Fox vs SN-95

[ShadowBolt]

I sure wish I had known all of this when I purchased my car. As a newby I saw a two time championship winning car for sale for damn near nothing and thought I should jump on it before someone else bought it. Nothing was said about the guy selling because he could not win in the Fox anymore (and we all know that car was not developed at all so that's not the issue). Todd, in the future if other newbies look at the series results most will do what I would have done and purchased a GM product. Do we want a all GM series?

 

Wait a minute this is a Ford thread.

 

None of this means anything to me at the moment because I'm not good enough. But if Jay or I can learn to compete I will have a hard time not wondering if platform is what is holding us back from the front. I'm just saying knowing what I know now I would not have bought a Fox......maybe a Ford but not a Fox. I don't worry about this but will a Fox have any resale value in a year or two if they don't start winning?

 

JJ

[Boudy1548534717]

Jerry: Yes, your Fox will have a perfectly respectable resale value. Why? you ask. Because the purpose of this has been to find out if management was aware of the issue and if there was a plan. Well, I've spoken to Tony and yes they were aware of a potential issue but there is currently no solid evidence as to the extent or depth of the issue. Hell, testing may prove that we're full of poopy. Tony has also agreed that testing an SN-95 with and without spacers should give us a measureable difference as to how the track width is affecting the car in regards to laptimes. Then we'll test to determine how laptimes are affected by weight. The end result is that we'll know how much weight the Fox would have to lose to equal the laptimes of a 1.5" wider track, if any.

 

Boudy

[Tony G]

Jerry,

Read my post above, fox bodies are great cars ,and this is why I hate when one guy (Matt)has a opinion and screws everything up with comments that he may believe are correct for himself but may not be for everyone else.

 

Robert, that post above was for Matt not you,I actually like the way you requested what you did and I'll work with you on this.

 

Tony Guaglione

I'm done wasting time on this...

[TxCMC22]

I just hope they don't slow the SN95 to equal the Fox. That would be dumb...

[jeffburch]

No.

This thread is attempting to head down the slippery slope of allowing the Fox to be a SN 95.

Then both will want what the 99-04 has.

I want I want.

Where does it end?

 

Thanks TG for having a firm hand on the tiller.

The tiller of the cheapest entry level form of roadracing in the world!

 

jb

[King Matt1548534716]

I don't know what other people might be asking for, but this is nothing that a 50-pound weight break for Fox Mustangs can't fix as far as I'm concerned.

[mitchntx1548534714]

I don't know what other people might be asking for, but this is nothing that a 50-pound weight break for Fox Mustangs can't fix as far as I'm concerned.

 

What is your post race weight, Matt?

[King Matt1548534716]

Depends on fuel and ballast, but usually around 3165-3170 when I was making 231hp and had to carry a 3160 minimum.

[bsim]

I say we ADD 50 pounds to all EXCEPT foxes. How's that?

 

But wait, isn't this about track width?

[King Matt1548534716]

It's really about seeking an adjustment to compensate for the difference in track width, which does not have to mean making the narrower car wider. The proposal I submitted over the winter was to drop the Foxes by 50, leave the SN95 and 3rd gen where they are, and add 50 to the 4th gen. Considering how many people I have heard complain about the work involved in getting a 4th gen to 3200 and keeping it there, I would think that might actually be welcomed by quite a few people racing them.

[tacovini]

The bottom line is that I think we all agree that there aren't "drastic changes" needed nor are any CMC platforms extinct. Sure there might be a few tweaks here or there and a few inequities/advanatages with a few cars over others, but overall in the big scheme of things, it's not the end of the road and (as we've done for 15+ years) evaluate things objectively at years end and adjust as necessary.

 

The CMC spirit & intent isn't changing anytime soon.

 

-=- Todd

 

PS- I'm never selling my Fox and now have more incentive than ever to return and dominate in it!

[jeffburch]

What?

The fox gets something AND

you're taking away from the 4G.

 

If a 4G has such an perceived advantage, why am I not in one.

You?

 

What?

 

jb

[Glenn]

the last thing i need is to find another way to keep up w/ the Fox's and 3rd gens coming out of low speed corners. that 50lbs is very apparent at those times. adding another 50lbs to that and i'll have no chance and the standing starts are already a huge deal. the Fox's here kill us.

man 100lbs is huge.

 

piss on your track width issue. you can have it for all i care, once you get the same overall length too. whats the length nose to tail of a fox? i think a 4th gen is like 16 feet.

[Boudy1548534717]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Why 50lbs? Why not 25lbs or 100lbs? Pulling the trigger on such a change with nothing but speculation is a big mistake. CMC's commitment to us is to follow it's own mission statement.

 

NASA's CMC series gives its members a place to race V-8 powered Camaros, Firebirds, and Mustangs that are evenly matched in both power and handling.

 

CMC grids 79-present Ford Mustangs and 82-2002 Chevrolet Camaros and Pontiac Firebirds in an exciting driver's challenged series. Within CMC there are two classes: CMC and CMC-2, with CMC-2 allowing the newer model cars and slightly more power.

