Jump to content
D Algozine

7) Allow threaded spring adjusters on all four corners, all

Recommended Posts

D Algozine

I think this makes good sense.

My input

Fronts of all platforms - coil overs allowed - and adjustment should be open

Rears - Conventional springs with threaded adjusters - open adjustment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

Seems like alot of the rules your in favor of point towards a desire to have an AI light class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D Algozine

Well I am a CMC newbie, so maybe i should just keep me head down and go with the flow.

But since you brought it up. Yes, AI is too far gone, unless you want to buy/build a Grand am type car with Grand am type money and resources. I like the principles of CMC. My opinion is that by trying to stay truly stock (which is nearly impossible, unless you buy/built an S197) , it is more expensive in the long run. My experience, I see very few CMC racers who get or have a stock car, put a cage and go racing. Most spend a great deal of time and effort to build a race car, and continue to do so as they progress in the series. The rules have been written to allow that guy who has a stock camaro/firebird/mustang to add a cage, make a few changes and go racing. You MOST likely will not be competitive with that approach and few are taking that approach, unless you have the new Mustang, which is perfectly suited for on track performance. So, the rest of the platforms need some help. They simply were not designed for road racing. I love the idea of a restrictive, cost sensitive, drivers class, just exactly how that is achieved is the whole point of the rules discussions. Cheap does not always mean inexpensive. Perhaps I have the wrong opinion, but i see CMC as RACE cars that are relatively inexpensive and very limited in mods, and not street cars that go racing, there is only one platform that can do that.

Just giving my opinion, take it for what you feel its worth.

 

My time is limited and valuable, so repairing broken parts, or making adjustments the hard way to save a couple hundred, seems counterproductive. As with everything, there is a balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wastntim
I think this makes good sense.

My input

Fronts of all platforms - coil overs allowed - and adjustment should be open

Rears - Conventional springs with threaded adjusters - open adjustment.

 

I love this suggestion. It would especially be nice to have the abilty to add the screw adjustors to the rear. It just makes sense. When you buy the kits, they sell the backs with the fronts. This would allow us a simple and inexpensive way for us to better cornerweight our cars without having to fabricate a bunch of different spacers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soundguydave1548534741

 

My time is limited and valuable, so repairing broken parts, or making adjustments the hard way to save a couple hundred, seems counterproductive. As with everything, there is a balance.

 

I'll also add that all the "custom work" involved in maximizing the car to the ruleset, particularly with the "mature" chassis, frequently costs MORE than an off-the-shelf bolt-on solution. I'm tired of breaking the car at the track, constantly fixing things that are overstressed but rules-limited to OE, and even knowingly overstressing the chassis itself. That is not "cost containment," it's a simple redirection of funds spent. Spring rate is already open, spring size is already open, corner-weighting is allowed, but is restricted to the most difficult possible method, except for the two "overdog" chassis... I would also support Dave's recommendation, and ask for support of this RCR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn
I think this makes good sense.

My input

Fronts of all platforms - coil overs allowed - and adjustment should be open

Rears - Conventional springs with threaded adjusters - open adjustment.

 

I love this suggestion. It would especially be nice to have the abilty to add the screw adjustors to the rear. It just makes sense. When you buy the kits, they sell the backs with the fronts. This would allow us a simple and inexpensive way for us to better cornerweight our cars without having to fabricate a bunch of different spacers.

 

The goal was to never allow corner weight ability. Then it was to limit "between race" adjustments. Several Directors and racers over the years have proven that what the series wants to prevent is taking place anyways, but w/ more effort and cost than if we just allowed it. All the arguments have been made. If it changes, it is another "must have" item in order to run up front. The 4th gens got them cause w/out that allowance, they would have to run on "street" springs from Eibach or LGM or Strano. I don't know of a single CMC 4th gen set-up on springs w/in 100lbs of those. If there was an off the shelf solution that didn't adjust that allowed adapting to a commonly available spring, it would have been done that way.

