2014 RCR #2 LS in third gens

[Al F.]

Thanks Robert for a well thought out recommendation to allow the LS motors in the third gen GM body. Please be considerate in your discussion.

 

1) Robert Salus, Midwest, #24

2) Rule 7.11.1 and 7.14

3) Any 4.6 Ford, 5.0,(302 Ford or 305 GM), 5.7 liter LT1/LS1 GM V8 production engine, in OEM stock configuration unless otherwise stated in these rules, that was originally offered in an eligible model car is legal. Cobra R model engines (Ford) and LT4 (GM/Chevrolet) engines or engine components are prohibited. Additionally, early GM cars may run any LT-1 or LS-1 from the 93-02 Late GM cars as long as the stock LT1 or LS1 engine controlling electronics are maintained.

 

7.14 GM 5.3L LS Engine Option

 

Late and early GM cars may substitute the engine long block assembly with the 5.3L LS series LM7, L59, LM4, and L33 long block assembly from 1999-2004 GM trucks. The intake, exhaust manifolds, and all external

accessories and electronics from the Late GM 5.7L cars must be retained. The camshaft from the Late GM 5.7L cars may be used.

 

4)(a) I am proposing allowing LS1 engines to be introduced into early GM cars. I believe that allowing these engines, with the 5.3 option allows for a more reliable and, therefore, less costly option to the LT1. As time goes on, parts for LT1’s become harder to find and more expensive. The optispark has been a continued source of failure on many cars and at $400 to replace, it hardly makes the engine cost effective to run. An LS1 can easily be swapped into and early GM car with virtually no modification to the car.

4(b) I believe allowing this option will promote series growth as it will give racer’s the option of running a much more popular and reliable motor at a low price. During this last summer I purchased a 5.3 LS1 with 30,000 miles on it for $600. I believe it also add’s a “cool†factor. Seeing the older cars with a modern LS1 engine definitely catches people’s eyes and gets them to talk about the car.

4(d) Allowing an LS1 will improve competition as it will allow the older cars to have the same, more reliable engine as the later generation. The adoption of this rule may slow down the trend of racer’s moving to the newer generation and could help extend the life of CMC.

[FBody383]

As a 4th gen LT1 guy, I generally like this idea as a hardware only plug and play.

 

Hasn't Denton been running this combo on a "test" basis? Is there dyno and result information compiled to share?

 

What are the realistic 3rd gen camaro/firebird transmission options with the LS motor?

[Dustin M.]

I say the powers that be call out a specific engine mount kit to locate the engine so we don't end up with arguments over weight distribution advantages (aluminum block notwithstanding, you just eat the same weight penalty as a 4th gen there). Now will the Ford guys want to swap 4.6s in and will they feel left in the cold?

[Smike]

Now will the Ford guys want to swap 4.6s in and will they feel left in the cold?

 

Yes.

 

Please to have LS1?

[Smike]

In all seriousness. Get all options in front for review?

 

94-04 SN95 Mustang:

FI 4.6l 281ci SOHC

FI 4.6l 281ci DOHC (Cobra/Mach1 motor)

FI 5.0 302 ci

Carb 302 ci

 

3rd Gen:

FI 305 ci

Carb 305 ci

Carb 350 ci

FI FI LS Based LM7, L59, LM4, and L33 323 ci (requested)

 

4th Gen:

FI LT1 350 ci

FI LS1 350 ci

FI LS Based LM7, L59, LM4, and L33 323 ci

Carb 305 ci

Carb 350 ci

Edited September 17, 2014 by Guest

[ls168camaro]

In all seriousness. Get all options in front for review?

 

94-04 SN95 Mustang:

FI 4.6l 281ci SOHC

FI 4.6l 281ci DOHC (Cobra/Mach1 motor)

FI 5.0 302 ci

Carb 302 ci

 

3rd Gen:

FI 305 ci

Carb 305 ci

Carb 350 ci

FI LS3 323 ci (requested)

 

4th Gen:

FI LT1 350 ci

FI LS1 350 ci

FI LS3 323 ci

Carb 305 ci

Carb 350 ci

Please make sure you have the right options listed. The Carb 305/350 isn't an option for a 4th Gen. It also doesn't have an LS3 availabe. The 4th GEN only has the LT1, and LS in either 5.7 or 5.3.

