Sidney Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Tony, Thanks. That answer should put this discussion to bed for now. Sidney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted November 15, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 15, 2007 Matt, seriously... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Yes, very seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT4Point6 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Someone mentioned at Buttonwillow about spec'ing a crate motor for the 3rd gens and fox bodies to bring up thier power levels for CMC-2. Not a bad option for them. The 4.6 2v (bone stock, like mine minus the Canton pan) is close to 260 but misses the mark at around 250-254 on the west coast, one as low as 240. Some other options will need to be looked at for that IMO for the 2v's for CMC-2. Not much out there either that really makes 20 rwhp other than cams which are PRICEY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchntx1548534714 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Mitchntx, CMC already allows other platforms...Pontiac Firebirds and Mercury Capris. Sidney AI #64 Same platform ... differnt nameplate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 I guess I was wondering one thing - We have tables to dictate power and weight. Have we considered a straight ratio (like AI) with a maximum absolute power and minimum absoluete weight to ease the "merge" of CMC/CMC2? Actually, this has probably been discussed and not done. I am more curious about why this wasn't done... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comeback kid Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 I guess I was wondering one thing - We have tables to dictate power and weight. Have we considered a straight ratio (like AI) with a maximum absolute power and minimum absoluete weight to ease the "merge" of CMC/CMC2? Actually, this has probably been discussed and not done. I am more curious about why this wasn't done... Keith, You are probably right, someone probably has and has not posted it, or has e-mailed it to our Directors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 here's my humble opinion... all 5 lts in CMC all 4.6 + 5.7lts in CMC2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT4Point6 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 I guess I was wondering one thing - We have tables to dictate power and weight. Have we considered a straight ratio (like AI) with a maximum absolute power and minimum absoluete weight to ease the "merge" of CMC/CMC2? Actually, this has probably been discussed and not done. I am more curious about why this wasn't done... My take on it, not as a director or anything, just my $.02 If you allow this, you will have drivers paying big bucks for a motor to make the max HP and flattest TQ curve possible and putting themselves in a position to run a way with wins, driver permitting of course. So it has the potential to turn into a "who ever has the deepest wallet, can win the most races". Maybe that is the extreme of possibilities but well inside the realm with a good driver and is not in keeping with the current CMC philosophy of keeping it on the low end of race cost. I’ve heard of some AI motors running 20-25k. Wow, that’s a lot more than my entire car and only about 75-100hp more than my bone stock motor. That’s a lot of money for 100hp. Keep it stock or use an approved spec kit or crate motor. That's what I think will work the best and keep cost down. YMWV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Keith, I think it's an interesting idea. I'd like to hear the background on this. Current ratios are as follows: Cars at 3150 minimum: 13.7 LB/HP and 10.5 LB/TQ Cars at 3200 minimum: 13.9 LB/HP and 10.67 LB/TQ There is a sliding scale penalty for exceeding the 230/300 levels, so the ratios change quite a bit above these numbers and get as high as 14.13 LB/HP and 10.9 LB/TQ for a car making 237/307 at 3350. What adopting a ratio formula based on the current tables could do is give a weight break to under-powered cars, which would be a simple way to equalize certain combinations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT4Point6 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 here's my humble opinion...all 5 lts in CMC all 4.6 + 5.7lts in CMC2 What, you scared of a little O' 281? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 If you allow this, you will have drivers paying big bucks for a motor to make the max HP and flattest TQ curve possible and putting themselves in a position to run a way with wins, YMWV That assumes there is a change to rules regarding the engine hardware that is legal. Under the current ruleset, implementing the ratio formula would only allow under-powered cars to run at a lighter weight compared to cars making more power. Right now, unlike in AI, if your engine does not make the maximum power for its minimum weight, you are simply SOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 here's my humble opinion...all 5 lts in CMC all 4.6 + 5.7lts in CMC2 +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Keith, if you noticed that the HP chart was chopped off at the 237/307 mark this year. the goal is to get the cars to the same power and weight. if not, you have this deal where cars are hard to pass in the straights even when your faster in the corners. even power to weight is not a perfect equalizer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBody383 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Keep it stock or use an approved spec kit or crate motor. That's what I think will work the best and keep cost down. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comeback kid Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 With some of us new racers coming in, it has us kind of going "whoa". I know of four other cars being built for 08. Mine being one of them. With one of the principles of keeping costs down, is what drew me to CMC. Now I am questioning if I should try to get out there for 08. Do I build an engine for current rules, and spend more for an upgraded package in a year or two? Do I wait and see what the changes will be? If the changes are announced in the next two or three months, do I build according to the new rules and just race without earning points? With 16" and 17 " wheels being allowed, the brakes are not an issue. I can run the 1LE system for now. My biggest cost for this off season is the engine build. I save money building my own engines. A crate motor costs the same if you had someone else build an engine for you. The 25K engines were obviously built by a shop, and most of the cost is machining and assembly labor. I guess I'll wait and see what the Directors decide on. I am glad I am not a Director. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harleydave Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 here's my humble opinion...all 5 lts in CMC all 4.6 + 5.7lts in CMC2 Since I have two 5.0 mustangs right now - Yeah Carson! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Like I said,email me directly. Nothing is changing fast here,not near as fast as some of you posting on here. Remember it is entirely possible that we may do absolutely nothing,and just keep it as is since its working well. Tony Guaglione Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchntx1548534714 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 For those of you voicing concerns about wasting money building a motor now vs in 09 or 10 ... Look back at posts in Nov-Jan 2006 and 2005 ... Same song, second verse. We are all racers and will bench race at the drop of a hat ... or mouse click in this case. It's the off-season or silly season. It's what we do. I am a newbie, having joined this group of bench racers in late 2K4. A couple things around here are a given ... We all voice our opinion and the rules stay basically the same. Build your car. Don't wait. Get'er Done! And finally ... I have a cat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Thanks Mitch, I needed a cat picture right about now.... Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllZWay Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 When the CMC-2 was first announced, I had just built my CMC car and I was furious, because I thought I had just built an already outdated platform. With the look ahead, I can fairly easily move to CMC-2 so I am not as dismayed as some with Fox's may be feeling. But with the way this is headed....it look as if the Fox's are going to die off. I also am not to thrilled to hear about allowing 17's in CMC...maybe CMC-2/AI lite as I have heard it called, but CMC should stay 16's. IMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 But with the way this is headed....it look as if the Fox's are going to die off. I think this is an appropriate place to mention that total Fox body production from 1973-1993 was 2,594,222 units. Scarce as hen's teeth these days, I tell you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 A couple of quick points - 16" or 17" wheels don't mean a hoot since the section width has to be 255 regardless of wheel choice. I'll be making my choice based on cost, weight and tire diameter (for the gearing possibilities). Second, Kevin, I understand what you are saying about the $25k motors but your response also assumes that we've opened "pandora's box" on motor mods and I don't think this is what is intended. I am reading that there will select permissible mods and that's it. I was thinking that if there was a "merge", a simple way ahead would be an absolute ratio and relatively tight (as much as practical) minimum weights and maximum power. I recognize that power/weight isn't perfect but our tiny tires (for our weight) make this a pretty good equalizer. Third, whether I run CMC or CMC-2 I plan on sticking with my LS1 brakes. Since I won't be getting anymore tire going to CMC2 and I don't have fade issues with the current setup, I think I can stay with what I have. The bigger rotors are bigger heat sinks but I don't need a bigger heat sink. So you all know where I am coming from - My restricted LT1 car makes 238/289 (IIRC) and weighs about 3330. I had been planning on spending countless hours to get more weight out of the car over the winter. Now I might not. The only reason that I can think of to NOT prepare my car to CMC-2 rules is that I will be playing alone in my region. I'd rather have an underprepared car than run alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supermac Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 (edited) For those of you voicing concerns about wasting money building a motor now vs in 09 or 10 ... Look back at posts in Nov-Jan 2006 and 2005 ... Same song, second verse. We are all racers and will bench race at the drop of a hat ... or mouse click in this case. It's the off-season or silly season. It's what we do. I am a newbie, having joined this group of bench racers in late 2K4. A couple things around here are a given ... We all voice our opinion and the rules stay basically the same. Build your car. Don't wait. Get'er Done! And finally ... I have a cat. Well said Mitch (except for the cat) . But I feel there are always those that want to blame not getting there car done on one silly thing or another. There are those that race and then there is everyone else. Like you said get-r-done. WooHoo let's go. Is there a race somewhere this weekend I am jonesing. Edited November 16, 2007 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Kieth O - your current HP (238) is now no longer legal in CMC. get the HP down and get that weight down. all your other points are spot on. 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.