 

Anyone want to tell me why coilovers are better? How is the car faster w/ the shock in the center of the spring?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soundguydave1548534741

Anyone want to tell me why coilovers are better? How is the car faster w/ the shock in the center of the spring?

 

Because the coil-over springs themselves are sooo cheap, I can afford extra track time!!

 

Seriously, though, $50-100 per set cheaper, plus the ability to mix-and-match front and rear values, and availability of linear rate springs in 25lb rate increments. The net cost differential can be huge. As an example, assuming that you go through three sets to find the right front rate, but the rear rate is off, so you buy another set to get the right rear springs, you've spent roughly $1000 on stock-replacement springs, to say nothing of the costs associated with installation, alignment, etc. With coilover springs, you can independently pick rates front and rear, and you will have a LOT less "wastage." Assume you buy a total of 10 springs, at $50 a pop. That gives you three chances to nail the front rate, and two chances to nail the rear. Total parts cost? $500, versus $1250, with the stock-replacement sets. That more than pays for the cost of the "conversion kit" to utilize coilover springs. There's also a HUGE used market in coilover springs, so you could probably cut your net costs in half with a little wise shopping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D Algozine

Firstly, not my rule suggestion. I just cut and pasted it from Al's "Rules announcement thread", then added my comments.

BTW, has everyone seen the list?

 

Secondly

Anyone want to tell me why coilovers are better? How is the car faster w/ the shock in the center of the spring

 

There is a small weight savings, and ease of adjustment. I don't think the issue is coilovers. I think it is the ability to have simple screw type spring height adjusters. Coilovers just make it very simple, but I don't think they are nnecessary.

The only reason I think that all fronts should be allowed coilvers, is because some of the cars have them from the factory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wastntim
The goal was to never allow corner weight ability. Then it was to limit "between race" adjustments. Several Directors and racers over the years have proven that what the series wants to prevent is taking place anyways, but w/ more effort and cost than if we just allowed it.

 

First of all, I can tell you from personal experience, having a car that is not cornerweighted is not fun and is much more expensive. I went through almost two full seasons without cornerweighting my car. The car sucked to drive! It pushed like crazy and worse yet, I absolutely would burn up my driver's front tire. After cornerweighting my car, it handled 50% better and my front driver's side tire wear went down by 75%! The difference was night and day and because I was not burning up my front tire, I was saving money.

 

The fact is that all of the top cars are cornerweighted already. The only thing the rules are currently doing is making the process much harder to get it done. Personally, I'd much rather be able to adjust a perch than make 10 different spacers to have a car that is worth driving.

 

I'm all for keeping costs down, but if the car absolutey sucks to drive, what's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Al F.

 

corner-weighting is allowed, but is restricted to the most difficult possible method, except for the two "overdog" chassis

 

That is not true. 4th gens and S197s do have coil overs, but only in the front. However, the adjusters on both sides have to be within 1/8" of each other, meaning they cannot be used for corner weighing. They still need to stack spacers just like everyone else. To make matters worse, they have to completely disassemble the suspension to change front springs at the track, where everyone else can just jack the car up and loosen the strut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D Algozine

 

corner-weighting is allowed, but is restricted to the most difficult possible method, except for the two "overdog" chassis

 

That is not true. 4th gens and S197s do have coil overs, but only in the front. However, the adjusters on both sides have to be within 1/8" of each other, meaning they cannot be used for corner weighing. They still need to stack spacers just like everyone else. To make matters worse, they have to completely disassemble the suspension to change front springs at the track, where everyone else can just jack the car up and loosen the strut.

 

If your scoring at home, this is Dave Lowum's quote, not mine.

corner-weighting is allowed, but is restricted to the most difficult possible method, except for the two "overdog" chassis

 

I read somewhere, that originally corner weighting was illegal. How could you ever know or prove that springs and or right height has been selectively adjusted for optimum corner weight. There is only a ride height minimum and never has there been a spring height max or min. You selectively cut springs and/or add some type of shims. I guarantee 90% of all cmc cars use this method or a form of it, and 100% of the cars that finish up front. So, its always been done and is still being done, but its just been a pain in the a$$ to complete.

