PDA

View Full Version : Tony G's 2000 GT...



AI#97
07-10-2008, 10:19 AM
Ok, so I saw his for sale ad...how is that motor legal?

early pistons with PI heads take that car nearly to 10.5:1 compression, stock at lower 9's....sounds to me like a cheatn' bastard to me! Granted they are all stock parts but there has NEVER been a 2V mustang offered with that much compression...

just thinking out load in black and white...

mitchntx
07-10-2008, 10:32 AM
....

RichardP
07-10-2008, 10:42 AM
If you wanted to go deep into the conspiracy theory realm, you would note that he sold his old CMC car just hours before announcing the big new plans for the group. Maybe he knows something that we don’t… :roll:


Richard P.

AI#97
07-10-2008, 11:31 AM
do as I say and not as I do! :roll:

Waco Racer
07-10-2008, 11:57 AM
If you wanted to go deep into the conspiracy theory realm, you would note that he sold his old CMC car just hours before announcing the big new plans for the group. Maybe he knows something that we don’t… :roll:


Richard P.

I actually thought about that when I read the "Big Announcement" post.

Al Fernandez
07-10-2008, 12:02 PM
From my perspective...

We've had hundreds of emails from all the directors trying to figure out a better way to describe compression than what we have, recognizing the fact that allowing mix and match parts results in a wide swing in ratio. So, what that car has is not illegal. Is that why the ca cars are making numbers while the Tx cars never do?

AI#97
07-10-2008, 12:12 PM
From my perspective...

We've had hundreds of emails from all the directors trying to figure out a better way to describe compression than what we have, recognizing the fact that allowing mix and match parts results in a wide swing in ratio. So, what that car has is not illegal. Is that why the ca cars are making numbers while the Tx cars never do?

That sort of shoots a HUGE hole in the theory that "that combination was never offered in a Factory Mustang, so you can't run it"... I just feel sorry for the guy who bought the car is now going to have to deal with all the "illegal motor" BS.

You CMC guys have a HUGE problem on your hands and IMHO, would be better off dropping -2 and going back to the 2006 rules set with minor mods... Too much inkling of impropriety at the top if you ask me! You also don't want to see the differences on mod motor dyno graphs when stock VS. high compression is put on the same chart... If I were a 5.0L guy, I would be Yelling at the top of my lungs...."Cheating Asshole rules writer!" LOL!!!

Sort of Glad that very few of the AI rules keepers have cars to race from the example the CMC guys are setting!!! :shock: But, at least you guys post rules changes ahead of time and blast them to death before they are law....wish we had that luxury in AI! :?

ShadowBolt
07-10-2008, 12:21 PM
Ok, so I saw his for sale ad...how is that motor legal?

early pistons with PI heads take that car nearly to 10.5:1 compression, stock at lower 9's....sounds to me like a cheatn' bastard to me! Granted they are all stock parts but there has NEVER been a 2V mustang offered with that much compression...

just thinking out load in black and white...

If this is correct why in the hell should any of us try to do things within the rules? The top NASA guy has a car that has won 20 races and the motor is a cheatn' mother fucker? If this is really the case (and I certainly don't know but it looks like it) we need to let everyone run whatever they want in the motor as long as it does not go over the power rules. Let us run what we want as long as we stay under 260/300 (or whatever) and leave the brakes and tires and wheels alone! I'm going to Colorado and cool off for a week. Maybe you will all have it figured out by the time I get back.


JJ

jeffburch
07-10-2008, 12:24 PM
Yea, I wonder what that car sold for $ wise.
I know he got 17K for one once.
How do you think I feel.

JJ for Prez!

jb

AllZWay
07-10-2008, 01:06 PM
I guess this is speculation until proven otherwise....but if true....I would definitely not think that motor would be legal "within the sprit of CMC" as we have so often been told.

Very interesting for sure.

AI#97
07-10-2008, 01:30 PM
I guess this is speculation until proven otherwise....but if true....I would definitely not think that motor would be legal "within the sprit of CMC" as we have so often been told.

Very interesting for sure.

check the classifieds on the CMC site...HP numbers and piston description are in black and white...

Al Fernandez
07-10-2008, 02:13 PM
Guys, swapping parts up and down a given set of years has been legal in CMC since before LT1s and 4.6 cars came along. The driver has never been that the combination was offered, rather that the part was offered in an elligible model from section 4. What you're saying about mixing and matching parts has been a part of CMC for ever. The arguments around how this leaves compression and the only place it is mentioned in the rules as grey have been ongoing for a loooong time. How is this new? Kevin Marghetta posted about this explicitly in Jan of 07!
[/i]

mitchntx
07-10-2008, 02:40 PM
.....

Al Fernandez
07-10-2008, 03:04 PM
I hear you...I'd be miffed about that as well.

BryanL
07-10-2008, 04:22 PM
I read that too and thought it didn't sound right but I didn't know enough about the Ford heads.

From Rule 8.16

Compression ratio must remain within stock tolerances for the make/model/year of the engine.

So what is the stock tolerances for Tony's year of Mustang? I don't think the stock compression ratio tolerance is a full point. To me that is illegal and certainly isn't in the spirit of the rules. Especially considering that the owner was the national director. To me it just isn't a good example for the leader to set.
Good conspiracy theories. Does the trend also include the allowance of wings into CMC as Tony's car had a wing.

MFW-post this up on the national site since you enjoy stirring the pot.

On the update/backdate can I put an LT1 in a 98 up Camaro or a LS1 in a 93-97 Camaro?

marshall_mosty
07-10-2008, 04:33 PM
From Rule 8.16

Compression ratio must remain within stock tolerances for the make/model/year of the engine.


If you swap around heads, cam, etc. what "year" is correct with regards to evaluating compression ratio? Does the block year make the engine, crank, heads, water pump??? :?:

michaelmosty
07-10-2008, 04:49 PM
Tony sold me a boat load of RA1s and then a few weeks later, RA1s are deemed worthless in 09.

See a trend?
I'm in the same boat. I bought a new set of RA1's before Hallett when it was told that we would be able to run them and get points in 2009. My only need for them was for Eagles Canyon. Now their value plummets at the end of the year.

If I had know what we know know I would have done EC on the 8 used up tires I have. :?


Also, is Tony's Mach 1 chin spoiler legal? I didn't think you could have anything like that. Seems like a nice advantage to me.

BryanL
07-10-2008, 04:57 PM
MM-I believe you can still run them but you can't collect Toyo bucks unless running the 888's? Couldn't you at least run the RA1's in the races next year that aren't paying Toyo bucks? I know its a pain but its better than nothing. Though I still think there are some newbies out there that would buy some RA1's for DE stuff next year.
Nonetheless I understand. Though looking at other racing sanctioning bodies and classes I still think we have the best setup.

AI#97
07-10-2008, 05:20 PM
MFW-post this up on the national site since you enjoy stirring the pot.


I would but I am going to go win NATS before I go piss on a director's little game. No need to get banned from the race before I get there! I already got a warning from JWL a couple years ago so I gotz to bite my tongue up to a point...

