Talk to me about 5th Gen Camaros

[Den341548534727]

Cody kind of beat to the punch on this one. I was going to start a thread about this in the next week or so, but my approach was going to be slightly different.

Think outside the box a little and ask ourselves: Where are we going to be in 5 years? It will be 2017. What will the CMC landscape look like at that point? The 5th gen will be 7 years old at that point, The Challenger will be 9 (will we ever let them in?), the "evil" S197 will be 12, 4th gen will be 24, the 3rd gen will be 35 and the fox will be 38! That is a huge task to try and level that kind of spread. Several key questions need to be asked, and the vision of CMC will need to be addressed whether we want to or not.

The concept of taking a stock car, throwing a cage in it, a safety gear and going racing will not work if CMC allows the new cars into the fold. To take a new car and choke it down to the current levels will be very difficult at best, and to remove technology, IE IRS antilock 14 inch brakes, etc. is contrary to this “throw a cage in it†concept. To bring the old cars up to the new levels will be difficult and the old cars will always lack the technology, and we re-live the s197 "advantage" issue all over again.

.

What are the options? This is just my opinion. I am sure there are other options out there.

 

1) Make a break and have a CMC1 and CMC2 all over again

2) Bring the old cars up to the new levels.

3) Bring the new cars down to the current level.

4) Create a new midpoint (e.g. 300HP / 330 tq)

5) Revamp and integrate the entire CMC / AI / AIX structure to accommodate the entire spread. Something like GTS 1-5 or HC 1-5.

6) Do nothing.

 

I do not have a bias towards any of these options, I am just throwing them out for the sake of discussion. NASA needs to start thinking about this (and I am sure they have) and maybe soliciting some feedback from us (the customer) via forum discussion, private surveys, and/or round table discussion. I think this is more than just a task to be thrown at the directors to deal with. For example, if option 5 is the favored choice the AI and CMC directors would need to come together to work it out and we would want some representatives from all regions and platforms.

This is not going to get any easier in the future and some of the traditional CMC paradigms are going to need to be set aside. Maybe a different way of defining the box like; Here is a list of eligible platforms and here is a list of eligible engines. Update backdate all you want but you must make 260/310. If you have a all aluminum engine…add 50 pounds.

The point is we need to start thinking about this stuff and figuring out the feasibility of the possible options.

[MHISSTC]

...start thinking about this... ...soliciting some feedback from us... ...this is more than just a task to be thrown at the directors to deal with. This is not going to get any easier in the future... ...we need to start... ...figuring out the feasibility of the possible options.

 

I'm glad to see more participants who think this way starting to speaking out. I've subtly annoyed people with my ideas for years and finally stopped submitting my suggestions after hearing every version of "it's not an issue right now and we'll deal with it when the time comes". Basically, I've become less vocal (if you can believe that) because I have more important things to devote my time and energy towards right now. So, I'm probably getting slowly sucked into the same "it's not an issue right now and I'll deal with it when the time comes" attitude trap that I've always disagreed with.

[cmc79]

Nice to see several other racers that think a GTS, HC, ST, type format would work well with CMC.

Should have been the plan all along. Then there would be no debate about the S197 and 5th gen's... just in which CMC to put them (1,2,3, etc).

CMC already has S197's. Guys want to race the 5th gen. Let them race with CMC level prep without downgrading, and don't force an '82 Camaro or '79 Mustang to continually upgrade to compete.

[supermac]

Nice to see several other racers that think a GTS, HC, ST, type format would work well with CMC.

Should have been the plan all along. Then there would be no debate about the S197 and 5th gen's... just in which CMC to put them (1,2,3, etc).

CMC already has S197's. Guys want to race the 5th gen. Let them race with CMC level prep without downgrading, and don't force an '82 Camaro or '79 Mustang to continually upgrade to compete.

 

There is no need for this.

 

I am going to be a Dick so stop reading if you are easily offended.