 

And the the fear that this will be another "must have" doesn't work either. You already "must have" a corner weighted car to be competitive. And Dave Lowum pretty much debugged the cost issue, related to coilover springs vs conventianal. Again, I don't think the rears "need" to be coilovers, but I think screw type adjusters should be legal, and you should be able to adjust the fronts and rears to any setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

Corner weighting was not illegal. The goal was to prevent quick and easy adjustments that could be made between qual and race 1 .... ect....

When I said "must have" I was refering to spring adjusters, not corner weighting.

 

The reality is that the CMC'er of 2012 is doing alot more than the CMC'er of 2000, and considerably more than any CMC'er of the early 90's. The class has just evolved. The class is now to the point of splitting hairs. But it is best to have those hairs split at home in the garage, and not sitting in pre-grid w/ 5 to go. So the 4th gen is no more adjustable in that regard (corner weighting) than any other platform. So there is no need to "open it up".

 

 

Lets say we ban any means of corner weighting..... will it stop? NO.

Guys will order several sets of springs and mix and match until they get what they want. The will put cars on a frame machine and pull and twist it to get what they want. That would surely cost a shit ton to do. So from that POV, the series is allowing a cheeper method - shims. Do this w/in the limits the class has in place, and your good to go, and is tons cheeper than the alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn
First of all, I can tell you from personal experience, having a car that is not cornerweighted is not fun and is much more expensive. I went through almost two full seasons without cornerweighting my car. The car sucked to drive! It pushed like crazy and worse yet, I absolutely would burn up my driver's front tire. After cornerweighting my car, it handled 50% better and my front driver's side tire wear went down by 75%! The difference was night and day and because I was not burning up my front tire, I was saving money.

 

The fact is that all of the top cars are cornerweighted already. The only thing the rules are currently doing is making the process much harder to get it done. Personally, I'd much rather be able to adjust a perch than make 10 different spacers to have a car that is worth driving.

 

I'm all for keeping costs down, but if the car absolutey sucks to drive, what's the point?

 

 

Your acting as though I disagree w/ you in that it should be allowed. I would rather it be easier.

 

If I were to pay a shop to corner weight my car per CMC legal means, it would cost me about 10 times the labor than if we had an adjuster. Several folks over the years have tried to have this change. It is not a new proposal. This "yearly submition" even has a currently sitting Series Directors name tied to it. Most of us chuckle each year we see it. "There is the John Doe RCR!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ls168camaro

 

corner-weighting is allowed, but is restricted to the most difficult possible method, except for the two "overdog" chassis

 

That is not true. 4th gens and S197s do have coil overs, but only in the front. However, the adjusters on both sides have to be within 1/8" of each other, meaning they cannot be used for corner weighing. They still need to stack spacers just like everyone else. To make matters worse, they have to completely disassemble the suspension to change front springs at the track, where everyone else can just jack the car up and loosen the strut.

 

If your scoring at home, this is Dave Lowum's quote, not mine.

corner-weighting is allowed, but is restricted to the most difficult possible method, except for the two "overdog" chassis

 

I read somewhere, that originally corner weighting was illegal. How could you ever know or prove that springs and or right height has been selectively adjusted for optimum corner weight. There is only a ride height minimum and never has there been a spring height max or min. You selectively cut springs and/or add some type of shims. I guarantee 90% of all cmc cars use this method or a form of it, and 100% of the cars that finish up front. So, its always been done and is still being done, but its just been a pain in the a$$ to complete.

 

And the the fear that this will be another "must have" doesn't work either. You already "must have" a corner weighted car to be competitive. And Dave Lowum pretty much debugged the cost issue, related to coilover springs vs conventianal. Again, I don't think the rears "need" to be coilovers, but I think screw type adjusters should be legal, and you should be able to adjust the fronts and rears to any setting.

