Disqualified Mustangs.

[mitchntx1548534714]

 

I remember back in '05 when I was posting up about how the rules favored Mustangs because

 

- shocks, motors, transmissions, etc. could all be purchased/rebuilt cheaper for a Mustang than a 4th gen.

 

- how unfair it was to get a 50lb weight advantage on the same tire, brake and dyno sheet.

 

- how there are a wide variety of non-Ford parts available for suspension tuning and aero like through Roush, Saleen, etc.

 

- pointed out how all regions across the nation were being dominated by Mustangs as fodder to prove my point.

 

I wish I had copyrighted all those rants. I think I'm re-reading my posts.

 

The only thing new I can add ... A victory on paper is a hollow one.

 

[Al F.]

Its basic racer's nature to think their platform is disadvantaged and that a rules change would make them more competitive/faster/cheaper/prettier/whatever. Thats just the way humans, and especially racers, work. In a sense everyone on this thread is right: all platforms have certain disadvantages. They all have certain advantages too.

 

What about punishing the driver that wins? We tried rewards weight once, but it was a paltry 25# or something. What about bumping your weight by something meaningful like #150 or #200 for a meaningful amount of time like three or four race weekends?

[Glenn]

3-4 weekends? that almost a whole season.

 

i could see doing rewards weight for wins, and removing it for 3rd or lower and leaving it for 2nd. but if we go to rewards weight, we will no longer do inverted starts. to me, thats a much greater "penalty" than rewards weight.

[mitchntx1548534714]

What about punishing the driver that wins? We tried rewards weight once, but it was a paltry 25# or something. What about bumping your weight by something meaningful like #150 or #200 for a meaningful amount of time like three or four race weekends?

 

I like it ... but lets get creative ...

 

Maybe penalize the leaders by not having tire pressures over 25psi coming off the track.

 

Or the racer has to drag their trailer around during the race.

 

Or sew up one arm of their driving suit.

 

Or take the green flag from the square of the nearest town.

[bsim]

Nah, no need to punish those that are successful. I think we need breaks or incentives to the slower folks if anything.

 

Of anything we do that's easy, inverted starts are the easiest to execute, and help both the fast and slow guys learn racecraft.

[CMC#11]

 

I remember back in '05 when I was posting up about how the rules favored Mustangs because

 

- shocks, motors, transmissions, etc. could all be purchased/rebuilt cheaper for a Mustang than a 4th gen.

 

- how unfair it was to get a 50lb weight advantage on the same tire, brake and dyno sheet.

 

- how there are a wide variety of non-Ford parts available for suspension tuning and aero like through Roush, Saleen, etc.

 

- pointed out how all regions across the nation were being dominated by Mustangs as fodder to prove my point.

 

I wish I had copyrighted all those rants. I think I'm re-reading my posts.

 

The only thing new I can add ... A victory on paper is a hollow one.

 

I remember in 2005 when the Mustangs were winning the majority of the races in the TX region....and Mustangs also accounted for about 65% of the drivers. The law of averages says it is likely that a Mustang would win.

 

Looking at this years Nationals, there were 10 Mustangs out of 17 racers.

The law of averages says a Mustang would win? Nope

At least get 2nd? Nope

Podium? Nope

Surely one top five finish? Nope

If you want a good laugh check out the statistical odds of the 7 f-body drivers covering all top 5 positions. Is this b/c of a platform advantage?

Ohh that's right, it's b/c all 10 of the Mustang drivers don't know how to prepare their cars and can't drive consistently.

 

-Michael Mosty

Texas Region #11 Mustang

[Lady in Nomex]

Gotta agree with ya Michael! When you go to the Dr. and he/she hits you with

the rubber hammer on your knee that is called a ____ ____ ____?

[supermac]

All of these are great ideas for short term or local solutions, the problem becomes trying to implement them on a national level without getting some rules creep and after watching the spec miatas get there engines torn out in tech you can keep that stuff. I know that Glenn and I are both concerned at keeping it fair and close in our home regions, just read his posts on his forum. I have already talked with Chris McComb about bringing my HP down to meet his until he can get his up or he starts waxing me. Thrashing people does not promote a class.

 

Matt, from what I have heard you say you are looking for an improved front end. Do you really believe that say a MM front end is the answer.

What about the guys who can't afford them? Is that fair?

 

For me personally I don't think weight is the answer, I ran 100 lbs over at the nats and my car worked great.

I personally believe that the 4th gen is a better platform, that is why I built one, however Pat Stone, Tony G and Brady all think they suck. So who is right? I Dunno. I know this, there is no easy answer and throwing parts at it isn't the answer.

