Suggestions for T5 rebuild

[Hood]

I need to go through my T5 (synchros, bearings and seals) and am looking for a reasonably priced place to have it done. OR... even better... a good source for parts (complete rebuild kit) and maybe I can get DL to go through it :wink:
I was considering an Astro Performance rebuild with gear upgrades but don't have the coin to play in that arcade ($1200 quote).
I'd rather put it into a T56 WHEN that rule is approved 8)

[jeffburch]

"Suggestions on a T5 rebuild"

Don't waste the money.

Pick another box.

Jb

[Waco Racer]

I'd rather put it into a T56 WHEN that rule is approved 8)

It is my understanding that you can put that in to your car now, even without the LT1.

[GlennCMC70]

I'd rather put it into a T56 WHEN that rule is approved 8)

It is my understanding that you can put that in to your car now, even without the LT1.

your understanding would be wrong.

[David Love AI27]

Rob pointed out Rosehill Performance to me after mine blew up at ECR. they are on the net, google them.

They use Astro parts

[Hood]

This might need to be moved to the 'Rules' thread...


It is my understanding that you can put that in to your car now, even without the LT1.

7.3 Update/Backdate Non-body Components
Non-body components may be updated/backdated within cars of the same manufacturer on the eligible manufacturers/models list (i.e. 1982-92 GM Early components may NOT be interchanged with 1993-97 GM Late components) unless noted elsewhere in these rules.

But then this one may offer up some hope...depends on how it is interpreted.

7.27.1. Any OEM stock four, five or six speed transmission that was originally offered in an eligible model car of the same manufacturer is allowed. Tremec 3550 (Tremec part 260 0682R or TCET1376 only), and Tremec TKO transmissions are also allowed.

I would LOVE to put the T56 in my 3rd gen...
Can I get an official ruling on this as I am about to start the trans rebuild or swap process.

[Hood]

I'd rather put it into a T56 WHEN that rule is approved 8)

It is my understanding that you can put that in to your car now, even without the LT1.

your understanding would be wrong.

I'll take that as official... :wink:

[GlennCMC70]

since 3rd gens and 4th gens are listed in the rules on two different allowed model lines, those parts are not allowed to be shared between them.
the Fords have the same platform separations and they too are not allowed to swap parts between them.

this was made very clear to me back in 2004 when i was going put a 305TPI and 5 speed in my 4th gen.

[Waco Racer]

Hmmmm, my discussion with Al went very differently. I guess it wouldn't hurt to verify what we discussed.

[GlennCMC70]

Hmmmm, my discussion with Al went very differently. I guess it wouldn't hurt to verify what we discussed.

me and Al dont always agree w/ the rules. but i am 100% correct on this one.
now, you can put a T-5 in a 4th gen as long as its from a 4th gen V-6 car. but no 3rd gen came w/ a T-56 in any form thus not legal.

[GlennCMC70]

Hmmmm, my discussion with Al went very differently. I guess it wouldn't hurt to verify what we discussed.

me and Al dont always agree w/ the rules. but i am 100% correct on this one.
now, you can put a T-5 in a 4th gen as long as its from a 4th gen V-6 car. but no 3rd gen came w/ a T-56 in any form thus not legal.

just got off the phone w/ Al and it was explained to me that the rule was reworded a few years back (before me) and the intent was to allow ANY Trans from any CMC legal platform to be installed in any car. i dont agree w/ it, but so far it seems to be the case. i've asked for a re-write of the rule if that is what they really wanted. sorry for the added confusion.

[jeffburch]

T5 = main fuse.
The cluster is made of china (prolly in China).

Jb

[mitchntx]

So it's the LT1 being allowed in a 3rd gen that's the big no-no.

Well hell, there goes the build a 305 for $800 theory.

A used LT1 long block can be bought for that or less. Hell, Mike and I have a zero mile long block from a rebuilder we'd sell for $800 ... or maybe the price just went UP!

[GlennCMC70]

So it's the LT1 being allowed in a 3rd gen that's the big no-no.

Well hell, there goes the build a 305 for $800 theory.

A used LT1 long block can be bought for that or less. Hell, Mike and I have a zero mile long block from a rebuilder we'd sell for $800 ... or maybe the price just went UP!

not sure how we got on engines here? i'm confused.

