Texas Mustang Challenge Review 2016/2015

[BryanL]

2016 Texas Mustang Challenge Year in Review

Every fast lap of racing or qual all year was by a Fox (McCormick/Gardner) {The Fox is Dead, Long Live the Fox}

Mustangs were on the podium 83% of the time for 2016.

GM didn't have a win in a Toyo race all year.

During Toyo races GM only had 4 podiums compared to 32 for the mustang or 89% of the time.

GM had 4 wins out of 24 races. #1 was a rain race #2 was an invert #3 was an invert #4 was in invert but the four fastest mustangs were either running AI, broke, or a different driver.

2015 Mustang Challenge Year in Review

Every fast lap of racing or qual all year was by a Mustang. (Mcspadden - 2/ Mosty - 2/ McCormick - 1)

Mustangs were on the podium 72% of the time for 2015.

Gm had one win in a Toyo race.

GM's other 3 wins were all inverts with one an inverted shortened race won by Leinart

[Pranav]

Wait until I swap the 5.3 in my car.

If I can set the CMC lap record in the wet at MSRH like I did last year in an overweight LT1 car, imagine what I can do when I put the "superior" back in to the Superior Platform (TM)

[Boudy]

ROTFLMFAO!!!

Boudy

[dtanker65]

Dang Bryan

I am liking the S-197, it's robust but damn heavy. Trying to shed 100+ pounds from the car weight to get to the hp/weight limit and I hate f**kin broccoli.

I am not even close to MikeP yet. I think my car was pretty evenly matched with Casey's car, but he just out drove me last time we raced together. Kevin and his GTO are very fast, Mason in his Cobra and Bill too.

McSpadden is a National Champion in CMC, just sayin, he and Jack Murray are two of the most talented drivers I have seen.

Racing a Fox seems as much an art as a skill, like flying old airplanes. They seem way too delicate for my driving style.

The platforms all have their plus' and minus' but it seems, if properly prepared, any one of them can win in the right hands.

God bless Texas and all of the fierce competitors in Nasa Thunder

[Trublu]

2016 Texas Mustang Challenge Year in Review


GM didn't have a win in a Toyo race all Year
Commiserations mate. I'm liking Glenn getting his car back together and James starting to think about it again......who knows maybe GM is on its way back

[BryanL]

ROTFLMFAO!!!

Boudy

Awesome. You haven't posted in probably 4 years but you are immediately on this. Makes me want to dig up your posts from 4-5 years ago. So where is your old Fox?

Dennis-this only has to do with CMC.

Craig-no reason for pity.

It's simply the results. Now everyone go enjoy Taylor Swift. I'm going camping.

[Fbody383]

During Toyo races GM only had 4 podiums compared to 32 for the mustang or 89% of the time. Technically I would call that 5. If we had just checked the front track width at Hallett, the second would have stood, if Craig had still broke - butterfly effect and all.

See, slightly better than you thought.

[mach1]

After driving Paul's LT1 earlier this year I fell in love with the platform/engine, if it was in the cards I would love to build a 4th gen to run in 2017. The torque was to die for, the stability of the chassis reminded me of my 2015 Mustang, you could throw it into a corner all wrong and come out on the other end just fine.

[ShadowBolt]

After driving Paul's LT1 earlier this year I fell in love with the platform/engine, if it was in the cards I would love to build a 4th gen to run in 2017. The torque was to die for, the stability of the chassis reminded me of my 2015 Mustang, you could throw it into a corner all wrong and come out on the other end just fine.

Tyler,

I wish you had some times in Paul's car that you could share. I'm not smart enough to know how much difference there would be in a Fox (or SN95, SN99) and a fourth gen but the Mustang for sure has a less sophisticated suspension. You could not find a soul that would rather have the Mustang suspension over a fourth gen. so I still believe the Mustang deserves some kind of help. How much help I have no idea. If you can go out and run faster lap times in Paul's heavier car then that would kind of prove the point. Rob has driven both and he says the Camaro is "easier" to drive but easier does not necessarily mean faster. Maybe the difference is so little that we can't use hundreds of lbs. to make things evan. I would be willing to let my Trackmate be used to see if there is really a difference and how much of a difference.


JJ

[mach1]

Tyler,

I wish you had some times in Paul's car that you could share. I'm not smart enough to know how much difference there would be in a Fox (or SN95, SN99) and a fourth gen but the Mustang for sure has a less sophisticated suspension. You could not find a soul that would rather have the Mustang suspension over a fourth gen. so I still believe the Mustang deserves some kind of help. How much help I have no idea. If you can go out and run faster lap times in Paul's heavier car then that would kind of prove the point. Rob has driven both and he says the Camaro is "easier" to drive but easier does not necessarily mean faster. Maybe the difference is so little that we can't use hundreds of lbs. to make things evan. I would be willing to let my Trackmate be used to see if there is really a difference and how much of a difference.