 

I believe that Tony, Todd, Al and maybe Glenn are very level headed and will figure out a fair and equitable solution, call me naive but I have read the posts on this board going way back and they always seem to do the right thing. Besides two of them drive mustangs.

 

Just my $0.02

 

Cody Powell

[mitchntx1548534714]

Looking at this years Nationals, there were 10 Mustangs out of 17 racers.

The law of averages says a Mustang would win? Nope

At least get 2nd? Nope

Podium? Nope

Surely one top five finish? Nope

If you want a good laugh check out the statistical odds of the 7 f-body drivers covering all top 5 positions. Is this b/c of a platform advantage?

Ohh that's right, it's b/c all 10 of the Mustang drivers don't know how to prepare their cars and can't drive consistently.

 

-Michael Mosty

Texas Region #11 Mustang

 

You forgot ...

 

a single driver taking out almost 1/2 the Mustang field with one ill-advised move going into T2.

[ShadowBolt]

I don't know if I have a right to even post on this topic but here are my thoughts.

 

First you have to understand that I don't give a damn about Ford or GM. Neither one of these companies have given me a thing and I don't understand why some of you live and die by a car brand. I bought CMC 17 because it was cheap and because it had won two championships. I assumed if I was good enough I would be able to win in it. I did not know (and Eric did not tell me) that the Mustang was not the hot platform at the moment. Don't misunderstand, he did not make the car out to be anything other that what it is. He did not lie to me, he just left out the reason for his leaving the series. I probably would have still bought the car even if I had known the real reason for Eric leaving. I assumed that all the cars in CMC were going to be like CMC 17 (very low budget). I found out different when I showed up at MSRH and saw real race cars! I thought this was a grass roots series that was as equal as any and inexpensive because you could do so little to the cars. I read a post about someone using a shock dyno. That sort of special equipment may not be against the rules but certainly are not in line with the intent of the series. Some in both camps are willing to spend way more in time and money than I am to race for trophies. I work 60 hours a week and just want to race a few weekends a year. If the only reason the Mustang is getting beat is because the GM guys have come up with better set-ups consisting of caster, camber, toe and spring rates then shame on the Mustang crowd. If the Mustang is getting beat because the cars are not equal after the allowed changes are made then maybe it should be either Spec Mustang or spec Camaro instead of CMC. I have so much to learn and I am so much slower than the rest of you that I don't need to worry about this for a while.....if ever. But if and when I do get fast enough to run up front I hope all this has been straitened out.

 

 

JJ

[CMC#11]

Looking at this years Nationals, there were 10 Mustangs out of 17 racers.

The law of averages says a Mustang would win? Nope

At least get 2nd? Nope

Podium? Nope

Surely one top five finish? Nope

If you want a good laugh check out the statistical odds of the 7 f-body drivers covering all top 5 positions. Is this b/c of a platform advantage?

Ohh that's right, it's b/c all 10 of the Mustang drivers don't know how to prepare their cars and can't drive consistently.

 

-Michael Mosty

Texas Region #11 Mustang

 

You forgot ...

 

a single driver taking out almost 1/2 the Mustang field with one ill-advised move going into T2.

 

..and the top 4 in class (GM's) were already 20 seconds ahead of everyone when this happened.

[mitchntx1548534714]

Looking at this years Nationals, there were 10 Mustangs out of 17 racers.

The law of averages says a Mustang would win? Nope

At least get 2nd? Nope

Podium? Nope

Surely one top five finish? Nope

If you want a good laugh check out the statistical odds of the 7 f-body drivers covering all top 5 positions. Is this b/c of a platform advantage?

Ohh that's right, it's b/c all 10 of the Mustang drivers don't know how to prepare their cars and can't drive consistently.

 

-Michael Mosty

Texas Region #11 Mustang

 

You forgot ...

 

a single driver taking out almost 1/2 the Mustang field with one ill-advised move going into T2.

 

..and the top 4 in class (GM's) were already 20 seconds ahead of everyone when this happened.

 

And they got there because they didn't run a similarly clean qualifying race. Gotta stay on track to start up front.

 

Poe was damned fast and gave Glenn fits. He just couldn't string a series of clean laps together.

 

If you look at laptimes, you will see a wide variance in lap times, sometimes a 3 seconf spread between fast and slow lap.

 

Jeff's lap times were all within tenths of a second per lap.

