Jump to content
wastntim

What is going on with CMC?

Recommended Posts

suck fumes1548534743

I brought it up over a year ago when I was building my car. The response I got....."Has to be stock!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smike
I brought it up over a year ago when I was building my car. The response I got....."Has to be stock!"

 

Our class has a HP/TQ cap, right?

 

We have how many motor options out there?

 

5.3 and 5.7 LS, 350, 305, LT1

4.6, 5.0, 302

 

None make power the same way. Cap is a cap, if one needs something to get there cost effectively (not a blueprinted motor) - what's wrong with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smike
So we can expect a RCR for this then right?

 

I already received it from Mike. Just was waiting for the silly season to start to submit officially to directors.

 

Please advise if it needs any more editing before submission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dustin M.

Because then the perception will be that you need those parts to win. I don't entirely agree with that, here's the intent of CMC.

 

The intent of the Camaro Mustang Challenge (CMC) racing series is to provide National Auto Sport Association (NASA) members a racing series featuring production American pony cars. Modifications will be limited to those necessary to promote safety, close competition, and flexibility to enable drivers to learn and experiment with the principles of race car setup within boundaries intended to limit expenses, thereby providing the drivers with fun, exciting, and challenging yet approachable racing.

 

Of interest to me is the part in bold. I'd love if we were able to experiment with roll centers and I'm thinking about getting some practice in submitting my first ever rejected RCR. I know people are beating me on the same overlowered and not-ideal geometry and they'd stay faster no matter how much I experiment, but at least then that option would be open for us to try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smike
Because then the perception will be that you need those parts to win. I don't entirely agree with that, here's the intent of CMC.

 

The intent of the Camaro Mustang Challenge (CMC) racing series is to provide National Auto Sport Association (NASA) members a racing series featuring production American pony cars. Modifications will be limited to those necessary to promote safety, close competition, and flexibility to enable drivers to learn and experiment with the principles of race car setup within boundaries intended to limit expenses, thereby providing the drivers with fun, exciting, and challenging yet approachable racing.

 

Of interest to me is the part in bold. I'd love if we were able to experiment with roll centers and I'm thinking about getting some practice in submitting my first ever rejected RCR. I know people are beating me on the same overlowered and not-ideal geometry and they'd stay faster no matter how much I experiment, but at least then that option would be open for us to try.

 

Reality is that you need 260-264hp and 290-310tq. If you dyno and make that - great! Nothing else needed. If you have a motor that allows for some additional mods (like headers or cough - throttle body/plenum) and dyno says its needed - that is what we're asking for here.

 

Ha, this has come a long way from entry level racing. Look at the cars and prep of the cars. Hell, I've rebuilt this one 3x in terms of motors and suspensions. And 3-5k motors? That's not a limited expense. Right now perception is that you must blueprint or run a choice motor to get to the power levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D Algozine

I think we all understand the intent, but there will always be one or more racers who will spend $50k to build, test, redesign, and retest to assemble the absolute best car, built to the very edge, with every performance component max'd out. The problem that CAN occur is if that happens more and more in a LOWER cost series, then the intent gets lost. One way to offset that situation is to make it easier for the masses to complete the NEARLLY identical built car for a reasonable dollar value. Meaning if you make it easier and reasonably inexpensive to remain competitive, then you can negate the BIG SPENDERS. But this would involve the aftermarket parts more then they are currently. It is a very difficult balance and directors need to be staying ahead of, or at least current with needed changes, instead of continually reacting. Again not easy to do. The challenge is trying to keep a lower cost class relevant, inexpensive, competitive, and immune to CUBIC dollar take over. God forbid the rule book would have to................dare I say it...... get bigger and more detailed........there I said it !!!

 

Personally I'm in favor of, in order:

Level the field....I think there are some changes that could be made

Reliability.....Likely means some more aftermarket parts

Cost efficiency.....same as above, goes hand in hand with reliability

Keeping the CUBIC dollars out.........Likely will always be someone willing to spend an insane amount in a low budget class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
suck fumes1548534743

The 4.6 intake elbow is the biggest handicap on those engines. You smooth out the air, you increase the top end which puts it on par with the F bodies. Closer competition and less spending!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DrC

Please do not count me out just yet. Have not been to the track this year and greatly miss all of you and running with the group. As you know I have never been able to keep up with the other cars whether it is a Ford or GM car. I am still working out issues with the car as well as with the driver. But all that does not take away from the amount of fun I have each time I am able to be a part of the standing start and making you all look good while helping you practice you well executed passing skills.

 

One thing I am all in favor of is improved Reliability without it being a competitive advantage. I would prefer to be telling over exaggerated stories and not pulling some part that failed in hopes of meeting the nest race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cozog1548534733
Please do not count me out just yet. Have not been to the track this year and greatly miss all of you and running with the group. As you know I have never been able to keep up with the other cars whether it is a Ford or GM car. I am still working out issues with the car as well as with the driver. But all that does not take away from the amount of fun I have each time I am able to be a part of the standing start and making you all look good while helping you practice you well executed passing skills.

 

One thing I am all in favor of is improved Reliability without it being a competitive advantage. I would prefer to be telling over exaggerated stories and not pulling some part that failed in hopes of meeting the nest race.