 

It is funny to me that guys piss and moan about upgrading thier cars and then spend way more to go to the class with fewer guys so they have a shot at winning.

 

It happened when CMC2 was started the mid packers and slow guys went first.

 

Look it up if you don't believe me.

 

If you want to race in small classes, go to AI or become the PT director in your region.

 

I told you I was going to be a dick.

 

Take this class dilution stuff somewhere else, we don't need it here. That was never the point of this. I was merely pointing out the fact that the s-197 is superior to the 5th gen and it is already legal. The car is already here why create new classes for it?

 

STOP THE MADNESS!!!!

 

CMC in my opinion is as even as it has ever been and as healthy, why f@#k with it. Just tweak the s-197 and let's go racing.

 

I personally will be racing my 4th gen and loving it.

 

The guy who started all this decided to stay in AI. So I for one am dropping the 5th gen arguement. Move along nothing to see here.

[roadracerwhite]

Nice to see several other racers that think a GTS, HC, ST, type format would work well with CMC.

Should have been the plan all along. Then there would be no debate about the S197 and 5th gen's... just in which CMC to put them (1,2,3, etc).

CMC already has S197's. Guys want to race the 5th gen. Let them race with CMC level prep without downgrading, and don't force an '82 Camaro or '79 Mustang to continually upgrade to compete.

 

There is no need for this.

 

I am going to be a Dick so stop reading if you are easily offended.

 

It is funny to me that guys piss and moan about upgrading thier cars and then spend way more to go to the class with fewer guys so they have a shot at winning.

 

It happened when CMC2 was started the mid packers and slow guys went first.

 

Look it up if you don't believe me.

 

If you want to race in small classes, go to AI or become the PT director in your region.

 

I told you I was going to be a dick.

 

Take this class dilution stuff somewhere else, we don't need it here. That was never the point of this. I was merely pointing out the fact that the s-197 is superior to the 5th gen and it is already legal. The car is already here why create new classes for it?

 

STOP THE MADNESS!!!!

 

CMC in my opinion is as even as it has ever been and as healthy, why f@#k with it. Just tweak the s-197 and let's go racing.

 

I personally will be racing my 4th gen and loving it.

 

The guy who started all this decided to stay in AI. So I for one am dropping the 5th gen arguement. Move along nothing to see here.

 

I agree, I don't want to see a GTS or Honda Challenge type rules. I think it would be a disaster from which I doubt the class would recover from.

 

I do think we need to work on getting the Camaro and possibly the Challenger into the game. I think there are some hurdles to overcome though, and lets be honest we aren't lightning fast at making decisions either.

[ls168camaro]

Cody-how dare you call me out as the mid pack slacker who started out in CMC2!- Just kidding.

I don't want to have multiple classes within CMC and not looking at class dilution. I just think they should consider a class allowing the new 400 hp cars to run in other than AI. My point is that right now if you want to race a new Camaro or new 5.0 Mustang then NASA's only option is AI. Is there an option with SCCA that isn't pro racing to race them? Is there still T2?? I'm looking at it from a newbies perspective and thinking back to when I was just looking to go racing with NASA. People are going to want to race the 400 hp cars so why not give them a venue to run in that doesn't require you to buy a $80k S197? The difference in the new 400hp cars and ours is just too big to close the gap so why not create a class for them-heck don't call it CMC if people get their manties in a wad over it.

Just food for thought.

[supermac]

Bryan,

I hear you, you fellow mid pack slacker!

My point is that the s-197 is already legal and proven to be a better chassis than the 5th gen. So why the big dust up against allowing it in with ls-1 power and meeting all CMC rules save 1, the IRS?

I think the absolute silence from the ford camp speaks volumes, they are not afraid of this car, at all.

If the s-197 is neutered (sp) then I think putting a 5yr plan in place per the esteemed Mr Denton is a great idea.

Otherwise CMC will become what AI is, "spec mustang"

[mitchntx1548534714]

[Al F.]

