Disqualified Mustangs.

[Tom Y]

Does anyone know which Mustangs were disqualified at the Nationals and why they disqualified them? Thanks Tom Young.

[King Matt1548534716]

One Mustang was DQ'd on Sunday for avoidable contact. It was the only DQ of the weekend. Why do you ask?

[Tom Y]

Matt I asked, first because I am building a CMC Mustang, second in the Event Specific Forum, CMC National Champs thread, Glenn infers that the top Mustangs were disqualified because of rule infractions. I was of course curious what the were. Being a Ford man all my life I also didn't like seeing four Chevys at the front. Thanks Tom Young.

[jeffburch]

5.

 

jb

[King Matt1548534716]

Rub it in. It just adds ammo to our case.

 

I don't recall any Fords being DQ'd or penalized for a rules infraction at the Nats, although Ginsberg might have been underweight in one session (the car, certainly not him!). But there was one front-running GM DQ'd (later reduced to a last in class penalty) for coilover adjusters being out of spec.

[Glenn]

those are the ones in which i was talking about. there were also guys who tried to make low risk moves and paid the price. one was the outside of T8 at the top of the crest. no grip there at all.

also, my starter didnt fall out of my car. so should i be penalized because one fell out of a Ford? i think not.

point is, the GM's were a better prepared car. i've worked my ass off to ensure its reliability. bring a prep'ed car and then we can see.

 

3 of the top 4 cars had zero infractions that weekend.

 

the Ford camp has there King of the Hill from 2006. the 3rd gen guys have theirs this year. look for the 4th gen at the top next year.

i love it when the group here lumps the 3rd and 4th gens into the same pile w/ regards to rule parity. the only thing the 3rd/4th gens share is the same rear suspension design (T/A, rear LCA's, PHR). everything else is no different than a Fox coupe. same strut design, same brakes, same minimum weight.

 

until the 4th gen gets the same minimum weight as the rest of the field, i have little to no sympathy for you Ford guys.

 

I do recall a 4th gen finishing near the back. so I know its not the platform.

 

not sure what its gonna take. do i need to build a Fox car to show how its done? i've had 9 years working w/ the 4th gen platform. can i get someone w/ 9 years of Ford road racing experiance to step forward please?

[Glenn]

to put water on the fire......

look at the best lap time from the Championship race Sunday. i took out 3 of the ones who were really off the pace (2 fords and a 4th gen).

 

the Champ ran a best of 1:40.7xx.

the slowest one was a 1:42.8xx.

2 seconds is all the separated the field. i know the Champ had clear track the entire race and he was never really contested the whole time.

what about the guy who ran the 1:42.8? he was 10th and 11th. you can bet your ass there was a battle back there. anyone think open clear track is worth 2 seconds over a mid pack battle? i sure do. add in any questions over ability to drive, set-up a car, learn new tracks, ability to adjust for weather (it was 95 degrees at home and i was racing in 39-70 degree weather - i had to adjust - alot) and 2 seconds on a 2.25mile track in not much. take a look at a World Challenge GT race. see how much lap times range. i bet its more that 2 seconds. hell, NASCAR almost has a 2 second spread between pole and go home (just a wild guess).

 

anyways. if your building a car, keep building one. take a look at the drivers ability and experiance before you cry foul about the rules. infact, Tony G (our fearless leader) switched from a 4th gen to a Ford last year didnt he? why on earth would he want to loose?

[jeffburch]

Well after watching JG III's dvd today, I must say the only ammo the ford camp needs is in their right foot.

 

 

jb

[Glenn]

also, i took my worste lap and my best lap and subtracted the difference.

i got a 1.9 second difference.

i took another name from the list and i got a 5.1 second differance.

i made up 3.2 seconds on that driver alone in one lap.

all that shows is a driver who can and a driver who cant string together consistant laps. i didnt dig for the most inconsistant driver, i picked a name at random.

 

get some facts. not just, "i got beat and it cant be my fault."

[King Matt1548534716]

OK, let's get some facts into the discussion. What's the track width and CG of a 3rd and 4th gen, Glenn? Given two cars with the same weight and HP, the lower, wider one will be faster. An SN95 is over 2.5 inches wider than a Fox. How much wider than that are the GMs? This is one area where we need to start equalizing the rules, just like in AI. It's also time to consider adding some weight to the 4th gens and deducting weight from the Foxes. The 4th gen has an SLA and a torque arm and you think that's a fair comparison to a Fox as long as it's 50 pounds heavier?