 

I'm really glad to hear this Dan. Look forward to racing with you again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spencer

So when are we going to see the RCR on throttle bodies for SN95-99s? I exhausted all legal bolt on options for getting my 4.6 up to power (LTs, UDs, CAI) and I am still well short of the min requirements. Throttle bodies seem like the clear answer for us 4.6 Mustang guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CMC#11

What is your hp/tq number?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spencer
What is your hp/tq number?

 

250/285

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nasa-rm
What is your hp/tq number?

 

253 / 290 for my beast. Not interested in throwing $$ at it for new low cc pistons, blueprinting, balancing, funky springs, etc.

 

Michael, you drove it. Ok on power, but just not quite there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blk96gt
What is your hp/tq number?

 

250/285

 

What year is the car? If 96-98, were PI heads installed. If the PI heads were installed, were they purchased new from FRPP or pulled off another car. If pulled off another car, what year were they off of?

 

Has the engine ever been rebuilt? If it has, do you know what dish pistons were installed?

 

Also, have you checked the compression recently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spencer
What is your hp/tq number?

 

250/285

 

What year is the car? If 96-98, were PI heads installed. If the PI heads were installed, were they purchased new from FRPP or pulled off another car. If pulled off another car, what year were they off of?

 

Has the engine ever been rebuilt? If it has, do you know what dish pistons were installed?

 

Also, have you checked the compression recently?

 

Mine is. 2000 GT which was completely stock when I purchased. Did a compression test a year ago and results were great. My numbers are right on for what a 4.6 will make with legal bolt ons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blk96gt

The 99-00 have 18cc dish pistons vs the 01-04 which have 15.8cc and the 96-98 that have 11cc. Technically the 99-00 will make less HP than the other years with the same mods. Not sure how much difference 2cc's make though. The 99-00 also have a Windsor block, whereas the other years all have Romeos. Don't think that causes any HP difference though.

 

What were your actual numbers? Mines at 170-180psi (except for cylinder 1 which is at 90psi). I've got a 96 with 04 cast FRPP heads, 11cc pistons, stock rods and crank, and bored .020 over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
suck fumes1548534743

For the guys with worn motors aka 250/285 ish numbers, adding the TB/plenum will put you right on the money with where most other cars are on power. Has to be the 75mm though to get it at the 260/300ish number though. Putting new PI heads will get you a boost too. They used to be cheap for a fully assembled head but recently have gone up in price a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CMC#11
What is your hp/tq number?

 

253 / 290 for my beast. Not interested in throwing $$ at it for new low cc pistons, blueprinting, balancing, funky springs, etc.

 

Michael, you drove it. Ok on power, but just not quite there.

Power felt good to me, I wasn't getting pulled at all in 3rd or 4th gear. Now 5th gear was another story, the .68 5th was frustrating!!! Dang that T45.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
suck fumes1548534743

Put 3:27's in and you won't need 5th haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smike
For the guys with worn motors aka 250/285 ish numbers, adding the TB/plenum will put you right on the money with where most other cars are on power. Has to be the 75mm though to get it at the 260/300ish number though. Putting new PI heads will get you a boost too. They used to be cheap for a fully assembled head but recently have gone up in price a lot.

 

I tested both the 70mm and 75mm. 75mm didn't make any more power for my car.

 

From my talks with American Muscle, Trick Flow, and Summit, really requires aggressive cams, turbo, or nitrous to support that big on a 4.6l. If you did it on a minimal bolt-on you will see little to less gains.

 

The 264hp was made with the 70mm. And weight minimums go up a lot for each pony. RCR submission was written to the 70mm.

 

PI heads are ~$900 for both. Will need to run a PI intake as well ($240ish). And there is the PI cams too. And install - everyone's a mechanic here?

 

Junkyard 01-04 motor maybe cheaper. Still needs that extra push to get to 260/300. Adding a TB/P gets that job done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smike
Put 3:27's in and you won't need 5th haha

 

Yes. Some testing I did last year. I went with 3.31s since I run the 255/40R17 tire size. And that combo gave me enough for all the tracks here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blk96gt

We're there any issues with AFR after the throttle body install? That would be my main concern with allowing throttle bodies, since there is the potential that it could lean the AFR out and potentially cause more issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smike
We're there any issues with AFR after the throttle body install? That would be my main concern with allowing throttle bodies, since there is the potential that it could lean the AFR out and potentially cause more issues.

 

A/F controlled by fuel pressure regular - 7.22.2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
suck fumes1548534743

The PI heads from ford racing come fully assembled with cams. I bought mine from late model last year for $600 for the pair. So like I said they went way up in price!

 

If your motor still can't hit good numbers then your only other option is race gas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dustin M.

Maybe if you unplug those O2 sensors. They trim the AFRs right back every time, the only thing the FPR is good for long term is adding tip-in fuel. Not only have I read this, I lived it on my Crown Victoria. I tried to cheat and add more fuel to my GT40P top end equipped 5.0HO and after a day or 2 of driving, fuel was back to too lean again. I was anticipating this though, and tip-in was awful until I cranked up the pressure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...