AI is not the only class a 5th gen can run in. ST was designed to enable guys to run just about whatever they want to. If two levels of ST are not enough, its easy to expand.

 

Keep the discussion going, its a good thing.

[raybob92891548534723]

AI is not the only class a 5th gen can run in. ST was designed to enable guys to run just about whatever they want to. If two levels of ST are not enough, its easy to expand.

 

Keep the discussion going, its a good thing.

 

What do you mean, its easy to expand????

[cozog1548534733]

While I completely agree with Bob about planning for the future today, I feel that having multiple CMC classes just won't work. Even if it's back to 2 classes, then we just cut car counts in 1/2. Or worse, 1-2 cars in CMC3 and 4-5 cars in CMC2 (or whatever class names).

 

If we already had 10-15 car fields on a regular basis, this might work. But honestly, I was excited to race against more than 3 other people at one time last year.

 

Driving alone on track sucks.

 

I really like Bob's thought of "Maybe a different way of defining the box like; Here is a list of eligible platforms and here is a list of eligible engines. Update backdate all you want but you must make 260/310." Or bumped to 300/330. That might actually attract more cars if there are more engine/chassis combos avail.

[supermac]

Mitch's give-a-shit is broken...imagine that

[Den341548534727]

I really like Bob's thought of "Maybe a different way of defining the box like; Here is a list of eligible platforms and here is a list of eligible engines. Update backdate all you want but you must make 260/310." Or bumped to 300/330. That might actually attract more cars if there are more engine/chassis combos avail.

 

Todd has made a beautiful segway for me....

 

I have often said CMC should not change a thing. It is just about perfect right now. the key word is "right now" It is naive to think that time will not change things for better or worse. the availability of good donor cars and engines for the older cars is going to eventually dry up and some will need to move to newer stuff. the landscape is going to change whether we like it or not.

I threw out some options but I never said I liked them, they are options

If I was king for a day this is where I would go with it. Careful...I may step on some toes here.

I would simplify the rules but keep certain core CMC beliefs.

 

Body

Stock body, no special facias, no fiberglass or carbon fiber unless it came with it new.

stock glass, No lexan. Doors must open and close. No pinned on doors etc. No cutting or gutting same as now

 

Specify the Platforms: Mustang 1978 to present. Cam-bird 1982 to present. Challenger 2008 to present.

Min weights would be set by platform and potential of the platform. (Read equalizer)

 

Specify the Engines: Ford 5.0 carb 5.0 FI 4.6FI etc GM 5.0 carb, 5.7 carb, LT1, LS1, 5.3. Chrysler 5.7 FI Hemi, 360 carb 340 carb.

Specify HP and tq 260/ 310. Same as now

Allow the update and backdate of engines into any platforms. yes that means allow a carbed engine in a 4th gen or a LS engine in a thirdgen. If you are willing to do the swap more power to ya! You would still need to meet min weight for the platform and power levels. If all Aluminium engine was used add 50 or 75 pounds

 

Transmissions- same as now . Clutches and flywheels need to be Ferris and stock diameter.

 

Differential / rear end. same as now but allow IRS if it came with it. Limit the IRS by not allowing hiem joints and only allow better bushings. IRS cars may need some weight adjustment or tire size adjustment.

 

Wheels 17 x 9.5 max

 

Brakes same as current. If the new cars have better they would need to retrofit to current levels

 

Interior. Stock dash would need to be present. No aluminium or fabricated dashes.

 

I would give up on trying to micro manage the little stuff and concentrate on parity and the engine combinations. For example the bumper structure....who cares? Just make sure the car looks stock from the outside and they are not gutting it so it is unsafe or huge competitive advantage.

Six cylinder cars....sorry if I was king it would not happen. Old school!

 

The overall concept is : Here is the box, cars that fit in this box should..on paper run relatively close lap times. If the one platform is faster than others you adjust via weight or tire size or maybe slightly lower HP / TQ combination.