 

Tap the brake a little. This isn't AI. 90% of the cars are corner weighted? Are you kidding me. I don't know anyone that has done this in tx. Now maybe that is why I'm a mid pack slacker-guess ill add that to my list of excuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CMC#11

Sorry Bryan, I'd bet there are at least a handfull of racers from this year who corner-weight their cars plus another handfull of racers from years past who I know did as well.

It simply is a must do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wastntim
Sorry Bryan, I'd bet there are at least a handfull of racers from this year who corner-weight their cars plus another handfull of racers from years past who I know did as well.

It simply is a must do.

 

If you're not doing it, you are flushing money down the toilet. Even you have to pay to have it cornerweighted, you will save money in the extended life of your tires.

 

I still do not understand why under the current rules the perches must be fixed. If is an ajdustabel piece what is the sense in making people also use shims if they want to do adjustments at the track?

 

If somebody doesn't want to buy the perches, they can use the shims as an inexpensive alternative but to force the use of shims seems pointless.

 

I can understand and appreciate trying to keep costs down but is there some reason we need to make our lives more difficult at the same time? At a certain point, the directors need to realize they are making the class less attractive because to make the car fun to drive, you are making the racers have to spend hours upon hours of finding a way to make that happen.

 

I don't have an endless racing budget AND I also don't have an endless time budget either. So stop forcing us to cut 12 sets of spacers to accomplish what could be done with the turn of a socket!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soundguydave1548534741

If I were to pay a shop to corner weight my car per CMC legal means, it would cost me about 10 times the labor than if we had an adjuster. Several folks over the years have tried to have this change. It is not a new proposal. This "yearly submition" even has a currently sitting Series Directors name tied to it. Most of us chuckle each year we see it. "There is the John Doe RCR!"

 

And no pre-judgement on the RCR, either, right?

 

Corner weighting was not illegal. The goal was to prevent quick and easy adjustments that could be made between qual and race 1 .... ect....

When I said "must have" I was refering to spring adjusters, not corner weighting.

 

The reality is that the CMC'er of 2012 is doing alot more than the CMC'er of 2000, and considerably more than any CMC'er of the early 90's. The class has just evolved. The class is now to the point of splitting hairs. But it is best to have those hairs split at home in the garage, and not sitting in pre-grid w/ 5 to go. So the 4th gen is no more adjustable in that regard (corner weighting) than any other platform. So there is no need to "open it up".

 

 

Lets say we ban any means of corner weighting..... will it stop? NO.

Guys will order several sets of springs and mix and match until they get what they want. The will put cars on a frame machine and pull and twist it to get what they want. That would surely cost a shit ton to do. So from that POV, the series is allowing a cheeper method - shims. Do this w/in the limits the class has in place, and your good to go, and is tons cheeper than the alternative.

 

I agree, that the racers today are running things closer to the edge than they were 10 or 15 years ago. I think it's time the rule set recognized and regulated that! By your own admission, the racers WILL do whatever they can within the ruleset (even in the grey areas!) to gain or maintain an edge, and unfortunately, this is a prime example of how the tighter regulation simply drives the cost UP, rather than contains it. We move batteries around, we add cool suit coolers, we selectively leave stock bits in place, all with an eye towards how the car will scale. Adding threaded adjusters to the "legal" parts inventory isn't going to drive up the cost, it'll contain it! I would much rather pay for the adjusters ONCE than pony up for a session on a frame rack, or have custom spring cups and shims fabricated. This brings things back to the whole deep-pockets concept, which I thought was supposed to be an anethema to this series. Correct me if I'm wrong in that assertion...

 

If I wanted to make a spring change, legally, under the current rules, I could do so at home, with my custom-fabricated cups. That is, until I find that the rate that I want combined with the free-length needed to stay away from the ride-height police isn't available. New shims? Cut a longer spring down? More money, or compromise the rate from the heat of cutting the spring.... OR, I can just spin the adjuster until I'm legal.