[mitchntx]

So it's the LT1 being allowed in a 3rd gen that's the big no-no.

Well hell, there goes the build a 305 for $800 theory.

A used LT1 long block can be bought for that or less. Hell, Mike and I have a zero mile long block from a rebuilder we'd sell for $800 ... or maybe the price just went UP!

not sure how we got on engines here? i'm confused.

:roll:

Recent lobbying for an LT1/T56 combo in a 3rd gen for CMC2 ... deemed too expensive. Shooting for $800.

T56 is OK per the grand poo-bah ... see above.

So its the motor that is the issue. And now the cost has been equalized. So the LT1/T56 should be easily allowed now.

C'mon, Glenn ... keep up.


Oh wait ... it's off topic ... am I about to be "moderated"?

[GlennCMC70]

i guess.
still lost.

[NickV]

I'd rather put it into a T56 WHEN that rule is approved 8)

Were you looking at a T-56 more for the extra weight, or for the gas mileage in 6th gear??

:)

[Hood]

I'd rather put it into a T56 WHEN that rule is approved 8)

Were you looking at a T-56 more for the extra weight, or for the gas mileage in 6th gear??

:)

Actually, the weight would help a bit (I'm underweight without a passenger seat) but I'm more interested in having something that doesn't break all the time.

[AI#97]

just got off the phone w/ Al and it was explained to me that the rule was reworded a few years back (before me) and the intent was to allow ANY Trans from any CMC legal platform to be installed in any car. i dont agree w/ it, but so far it seems to be the case. i've asked for a re-write of the rule if that is what they really wanted. sorry for the added confusion.

Glenn, I knew your reasoning was off because you can put T5's behind mod motor in Mustangs. Now along this thinking, can we put T56's in mustangs even though they come from 03/04 cobras and 2000 Cobra R's...? They aren't really necessary but if someone were to come across a deal for a T56, no sense in making them spend more on an A5 setup.

If the T56 is allowed in 3rd gens, the LT1 being allowed is a "no brainer"...

[mitchntx]

the LT1 being allowed is a "no brainer"...

The grand poo-bah's of the series can thank me later for leaving that one alone ...

[GlennCMC70]

If the T56 is allowed in 3rd gens, the LT1 being allowed is a "no brainer"...

i dont agree w/ the trans rule as its been explained to me as of late.
and a no brainer for you does not make it a no brainer for everyone. its very possible that will be alowed, but it cant be the only solution. not eveyone is able to do the swap.

[mitchntx]

not eveyone is able to do the swap.

This ain't grocery shopping, Mary Poppins.

If someone has the cash to have a pro shop build their car, they have the cash for this kind of swap.

[GlennCMC70]

not eveyone is able to do the swap.

This ain't grocery shopping, Mary Poppins.

If someone has the cash to have a pro shop build their car, they have the cash for this kind of swap.

and some guys/gals bought cars already built at a really good price and shouldn't have to budget an engine swap to stay in this series. lowest common denominator should be considered.

[mitchntx]

lowest common denominator should be considered.

Considered or Catered?

[GlennCMC70]

as much as i dont understand it, i still have to consider it.

[mitchntx]

The point is having gracious consideration is what has the series neck-deep in this debacle. Tire-gate didn't help.

The guys who have Fox/3Gs are not happy cause they don't know what to do or which group to run in.

Those that were in the building process are not happy cause they don't know what to do or which group to run in.

At some point in time the leadership has to quit pointing fingers at outside influences, take responsibility, draw the line and move on.

Make some one happy ... ANY one happy.

[GlennCMC70]

i'm lost. what debacle?

[mitchntx]

I'm lost as to why you are lost.

It appears this is a covert way of moderating.

And in case that loses you too, if you keep playing dumb, it'll frustrate me enough that I'll stop posting.

[Al Fernandez]

Recent lobbying for an LT1/T56 combo in a 3rd gen for CMC2 ... deemed too expensive

How recent are you talking about? LT1 in a 3rd gen is on the list of items to discuss. If you have energy around that, start chatting it up with the guys on the last page of the book.

I'm with Glenn in being confused about why Fox owners would be confused. They have a proven upgrade path to CMC2 or they can stay in CMC1 as long as they wish. What's the problem?