I understand with this concept that the throw a cage in a car and run it will not work for some models, IE most likely the new cars, but I cannot see any other way to make the new cars fit unless the bottom is raised up to that level or run though the other options I stated in my previous post.

Bob

[G_Lemke]

Where should the new cars go?

 

Lets see Mustangs:

 

Mustang Cobra ('93-'95) PTE* 3354

Ford Mustang Cobra ('96-'98) PTC 3393

Ford Mustang Cobra ('99 & '01) PTC* 3285

Ford Mustang Cobra R ('00) PTB* 3590

Ford Mustang Cobra R ('93) PTD* 3248

Ford Mustang Cobra R ('95) PTC* 3325

Ford Mustang Cobra SVT ('02+) PTB* 3665

Ford Mustang GT ('05-'06) PTD** 3450

Ford Mustang GT ('07-'08) PTC 3356

Ford Mustang GT ('10) PTC 3530

Ford Mustang GT ('11) PTB 3770

Ford Mustang I4 PTH** 2699

Ford Mustang I4 turbo PTG* 3065

Ford Mustang I6 PTG 2800

Ford Mustang Mach 1 PTD** 3450

Ford Mustang SVO ('84-'86) PTE 3036

Ford Mustang V6 ('99-'08) PTF** 3351

Ford Mustang V6 (pre-'99) PTG** 3065

Ford Mustang V8 ('64-'68 <272 hp) PTF* 2980

Ford Mustang V8 ('69-'70 <291 hp) PTF* 3250

Ford Mustang V8 ('71-'73 <286 hp) PTF 3560

Ford Mustang V8 ('79-'93 <226 hp) PTE 3075

Ford Mustang V8 ('94-'98 <226 hp) PTE* 3075

Ford Mustang V8 ('99-'04) PTE** 3273

 

Camaro's

 

Chevrolet Camaro 3.1L PTG* 3105

Chevrolet Camaro 3.4L PTG* 3306

Chevrolet Camaro 3.8L PTF* 3307

Chevrolet Camaro 5.0L carb (170 hp)('87) PTF** 3250

Chevrolet Camaro SS ('98-'02) PTD** 3433

Chevrolet Camaro SS ('96-'97) PTD* 3439

Chevrolet Camaro SS ('10) PTB 3860

Chevrolet Camaro Z28 ('98-'02) PTD* 3439

Chevrolet Camaro Z28 (pre '98) PTE** 3441

 

 

Limit weight to power:

PTA 8.70:1

PTB 10.25:1

PTC 12.00:1

PTD 14.25:1

PTE 16.50:1

PTF 19.50:1

 

And relatively simple rules to equalize additional Mods:

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/performance_touring_rules.pdf

 

Seriously, once the new cars are out there with the same level of Mods, a weight or mod limit could be assigned to eventually allow them, or determine it is time for another class, as was done before.

[Glenn]

Couple comments…..

Creating a new class for only the new cars to run allows the current class to grow or die naturally. Allowing new cars in and requiring older cars to evolve will run off those with older cars w/ no guarantee that those w/ older cars will come back w/ newer ones. We will likely end up w/ a revised class w/ half the current car count. Keeping the current platforms restricted to CMC (excluding the S-197 - let it run in both for now) will preserve the current car count (for the most part) as we provide a place for those who want to race the newer stuff in a CMC type class.

Creating a new class for newer cars does not dilute the current class if the current class of cars is not legal in the new class (excluding the S-197).

 

So it appears from all the comments we all want to allow the new cars to race under a class w/ the CMC mindset. But do we do that in the current class at the risk of running off current racers? I say no. We have a recent history to prove that was/is dangerous - CMC2 almost killed CMC.