[Smike]

In all seriousness. Get all options in front for review?

 

94-04 SN95 Mustang:

FI 4.6l 281ci SOHC

FI 4.6l 281ci DOHC (Cobra/Mach1 motor)

FI 5.0 302 ci

Carb 302 ci

 

3rd Gen:

FI 305 ci

Carb 305 ci

Carb 350 ci

FI LS Based LM7, L59, LM4, and L33 323 ci

 

4th Gen:

FI LT1 350 ci

FI LS1 350 ci

FI LS Based LM7, L59, LM4, and L33 323 ci

Carb 305 ci

Carb 350 ci

 

Please make sure you have the right options listed. The Carb 305/350 isn't an option for a 4th Gen. It also doesn't have an LS3 availabe. The 4th GEN only has the LT1, and LS in either 5.7 or 5.3.

 

Updated - LM7, L59, LM4, and L33.

 

How is the carb not an option for 4th gen?

 

7.12 Ford Spec Carbureted Engine Option

Any of the following unmodified aftermarket components (and only these components) may be substituted

on a CMC legal Ford 5.0 liter (302ci) V8 long block to create a carbed, spec Ford engine:

1. Holley carburetor 600cfm-4bbl #4776

2. Edelbrock Performer or Performer RPM intake manifolds #2121, #7121, #7521

3. Ford Racing B303 camshaft

4. Ford OEM distributor (non-computer controlled)

 

7.13 GM Spec Carbureted Engine Option

Any of the following unmodified aftermarket components (and only these components) may be substituted

on a CMC legal GM V8 long block to create a carbed, spec engine:

 

5.0 liter (305ci)

1. Holley carburetor 600cfm-4bbl #4776

2. Edelbrock Performer intake manifold #2101, #2104, #2116, #7116, #7516

3. Edelbrock Performer Cam kit #2102 or Comp Cams #12-238-2

4. GM L31 #12558060 or L30 #12552520/12558059 heads

5. GM OEM H.E.I. distributor (non-computer controlled)

 

5.7 liter (350ci)

1. Holley carburetor 600cfm-4bbl #4776

2. Edelbrock Performer intake manifold #2101, #2104, #2116, #7116, #7516

3. GM Camshaft #24502476

4. GM L31 #12558060 or L30 #12552520/12558059 heads

5. GM OEM H.E.I. distributor (non-computer controlled)

[ls168camaro]

4)(a) I am proposing allowing LS1 engines to be introduced into early GM cars. I believe that allowing these engines, with the 5.3 option allows for a more reliable and, therefore, less costly option to the LT1. As time goes on, parts for LT1’s become harder to find and more expensive. The optispark has been a continued source of failure on many cars and at $400 to replace, it hardly makes the engine cost effective to run. An LS1 can easily be swapped into and early GM car with virtually no modification to the car.

4(b) I believe allowing this option will promote series growth as it will give racer’s the option of running a much more popular and reliable motor at a low price. During this last summer I purchased a 5.3 LS1 with 30,000 miles on it for $600. I believe it also add’s a “cool†factor. Seeing the older cars with a modern LS1 engine definitely catches people’s eyes and gets them to talk about the car.

4(d) Allowing an LS1 will improve competition as it will allow the older cars to have the same, more reliable engine as the later generation. The adoption of this rule may slow down the trend of racer’s moving to the newer generation and could help extend the life of CMC.

This has been discussed several times and would likely be the class killer.

4a-The LT1 isn't required in a 3rd Gen so it's shortcomings shouldn't be considered. Please explain how it will be cheaper than running the current allowed 305/350 options? Most people don't know the true cost of a swap as it isn't simply a $600 long block from a junk yard. I also don't see how it's more reliable than a traditional SBC? To make the LS more reliable you need to consider a modified oil pump, rod bolts, windage tray, accusump, etc.