[mitchntx]

How recent are you talking about?


ECR, Friday. You said the target is trying to get it done for $800




start chatting it up with the guys on the last page of the book.


No longer interested in going down that road. A rudamentary cost benefit analysis in my world sees little gain and at a high cost.




I'm with Glenn in being confused about why Fox owners would be confused. They have a proven upgrade path to CMC2 or they can stay in CMC1 as long as they wish. What's the problem?

The same can be said for 3rd gens. So why all the experimenting and R&D?

It just prolongs the period of uncertainty which begats its own series of issues with car count and series growth.

And what about reliability? You are basing the Fox guys "getting to the number" after only a year. I wonder how many of those Foxes made "the number" at the end of the year after a season of racing.

And I've said before, the purist in me would prefer to see OEM under the hood, whether it's platform specific or not, as opposed to the aftermarket. Even installing an LT1 in a 3G or even a Windsor in a Fox would be better than seeing Edelbrock, Mac and Crane under the hood. MHO The perception is stock, not modified.

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Remember in the not too distant past, rules stability was a HUGE marketing point and the series reaped the rewards from it.

The same can't be said today. Many are questioning their 2010 move.

[GlennCMC70]

The point is having gracious consideration is what has the series neck-deep in this debacle. Tire-gate didn't help.
how is having consideration for the lesser mechanically inclined folks a bad thing? What debacle are we having? 3rd gens not knowing what mods they need to do for CMC-2? its not like they have no place to race. the directors of the series didn't make the problem, we were left to deal w/ it. Same w/ tire gate. Direct your anger over the situation at those responsible, not those who are dealing w/ the problem.


The guys who have Fox/3Gs are not happy cause they don't know what to do or which group to run in.
The Fox cars are set. They have a clear path and a working solution.


Those that were in the building process are not happy cause they don't know what to do or which group to run in.
I understand there are folks in limbo. As I said, the directors didn't make the problem, we were stuck dealing w/ it. NASA National has now realized they put us in a bad spot and have stepped up to help us out.


At some point in time the leadership has to quit pointing fingers at outside influences, take responsibility, draw the line and move on.

Make some one happy ... ANY one happy.

we have, and for the time being, LT1's in 3rd gens is not the answer. It could very well be in the future. No different than the feeling that Fox cars didn't need a weight reduction to run up front. At one time it wasn't under consideration, then it was, and it was made to be. You speak often of how knee jerk reactions have been a bad thing w/ the series or here on the site. How is this no different? The knee jerk reaction is to allow LT1's in 3rd gens. My bet is if we did allow it, more folks (10x?) would feel trapped in CMC-1 than the number of folks who feel liberated to CMC-2. Providing a solution is only part of the problem. We have to find a solution that works w/ minimal impact to the series (in this case - 3rd gens). The series would be 100% problem free if we all drove the same platform. That would be a solution; we all switch to 4th gens. Problem solved, right? Or would that be too impacting to a greater number of racers? Right, it would, and it's an exaggerated example of the LT1 in the 3rd gen being the solution to 3rd gens in CMC-2. The allowance of the LT1 would be of lesser impact the "we all drive 4th gens" but an impact none the less. So as convenient as a solution as it would be, we would like to try and find an even lesser impacting solution.

My attempt to be lost was an attempt to stay on topic.

[Al Fernandez]

Mitch, don't confuse apples with oranges. The reason for all of the R&D effort around 3rd gens is they do not have a viable cmc2 path that doesnt involve a carburetor. If there is a way to get it done sub $1k then we should be exploring that. Allowing them an LT1 is AN option on the table, it cannot be THE option. Telling all 305 folks they have to ditch their entire motor/trans combo when there is the potential that a head/cam swap will yield the required performance doesnt make sense to me until we prove the head/cam switch wont work.

[AI#97]

Make some one happy ... ANY one happy. Just don't try to make Mitch happy....it's impossible.

Mitch, the fox guys know exactly what to do... 300 bucks in Cam/headers (less on craigslist) and some dyno time and they are in -2...if they really want to, they can do 17's and 4 piston brakes. Where are Fox guys lost on where to race?

Seems to me the only issue is how to get the 3rd gens into 2.