 

The CMC series has brought together some of the best, close knit, competitive drivers found in the country. Since the racecars are so evenly matched, the racing is as close, exciting, and challenging as it gets.

 

Who the hell wants the job of writing rules to allow 30 years of cars to be evenly matched? Not me, that's for sure. Every driver here is convinced he/she is being duped by the other guys. It's just human nature. The rules are continuosly monitored and tweeked in efforts to keep with the mission statement. As good drivers come/go and set-ups get hit/missed, the waves of win streaks will also come and go along with the conceived notions of advantages and disadvantages. Which further complicates the job of keeping a set of rules that complies with the mission statement. Maybe one day some cars will have to be CMCV'd because they become too expensive to evenly match newer platforms, who knows.

 

Back to the 50lbs... I can't asked for 50lbs because I don't have evidence to convince myself it's needed. I do have evidence that my car is the same as an SN-95 but without the track width. I feel any change to the rules should have some sort documentable research and evidence to back it up for future reference. That's why I asked if management was aware of the perceived issue and if there was a plan. I got what I needed, a "show us proof and we'll look at it."

 

As CMC grows and new platforms continue to enter, they too will suffer set-up whos and they too will seek rules changes. Then as those cars get tuned and get faster, older cars will again be evauluated to continue to comply with the mission statement. Sorry, but this is an ongoing process that we'll all have to endure every year to ensure the greatness of our series. I just hope that we eventually find a less stressful way to communicate our thoughts and find a more productive way to navigate the slippery slope of our mission statement.

 

Boudy

[mitchntx1548534714]

Maybe one day some cars will have to be CMCV'd because they become too expensive to evenly match newer platforms, who knows.

 

Great idea ... the CMC COT ...

[Boudy1548534717]

 

rb

[CMC#11]

piss on your track width issue. you can have it for all i care, once you get the same overall length too. whats the length nose to tail of a fox? i think a 4th gen is like 16 feet.

Cool, are we gonna get to run a splitter to get the extra length?

I measured my vehicles tonight. Wheelbase is virtually identical.

Overall length is:

Fox - ~14 feet

95 Trans Am - ~16 feet

I see where you are going with this Glenn. Every car has both its advantages and disadvantages. By these figures the fox is more "maneuverable".

 

If you want to talk about this specific topic start a new thread and we'll see where it goes.

[CMC#11]

I say we ADD 50 pounds to all EXCEPT foxes. How's that?

 

But wait, isn't this about track width?

And how do you propose we change the track width on the Fox?

[bsim]

We don't. 50 pounds will fix it everything in CMC.

[mitchntx1548534714]

We don't. 50 pounds will fix it everything in CMC.

 

If only NASCAR had listened to us ... coulda saved the industry millions.

[Glenn]

avatar is great Mitch.

[Boudy1548534717]

I agree, nice avatar Mitch. Nothin' getting by you.

 

This thread has begun to get muddy again. We can't solve every concern with one wand. To address 50 lbs - It is not yet know what weight if any needs to be subtracted or added to the Fox to equaly perform with the SN-95 which is clearly our mission statement. To address how this effects other platforms - it doesn't effect them. Glenn's concern in regards to corner exit speed may very well be a valid concern but does not play into this discussion. He's already contending with the SN-95 so equalizing the Fox to the SN-95 has no negative impact to that issue.

 

rb

[Al F.]

Geez, I go away for a few days and you guys get into a chic fight.

 

Boudy why would you ignore the edge 2000 cars? They're wider than the early sn95 cars still! Didnt RP already try to prove this to the Texas world a while ago?

[GT4Point6]

No.

This thread is attempting to head down the slippery slope of allowing the Fox to be a SN 95.

Then both will want what the 99-04 has.

 

jb

 

Actually, there is no seperation from 94-04. All are SN95. Look at the 99+ model running the 5.0 at the Nats the last couple of years. Not offered in that body style but allowes since the 94-04 are all considered SN95 and backdating is allowed. I don't agree that the 99+ should be able to run a 5.0, but they are all SN95s.

The slope is already greased a bit...

[Boudy1548534717]

Al: Ford reskined the Fox and called it an SN-95, if the 99-04 also fits the cookie cutter then yes it applies to the discussion. Kevin believes it does, I just don't know either way. However, it won't matter because:

 

The end result of what I'll offer you is hard numbers to base a logical decision on. You'll have clear evidence of what various track widths lend to laptimes on a single CMC prepped Mustang with the suspension they all contain. You'll also have clear evidence of what 25 lbs weight increments lend to laptimes. If you guys determine that there is a laptime difference between the track widths to warrant an equivilant weight adjustment. Then so be it. Furthermore, you'll have documented evidence to review in regards to the edge 2000 or possibly defend the decision years later. Speculative rules changes are dangerous.

 

RP's testing, although not exactly relevent here due to it being an AI car, showed a consistant 1/2 second improvement by adding 2" to his front and 1" to his rear. Further testing could not be done as it was a Fox and fender clearance prevented it. The future testing will be done with an SN-95.

 

Boudy