4b-Again-what is the true cost of the swap? So you bought a 5.3 for $600. You then need different accessories, intake, throttle body, air filter setup, wiring, computer, exhaust, motor mounts, etc. What about the transmission? Do we allow the t56? How will the clutch/pressure plate setup work? Itemize it to see if it's over $5k. An LS in a 3rd gen is cool but I have never seen a rule passed because it would be cool.

4c?

4d-From what I have witnessed the 3rd Gen is plenty competitive and there are still people who believe a SBC is reliable. It's inevitable that racers will gravitate towards newer cars. (just look at how many SI cars were at Nats). How many people show up for a DE weekend in an 88 Iroc compared to a new 5.0?

[ls168camaro]

7.11.1 Any 4.6 Ford, 5.0,(302 Ford or 305 GM), 5.7 liter LT1/LS1 GM V8 production engine, in OEM stock configuration unless otherwise stated in these rules, that was originally offered in an eligible model car is legal. Cobra R model engines (Ford) and LT4 (GM/Chevrolet) engines or engine components are prohibited. Additionally, early GM cars may run any LT-1 from the 93-97 Late GM cars as long as the stock LT1 engine controlling electronics are maintained.

 

Carb of traditional SBC was never offered in a 4th Gen so it isn't legal.

[Smike]

7.11.1 Any 4.6 Ford, 5.0,(302 Ford or 305 GM), 5.7 liter LT1/LS1 GM V8 production engine, in OEM stock configuration unless otherwise stated in these rules, that was originally offered in an eligible model car is legal. Cobra R model engines (Ford) and LT4 (GM/Chevrolet) engines or engine components are prohibited. Additionally, early GM cars may run any LT-1 from the 93-97 Late GM cars as long as the stock LT1 engine controlling electronics are maintained.

 

Carb of traditional SBC was never offered in a 4th Gen so it isn't legal.

 

By that ruling a carb motor was never offered in the 94-04. So no Ford can run the carb spec motor?

Edited September 17, 2014 by Guest

[Sidney]

4d-From what I have witnessed the 3rd Gen is plenty competitive...

 

You have data to back that up? Regional Championships? Any National Champions...ever (Since CMC1&2 were combined)?

 

Sidney

[ShadowBolt]

4d-From what I have witnessed the 3rd Gen is plenty competitive...

 

You have data to back that up? Regional Championships? Any National Champions...ever (Since CMC1&2 were combined)?

 

Sidney

 

Not trying to be an ass but we had a guy a few years ago (dropped out the last year of CMC1) that set track records (some may still stand) in a Third gen at CMC1 power on 16's. Jeff Wirtz I believe could have won several National championships.

 

JJ

[suck fumes1548534743]

Yep it's not the car it's the driver! Any car can win with the right prep/driver combo. Sorry to be an ass too but it's true.

[BADVENM]

In 2013 our Rocky Mountain CMC director Brad (3rd gen Camaro) placed 3rd.

In 2012...Brad (same 3rd gen) placed 5th.

In 2011 Brad (same 3rd gen) placed 1st.

In 2010...Brad (same 3rd gen) placed 2nd.

In 2009 Brad (same 3rd gen) placed 2nd.

 

So, I would say his 3rd gen was very competitive.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Guest

[ShadowBolt]

Jeff Burch was about as fast and anyone anywhere in his third Gen. At Hallett he was in a class by himself. I think he smoked a cig. during the race. Hallett is a race everyone in Texas wants to win and fields are very large so he did this against a large field not just a few cars. Another racer we lost because of CMC2.

I know he won one National championship (at least). Maybe he only went to one. The third gen makes a very good race car.

 

JJ

[Glenn]

JB went to 2 Nats. 2nd at the first one and won the 2nd. He was very fast.

Him and Wirtz would still be winning today in 3rd gens no doubt in my mind.

[ls168camaro]

7.11.1 Any 4.6 Ford, 5.0,(302 Ford or 305 GM), 5.7 liter LT1/LS1 GM V8 production engine, in OEM stock configuration unless otherwise stated in these rules, that was originally offered in an eligible model car is legal. Cobra R model engines (Ford) and LT4 (GM/Chevrolet) engines or engine components are prohibited. Additionally, early GM cars may run any LT-1 from the 93-97 Late GM cars as long as the stock LT1 engine controlling electronics are maintained.