[GlennCMC70]

Make some one happy ... ANY one happy. Just don't try to make Mitch happy....it's impossible.

Mitch, the fox guys know exactly what to do... 300 bucks in Cam/headers (less on craigslist) and some dyno time and they are in -2...if they really want to, they can do 17's and 4 piston brakes. Where are Fox guys lost on where to race?

Seems to me the only issue is how to get the 3rd gens into 2.

Matt - i saw that you had replied and was all ready to have to come in and delete you post.
glad i didnt have to.

[AI#97]

Matt - i saw that you had replied and was all ready to have to come in and delete you post.
glad i didnt have to.

I'm in a good mood this morning so no worries.

I am only concerned about Lemons right now....I could give a shit about the rules process for AI or CMC right now as it always seems input is ignored and the "racing majority" seems to get their way. I'll figure it out in 2011 when/if I return....again, no worries.


There, had to give you something to delete if you feel like it! ;)

[mitchntx]

My attempt to be lost was an attempt to stay on topic.

After moderating boards a lot more volatile than this one I learned that threads are like normal conversations. They go where they go.

Attempts to line up thread topics like little soldiers is a waste of energy.

[GlennCMC70]

My attempt to be lost was an attempt to stay on topic.

After moderating boards a lot more volatile than this one I learned that threads are like normal conversations. They go where they go.

Attempts to line up thread topics like little soldiers is a waste of energy.

finally, some common ground.

[michaelmosty]

Can't we all just get along.
http://i.pbase.com/o4/01/380001/1/56809827.catloungingonmustang.JPG

[mitchntx]

Mitch, don't confuse apples with oranges. The reason for all of the R&D effort around 3rd gens is they do not have a viable cmc2 path that doesnt involve a carburetor. If there is a way to get it done sub $1k then we should be exploring that. Allowing them an LT1 is AN option on the table, it cannot be THE option. Telling all 305 folks they have to ditch their entire motor/trans combo when there is the potential that a head/cam swap will yield the required performance doesnt make sense to me until we prove the head/cam switch wont work.

As with the Foxes, this is assuming CMC2 is the path the 3G owners want to take.

Like you you and Glenn have both said ... if the 3G owners wants to stay with a 305, then race in CMC1

And the point that seems to be constantly overlooked or set aside is the LT1 motor is a tried and true work-horse that can be made to run in BOTH CMC1 and CMC2.

Its reliable, its relatively cheap, its a self contained package, it bolts in, its pure GM ... it has everything going for it that I think CMC stands for.

Stop laying blame at the feet of some one or some thing. That is unproductive and shows just how powerless you guys really are.

Being as the T56 has been legal in a 3G this whole time, that expense is off the table. I am susggesting you fix the motor problem with a known element, cheap to purchase, easy to install and move on.


OT: I don't know of any Houston trans builder, Gary.

[mitchntx]

My attempt to be lost was an attempt to stay on topic.

After moderating boards a lot more volatile than this one I learned that threads are like normal conversations. They go where they go.

Attempts to line up thread topics like little soldiers is a waste of energy.

finally, some common ground.

I'm lost

[GlennCMC70]

My attempt to be lost was an attempt to stay on topic.

After moderating boards a lot more volatile than this one I learned that threads are like normal conversations. They go where they go.

Attempts to line up thread topics like little soldiers is a waste of energy.

finally, some common ground.

I'm lost

see, your getting it. :wink:

[ShadowBolt]

Why do we care if someone runs a LT1 in a 3rd gen? I am told I can run the 5.0 in my new 2003 even though it came with a mod motor. From someone on the other side I could care less if the LT1 is allowed assuming it makes like power. I still don't understand how we make all these different motors so close. We have guys (like us) running 4.6's and others running over half a liter larger at 5.2. My 280 ci to the LS1 350. Is this a money deal or is the LT1 too hot? Would everyone want a LT1 if it was okay because of the powerband? I don't have a dog in the fight but wondering.

JJ

[AllZWay]

http:\\www.jpmotorsports.biz\smilies\popcorn.gif
http:\\www.jpmotorsports.biz\smilies\popcorn.gif

I guess you can't add images.


I think where most folks are looking at this... why not go ahead and annouce that a LT1 would be legal and that other options are being explored and will hopefully be just around the corner?