Either way, it's been pointed out that more than one racer from Kali has been "caught" cheating so personally I wouldn't trust any of them to be honest with you. I think the TX group has lived the rules to the intent and race clean and fair and LEGAL... and I love the fact that Burch is saying "go get all your new fangled stuff and TRY and beat me! I don't need it! "

Anyway, If he saw an opportunity with a hole in the rules or the fact the general public didn't know much about those motors, hey, more power to him...but I agree that as a director, he probably should have been more responsible about it. I remember Glenn catching hell last year for being a director and going after the regional championship...this makes Glenn's deal look like playskool!!!

AI#97
07-10-2008, 05:32 PM
From Rule 8.16

Compression ratio must remain within stock tolerances for the make/model/year of the engine.


If you swap around heads, cam, etc. what "year" is correct with regards to evaluating compression ratio? Does the block year make the engine, crank, heads, water pump??? :?:

Marshal to answer your question, we would need to know if he had a 92-98 block or a 99+ block. While dimensionally identical, they had different pistons and different heads. So if you were to date the engine as 96-98, it should have had 9.28:1 compression with an 11cc dish. If it were a 99+ motor, it should have had 9.66 with the 17cc dish. Now what he ended up with is 10.52... using the same chart, the standard overbore for a rebuilt motor would bump compression by only .1....NOT .9 or 1.2... If that's the "gray area" tolerance....then yeah, we just figured out why the TX boys can't make the numbers. :roll: So what if I wanted to run STOCK ford flat tops on a PI head? It's all stock parts right?! Would a 12.64:1 motor be in "tolerance" and legal?!

If you really want to stir the pot, that one point in compression changes the torque curve below 3k rpm by 20 and sometimes 30 ft/lbs... not to mention the rule of 15hp per full point bump...

What really sucks is that the mod motor cars of the future are really going to be questioned when they come into the series because of all of this... :cry:

mitchntx
07-10-2008, 07:14 PM
....

jeffburch
07-10-2008, 07:22 PM
I need a couple of used rinds Michael.

jb

Rsmith350
07-10-2008, 07:32 PM
I'd be interested in picking up some of ya'lls RA1's for.....ummmm....testing. :shock: I won't be able to get licensed till next year anyway because of the rules changes. ( read-"car won't be done") You guys let me know what you want for them and go get some 888's. 16X8's please......

Rsmith350
07-10-2008, 07:35 PM
oh yeah......by the way.....SCREW THE RULES CHANGE!!! I am gonna build this damn car and come out swinging! I don't give a crap what they change (my pocketbook might) I'm gettin on track! :twisted:

jeffburch
07-10-2008, 07:37 PM
This thread just illustrates the whole "lead by example" thing huh?
Hehe, redefines "spirit".
My mind reverts back to my "whistle" episode at Nats '07.
Gee.
Oh, and lumpy westcoast camshafts.
Spirit my hairy ass!
Griffith III passing me like I was tied to the flagger stand in "06
Game on fellas.
jb

michaelmosty
07-10-2008, 07:43 PM
I need a couple of used rinds Michael.

jb
I'll take inventory and let you know.
I have a set of 4 that are all bald but no cords. These are the ones Jeremy ran on his Mustang for the Cresson DE.

I'll definitely be able to part with some after TWS. Do you need some for TWS or just after?

As far as the new tires (RA1's) I'm just pissin and moaning. It'll be good to have some fresh ones for the last event to kick everyones ASS!! :twisted:

mitchntx
07-10-2008, 07:45 PM
.....

michaelmosty
07-10-2008, 08:09 PM
oh yeah......by the way.....SCREW THE RULES CHANGE!!! I am gonna build this damn car and come out swinging! I don't give a crap what they change (my pocketbook might) I'm gettin on track! :twisted:
Heck yea! Get with Dave Francis and get those cars done!!! :D

AI#97
07-11-2008, 09:56 AM
This thread just illustrates the whole "lead by example" thing huh?
Hehe, redefines "spirit".
My mind reverts back to my "whistle" episode at Nats '07.
Gee.
Oh, and lumpy westcoast camshafts.
Spirit my hairy ass!
Griffith III passing me like I was tied to the flagger stand in "06
Game on fellas.
jb

Yeah, Tony G really seems like the type to argue for HIS cause only. the whole 2000R wing deal and now the off year pistons not matching the motor in the car REALLY shines a not so truthful light on him in my mind.

As for the lumpy camshafts, I don't know...I have said the same thing about Boudy and Micheal's cars too but they are the ones complaining about power. Those cobra camshafts just seem to have some lump to them when you start adding ignition timing.

Griffith? Well, he could have a staged throttle stop so that with "foot to the floor" effort, you get legal power....then with Foot to the BUMPER effort, you get WOT. Seen that on a few bracket cars over the years so they could gain at the big end if they needed to... A dyno operator wouldn't know to press so hard!! ;) there's also the sneaky pete in the fire extinguisher bottle! :lol:

Al Fernandez
07-11-2008, 10:24 AM
Guys, this thread is very disappointing. I may be biased, but I think the majority of the posts on this thread are in very poor taste.

1) Compression being "undefined" is a known problem that no one has stepped up to the table with a plausible solution to yet. I have no fewer than 113 emails in my computers discussing how to make this clearer.

2) The fact that Tony has the early mod block with late model pi heads was made public two years ago when he first did it, and copied by many others. If he thought this was cheating he a) wouldnt have told anyone then and b) wouldnt have pointed it out explicity in his post selling the car.

3) The tire deal was pushed onto us. We, as we had posted, had every intention of allowing RA1s all of next year. It was after Toyo told us "no way" that we reversed gears. It disappointed me too. If you were online at the right time you might have caught me posting confirmation that the RA1s were allowed and then editing the post 20 minutes later when I got the phone call.

4) Griffith WAS cheating, and was eventually caught, and thrown out of NASA for an entire year.

Bottom line, if you guys think the guys on the last page of the rulebook have anything other than the best intentions for the group then you seriously need to pick up the phone and talk to your suspected offender to understand what you're talking about before you go on a smear campaign. Ok, I'll not look in this thread any more, you guys can go back to your venting.

GlennCMC70
07-11-2008, 10:39 AM
On the update/backdate can I put an LT1 in a 98 up Camaro or a LS1 in a 93-97 Camaro?

yes. if you have an LT1, you will follow the 93-97 rules. if LS1 you follow the 98-02 rules. i can put the 98-02 front clip on my 95 4th gen w/ a 93 LT1 and will still have to use the 93-97 rules.

GlennCMC70
07-11-2008, 10:50 AM
well Al, i'm a little disapointed in what i've read about Tony's car. maybee i should have been more aware of what the Ford guys are doing to get the numbers, but the overall point remains. Tony ran a car w/ a major increase in comp ratio. since the rules require stock comp ratio's, that makes his combination illegal. if he wanted to run those heads, he should have had to run the matching piston to keep the comp ratio stock. the point being is its not the patrs that are not legal, its the combination. its the comp ratio. here he is OEM blueprinting for a 1.5 point in comp ratio, and Mitch is junking perfectly good LT1 heads cause we are gonna see a 1 point increase in comp ratio. its cost us lots of money to stay w/in the rules and he spends money to go outside that intent. very poor judgement call.