Do we create a class where only the new stuff is allowed? I think so, but we have to be ready to accept low car counts for a few years. Obviously we shouldn't restrict the class to only Camaro's and Mustang's, but allow the above mentioned cars in as well. This approach will not work w/ the current CMC platform restrictions or the class name. The name is another reason to form a new class. I'm not apposed to allowing current CMC cars to mod as required/desired to run in the new class, but that puts the older cars that just do not have a cheap solution to move up at risk (we can work on this). If there is enough demand to warrant a new class, the car count of new cars only will support it, if not, we got nothing to worry about as the CMC of old is still alive and kicking.

Take the platform eligibility of AI, apply the rules approach of CMC and lets see how well it works. It cost us nothing to appoint a rules comity and put something on paper for NAS HQ to look over.

 

Thoughts?

[CMC#11]

Just throwing out an idea for many years down the road...

Make CMC a power/weight series. This would allow the newer high hp cars in at a much heavier weight. I would still set a max HP limit (say 300 hp) so the newer motors would still have to restrict down.

260 hp @ 3200 lbs would be 12.3/1 ratio

300 hp would have a minimum weight of 3690 @ 12.3/1 ratio

 

It would be interesting to see test data for the new Mustang/Camaro/Challenger motors for restricting down. Similar to the testing many years ago with the LS1.

[cozog1548534733]

Allowing new cars in and requiring older cars to evolve will run off those with older cars w/ no guarantee that those w/ older cars will come back w/ newer ones.

 

I completely disagree. As long as there is parity amongst all the cars on track, why would I leave CMC just because newer cars are racing? If the NASA/CMC chiefs want to include new Super Snakes and ZL-1, that's fine with me. As long as their lap times are within the expected range.

 

I don't think allowing new cars in will require the older cars to evolve beyond normal expectations. It's the newer cars that will need to be dumbed down a bit more.

 

I'm voting Bob to be King for the day.

1. Completely stock body delivered form GM, Ford or Mopar. Not Saleen, ASC or any other name.

2. Engines from a selected list

3. Newer cars with more modern technology/design get a weight penalty.

4. Everything else follows current CMC rules.

 

With those guidelines, ANY pony car from just about 1979 will be eligible to race. *THAT* will increase car count and participation more than anything else.

[BADVENM]

I too do not have a problem with the newer cars joining us.

 

I do have a question as to what the "expected range" is.

 

The "expected range" has been so far based on the current platforms...minus the newest Mustang. However, it seems to me (albeit with limited data except this years Nationals) that the "expected range" will be faster (ie lower lap times) given the newer platforms vs. what we've experienced with the older/current platforms.

 

It would be great to borrow/rent data loggers and slap them on all the different platforms at an event such as Hallett. Not sure if there are any of the newer Mustangs that attend for CMC (I dont remember any this past year) but we do get a great turnout and have many different years of Mustangs and Camaros to chose from, all with various degrees of modifications within the rules.

 

Maybe someone could rent a newer Mustang and a 5th gen Camaro and run them at the event. Granted they'll be full weight and have more power/torque but maybe somehow the power to weight and lap times can be useful vs the current platforms. Also, I'm not sure if the ABS can be disconnected, if it cant then that data would not be useful, if it can then maybe we'll learn something from it.

 

Again, just thinking out loud. With 2 or 3 regions attending the Hallett event it would seem the most likely location to get a lot of data from various platforms.

[Glenn]

I completely disagree. As long as there is parity amongst all the cars on track, why would I leave CMC just because newer cars are racing? If the NASA/CMC chiefs want to include new Super Snakes and ZL-1, that's fine with me. As long as their lap times are within the expected range.

 

We had alot of folks quit or leave the series as a result of asking them to mod up to 260hp from 230hp. I have seen it. It will happen again. Alot of folks didn't like it but sayed anyways. Some of those same folks will not stay if it happens again. Alot of the folks I know got into CMC to race, not to have to mod the car every off season to keep a front running car. I am one of those guys. I want a car to need as little work as possible between rounds and seasons so I can spend what little money I have for racing to race.

 

 

HP to weight will not work. One of the goals of CMC is to have cars that are close (as possible) in all aspects of racing. W/ heavy high HP cars, the jet down the straights and park it in the corner. It is like trying to pass an AI car in a CMC car.