The LT1 option is the low hanging fruit to be easily plucked....while the mroe difficult options are being explored.

Some folks might find it easier or even want the LT1 option over the other options anyway.

I don't think anyone wants that to be the ONLY option, but at least get an early option on the table for those that want to plan ahead now.

[GlennCMC70]

its not that we dont want the LT1 in the 3rd gen, we just dont want it to be the only solution. the directors will continue to work in the direction they are headed and see what happens.
look at it this way Jerry, if you had a Fox (still) and the only way you could get it to CMC-2 levels was to put a Mod motor in it, how would you feel? what if the directors said "its a no brainer, its a proven set-up, it makes the numbers, bla, bla bla...." its less work for me as a director to do that, but its not the right answer or one thats best for ALL involved. the LT1 in a 3rd gen may be best for Jeff Wirtz, or best for .... whoever, but its not for 99% of the others.

if i had a CMC-1 3rd gen i would plan 2 stay in CMC-1 for another year or 2. does that mean we will not find a solution tomorrow? no, it means we dont have one today.

[Fbody383]

if i had a CMC-1 3rd gen i would plan 2 stay in CMC-1 for another year or 2. does that mean we will not find a solution tomorrow? no, it means we dont have one today.

Isn't it that we don't have 2 solutions today? The LT1 is A solution; isn't the struggle to find ANOTHER cost effective solution?

I'm not convinced my current LT1 can get close to duece numbers without a rebuild so it's not just 3Gs drivers looking for solutions with low cost if they want to move to CMC-2.

[AI#97]

if i had a CMC-1 3rd gen i would plan 2 stay in CMC-1 for another year or 2. does that mean we will not find a solution tomorrow? no, it means we dont have one today.

Isn't it that we don't have 2 solutions today? The LT1 is A solution; isn't the struggle to find ANOTHER cost effective solution?

I'm not convinced my current LT1 can get close to duece numbers without a rebuild so it's not just 3Gs drivers looking for solutions with low cost if they want to move to CMC-2.

LT1 is plan B actually....they already have a 305 Carb solution right?....

Let's get past this already and start talking about LS1's in Mustangs for -2!!! LOL!!!! :P

[David Love AI27]

if the 3G owners wants to stay with a 305, then race in CMC1
.

THANK YOU! just don't want Jason to be the only one out there



Its reliable, its relatively cheap, its a self contained package, it bolts in, its pure GM ... it has everything going for it that I think CMC stands for.


What is TOTAL cost?... and does it include engine controls?



Being as the T56 has been legal in a 3G this whole time.


IS IT!! I really need to know...




OT: I don't know of any Houston trans builder, Gary.

Gary did you look up Rosehill performance? What about rebuild kits?

I have 3 on the shop floor that need rebuilt and 2 more need road racing 5th (5 5th gears total)

[David Love AI27]

And I've said before, the purist in me would prefer to see OEM under the hood, whether it's platform specific or not, as opposed to the aftermarket. Even installing an LT1 in a 3G or even a Windsor in a Fox would be better than seeing Edelbrock, Mac and Crane under the hood. MHO The perception is stock, not modified.

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Remember in the not too distant past, rules stability was a HUGE marketing point and the series reaped the rewards from it.

The same can't be said today. Many are questioning their 2010 move.

AMEN BROTHER... (did I just agree with Mitch? actually I usually do)

Lets review shall we:

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Questions? let me repeat:

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

[AI#97]

AMEN BROTHER... (did I just agree with Mitch? actually I usually do)

Lets review shall we:

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Questions? let me repeat:

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Awesome! So I just bought a 2010 camaro and want to race in the duece! Go make that happen!

Reality is a bitch sometimes.....BUT, make a freakin' decision already!!!

[David Love AI27]

AMEN BROTHER... (did I just agree with Mitch? actually I usually do)

Lets review shall we:

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Questions? let me repeat:

One of the HUGE draws is taking a stock street car, install a cage and go racing. You begin muddying those waters when you involve the aftermarket.

Awesome! So I just bought a 2010 camaro and want to race in the duece! Go make that happen!

Reality is a bitch sometimes.....BUT, make a freakin' decision already!!!