BryanL
07-11-2008, 11:18 AM
[quote="Al Fernandez"] 2) The fact that Tony has the early mod block with late model pi heads was made public two years ago when he first did it, and copied by many others. If he thought this was cheating he a) wouldnt have told anyone then and b) wouldnt have pointed it out explicity in his post selling the car.

quote]

Al-I usually agree with you but this is extremely disturbing. You are a regional director saying that if the national director thought he was cheating he wouldn't have told anyone!!!!! What does that say for the series.

One would hope that the national director especially would follow the 'spirit of the rules' and be trying to close what I see as a huge loophole. I don't think his engine is legal when following the rules that state it has to be within stock tolerances for the year/make/model.
I don't think anyone who is trying to follow the rules believes that a point to point and a half increase in compression is keeping within the stock tolerances. If so then let the blocking, decking, and thin head gaskets begin.

Compression issue in the rules. I would love to look at the issue to see if I could help in any way. Though when the national director is running a car with a huge increase in compression from stock I bet it is tough to make it clearer.
Make no mistake Al I appreciate what you guys do and understand it can be a tough job.

mitchntx
07-11-2008, 11:21 AM
.....

AI#97
07-11-2008, 01:13 PM
Bottom line, if you guys think the guys on the last page of the rulebook have anything other than the best intentions for the group then you seriously need to pick up the phone and talk to your suspected offender to understand what you're talking about before you go on a smear campaign. Ok, I'll not look in this thread any more, you guys can go back to your venting.

Al, I sorry you took offense to this...but it's just one person really in our AI rule book and the one in CMC's.

From your comment, it sounds like the 5.0 guys in cali are ALL playing with compression bumps to get power. I guess maybe our racers are too honest here in TX because we respect our fellow competitors enough not to cheat.

I guess my point of putting the stirring stick into this pot is that if A director wrote the rules and they are gray, and he takes advantage of it while telling all others NO, you can't do the same....It's wrong and unhealthy for the series. I also disagree that it was public knowledge for 2 years...maybe in Cali and that's why they are building 11:1 5.0's as you imply, but NOT the rest of the country as it seems.

Anyway, I am going to pull the stirring stick out of the pot and go back to my little AI world while you guys figure this out. Once it is settled, I might jump ship and come play in CMC-4 or whatever it will be called in 2012! ;)

Back to your regularly scheduled channel!!!

MFW.

:D

Fbody383
07-11-2008, 03:43 PM
SCREW THE RULES CHANGE!!! I am gonna build this damn car and come out swinging! I'm gettin on track! :twisted:
Heck yea! Get with Dave Francis and get those cars done!!! :D

YEAH! Worst case I'll pull the restrictor and put a Mazda badge on it...

jeffburch
07-11-2008, 04:25 PM
Do you need some for TWS or just after?


After.
Thx mon!
jb

jeffburch
07-11-2008, 11:14 PM
Guys, this thread is very disappointing. I may be biased, but I think the majority of the posts on this thread are in very poor taste.

1) Compression being "undefined" is a known problem that no one has stepped up to the table with a plausible solution to yet. I have no fewer than 113 emails in my computers discussing how to make this clearer.

2) The fact that Tony has the early mod block with late model pi heads was made public two years ago when he first did it, and copied by many others. If he thought this was cheating he a) wouldnt have told anyone then and b) wouldnt have pointed it out explicity in his post selling the car.

3) The tire deal was pushed onto us. We, as we had posted, had every intention of allowing RA1s all of next year. It was after Toyo told us "no way" that we reversed gears. It disappointed me too. If you were online at the right time you might have caught me posting confirmation that the RA1s were allowed and then editing the post 20 minutes later when I got the phone call.

4) Griffith WAS cheating, and was eventually caught, and thrown out of NASA for an entire year.

Bottom line, if you guys think the guys on the last page of the rulebook have anything other than the best intentions for the group then you seriously need to pick up the phone and talk to your suspected offender to understand what you're talking about before you go on a smear campaign. Ok, I'll not look in this thread any more, you guys can go back to your venting.

Disappointing? Poor taste? OMG!
The customer speaks Bro.

Anyway.

Yup, cheater. See AG's vids.
http://www.shrackracing.com/video/SPIR-29-June-2008-R2-MQ.wmv
He's back. Went around him like MFW or DFD.

jb

jeffburch
07-11-2008, 11:29 PM
Guys, this thread is very disappointing. I may be biased, but I think the majority of the posts on this thread are in very poor taste.
1) Compression being "undefined" is a known problem that no one has stepped up to the table with a plausible solution to yet. I have no fewer than 113 emails in my computers discussing how to make this clearer.
2) The fact that Tony has the early mod block with late model pi heads was made public two years ago when he first did it, and copied by many others. If he thought this was cheating he a) wouldnt have told anyone then and b) wouldnt have pointed it out explicity in his post selling the car.
3) The tire deal was pushed onto us. We, as we had posted, had every intention of allowing RA1s all of next year. It was after Toyo told us "no way" that we reversed gears. It disappointed me too. If you were online at the right time you might have caught me posting confirmation that the RA1s were allowed and then editing the post 20 minutes later when I got the phone call.
4) Griffith WAS cheating, and was eventually caught, and thrown out of NASA for an entire year.
Bottom line, if you guys think the guys on the last page of the rulebook have anything other than the best intentions for the group then you seriously need to pick up the phone and talk to your suspected offender to understand what you're talking about before you go on a smear campaign. Ok, I'll not look in this thread any more, you guys can go back to your venting.

Disappointing? Poor taste? OMG!
The customer speaks Bro.

Anyway.

Yup, cheater. See AG's vids.
http://www.shrackracing.com/video/SPIR-29-June-2008-R2-MQ.wmv
http://www.shrackracing.com/video/SPIR-28-June-2008-R1-MQ.wmv
(Silver sn95, cobra R wing.)
He's back. Went around him like MFW or DFD.
Lap time differences between the 2 CMC classes seem a little wide to me.
30 hp right?
I dunno.

jb

Adam Ginsberg
07-12-2008, 06:28 PM
Yup, cheater. See AG's vids.
http://www.shrackracing.com/video/SPIR-29-June-2008-R2-MQ.wmv
He's back. Went around him like MFW or DFD.

JGIII is running CMC2, not CMC.

donovan
07-13-2008, 12:09 AM
He's back. Went around him like MFW or DFD.


I freak out a couple times behind the keyboard and now I'm DFD... Awesome!!!

:D
DFD 8)

mitchntx
07-13-2008, 06:48 AM
....

AI#97
07-13-2008, 10:00 AM
Maybe it's everyone in AFI?

Yep. Sort of catchy isn't!!!

:lol:

Rob Liebbe
07-13-2008, 06:29 PM
Can I be RFL?

GlennCMC70
07-13-2008, 06:32 PM
Can I be RFL?
how about RMFL? RBMFL? depends on what your wallet says.