[Raging Aardvark]

 

I'm almost afraid to comment (since our car has barely touched the track since our son was born), but I agree with Glenn. There are some of us out there still with 305TPI setups. Let's say the series bumps up to 300HP (which I could see). What's it going to take for us to hit that? We either have to switch to carb(drop a 350 in?) or throw in an LT-1(and everything that entails), and then hope we get close to not have to keep throwing money at it. I've run a car that was over 30HP down before, it's not much fun. When you start bumping numbers up, and people HAVE to throw money at it to even be anywhere near the ballpark, you could easily run out the ones who just can't afford to upgrade AND race. If I have to choose between upgrading an engine and not having any money left to race, or taking the existing car and running in another class, I know which one I'll pick

[roadracerwhite]

I completely disagree. As long as there is parity amongst all the cars on track, why would I leave CMC just because newer cars are racing? If the NASA/CMC chiefs want to include new Super Snakes and ZL-1, that's fine with me. As long as their lap times are within the expected range.

 

We had alot of folks quit or leave the series as a result of asking them to mod up to 260hp from 230hp. I have seen it. It will happen again. Alot of folks didn't like it but sayed anyways. Some of those same folks will not stay if it happens again. Alot of the folks I know got into CMC to race, not to have to mod the car every off season to keep a front running car. I am one of those guys. I want a car to need as little work as possible between rounds and seasons so I can spend what little money I have for racing to race.

 

 

HP to weight will not work. One of the goals of CMC is to have cars that are close (as possible) in all aspects of racing. W/ heavy high HP cars, the jet down the straights and park it in the corner. It is like trying to pass an AI car in a CMC car.

 

I may be misunderstanding Todd but I think he is talking about and I agree, bringing the new cars down to our numbers, with comarable lap times, and add them to CMC. Not increase our cars to those stock levels.

 

I don't want to have to chase a moving target either.

 

 

More cars = more fun

More classes = dilution

[BADVENM]

I too dont want to chase a moving target. I'm holding off on the $$ 4 piston brakes this year hoping the Cobra brakes I bought used do the trick and keep me competitive...whatever that is.

 

I dont know the cost of getting my current motor to the possible 300 hp mark but I have to ask will it be cheaper to pull another motor already at the mark, grab all the harnesses, computer, etc that goes with it and totally redo the car or be allowed parts to get my current setup to 300 hp or whatever it will be. I'm already pushing my speed density computer to its limit in hoping for 260 hp and to go any higher will require the appropriate computer, injectors, wiring harness, etc. I'm hoping to not have to do that this year but if 300 hp is the standard in the next few years why would I want to go through this possibly twice?

 

Think too about the others who are thinking about getting into CMC with the older platforms. They have the car, parts, etc for the current rules but in the near future find out (like the rest of us with older platforms) that the car they were to build this year or next will be less then adequate to be competitive. Do you think they'll still build the car now, will they wait another few years til those rules come out, will they build the car at all?

[mitchntx1548534714]

Glenn, just stop.

 

You will never convince the nay-sayers nor will you placate the kool-aid drinkers. And most of all you can't fix the series.

 

It is what it is ... a CMCer today is faced with living with it or finding something else. Simple.

 

One sure thing, though. There is revolving door of drama. As one group leaves, a new group enters. That is the only constant remaining in CMC.

[wastntim]

HP to weight will not work. One of the goals of CMC is to have cars that are close (as possible) in all aspects of racing. W/ heavy high HP cars, the jet down the straights and park it in the corner. It is like trying to pass an AI car in a CMC car.

 

I completely agree about the difficulties of having cars with a major disparity in horsepower. It makes racing difficult at best. The cars must be equal in horsepower.

[cmc79]

Mitch, you are on target again as usual.

 

Glenn, the idea keeping the existing class while creating a new class for new cars is a good one, IMO.

Edited November 10, 2011 by Guest