DAMNIT... could you just stop being Matt for just a second?!?! :roll:

[AI#97]

DAMNIT... could you just stop being Matt for just a second?!?! :roll:

Sorry David, I just wanted to point out that the "rules process" for CMC/2 is very complicated and very hard to do...however, it would be nice for someone to just make a decision and move forward. If it turns out to be wrong, fine. Change it later on and fix it. Just looking for direction from the directors that should be directing on direction. Constantly asking the masses for "what would you like" is like masterbating with sand paper while banging your head against the wall.

Mostly why I am so frustrated with the rules "process" at NASA. They have identified a problem, heard the complaints of "why this and that". So make a decision and move forward....quit worrying about the racers that are already here in the series and have committed to be here, bring more racers in by solving the problems you already know and understand.

Sorry....guess I am bleeding a little from the AI crap but some of that same rules stuff applies here too but somewhat more watered down.

eh, carry on.

[michaelmosty]

Matt, the main downside is that if they make a decision quickly there is a greater chance it will need to be changed in the future. Then we have the same scenario we had this year with Toyo. Everyone will be furious in the future when the same rule is tweaked again.

I know we all want an answer immediately but that is simply not possible. After what I heard at Nationals it is very evident that this situation is very understood by the powers above and they are providing support to get the best resolution as quickly as possible.

[AI#97]

Matt, the main downside is that if they make a decision quickly there is a greater chance it will need to be changed in the future. Then we have the same scenario we had this year with Toyo. Everyone will be furious in the future when the same rule is tweaked again.

I know we all want an answer immediately but that is simply not possible. After what I heard at Nationals it is very evident that this situation is very understood by the powers above and they are providing support to get the best resolution as quickly as possible.

I know "knee jerks" are not good most of the time.....BUT, haven't they been discussing this for nearly 2 YEARS now? Foxes figured out e-cam and shorties in like 3 or 4 months, probably because there are TONs of mustangs in the series. How many 3rd gens are we talking about here that aren't already running the carb'd setup that makes the numbers? Are we trying to "please everyone AND Mitch" at the same time?! LOL!!! :wink: :lol:

[Wirtz]

I like the way James put it; if the LT1 in a 3G is going to be an option, then get one with it and say so so folks can start working on making the change.

As it sits right now, my only option to move to CMC2 is to sit and wait...


...the LT1 in a 3rd gen may be best for Jeff Wirtz, or best for .... whoever, but its not for 99% of the others.


Shouldn't you be dragging Mitch into something? Not me...

1000% agree with the comments in that the LT1 / 3G combo should not be THE answer. There must be a good FI 305 based solution as well.

[David Love AI27]

Everyone will be furious in the future when the same rule is tweaked again.

Like "lets throw 50 lbs on the problem... that will fix it" :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

[AI#97]

Everyone will be furious in the future when the same rule is tweaked again.

Like "lets throw 50 lbs on the problem... that will fix it" :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

This is meant as a serious post, but why can't we just say 260/310 is the line, do what you want to get there. Some will build monster motors, many will build "regular" motors. This let's the directors off the hook to figure it out, leaves it to the racers to figure out THEIR way to get there along their budget lines....THEN, use the current base weight table, AND reward weight to level the playing field.

For years, folks in CMC have made different power numbers, most not near the max, and we have seen some of the closest racing of any series. It has come down to car prep and driver talent to rise to the top of the box. The 50lb weight break for the fox's, IMHO, made a GREAT change to make the racing even closer. Why not work the other way to slow the guys who build the MONSTER's and have success. Eventually, by race weekend 3, the field should be level? Right? Isn't that how OTHER sanctioning bodies level the playing field with vastly different platforms int he series? Establish a smart base line, which I think we have our hands on, then balance as we go along. I'll even put Gunter in charge of providing elevator plate with holes already drilled for you guys! ;)

Just a suggestion as it's columbus day and I have nothing to do.

[David Love AI27]

it's columbus day and I have nothing to do.

here is an option: masterbating with sand paper while banging your head against the wall.

your words, not mine

[Hood]

Gary did you look up Rosehill performance? What about rebuild kits?

I talked to him on Friday. He has pretty reasonable prices. He also said that he can get the 5th gear we want from Astro Perf.