Rob Liebbe
07-13-2008, 08:57 PM
My wallet is crying for mercy lately; rebuilt/improved trans, decent shifter, oil cooler - yes oil cooler but no temp guage, new radiator fan/shroud, decked heads, dome pistons out of ' 84 Police Interceptor Mustang, "California" spec cam, new tires, relocated guages, caster/camber plates, and a couple of other things Tony G. gave me special permission to run including the approval of the Ranger airdam as stock at its full length - 3" ride height. Watch out suckers!!!!

mitchntx
07-13-2008, 10:25 PM
....

GlennCMC70
07-13-2008, 10:47 PM
at this point in time Tony has stopped talking w/ me (or anyone i guess) about this.
the "official interpretation" is that since parts can be swapped between eligible year models, the resulting increase in comp ratio is legal.
there is a rule that states comp ratio must be w/in stock limits. stock comp ratio for a 2000 GT is 9.0:1 and he was at or near 10.5:1. not sure what year 4.6 came stock w/ 10.5 comp ratio.
I've already asked if I can have a full point increase in comp ratio (to match his 1.5 point increase) and both times I've not gotten an answer to that question, but rather, "I'm done w/ you here."
so all you guys w/ 4.6 motors, feel free to ignore the language about compression ration in rule 8.16. seems 10.5:1 thus far is legal.

its also been pointed out to me that i seem to be the only one w/ a problem w/ this. if you feel otherwise, drop Tony an email and let him know your thoughts. seems my word about this groups feelings is not believed. share your opinions w/ him in a tactfull and respectable manner.
good times.....

Wirtz
07-13-2008, 11:32 PM
Thanks for saying so Glenn. I'll pass my thoughts on, respectfully of course.

This one really does feel like BS. I asked on forums, and through IM for clarity on the compression ratio, and came away with a message that it must be stock for the year engine you are running.

I sure hope this gets addressed in the rule book for next year. The grouchy side of me thinks the rules can be greatly simplfied to "do whatever in the engine as long as you are under 230/300" since that seems to be what is happening in the series anyway. Same for the dang ECU bit since there is no effort to keep it in check...

Ok, better now...
Jeff

Todd Covini
07-13-2008, 11:33 PM
We'll get this figured out. I still stand by my interpretation, there Mitch. We were going to detail out specific C/R's for all CMC model cars and that got too detailed, so we elected to keep it generic around the "tolerance" language for all cars.

Rules rewrite season will be a fun one.

-=- Todd

GlennCMC70
07-13-2008, 11:56 PM
Todd is correct. it has been agreed upon that this rule will get alot of attention in the off season.

donovan
07-13-2008, 11:58 PM
I have read this entire thread and I am speachless...

I can't believe that Tony G. built that car and new it was 10.5:1 and thinks that is legal.

Wow! and he is the National CMC Director in charge... Wow!

Who else is cheating out there... if he thinks its okay what else are they doing?

DD - (makes me sick to my stomach)

Rob Liebbe
07-14-2008, 07:56 AM
Anybody know another Carbotech dealer. Tony was my supplier, but I may need a backup.

GlennCMC70
07-14-2008, 08:05 AM
no one will beat the price Tony is giving us on these.


dont burn a bridge w/ Tony here guys. just let him know your thoughts on the matter - in a nice way.

AI#97
07-14-2008, 08:53 AM
at this point in time Tony has stopped talking w/ me (or anyone i guess) about this.
the "official interpretation" is that since parts can be swapped between eligible year models, the resulting increase in comp ratio is legal.
there is a rule that states comp ratio must be w/in stock limits. stock comp ratio for a 2000 GT is 9.0:1 and he was at or near 10.5:1. not sure what year 4.6 came stock w/ 10.5 comp ratio.


Glenn, I would add that what he did is not right because if you truly COULD swap "parts" around, then the aluminum block would be allowed too, which it is NOT because it was never offered in a GT of any model year, same as his combo wasn't offered...just more fire to fight his interpretation.

During the rules re-write, if Todd, Al or Glenn have any questions about mod motors, feel free to ask as I have a lot of experience with them or can find someone with THE answer you are looking for.

so, who's running 100 octane in CMC next year?! :lol:

AI#97
07-14-2008, 08:55 AM
no one will beat the price Tony is giving us on these.


dont burn a bridge w/ Tony here guys. just let him know your thoughts on the matter - in a nice way.

As a point of reference, if you call Carbotech directly, you get nearly the same price/discount.

mitchntx
07-14-2008, 09:00 AM
....

GlennCMC70
07-14-2008, 09:01 AM
Matt, call me sometime later this afternoon.
i seem to be confused here. are you telling me that the heads he used are from a car that is not a eligible CMC platform?
Tony says they are.

Adam Ginsberg
07-14-2008, 09:49 AM
Glenn, I would add that what he did is not right because if you truly COULD swap "parts" around, then the aluminum block would be allowed too, which it is NOT because it was never offered in a GT of any model year, same as his combo wasn't offered...just more fire to fight his interpretation.

Actually, the AL block is permitted, but right now, only in CMC2.

2008 CMC Rules, Section 4, Eligible Manufacturers


1996-04 Ford Mustang 4.6 DOHC N/A V8*(2000 Cobra R and 2003-2004 Cobra models excluded; 4.6 DOHC may run CMC-2 only)

Given how the 2 classes will merge, it will eventually mean the AL block will permitted in ALL 1996-2004 Mustangs.

Glenn - the heads Tony appears to have used are from an eligible CMC model.

Rob Liebbe
07-14-2008, 10:08 AM
I'll start looking for a 96 Cobra drivetrain to put into my CMC2 - Fox Body!!!!

AI#97
07-14-2008, 11:02 AM
Matt, call me sometime later this afternoon.
i seem to be confused here. are you telling me that the heads he used are from a car that is not a eligible CMC platform?
Tony says they are.

PM me your number.

Basic premise is that if he used a 96-98 block with STOCK internals with 96-98 heads as delivered in a 96-98 car..he's ok. OR, if he used the 99-2004 GT shortblock as delivered from the factory, with 99+ 2V heads, he would be fine. The problem is putting the later heads onto an older shortblock. All the parts would be legal if they were installed in the combination AS DELIVERED from the factory. Mix and match and you have a HUGE swing in Compression. It would be like putting the old 289 heads on a modern 302 Cobra...BIG compression change but still using stock parts.

I understand his argument that all the parts are OEM and by themselves are CMC legal...however, the COMBO he has RESULTS in a major violation of the compression ratio rule. One right doesn't offset the one wrong.

Something to be considered for CMC 2 legality will be the difference between 99-01 Cobra motors and 03/04 Mach 1 motors... the later Mach's have better heads and flat top pistons with over 10:1 compression while the 99-01's have crappy heads and slightly dished pistons. The motors LOOK identical but have been known to have nearly 40hp difference at the crank because of the problems with the 99 4V heads and ford keeping the same power rating for the Machs even though they had better compression and better flowing heads. Now go so far as to find a set of Navigator heads (outflow 2000 Cobra R heads) and put them on an 03/04 mach 1 motor and drop them in a 96 Cobra in CMC2, choke it down on power and you have another winner that could spin to 7200 rpm with ease....not real fair to a 5.0L ford really or the LT1's...