[Pat Stone1548534713]

Well I might as well weigh in on this discussion since I was the only Official non negotiated DQ of the week end. I think the competition was extremely close. Glenn makes one little slip at the start and could never get it back. I thought the cars were all very close. The only problem we had was not enough track time to even do proper tire temps because the morning sessions were a toss out because it was so cold we couldn't get 100 degrees in the tires. Then in the main qualifying race we have a hood eject into the field at 120 mph. See Jeff Burches film on why you should use hood pins.. So of course the whole field had to check up, so you weren't killed by flying debree and glass. So as we watch the leaders check out the battles ensues for fifth thru tenth. All the cars were very close and you'll notice that any of the top ten cars in CMC could have easily won the CMC2 race. Lap times were very fast all weekend. I would like to apoligize to Rusty once again for the contact. He drove a very good race and should have finished in top ten. It is harder to race against people you're not used to, when you don't know their tendancies and any slight miscalculation at 100 plus can have dire consequences. We did have a blast and NASA did an outstanding job of keeping things running smoothly. I really enjoyed racing with all of you and hopefully we can do it again next year with a little better results.

 

Pat Stone

[Glenn]

CG??? who the hell knows. I bet if we really looked into it, the Fox would win. those things can be stupid light and when the 100lbs of ballast is added to the passenger floor pan, the CG goes way down. hell, I cant get a 4th gen to minimum weight w/out fuel starving it in a 20 minute race.

we all have the same ride height limits. width is only part of it. how about length? so my car is longer and wider. I bet that works against me in traffic - right? a fox will squeeze thru a much smaller opening than a GM.

you are right, same HP and same weight - the lower/wider car will be faster. but the 4th gen is not the same weight. its 50lbs heavier.

as for it being fair w/ only 50lbs difference? add 50 lbs to your car for shits and grins and see what it does to your lap times. 50lbs is huge when its being decelerated from 125mph w/ the same brakes you have on the same tire you have. then I have to accelerate that same 50lbs w/ a TQ curve that’s pathetic above 3500 rpm's.

as for the SN95 - cant you fox guys convert to the SN-95 track width using the SN-95 lowers? I bet that helps in available camber.

 

you asked for facts, but you didn’t bring any.

I brought facts about the parity in driver ability. that is far more a factor that anything else. I turned a 1.9 second spread over 18 laps. Matt, you did a 4.2 spread over 9 laps. turning consistent lap times is more a part of this that anyone will know. until you can run the same lap repeatedly, you will never be able to get a good baseline for what the car is doing and what needs to be changed.

most of the Fox guys around here have no idea what spring rates they run. when I ask, it’s the same old "H&R Race springs from MM!" crap. whats the rate? they don’t know. none of the guys around here knew you could get springs from the dirt track shop in 1" increments of height and in 50lb increments in rate for the front and 25 lbs for the rear. I learned this, and I used a few (many) different spring rates to find out what works and what doesn’t. I didn't follow the lead of the California 4th gens, I learned on my own. we have a group of 4 of us here who constantly try new rates. we worked together to catch the Fox chassis thru 2005, and 2006. I see absolutely no teamwork from the ford camp.

what sway bar diameters are on your car? most here don’t know. they don’t know what sizes were available from 79-04 (front or rear). sway bars are a huge tuning tool. I own at least one of every legal size for a 4th gen. I've used most of them. wheel spacers are a nice tool too. ever used a wheel spacer to make a car loose or tight? I have, many times. works very well. in fact, I have about $300 in different thickness wheel spacers in my track box.

 

the point I'm making is I don’t see the same effort put into tuning the car from most other drivers that I know I put into mine. I tell everyone anything they want to know (doesn’t help you at all, I know). so answer these questions honestly and openly. have a "sniff" of a clue as to how hard I have worked, Jeff B has worked, Nick Steel has worked to make these cars what they are. we don’t have a Maximum Motorsports speed shop to get RR stuff from. we don’t rely on the "hot set-up" to make us fast.

 

Matt, how long have you been driving on a road course? how much track time do you really have? I'm at 9 years. 4-5 events a year in the first 6, and 7-10 a year for the last 3. I have a lot of seat time.