 

Carb of traditional SBC was never offered in a 4th Gen so it isn't legal.

 

By that ruling a carb motor was never offered in the 94-04. So no Ford can run the carb spec motor?

It's otherwise stated. A 5.0 liter engine was in a 94 up Stang at some point and since the 5.0 Ford has a spec carb option it is legal.

[Smike]

7.11.1 Any 4.6 Ford, 5.0,(302 Ford or 305 GM), 5.7 liter LT1/LS1 GM V8 production engine, in OEM stock configuration unless otherwise stated in these rules, that was originally offered in an eligible model car is legal. Cobra R model engines (Ford) and LT4 (GM/Chevrolet) engines or engine components are prohibited. Additionally, early GM cars may run any LT-1 from the 93-97 Late GM cars as long as the stock LT1 engine controlling electronics are maintained.

 

Carb of traditional SBC was never offered in a 4th Gen so it isn't legal.

 

By that ruling a carb motor was never offered in the 94-04. So no Ford can run the carb spec motor?

It's otherwise stated. A 5.0 liter engine was in a 94 up Stang at some point and since the 5.0 Ford has a spec carb option it is legal.

 

And a 350 = 5.7l, so can be carb'd too?

[Den341548534727]

I suppose I better chime in here as I helped Robert put the LS engine in his car for this past season to see how it would work.

First off I really don’t feel like this combo is a class killer. The LS engine is lighter than the LT1 that was previously in the car. We corner weighted the car before pulling out the LT1 and compared it to the corner weight after we put in the LS engine and the weights changed very little. Not enough to worry about. Unfortunately I cannot find the actual numbers but it can be replicated. We did add sub frame connectors at the same time the swap was being done so that influenced the weights as well. For this past season Robert ran at the minimum weight of a LS 4th gen of 3300 pounds. So the car had almost the same corner weights (within 20 pounds as before) and made the same power as before but now carried about 75 pounds more weight than before. Comparing the same car on the same track and same driver from September 2013 race at Autoban to September 2014 Robert ran about 3.5 tenths faster on his fast lap than last year. However we had great conditions this past week and everyone ran a little faster than before as a new track record was set that weekend by 4 tenths of a second over the previous one.

The hawks thirdgen mounts were used and this put the engine in the exact location so the transmission did not move. The plane of the bell housing is in the exact location as the LT1 or SBC. The LS engine is about 1 inch shorter than the LT1 or a SBC. The LS is missing the part of the casting on the rear of the block that sort of forms the beginnings of a bell housing on the back of a SBC (Small Block Chevy for those of you in Rio Linda). It is flush on a LS1. One could argue that the engine sits further back in the chassis but it is because the engine is 1 inch shorter in length so the crank flange is essentially in the same location as all other engines.

The K member was notched but this was not entirely needed. You could clearance with a hammer but it was easier to cut with a grinder and weld in some metal to get more clearance. This was the ONLY major modification. The F body manifolds, intake, front pulleys etc fit like it was meant to be in the car. It was a VERY easy swap.

 

Bryan L wrote It's inevitable that racers will gravitate towards newer cars. (just look at how many SI cars were at Nats). How many people show up for a DE weekend in an 88 Iroc compared to a new 5.0?

I think Bryan hit it on the head with this and this is precisely why we need to do this. It is MY opinion that we need to keep the cars viable. If we do not let modern engines in the older platforms we will wither on the vine. This goes for the fords as well. When you have 260 HP and 3200 or 3300 pounds what difference does it make how you got there. The cars are going to perform relatively the same. If something is not aligned, tweaks can be made get things in line.

Bob

[ShadowBolt]

I agree with your last statement Bob. Besides the third gen is a way better looking car IMHO.

 

JJ

[Glenn]

Well if we are going to allow the LS in the 3rd gen, we may as well allow a carb in the 4th gen put both platforms on the same line with regards to update/backdate.