Basically what I am saying is that there are SO many Factory parts on the modular motors that could be swapped around and argued that they are FACTORY parts... that you could easily end up with a 13.4:1 2V in a CMC car making a torque curve a diesel would envy! All factory parts... :roll:

AI#97
07-14-2008, 11:08 AM
Given how the 2 classes will merge, it will eventually mean the AL block will permitted in ALL 1996-2004 Mustangs.



Time to put magnets in the tech tool box!!!

And see my note in previous post regarding the 4V motors and the different heads... A 96 GT with a NAVI headed mach 1 bottom end would the Shizznit!!!

GlennCMC70
07-14-2008, 11:16 AM
remember Matt, its factory parts from CMC legal platforms. not just factory parts.

GlennCMC70
07-14-2008, 11:23 AM
214-869-9603
i'll be in and out of coverage.

Adam Ginsberg
07-14-2008, 12:56 PM
I'll start looking for a 96 Cobra drivetrain to put into my CMC2 - Fox Body!!!!

Nice try, but no dice. Section 4 doesn't permit those types of swaps.


Basically what I am saying is that there are SO many Factory parts on the modular motors that could be swapped around and argued that they are FACTORY parts... that you could easily end up with a 13.4:1 2V in a CMC car making a torque curve a diesel would envy! All factory parts... :roll:

It's not just the mod motors - the 302/5.0L pushrod motors are similar in nature. Lots of different cams (mostly roller cams but have different grinds from 85 to ~87-88 and into 1995, pre-85 motors are flat tappet hydraulic), a few different heads, different pistons (pre-87 pistons don't have valve reliefs), etc, etc, etc.

Jeremy Gunter
07-14-2008, 02:19 PM
Basically what I am saying is that there are SO many Factory parts on the modular motors that could be swapped around and argued that they are FACTORY parts... that you could easily end up with a 13.4:1 2V in a CMC car making a torque curve a diesel would envy! All factory parts... :roll:

Teach Me oh wise one! :shock:

AI#97
07-14-2008, 03:24 PM
Teach Me oh wise one! :shock:

Assuming you are running CMC2 in 2010, the motor combo to have would be an aluminum bottom end out of a 96-97 cobra which has a forged crank and flat top pistons. Deck a set of stock PI heads .010 to square them up, and run a thin head gasket... boom, all aluminum 2V motor and plastic intake with a little over 13:1 compression with stock cams and would REQUIRE 100 octane gas. That motor would make 300/330 all day long and need to be choked with stock headers, intake tube, probably a catted exhaust and would put you right on the bubble at the 250 or 260 mark. Put that motor into a 2000 GT with a WIDE track width and you can pretty well trash all the fox cars... :(

Adam Ginsberg
07-14-2008, 03:47 PM
.....boom, all aluminum 2V motor and plastic intake with a little over 13:1 compression with stock cams and would REQUIRE 100 octane gas.

And there's the kicker....we have to run pump gas.

While you could get those kinds of #'s with the combo you're stating, trying to do so on 93 octane pump gas, without doing ANY computer tuning (not allowed to play inside the black box in CMC), and getting the motor to survive for any length of time would be very challenging.....

AI#97
07-14-2008, 04:24 PM
.....boom, all aluminum 2V motor and plastic intake with a little over 13:1 compression with stock cams and would REQUIRE 100 octane gas.

And there's the kicker....we have to run pump gas.

While you could get those kinds of #'s with the combo you're stating, trying to do so on 93 octane pump gas, without doing ANY computer tuning (not allowed to play inside the black box in CMC), and getting the motor to survive for any length of time would be very challenging.....

Um...they have 100 octane at the pump at the gas station OUTSIDE the gate at Cresson. How's that for a rules interpretation?! ;)

It would also be VERY easy to adjust the timing down by simply relocating the pickup magnet 5 degrees retarded...or the steeda timing adjusters would be just fine or install a "delay" box to retard timing somewhere in the harness. I assure you I could make that motor last!

You could also choose to keep compression down at 10:1 or so and end up with a motor that is over 100lbs lighter than a 5.0L and approaching the weight of an LS1...

Sadly, I think where you guys are heading is...get to 260/300 peak and be done with it. Then it becomes an engine builder and cheater class... :( hope it doesn't kill the series...

Alien
07-14-2008, 10:27 PM
I know this is a little off topic (which might be a good thing), but can you swap in an LS1 into an LT1 car in CMC2?

nevermind... I should have read the top of page 3...

Jeremy Gunter
07-14-2008, 11:35 PM
just so everyone is clear on my intentions. I only pick MFW's brain on the boards to get information about what can be done to these motors in a public setting. I have no plans to build a motor like this one, unless of course it is the motor others run in the series... but I would never feel good about whipping Glens butt by cheating! or anyone else for that matter :lol:

mitchntx
07-15-2008, 07:09 AM
....

BryanL
07-15-2008, 11:55 AM
I was very disturbed about this issue so I wrote a message to Tony G. I just got off the phone with him. He said he doubled up on gaskets to keep the compression down. I don't know what the highest compression from the factory for one of those motors is either. I believe he ended up with either a 9.4 or 9.6 to 1 motor. I believe it is an increase over the factory combination but not a point and a half.
The issue is the wording of the rule concerning compression and it conflicting with the ability to mix/match parts from different years (which the reason for that is to help keep costs down). It sounds like the rule is going to be addressed so that it would clarify compression ratios for everyone.

MFW-we aren't allowed to adjust timing as it has to be factory stock. Though I appreciate your info. as it has helped people understand what is possible out there. I wonder if anyone would know how to check to see if the pickup magnet is 5 degrees retarded.
Do you think a motor that makes more power with less timing is better than a motor running factory timing? That isn't clear but what I am trying to say is would a motor make better power across a bigger powerband being choked down or unrestricted with both motors being close to the legal peak tq/hp numbers.
Based on some of your info. I think there might need to be a compression test done while doing a dyno cert? How is that done and is it difficult? My dad has talked about being P & G'd back in the 70's when drag racing but I always thought that was for cubic inches.
Another thing to be aware of is people having one cylinder that is legal for compression/cubic inches while the other cylinders aren't.
Again I am over my head with this stuff.

AI#97
07-15-2008, 01:02 PM
BL, I am not calling TG a bald faced liar but you DON'T stack gaskets especially on these motors!! Stacking gaskets?! LOL!!! You guys should all pool each story he gives each of you and compare notes! :lol:

If you can't adjust timing, does that mean the 5.0L guys can't adjust the distributor or fuel pressure? I understand not changing the base timing CURVE, but I thought you guys could change base timing. Isn't that why it asks what the base timing was at on the dyno form implying it can be adjusted and then recording what it was set at for the dyno? As for relocating the magnet, it would require machining the timing cover with a slot, and plugging with silicone. Could be done in a weekend and is slightly hidden behind the idler pulley for the missing A/C compressor. IF a 5.0 can adjust base timing, why would I not be able to?