 

Any way you look at it, with the given being that we WILL make an adjustment that is not prohibited by the ruleset, it's just flat cheaper to do it with a coilover kit than it is ANY other way. There's your barrier to entry, lack of cost containment, AND lack of parity all rolled into one. This time, maybe no chuckles over the discussion, but some rational, considered discussion is warranted. If it keeps coming back, year after year, and has support from the racers, it bears serious consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37Stang
By your own admission, the racers WILL do whatever they can within the ruleset (even in the grey areas!) to gain or maintain an edge, and unfortunately, this is a prime example of how the tighter regulation simply drives the cost UP, rather than contains it.

 

Its been proven time and time again in all forms of motorsports that rules designed to contain costs do one thing... drive costs UP!!! Sure, within reason, certain rules will keep the costs down. For example, limiting horsepower as checked by the dyno - there is simply no way to be beat the dyno reading. But talking about scaling the car and cutting springs, twisting the chassis, etc... costs more than being able to turn the spring perch. Add in the convenience and it is a win - win...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve91T

Can't you somewhat tweak the corner weights by shimming one side of the sway bars?

 

 

Another question. How much will screw adjusters cost? Is there a bolt in kit available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bluebandit48

I actually do not like this idea. I think it gets away from the stock type car too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soundguydave1548534741
Can't you somewhat tweak the corner weights by shimming one side of the sway bars?

 

 

Another question. How much will screw adjusters cost? Is there a bolt in kit available?

 

I haven't researched the F-bodies, since they already have a working solution, but the Maximum Motorsports kit runs $375, including springs. And no, you can't really tweak corner weights with the endlinks, all you wind up doing is preloading, which alters the wheel rate.

 

Bluebandit: I'm not sure where you're coming from... We already are allowed to go to "any spring" we want, as well as change out the shocks. This isn't a wholesale redesign of the suspension, it simply makes ride-height and corner-weight adjustment easier and cheaper, and opens up access to more spring rates for less money. No cutting and/or welding on the chassis at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bluebandit48

Yes but think about this. Now I have to buy coil over kits for the front of the car. New springs. Adjustable rears? Ok. I am just sour that if this passes i just sold mine like 2 months ago. But. I don't want my control arms to have the adjustment. I would want actual jack screws mounted to the car. I am just not a fan. I think it is a little too American Iron to me.

 

I don't think this should turn into a class where american iron cars come to run when they finally decide they don't have enough money to run with Dean Martin. Keep what we have in regards to coil overs. We are already spending 2k on shocks and I cant afford that.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soundguydave1548534741

I hear you, Rob. But, it's not a MUST HAVE item, if you're pretty well sorted. The location of the springs, in and of themselves, will not make the car faster. What it will do is cut the expense of anybody still developing the chassis, and make corner-weighting easier and cheaper. Like Robert pointed out, if you haven't corner-weighted to at least some degree, you're burning up tires to no benefit. With the current rule set, it's expensive, and a monumental pain in the a$$ to do it, but most of us still do, I'd wager. Oh, and you can keep your $2K shocks, the sleeve drops over them...

 

As for the AI boys coming down, there's a lot more to building an AI car than just having adjustable perches, and it would take quite a bit of work on their part just to "de-mod" to be legal with our rule-set. It's a lot more than a weekend's work. If they can make the car legal, then why not welcome them? More cars on track, more fun for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bluebandit48

Dave,

 

It would be a must have if you want to be fast... it would turn into.. well the fast guys are running it so I must have to run that to be fast.

 

I understand the sleeve option, but I have a feeling there might be some fancy options out there that cost a lot more than the 2k. oh and I have the $500 dollar SET of Tokicos!!

 

I just think if you do coil overs, why not front lower control arms, then why not k members, etc.. i can see fixing problems, like the torque arm for the sn95 and fox, but I just think it is a little much. that is just my .02.

 

usually if I am against a rule change it gets approved. usually if I am for it, it gets denied. So you might be in luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mitchntx1548534714
Can't you somewhat tweak the corner weights by shimming one side of the sway bars?

 

Or shave the spring itself. Its a way around the adjustment within 1/8" side to side rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...