 

I'm sure there is no making you feel better.

[Aaron Bambach]

I followed the Champs car for a few laps last year before he went off in turn one with a low tire or something, and that car was dialed in like no other- and Jeff can drive it like he stole it - I watched the whole race this year and in my opinion a good car with a great driver won the race- many cars could have been in contention had they put thier heads down early and got on with it - although JB had clean track he also made the fewest mistakes from where I was watching.

 

AB

[King Matt1548534716]

Wow, Glenn, you make a lot of assumptions and most of them are wrong. From here on out I'll make my arguments through official channels.

 

But just to set a few things straight:

 

-A Fox can't be made as wide as an SN95 because of the fender rule. I have SN95 controls arms and spacers and I'm still 2.5 inches narrower

-You can't lower a Fox or SN95 to the minimum ride height in the rules because it puts the roll centers underground and that's very bad on a Mustang

-I know my sway bar sizes and spring rates and I've tried several combos

-I wish I could run the same shocks as you GM guys are running, but the rules right now won't allow me to mount them on my car

-Comparing race laps in traffic doesn't prove anything about consistency

 

Considering how incredibly good you are, it's truly shocking you aren't celebrating your second consecutive championship. Maybe you need to work a little harder. Or learn to drive a little better. But at least your starter stayed bolted to your engine.

[Mike D1548534719]

Matt I cryed about the wider track of the 3rd gen vs the fox body about 4 years ago when they took the camber limit rule away from the 3rd gen,

the race techs said they could not accuately measure camber being that the ground at a given race track is not level the check it. I came up with a idea but got shot down, Ive wasted so much money on spring combo`s to take the push out of my fox body and ended up back to my globel west set up every time. Id be running up front for about 10 minutes then the front tires would fall off. I dont whine about any more because it does not do any good, I hope you have better luck.

 

Mike D

[Glenn]

Comparing race laps in traffic doesn't prove anything about consistency

 

Considering how incredibly good you are, it's truly shocking you aren't celebrating your second consecutive championship. Maybe you need to work a little harder. Or learn to drive a little better. But at least your starter stayed bolted to your engine.

 

i had more going on in front of me than just about anyone on the track in the Sunday race. in fact, it was one of the hardest battles i've had to date. you will see once the SpeedCast Productions vid is done. i still was able to be consistant. try as hard as you want to make me feel bad about finishing 3rd two times in a row. one things for sure, i'll work a little harder and i'll get a little faster. will you? its easy to poke fun at my finishing position when you have only one way to go...... up.

 

as good as i am, i know i have alot to learn. that was a tough leason i learned at the end of 2005. in my mind, i was the guy to beat in the 2007 Nationals. i had the better car for a 40 minute race. i made a big mistake on the start (not like sleeping at the wheel or anything) and it cost me 3 places before it hooked up. i was catching the leaders. i used up 20 of the 30 minutes working my way around Nick Steel. i'm not sure you were able to pass him at all in 3 days of racing, so you wouldnt know anything about that.

i'll keep working at my driving, as should you. i'll be looking for my low 40 next year and i'm sure someone will pop a 39 out of it.

the assumptions are made from the info i see around me here in the TX region.

 

the custom valving i run is available to you. any shock can be revalved - even the bilstien OEM replacements.

you answered the SN-95 control arm question, good.

you answered the sway bar and spring rate question - i think.

you didnt answer the other questions that are more important.

 

i get the feeling you think you could run a 41.4 in my car.

[Glenn]

Matt I cryed about the wider track of the 3rd gen vs the fox body about 4 years ago when they took the camber limit rule away from the 3rd gen,

the race techs said they could not accuately measure camber being that the ground at a given race track is not level the check it. I came up with a idea but got shot down, Ive wasted so much money on spring combo`s to take the push out of my fox body and ended up back to my globel west set up every time. Id be running up front for about 10 minutes then the front tires would fall off. I dont whine about any more because it does not do any good, I hope you have better luck.

 

Mike D

 

are you saying more camber gives a wider track width? or am i reading into you statement?

[Mike D1548534719]

The camber rule for the 3rd gen was 1.5 degree`s limit while there was no limit for the fox body, this was suppose to slow the camaro down and would help the mustang keep up being that the 3rd gen is lower and wider.

and turns better, Richard Pryer can better explain. Richard Were are you !!!