All I know is that my 2011 CMC 2 build is on hold because I thought I was going to be pushing the envelope on the engine build...now it would seem I would have been behind based on the left coast's interpretation on what can "legally" be swapped around on the mod motor'd cars.


I understand CMC/2 are in a pickle looking for ways to go forward and combine the classes....there are just going to be TONS of concessions with do's and don'ts for EACH and every motor combo out there to get all the chassis equal again. It's a large task ahead that is going to require TONS of collaboration and detailed rules writing along with TONS of tech inspection knowledge for the directors. Where I see things going is sort of like AI that "get to 260/300" anyway you like and run pump gas and figure different weights for the different chassis. I don't honestly know if that's good for the series as it seems to depart from what it has been in the past...? :?:

mitchntx
07-15-2008, 01:41 PM
...

ShadowBolt
07-15-2008, 05:36 PM
Stacking head gaskets?!


Now that is funny! I tried that on a RM250 once because I had the head milled so much that the piston was hitting. I could never make it work. Compressiom would blow through the gaskets. I know they do things different on the left coast though.

Someone here (I don't remember who) said something about the Texas drivers having too much respect for each other to cheat. I don't know if that is true but it's powerfull stuff! I like it.

JJ

silversvo
07-15-2008, 07:38 PM
Well, from my motorcycle racing experience, we have stacked head gaskets to lower the compression down, but of course we were doing it on stock compression so we can run a turbo system which anyone knows, high compression with a turbo doesnt work too well together... He could have stacked them, but there is no telling unless you tore the car down. :roll:

BryanL
07-15-2008, 08:51 PM
Is there a gasket that would be double the factory thickness for Tony's motor. Is it possible that he just doubled up on the thickness to keep his compression down?

Mitch you crack me up that its easier to check timing with a timing light versus plugging into the obd2 connector.

MFW-I don't know about the ford stuff but with the GM late model stuff the timing is controlled by the computer and we have to leave it factory stock and not adjust it.
It's what I don't understand is that guys with a distributor can adjust their timing but with a computer controlled timing we are not allowed too-that just doesn't make any sense to me.

GlennCMC70
07-15-2008, 09:09 PM
the issue w/the timing is - the folks who can change it need to so they can get to the number. those who are not allowed to do so, make the number easily w/out doing so. its really that simple. its part of the means to level the playing filed. if we just brought out 100% stock cars w/ no restrictions, it would be all LS1 4th gens.
we dont want SPEC LS1, or 4.6, or SN95, we want CMC. its just part of the equation.

fuel pressure is allowed to be adjusted. it must be marked on the dyno sheet. it can easily be checked at any time. i keep one in my trailer at all times along w/ a timing light. pony up the protest fee, and you can check anyones car you want.

Adam Ginsberg
07-15-2008, 09:24 PM
the issue w/the timing is - the folks who can change it need to so they can get to the number.

Not quite, Glenn. You have to go back to the roots of CMC......

Timing adjustments are permitted on motors where it's adjustable via a distributor. No distributor recurving is allowed. Simply put, this is a functionality of the engine/engine controls...old skool timing adjustments. It's policed via a timing light.

Later cars (4.6L, LS1's, etc), where timing is controlled via the computer, can't change it as we aren't permitted to reprogram the ECU. The Steeda adjuster isn't permitted, nor is relocating the magnet (Ford 4.6L) - if it's not specifically permitted, so it's prohibited.

mitchntx
07-16-2008, 07:10 AM
....

AI#97
07-16-2008, 09:54 AM
Kometic will make a custom thickness head gasket for $160 each. Don't ask how I know ... :x

Are you dealing direct with Cometic? HPP has been getting me really good deals on my custom cometics for the larger bore on my motor... Special order, 7 day turn and about $190. If you have a hook up of some sort, let me know....but I hope I won't need it anytime soon! :oops:

silversvo
07-16-2008, 10:34 AM
I think I paid about $150 for my custom gasket for my motorcycle and it was about a three week wait for it. I personally think they are the best gasket producer as I never had any problems with them.

mitchntx
07-16-2008, 12:14 PM
....

silversvo
07-16-2008, 01:40 PM
We all knew that you were talking about the same company I think... :roll:

Todd Covini
07-17-2008, 12:31 AM
Glenn didn't know the difference in spelling. :wink:

GlennCMC70
07-17-2008, 12:55 AM
Glenn didn't know the difference in spelling. :wink:
go f yourself Todd.
did i spell that right?

Rob Liebbe
07-17-2008, 08:11 AM
Glenn didn't know the difference in spelling. :wink:
go f yourself Todd.
did i spell that right?

Yeah, now you can work on capitalization. :D

silversvo
07-17-2008, 08:50 AM
Glenn didn't know the difference in spelling. :wink:
go f yourself Todd.
did i spell that right?

Yeah, now you can work on capitalization. :D

He is making progress!!!

GlennCMC70
07-17-2008, 09:30 AM
you guys should go have a 3 way.

and if you cant tell, i'm not in the mood for MFW games.

Rob Liebbe
07-17-2008, 04:29 PM
Sorry, Glenn. I was just trying to capitalize on a small bit of humor. I know your are smart and can capitalize. Keep up the good fight.

GlennCMC70
07-17-2008, 04:57 PM
FYI, i'm not a Director it seems. i've been reminded i'm just a regional coordinator.

that got me a little bent out of shape.
i'm also calling for the end of under the table handshake deals w/ Directors and the racers.
i'm getting beat up pretty good over it. almost got fired today.

i think one thing is clear w/ our group, we all expect everyone to follow the rules to the letter - w/ few exceptions.

Alien
07-17-2008, 05:33 PM
CMCTX & CMCTX2

:lol:

AI#97
07-17-2008, 06:01 PM
CMCTX & CMCTX2

:lol:

www.northeastiron.org

Not a totally original idea... :oops:

silversvo
07-17-2008, 07:42 PM
FYI, i'm not a Director it seems. i've been reminded i'm just a regional coordinator.

that got me a little bent out of shape.
i'm also calling for the end of under the table handshake deals w/ Directors and the racers.
i'm getting beat up pretty good over it. almost got fired today.

i think one thing is clear w/ our group, we all expect everyone to follow the rules to the letter - w/ few exceptions.

Sorry Glenn, didnt know that much stress was on you.

GlennCMC70
07-17-2008, 07:58 PM
thats not even the half of the Director crap going on right now.
add OKC DA charges for the reckless driving ticket w/ my 24' trailer in tow ($500 fine) and the $300 i owe the DPS next week for speeding in west TX (f'ing G8 .. 360hp of hauling ass mo fo. ). then there is that little detail about my job getting out sourced in 2009. then i'll be sitting out my first ever NASA Nats this year.
its been a really great year. i want a do over.

