Don't really matter to the majority anyway.

 

Look, The rules are what they are. They are not nearsighted, they are tight and fixed. The rules have worked extremly well for how long??? Sure they'll change and evolve over time but not because one or two guys want them to. By reading the comments from the Brass around here, they'll change as needed for the betterment of the series. Every series I've ever been a part of has changing rules every year and it's an endless cycle. Every year the lap times drop, the cars get faster, the cost goes higher, and the car count goes down. I raced Hot Stocks around DFW and one year they make mini-clutches legal, the next year they allow 180 degree headers and so on and so on. Then I tried Legends and guess what. One year Carrera is the legal spec shock and next years it's Bilstiens. It just doesn't end and that's why I'm now chosing to test the waters in CMC. I've watched this class for a couple years now and it's built on a solid foundation, its rules.

 

I assure you that as soon as the directors begin a pattern of rule changing, I'm OUT. And you can bet you sweet noodles that other racers will be OUT as well.

 

Pick any other class and try to compete with a 10 year old car. Kiss my bazooka, it won't happen anywhere but CMC. It may be called nearsighted or whatever, the fact is that CMC works.

 

So if you chose CMC then you chose CMC rules. AI has rules, and so does AIX, and A Sedan... Why did you chose CMC if you prefer rules that apply in the other series?

 

One guy wants to powder coat his headers for safety, another guy wants to run a 98' because it's free to him.... It's on and on. The rules will never accomodate every situation that every racer wants to take advantage of. Hell, I've got a 347 stroker in my garage that if I was allowed to run would save me money. Isn't that the intent of the series??

 

I'll quit now as I realize that I'm not 1/10 th done with the way I personally feel about changing rules and ruining classes as a result.

 

Boudy

[Glenn]

i'm done w/ this thread. seems we cant have a discussion w/out people getting upset. i'll go back to being a mindless participant.