[Al Fernandez]

I talked to him on Friday. He has pretty reasonable prices. He also said that he can get the 5th gear we want from Astro Perf.

Dude, what are you talking about? :lol:

Matt, come on man, take it easy. Shooting from the hip might work very well for Hollywood movies, but it doesnt work so well in either real gunfights nor in rules decisions.

[Hood]

I talked to him on Friday. He has pretty reasonable prices. He also said that he can get the 5th gear we want from Astro Perf.

Dude, what are you talking about? :lol:

Sorry for buttin' in on the off topic discussion :lol:
I know, I know... Rookies...

[GlennCMC70]

if i had a CMC-1 3rd gen i would plan 2 stay in CMC-1 for another year or 2. does that mean we will not find a solution tomorrow? no, it means we dont have one today.

Isn't it that we don't have 2 solutions today? The LT1 is A solution; isn't the struggle to find ANOTHER cost effective solution?

I'm not convinced my current LT1 can get close to duece numbers without a rebuild so it's not just 3Gs drivers looking for solutions with low cost if they want to move to CMC-2.

the poor health of your motor is your problem. my motor was a 80K junkyard salvage that made 280/320hp/tq unrestricted.
at CMC numbers it made 230/285 up to early 2007 and i did just fine.
fresh valve springs made JP's motor wake up. your motor is the only one i know of LT1 wise that has issues making power.

[GlennCMC70]

Matt - being in the works for two years does not mean there was a solution being worked on. the series directors had solutions in progress and NASA National killed those plans that took months to get going. we sat back and waited to see how thier plan worked out (gave them enough rope to hang themselves) and suddenly they are wanting to play ball w/ us this year.

if this was my full time job, that answer would have been found a long time ago. it isnt, so it hasnt. it takes time. there are so many things about CMC/CMC-2 that you know nothing about. i wonder why you act as though you know more than you do.

[AI#97]

if this was my full time job, that answer would have been found a long time ago. it isnt, so it hasnt. it takes time. there are so many things about CMC/CMC-2 that you know nothing about. i wonder why you act as though you know more than you do.

Don't know what you are referring to me not knowing Glenn but figuring out how to make X horsepower from Y motor is usually a call to a cam grinder, a few forays onto platform specific forums like LS1.com etc....a hammer of a gavel and done. Sorry if I am asking kindergarten questions as to why the "brains" can't figure elementary shit out in the last 2 years. Maybe there are too many brains involved....?

[GlennCMC70]

the motor issue has been beat to death, i'm not even addressing that.
its the "2 years" comment. dont blame the Regional or even National Directors for this. from your POV it may appear to be our/their fault, its not. much more to the story than you know.

[David Love AI27]

the motor issue has been beat to death, i'm not even addressing that.
its the "2 years" comment. dont blame the Regional or even National Directors for this. from your POV it may appear to be our/their fault, its not. much more to the story than you know.

Not placing blame... I understand the progression... as a racer you always want to have more power and to go faster, period.

What I saw was the frustration on the part of (some not all) 4th gen and sn95 guys when they had to choke their motors but not wanting to spend big bucks and move up to AI, thus CMC2. Then the 3rd gen and fox guys wanting to move up with their fellow competitors.

A few year back there were not as many sn95s and 4th gens reasonably priced donor cars so it wasn't as big of an issue. things have changed. nowadays 3rd gens and foxes are either classics or junk, so the natural progression is to buy the "newer" cars.

In addition, I see the safety issue with added horsepower and the need for bigger brakes and suspension mods for better car control, thus bigger wheels/tires.

Maybe NASA should have looked at the dying AIV and changed it to CMC(V) for the "vintage" 3rd gens and foxes... seriously

I don't envy the Directors. I was a director and president of a softball league for many years and understand dealing with the emotions of a competitive group. EVERYBODY wants to win or you wouldn't be doing it. Hats off to you guys.

[Al Fernandez]

I think James has proven that there are no changes required when moving from cmc to cmc2 other than a bit more power.

Same wheels? check
Same tires? check
Same cooling? check
Same brakes? check
Most wins, most top 5s, and TX Regional Champ? check!

Its 30hp, its not an entirely different league.