GlennCMC70
07-18-2008, 03:12 PM
thats not even the half of the Director crap going on right now.
add OKC DA charges for the reckless driving ticket w/ my 24' trailer in tow ($500 fine) and the $300 i owe the DPS next week for speeding in west TX (f'ing G8 .. 360hp of hauling ass mo fo. ). then there is that little detail about my job getting out sourced in 2009. then i'll be sitting out my first ever NASA Nats this year.
its been a really great year. i want a do over.

add to this great list a new A/C. seems my inside unit (air handler) has a freon leak. $2600 to replace just it (not fixable) or $5300 to replace both inside and outside units as thats only way to upgrade to the newly required freon for 2010 and the only way to get the increased efficentcy of the new unit. i've put well over $500 in current system over the last 2 months and well north of $1500 in the last 5 years. the units are not even 10 years old yet.

looks like we are going the $5300 route in a couple months.... that is if i'm not in jail by then...... :evil:

silversvo
07-18-2008, 07:46 PM
thats not even the half of the Director crap going on right now.
add OKC DA charges for the reckless driving ticket w/ my 24' trailer in tow ($500 fine) and the $300 i owe the DPS next week for speeding in west TX (f'ing G8 .. 360hp of hauling ass mo fo. ). then there is that little detail about my job getting out sourced in 2009. then i'll be sitting out my first ever NASA Nats this year.
its been a really great year. i want a do over.

add to this great list a new A/C. seems my inside unit (air handler) has a freon leak. $2600 to replace just it (not fixable) or $5300 to replace both inside and outside units as thats only way to upgrade to the newly required freon for 2010 and the only way to get the increased efficentcy of the new unit. i've put well over $500 in current system over the last 2 months and well north of $1500 in the last 5 years. the units are not even 10 years old yet.

looks like we are going the $5300 route in a couple months.... that is if i'm not in jail by then...... :evil:

Glenn,
I can relate to the tickets as I just got through paying over 600 for two speeding tickets a month ago and I just got another one a couple days ago for going 80 in a 60 and I wasnt even driving a fast car like the G8. I am sure you will not go to jail as I am sure that OKC will more than less likely put you on a six month probation period or something like that. You must have been pulled over by a ROBOCOP in OKC! I am sure everything will turn out for the best and I wish the best for you. I wish there was something I could do to help out and if you need anything let me know.
Troy

GlennCMC70
07-18-2008, 09:57 PM
well the $300 Texas DPS ticket wil get resolved w/ $108 fine to Texas and Defensive Driving for the rest.
the OKC one will be dealt w/ in the coming months.
anyone here in the home HVAC biz?

silversvo
07-18-2008, 10:40 PM
What size unit do you need?? I have a friend that might be able to get you the air handler and the condensor. He works at Goodman Mfg. which makes Janitrol hvac system.

GlennCMC70
07-18-2008, 10:42 PM
2.5 ton.

Adam Ginsberg
07-18-2008, 11:42 PM
anyone here in the home HVAC biz?

Glenn - give me a call when you get a chance. I might be able to get you a "hook up".

David Love AI27
07-18-2008, 11:58 PM
anyone here in the home HVAC biz?

If you get the parts hookup from Troy, I have a buddy in the commercial A/C business and he has just been transfered to the big "D"...

BryanL
07-25-2008, 03:59 PM
Posted by Tony G. on the national site. See the last sentence about higher compression.


I'm talking bone stock untouched unopened 4.6 Mustangs.
Kevin and I have both of our Dyno's with 250plus HP and 290 plus TQ, running X pipes,underdrives no A/C.
My car.. 2000 Mustang was dyno'd before I turned it into a CMC car and it had 249-251 HP and 288TQ throught the cats with 56K orig miles on the clock...Kevin's car was the same
So to answer Matts question:
Bolt on's:
Underdrives
X Pipes
Air intake?
Cam timer?
Predator ?
Alum Flywheel?
Don't know yet, we have not tested what we need to do ..but we will.
PS. the higher compression .8, netted only 3HP and 4 Tq which is worthless for the effort, but if your building a motor you might as well do it.

jeffburch
07-25-2008, 07:42 PM
He's our leader.

jb

AI#97
07-25-2008, 10:09 PM
link from a MOD motor specific site with more guru's on it that are more knowledgable than me...


http://forums.modulardepot.com/showthread.php?p=890448#post890448

I am sure more will chime in with time...

Todd Covini
07-26-2008, 10:26 AM
<<exhale>>

Remember....compression ratio was never on the CMC radar until Texas made an issue of it. Others were concentrating primarily on the max HP. Only after we highlighted the ability to abuse this area of the rules with regard to C/R, was the rule tightened up...and only now are we netting some of these less than pefect situations.

I see this as a misunderstanding and a natural progression of rulemaking. We were right to point out that a line needs to be drawn somewhere. But this stuff was common knowledge before lines were drawn.

-=- Todd

i.e.- Certain year cams are better than others....If we decide today that model year cars must match model year cams, there will be a bunch of "illegal" people netted up. Same thing. Inintended consequences...move on.

mitchntx
07-26-2008, 12:31 PM
So Texas is the bad guy for actually reading the rules and following them.

Why wasn't California ever a bad guy when the dyno didn't have an altitude restriction and we netted "some of these less than pefect situations"?

You make it sound like Texas (or a select few in Texas) is the only region which took the rule(s) and did something.

The difference between C/R and the Altitude loopholes, is no one in Texas ever won a national championship with it.

But, we're the bad guys ...

AI#97
07-26-2008, 09:39 PM
<<exhale>>

Remember....compression ratio was never on the CMC radar until Texas made an issue of it. Others were concentrating primarily on the max HP. Only after we highlighted the ability to abuse this area of the rules with regard to C/R, was the rule tightened up...and only now are we netting some of these less than pefect situations.

I see this as a misunderstanding and a natural progression of rulemaking. We were right to point out that a line needs to be drawn somewhere. But this stuff was common knowledge before lines were drawn.

-=- Todd

i.e.- Certain year cams are better than others....If we decide today that model year cars must match model year cams, there will be a bunch of "illegal" people netted up. Same thing. Inintended consequences...move on.

Todd, trust me, you will NOT change our minds about what we think has been going on. Probably best to agree to disagree and leave it be. We think the guys on the west coast are a bunch of cheating bastards and they think we are a bunch of whiney bitches. Pretty well sums it up and ain't nothing going to change it!

Next....

GT4point6
07-26-2008, 10:50 PM
Todd, trust me, you will NOT change our minds about what we think has been going on. Probably best to agree to disagree and leave it be. We think the guys on the west coast are a bunch of cheating bastards and they think we are a bunch of whiney bitches. Pretty well sums it up and ain't nothing going to change it!

Next....


either that your you Kali guys need to school the other 47 states full of mustang enthusiasts on what they are doing wrong. I will flat out tell you I never got to those numbers without tuning, LT and intake work... Guess that smog out there creates more power?!

260/300 at the crank is 221/255 with only a .15 driveline loss...you guys must be adding up HP numbers like ricers with the o/r and u/d's... Not seeing gains of 35/40 with just those two mods especially when say you only got 3 or 4 hp from .8 bump in compression?!

but hey, I don't know jack about mod motors....