[Smike]

Bryan L wrote It's inevitable that racers will gravitate towards newer cars. (just look at how many SI cars were at Nats). How many people show up for a DE weekend in an 88 Iroc compared to a new 5.0?

 

Kinda of expensive and goes against keeping this simple, no?

 

And what about the Foxes and SN95/99s Fords?

 

5.4L v8?

5.0 Coyote?

Crate motors?

[wastntim]

As Bob indicated, I did put the LS1 in my 3rd gen this year. The Hawks engine mounts were $90. The car is running a ls1 t56 exactly the same as a fourth gen. The cost was no more than putting an Lt1 in the car. I saw no noticeable increase in the performance of the car as compared to switching to 17s the previous year, which instantly increased my performance. Any speed increase I did have was likely a result of running RR's. We raced at Autobahn a couple of weeks ago, and I finished exactly where I usually finish, which is behind all of the fourth gens.

 

I cornerweighted the car but since I had to carry additional weight, all of the corner weights went up, so there was no benefit. I also have traqmate data which would show that despite running RR's, I showed no noticeable increase from last year.

 

The main reason I wanted to do this was that I had already invested a lot of money into this car. Between differentials, fuel cell, putting together a really nice dash and lots of other little things, I did not want to walk away from those things. Plus working in a third gen engine compartment is much easier for us "bigger boned" folks, not to mention that I think the car looks pretty great. Had I not already spent so much money and time on my third gen, based upon the finishing order I see in our region, I would have simply done a 4th gen. We have added several new race cars in the last few years, all of which are fourth gens. Between the plastic fenders and doors, coil over shocks and their ability to run a wider track width along with running the LS1, there is no reason to choose a third gen, except if you like the look and want an engine bay that is easier to work in.

 

In my opinion, CMC has two options. Either we can allow the older cars to update for easier part sourcing with more reliability or we can choose to stand pat and effectively eliminate third gens from the class altogether.

[Smike]

In my opinion, CMC has two options. Either we can allow the older cars to update for easier part sourcing with more reliability or we can choose to stand pat and effectively eliminate third gens (and other platforms) from the class altogether.

 

Rob - this is a statement I agree with. How do we manage from a complete portfolio standpoint (Ford and GM)? Manage vitality? Costs?

 

Is adding a new motor the right route?

 

To the HPDE question - we typically see newer cars. Nature of HPDE - drive what you have. How many drive 10-20 year old cars compared to 10-5yo cars?

[blk96gt]

To the HPDE question - we typically see newer cars. Nature of HPDE - drive what you have. How many drive 10-20 year old cars compared to 10-5yo cars?

 

Excellent point. Rather than trying to get them to build a newer $25,000+ Mustang/Camaro into a race car, explain to them that they can build a pretty awesome CMC car from scratch for the cost of their street car, likely with some left over for a trailer. Maintenance, parts availability and costs will likely be lower as well. I started DE's with a 2011 Camaro SS, and realized it would take more money than I wanted to spend to turn it into a TT car, much less a race car.

 

I do a lot of DE's outside of NASA, and I always have folks coming and asking about the car. Most of them balk initially at the horsepower and allowed mods, but once you explain to them the nature of class racing (versus being a DE superstar), they start to see the appeal. Don't think any of the ones I've talked to have ever followed up and actually got into CMC, but at least the seed has been planted.

 

Along the same vein, I think a great way to help promote CMC and get some attention is to get a group of CMC guys together and run a DE or two every year. Let people see the fun and camaraderie that we have, as well as the potential of a CMC car, outside of a NASA event.

 

On topic, I agree with all the previous posts that like this rule. The more options that are available engine wise for each platform, the better IMO. As stated by someone earlier, who cares how you get the power as long as you're getting it. You can argue about rule creep and the spirit of CMC all day long, but with the addition of 30 more RWHP, big brakes, larger wheels/tires, $2000 shocks, etc. the whole slap a cage in a car and race an almost stock car went out the window. Sure you can do it now, but you'll never run at the front (at least with a 4.6 or 5.0 Mustang).