 

I will submit that differing tracks favor specific platforms. Mustangs are hell on wheels at MSR-C and Hallett. They can be put into little, tiny spots that a fat F-Car just can't go.

 

TWS and MSR-H probably favor the F-Car because of the aero.

 

I do know I really like the hole your Mustang and wing provide in the air at TWS. WOW!

 

Jerry ...

 

The 17 car is the reason why the F-Car owners "went to wok". Eric in that platform and your specific car dominated every race for several years. So, we had to in order to be competitive.

 

If you look back in CMC history, you'll find that platform "domination" has come around a couple times. That tells me that driver/owner/car focus and prep plays a bigger role than platform.

 

Glenn and I came to an agreement where we would share experience and data, much like successful multi-car teams in the pro ranks. It took a couple years, but the rewards are being reaped now. I expect that similar activities will leap frog other teams, regardless of platform.

 

The shock dyno thing was an attempt to get a low end Penske shock available for the series. PST was asking for LAW MS help to develop it. It fell through, though.

 

No data was ever generated or experimented with.

[King Matt1548534716]

Matt, from what I have heard you say you are looking for an improved front end. Do you really believe that say a MM front end is the answer.

What about the guys who can't afford them? Is that fair?

Not sure where you heard that, but it wasn't from me, because I've never advocated for that and I don't think it's the answer. I would like to see some rules adjustment to keep the Fox platform viable against both the SN95 and the GM cars, however, and I think there is a workable solution that won't require radical change or expense. Weight adjustments are simple and cheap, but there is a limit to how far you can take it. I don't think we should be running around with 3500-pound cars just to get equality.

 

Cody, you say your car was running heavy, but I know from your dyno sheet that you were required to run at least an extra 70 pounds to make up for overages on HP and TQ, which puts you at 3270. So were you 100 over your minimum, or the car's minimum?

[supermac]

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?

 

Matt I misunderstood this post and after re-reading it I understand you are not looking for a different front end but a weight penalty and it looks like a wider front end. How do you propose you get a fox body 2 1/2" wider without a aftermarket front end? Will a spacer get you that far? Not that it counts what I think, I just don't know a lot about Ford front ends or GM for that matter, I am just curious.

 

My car wieghed 105 pounds over the class minimum and just 5 pounds over my dyno minimum as it turns out. I was very suprised to mysteriously gain 1 .4 extra horse power over my Wednesday dyno and 3 over my Saturday dyno. Note to self Dyno's change!

[Adam Ginsberg]

The comment about getting a 4th gen down to min weight is pure BS. When the #70 car showed up in TX for it's very first race weekend in March of 2005, it came off the track after a 20min race @ 3199/3200 ( scales were flipping back and forth due to the heavy winds that day ).

 

So - please drop the whole lame argument about getting a 4th gen to min weight. It can be done, legally, without any gray areas, and without it costing an arm and a leg - it's a matter of prep. It's been done in TX more than once, so drop it.

 

My qual time for Friday's race was tossed out for being 6lbs light. My own mistake. To add insult to injury, I didn't even have to go to impound ( I wasn't in the top 5 for qual times )....I came off the track early, no one from the series was at impound, but I chose to roll across the scales as a precaution....blech, so much for that.

 

Regarding laptimes during the race - sorry, but that's bunk as well. You can only string together consistent lap times if:

1. You aren't in any traffic.

2. You aren't battling for position.

3. There aren't any incidents.

4. You've got clear track ahead of you lap after lap.

5. You don't make any mistakes ( that's a given ).

 

So, saying drivers aren't consistent in a race isn't the way to look at data, as you don't know what they were dealing with throughout the race. JB's laptimes were consistent, as he didn't have a great deal of traffic in front of him, and the cars behind him were battling for their positions.

[supermac]

I never said you coudn't get one to miniumum weight, I just think they handle like crap setup like that.

You absolutely correct it just takes a ton of prep.

I think it would be fun to see how many Mustangs have been stripped to a tub and I mean nothing left, not one wire or bolt like my car was and I am pretty sure Glenn's was.

BTW Adam I think you have the nicest Mustang I have seen.

Enough butt kissing now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

It is crap to say that JB wasn't battling for postion I finished a whopping .667 seconds behind him and that was probably one of the biggest gaps of the race, in fact I was faster than him on 10 of the 17 laps.

He drove a mistake free race and I chose not stuff it in on him, and possibly take us both out with a move that may or may not have resulted in me taking the lead. Enough of my self pity rant!

[jeffburch]

You chose to not have to deal with my pit bosses Bev & Carolyn.