Unfortunately as long as we have multiple engines and platforms some will have to choke down to a common point. Some will have to add weight. Thats the nature of pushing the many to a point of equality.

What the uninitiated dont appreciate is how wonderful it is to go to the dyno with a stack of restrictors and roll off on the numbers. Personally, for ammateur level road racing, I think restricting down to a common number is TONS better than mixing and matching parts to the highest possible. Case in point, CMC champs often run junkyard motors. Spec MIata champs run $20,000 Rebello motors. Take your pick!

[David Love AI27]

Personally, for ammateur level road racing, I think restricting down to a common number is TONS better than mixing and matching parts to the highest possible.

before I agree... do you want to edit yours and I'll delete mine 8)

Cuz I will... otherwise I like 230 for aLL

[Fbody383]

the poor health of your motor is your problem.

Fine; but resolving it for either class may, or may not, be inexpensive.

If I raced a 3G car I could take that sentiment to be "your poor choice of platform is your problem."

If we're spending somebody else's money, there is A potential solution for the 3G cars that feels generally like CMC, just crossing generational boundaries.

And I was this --><-- close to owning a 3G car.

[GlennCMC70]

the poor health of your motor is your problem.

Fine; but resolving it for either class may, or may not, be inexpensive.

If I raced a 3G car I could take that sentiment to be "your poor choice of platform is your problem."

If we're spending somebody else's money, there is A potential solution for the 3G cars that feels generally like CMC, just crossing generational boundaries.

And I was this --><-- close to owning a 3G car.

fair enough. but realize there are no LT1 motors i know of that have power issues except yours. if more of them had the same problem, then yes.

plate size and hp/tq numbers again please?

[AI#97]

Matt, come on man, take it easy. Shooting from the hip might work very well for Hollywood movies, but it doesnt work so well in either real gunfights nor in rules decisions.

Al, two or three BIG series use the system I mentioned and it works....no reason to try and reinvent the wheel with 6 captains on the bridge asking "what do the racers want?". If you have ever seen a goat rodeo, it isn't fun to watch, even from the cheap seats. Get on a horse and ride it already and put all this "shoo didley" behind...

In those series, there are big budget teams and small budget teams and the "performance adjustments" in weight or tire size, or rpm range work...for the guys outperforming the little guys. Besides, I thought this was "YMCA racing" and not the SCCA?

[Al Fernandez]

Matt...the system you mentioned is state a hp/tq limit and let drivers do whatever they need to in order to get there?

CMC has never been the place for engine builders or even engine tinquerers. A strict formula is meant to keep the guess work out. Like you said, its created some of the closest racing anywhere. I guess I'm willing to pay a little extra time and energy when it comes to pumping out the rules in order to get that.

Besides, as people catch up with what technology enables my bet is you're going to see a lot of that "do what you want" mentality go away. The reality is with modern electronics running a butterfly-less IC engine in torque control mode at almost all rpms a hp/tq limit is simply not enough.

[AI#97]

Matt...the system you mentioned is state a hp/tq limit and let drivers do whatever they need to in order to get there?

CMC has never been the place for engine builders or even engine tinquerers. A strict formula is meant to keep the guess work out. Like you said, its created some of the closest racing anywhere. I guess I'm willing to pay a little extra time and energy when it comes to pumping out the rules in order to get that.

Besides, as people catch up with what technology enables my bet is you're going to see a lot of that "do what you want" mentality go away. The reality is with modern electronics running a butterfly-less IC engine in torque control mode at almost all rpms a hp/tq limit is simply not enough.

YOU have already said that "30 hp isn't all that".... so what is 10 ft lbs more at a given rpm range? I know it's a catch 22...

[michaelmosty]

CMC has never been the place for engine builders or even engine tinquerers. A strict formula is meant to keep the guess work out. Like you said, its created some of the closest racing anywhere. I guess I'm willing to pay a little extra time and energy when it comes to pumping out the rules in order to get that.


I completely agree!!!
On a side note, I don't think I have ever seen the word "tinquerers" actually used in a discussion. :lol:

[David Love AI27]

On a side note, I don't think I have ever seen the word "tinquerers" actually used in a discussion. :lol:

No... but there have been some discussions (behind the scenes) about a "tinkerbell cowboy"... :shock: :P :P :P