 

Mike D

[Mike D1548534719]

Im sorry more camber for the camaro better tire wear.

 

Mike D

[bsim]

It's been experienced by more than 3 drivers that Tony's Mustang is a hell of a lot easier to drive than a 3rd or 4th gen. And he's damn fast too.

 

As Glenn states, it's a hell of a lot of work and grey area probing to get a 4th gen light enough, while enough parts fall off a fox to get to minimum. I say raise ALL the minimum weights 50lbs across the board.

 

I really don't know why all the griping - do we think we're in the NASCAR manufacturers battle? The biggest complainers get the breaks next year?

 

Look at the times @ MO - there's no one car better than the other right now. If you're thinking your 1980's POS (Chevy or Ford) is falling behind the curve, think again.

 

OR you could always upgrade.

 

OR you could look and see what a good job the rules do to equalize almost 30 years worth of technology.

 

OR you could quit whining and learn how to drive it.

 

Oops, like that last one is EVER gonna happen.

[bsim]

Oh, and if track width REALLY concerned me, I don't think I'd consider a fox. Rules shouldn't have to be "adjusted" to make up for a bad design decision 20 years ago.

[King Matt1548534716]

Rules shouldn't have to be "adjusted" to make up for a bad design decision 20 years ago.

Actually Brad, that's pretty much the sole purpose of the rules, to equalize the potential of the platforms that are eligible for the class.

[bsim]

 

I know Matt. But the line's gotta come somewhere. How long do we continue to restrict the performance of newer cars to keep the older cars competitive? (that's a hypothetical question for another day)

 

There's good and bad to all the various designs. If you want a light car, you could go fox and give up on track width. Or, if you want a low wide car, you go 4th gen, but deal with the extra heft.

 

If it wasn't against my religion I think I'd build a Mustang. But, the weight, brakes, and PITA engine bay are the tradeoffs I pay to drive the 4th gen.

[Keith]

But, the weight, brakes, and PITA engine bay are the tradeoffs I pay to drive the 4th gen.

 

...me too but I also am a "dyed in the wool" Chebby guy so I have to run my 4th gen. When I mentioned that I was thinking of getting a Mustang my dad said he was going to change his will (I don't think he was kidding).

 

I've often wondered what my lap times would be like in one of the Burnett/Poe rentals. I don't know much about how to set up a car and I don't claim to. If it understeers here, oversteers there - I drive through that stuff. I don't even know where my shocks are adjusted and never have looked at them in 4 years that I've owned my car (Koni DA's). Quite frankly, I don't race to win, I race to compete so as long as I have a playmate out there, I don't care about absolute lap time nor finishing position. Probably a strange thing for some of you to read but those of you that have run with me probably understand this better.

 

My $0.02 is centered around Glenn's sentiment - the better prepared cars will rise to the top in CMC regardless of make. I don't have the time to get into the details of setting my car up and I am OK with that. More power to the guys that do.

 

I hope that this thread is simply idle banter and not a serious rules-change discussion. While I have a few minor gripes about the rules, I think that parity is very good right now.

[King Matt1548534716]

I don't expect anyone driving a GM to agree with me, but the rules right now don't even make a distinction between the Fox and SN95 on weight, which makes no sense given the fact that they are essentially the same car running the same HP and weight but the SN95 is quite a bit wider and has a better front camber curve. Even A Sedan gives the Fox a 100-pound weight break compared to the SN95. Given the budget nature of this class, those of us running the older Mustangs shouldn't have to go out and buy or build a new car just to take advantage of that loophole in the rules.

 

For you history buffs out there, the Fords used to have a weight break in this class relative to both GMs. Back in 2003, Fords had a 3125 minimum weight, early GMs were at 3200, and 4th Gens were at 3300. So over the past few years, as the 4th Gen has been developed with better parts, it's also been allowed to get 100 pounds lighter while the Fords have gotten heavier relative to the rest of the class. I think the Fox at least needs to get some of that weight break back. It's hardly an earth-shattering change, but it could go a long way toward leveling up the current playing field.

 

I propose the following minimum base weights:

79-93 Mustang: 3150 (no change)

SN95 and 3rd Gen GM: 3200 (+50)

4th Gen GM: 3250 (+50)

 

This would have the added benefit of making it a bit easier (cheaper) for people to get the 4th Gens to minimum weight, which is in keeping with the spirit of the class.