Thanks for a clean fast race Cody Powell.

Your a Champ.

 

jb

[Glenn]

The comment about getting a 4th gen down to min weight is pure BS. When the #70 car showed up in TX for it's very first race weekend in March of 2005, it came off the track after a 20min race @ 3199/3200 ( scales were flipping back and forth due to the heavy winds that day ).

 

 

Regarding laptimes during the race - sorry, but that's bunk as well. You can only string together consistent lap times if:

1. You aren't in any traffic.

2. You aren't battling for position.

3. There aren't any incidents.

4. You've got clear track ahead of you lap after lap.

5. You don't make any mistakes ( that's a given ).

 

that weekend that my car came off the scales at 3199/3200 was the very first session after my friday wreck. i came back on sat w/ parts missing on from the car. it was also fuel starving durring that session cause we worked on the car till 3am, got the car to the track and rolled it off the trailer and onto the grid for quall. i had not put fuel into it since the previous day. there is no reason that my car shouldnt be allowed rules adjustment to allow for it to be at 20 minutes short of a topped of fuel load w/ a 230lb driver and cross the scales at 3200. a fox can do it, and a 3rd gen can do it, but a 4th gen cant. if i drop the fuel load to allow for less weight, i run the risk of fuel starving it.

 

as for your countdown above, thats total crap too.

1) in Sundays race i was in a major battle w/ Nick Steel. i tried to pass in the grass on the inside of T2. my best/worste lap times deviated by under 2 seconds. when the SpeedCast Productions vid is done, you will eat your words.

2) see 1.

3) i had all the same yellows and cross flag areas you had.

4) see 1.

5) not sure of the point here. so if a driver makes no mistakes, he should be...lets say - ballasted up to allow those who do to keep up? is that what you were intending?

[Glenn]

i also forgot.

Matt King out qualled me on Sat w/ a 41.7 to my 41.9. (my best lap of the entire event was only a 41.4 - 3 tenths!)

does that mean there is no parity? should he have to up his minimum weight? what reason could there be that he didnt beat me? i mean he's faster than me. he was a full row ahead of me. no reason he shouldnt have finished in front of me. oh, except that whole part about him sleeping on the start. that would be a driver issue, not a platform issue.

so he's proven he can run a 41.7, yet in the race he runs a 43.2 to my 41.5. i picked up 4 tenths on a better track than we had in quall (temp was up) and came from 6th to 4th. he dropped 1.5 seconds and fell from 4th to 10th. i but he was set-up to run in the cold and didnt touch the set-up before the afternoon race.

but hey, its my fault cause i'm driving a GM. please, give it a rest.

 

also, who there was on new rubber for the sunday race? Jeff was on brand new stuff, Cody was on brand new stuff, i was on brand new stuff. new rubber is worth a full second and a half over old rubber. hell, the tires i ran from Thurs thru Sat were only used for 3 days (weekend and a half) before Nats.

[King Matt1548534716]

Glenn, it's absolutely ridiculous for you to suggest that a car that's wider, lower, has a front SLA, coilovers and a rear torque arm should be allowed to run at the same weight as a Mustang with none of that. If I can get within a few tenths of you on a flyer lap, maybe you're the one who needs to learn how to drive.

[jeffburch]

There's your parity right there!

 

 

 

 

 

Why was a car dq'd in the big race Sunday?

 

http://www.nasachampionships.com/pdf/2007-GroupA.pdf

 

jb

[King Matt1548534716]

Here's why:

 

http://www.optimummotorsports.com/Video/Byerly_Keyhole_Incident.wmv

[jeffburch]

DAaaaaaayum you mustang guys are nuts!

 

Thanks MK.

 

Got any more good links.

All my vids suck.

jb

[Glenn]

your exactly right Matt. thats why my platform has to carry the extra 50lbs. and thats why i'm ok w/ it.

as for my driving, well, keep making jabs. i'm ok w/ you thinking i cant drive. infact, it sounds like you think all the hacks end up in GM's.

Matt, you keep moving the target here. i'll bow out now as i just cant keep up.

i produced facts. show me one race where you ran consistant laps and i'll be open to your opinion. that goes for anyone who ran at Nats. consistant lap times is the first step. if you cant do that, how are you to know when a change in better or not?

can one Ford driver here show me consistant laps?its not that they cant doit, its thati havent seen any that have. i havent looked at the times for each, but i will make that a priority now. i did look at them for the top 6 or so and they all were almost 100% in the order of most consistant to least consistant when looked at by finishing order.

[AllZWay]

That was crazy.