Or CMC so over and out....

AI97/MattW/Or what ever you log in is...

For what it's worth, please follow the post you add too but know nothing about on the CMC forum. You state you don't know anything about mod motors or CMC so I have to ask why are you so wrapped up in calling people cheaters? You don't know anything about it by your own admission, why your post about the modulars?
We are not adding numbers like "ricers". I've got dyno sheets to back it up so unless you can prove what you say, STFU!
Don't belive me, you pay and I'll have the motor taken apart and rebuilt at your cost. Put up or shut up.

Here is what I posted to on the CMC site just so you know why some of the modulars are stronger than others.

Some really good info here that I dug up. As suspected, the 01-04 has a factory comp ratio incraese to 9.74:1 over the 99-00 9.3:1 due to smaller piston dish. First time I've actually found something on this but then again, I haven't researched this in a few years.

Oddly enough, Ford kept the rating at 260hp for 99-04.

http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/0302MMFF_MixMatch/index.html

AI#97
07-26-2008, 11:17 PM
[AI97/MattW/Or what ever you log in is...

For what it's worth, please follow the post you add too but know nothing about on the CMC forum. You state you don't know anything about mod motors or CMC so I have to ask why are you so wrapped up in calling people cheaters? You don't know anything about it by your own admission, why your post about the modulars?

Here is what I posted to on the CMC site just so you know why some of the modulars are stronger than others.
]

You obviously DON'T understand sarcasm or the fact I am probably one of the most knowledgable racers in the US regarding mod motors short of the big money in Grand Am and FORD! :roll:

and 10.5:1 is NOT 9.3 or 9.74...I guess math eludes the Kali surfer dudes too but I think we beat that horse FARTHER than dead!!!

And to answer your question why I give a shit about CMC is that I was about to start a CMC build for 2010 with a mod car... Since it seems that there is HUGE "turmoil" in CMC/2, that is on hold because MY interpretation of "intent" of the CMC rules, and the left coast interpretation aren't from the same zip code, state or planet for that matter.
I merely pointed out a FACT about a car that was clearly illegal by the 2007/2008 CMC rules and sadly it uncovered a shit load of OTHER problems with guys being ALLOWED to run e-cams cause they can't build motors and other CLEAR rules violations while the rest of the world was being told something entirely different. Sorry if the Kali dirty laundry got aired out but it's the bed you guys made so lie in it!

GT4point6
07-28-2008, 01:01 PM
[AI97/MattW/Or what ever you log in is...

For what it's worth, please follow the post you add too but know nothing about on the CMC forum. You state you don't know anything about mod motors or CMC so I have to ask why are you so wrapped up in calling people cheaters? You don't know anything about it by your own admission, why your post about the modulars?

Here is what I posted to on the CMC site just so you know why some of the modulars are stronger than others.
]

You obviously DON'T understand sarcasm or the fact I am probably one of the most knowledgable racers in the US regarding mod motors short of the big money in Grand Am and FORD! :roll:

and 10.5:1 is NOT 9.3 or 9.74...I guess math eludes the Kali surfer dudes too but I think we beat that horse FARTHER than dead!!!

And to answer your question why I give a shit about CMC is that I was about to start a CMC build for 2010 with a mod car... Since it seems that there is HUGE "turmoil" in CMC/2, that is on hold because MY interpretation of "intent" of the CMC rules, and the left coast interpretation aren't from the same zip code, state or planet for that matter.
I merely pointed out a FACT about a car that was clearly illegal by the 2007/2008 CMC rules and sadly it uncovered a shit load of OTHER problems with guys being ALLOWED to run e-cams cause they can't build motors and other CLEAR rules violations while the rest of the world was being told something entirely different. Sorry if the Kali dirty laundry got aired out but it's the bed you guys made so lie in it!

I never said 9.74:1 was the same as 10.5:1. You misread my post or can't read. I was clearly stating a CP increase in 01 since you didn't seem to know that. If you'er the expert in the mod motors that you claim to be, you should have known that right? Clearly it will increase the HP over 260 but Ford never changed the rating.

If you think Kali is the only ones cheating, do yourself a favor and do some math. Use a calculator if you need to...
How many 302 and 305's are running at or very near the 230/300 limit? A lot, all across the country, not just Kali as you claim. . But your ok with all those other regional cars right? You shouldn't be.

01 GT rated at 260 even with a .44 bump in CR. Closer to 270 I'm sure with the CR improvement and we'll use that as a ruff estimate (10 hp increase).
302/305's rated at 225/230 puts down 230 rwhp. WOW, thats even to +5 HP OVER it's flywheel rating.
4.6 putting down 250, thats -20 UNDER it's flywheel rating.

You following me here? My point is there is no way a stock 302/305 with no port matching, not CR increase, no head work other than valve job and a stock cam is going to hit 230/300 rwhp. Using your .15% drive train reduction, those engines are making 270 flywheel HP from a factory rated 225.
How do you do that on a stock rebuild?
270*.15=40.5, 270-40.5=229.5

Now, you got a beef with what Kali is doing? Look around, it's like that all over the country.

For everyone else's benifit, Ya, I said it. A lot of people think it, honestly, but no one ever says it. All I'm doing, is saying it. I'm not accusing anyone, I don't have a beef with anyone in CMC or any CMC cars in any region.

AI#97
07-28-2008, 01:18 PM
Don't know why you brought 302 and 305's into the mix...but, those cars were rated at 230/300 or close enough from the factory that all they are is an o/r exhaust and a few distributor and fuel pressure adjustments away from gaining back the driveline loss...confused here because that has been done for years by even some of the most bone headed guys in the land and even the masses on the corral.net! :roll: Would I question whether or not ANY CMC car in this region has an illegal motor or combo...honestly? Nope! The guys here can just drive like a mofo and some aren't even making the numbers! Hell, I don't think Covini has lifted the hood of his car since it left Kali and it makes the numbers day in day out? :?:

what I find as a problem is that your region, and others, feel it's ok to "cheat" or ignore the rules because you THINK the rest of the world is... no honor amongst thieves I guess...? What's even funnier is that you and TG keep spouting off facts to justify your case and the stories aren't the same between you...and some don't even make sense...stacked head gaskets? :?

I sort of wish I had never gotten involved in this discussion just because I felt it necessary to point out a SERIOUS inconsistancy with what I new was vastly different than well known fact. I saw what looked like a duck, quacked like a duck and even walked like a duck....so I just had to say "hey look! A fucking duck!" and as it turns out...there was a whole FLOCK of ducks! :oops:

silversvo
07-28-2008, 01:34 PM
Would I question whether or not ANY CMC car in this region has an illegal motor or combo...honestly? Nope! The guys here can just drive like a mofo and some aren't even making the numbers! Hell, I don't think Covini has lifted the hood of his car since it left Kali and it makes the numbers day in day out? :?:

:

Thats how we do it!!!! And Todd had to lift the hood just recently to fix the front of his car as it is still in the body shape...

GlennCMC70
07-28-2008, 02:17 PM
this one is done guys.
take it offline.