JJ
My times were way off but the car had a bad opti, 4600rpm is about all it would pull, the diff was blown, torque arm wasn't tight, etc. Based on feel it was great in the corners, but who knows if that would translate to a fast time. Now that the car is sorted maybe he will let me drive it at MSRH and we can compare.

[ShadowBolt]

My times were way off but the car had a bad opti, 4600rpm is about all it would pull, the diff was blown, torque arm wasn't tight, etc. Based on feel it was great in the corners, but who knows if that would translate to a fast time. Now that the car is sorted maybe he will let me drive it at MSRH and we can compare.

Great. If you were able to beat your Mustang times or equal them that would go a long way in figuring this out.

JJ

[Fbody383]

We need Sean to jump in about how the #39 races relative to the #15. And will be interesting to get him back in the #15 to see how the changes feel to him.


I would be willing to let my Trackmate be used to see if there is really a difference and how much of a difference. That might be a good tack to take. Data I've compared to Jander seems to show night and day under braking - Mustang by a ton. Some of that could certainly be operator error on my part.

[mach1]

I'm pretty sure the parity rules were the same in 2014 where the April TWS event Dan Alford ran the fastest time in Race 1 over any mustang, and Glenn ran a blistering 1:56.9 in R2, faster than any mustang in that race, and faster than any mustang ran this past TWS during any Race. I'd say the rules are good.

[RichardP]

I'm pretty sure the parity rules were the same in 2014 where the April TWS event Dan Alford ran the fastest time in Race 1 over any mustang, and Glenn ran a blistering 1:56.9 in R2, faster than any mustang in that race, and faster than any mustang ran this past TWS during any Race. I'd say the rules are good.

Craig ran a 1:55.9 in his Mustang on Saturday. Comparing lap times between events isn't all that helpful. It's nice that you recognize that Dan can be one of the faster cars even though he has nothing for the current crop of front running Mustangs.


Richard P.

[mach1]

Craig ran a 1:55.9 in his Mustang on Saturday. Comparing lap times between events isn't all that helpful. It's nice that you recognize that Dan can be one of the faster cars even though he has nothing for the current crop of front running Mustangs.


Richard P.
That wasn't a racing time, no one even came close in the races.

[RichardP]

Commiserations mate. I'm liking Glenn getting his car back together and James starting to think about it again......who knows maybe GM is on its way back

James sold his car. It was competing against us this past weekend with its new owner. We keep asking him to come back every time we talk to him but I don't think it's happening. I'm so tired of people saying that if James was around that he would still be winning. I've heard it a lot of times. In James' last full season, when he won the championship, Dan won six races competing against him and finished right behind him in the points. Why would James be winning when Dan can't?

I also heard for a while that Dan couldn't win anymore because the car was too tired and worn out. The new car is certainly more reliable, so far, but not faster.


Richard P.

[AI#97]

Having BOTH in our garage...I will add that it depends on the track as to which one is better. TWS? Camaro. Cresson? Mustang. Overall? Camaro. Which camaro? Well, maybe a 3rd gen with some pushing of the limits on the rules now that the 5.3 is allowed.

Given there are ZERO CMC 3rd/4th gens pushing the limit of the rules and there are SEVERAL mustangs knocking loudly on that door, I'd say the camaro drivers need to trim their mullets and get all the empty beer cans out of the cars and actually do some serious development on the cars. Dan and Richard probably do their homework but the rest of you guys REALLY need to stop relying on Frrax for help and start throwing time/money at the cars and get some data on what works and what doesn't work. At the very least you will get some seat time. Hell, I'd LOVE to drive Bryan's car for a race and see what I could get out of it sometime. If any of you guys want to come to a TWS PDS event and do some development work, let me know. I'll be glad to work with you since I am usually just goofing off anyway.

[RichardP]

Given there are ZERO CMC 3rd/4th gens pushing the limit of the rules and there are SEVERAL mustangs knocking loudly on that door, I'd say the camaro drivers need to trim their mullets and get all the empty beer cans out of the cars and actually do some serious development on the cars.


"ZERO" Piss off! There has been no expense spared preparing the Silver Camaro to the limit of the rules and we have done a bunch of development on it on non-race weekends. What has it gotten us? Dan is doing very well in Camaro-Camaro Challenge. At TWS, he was the fastest Camaro in both qualifying sessions, the fastest Camaro in every race, and the highest Camaro finisher in all four races. His driving got him to the lead of both inverts (on Saturday, that didn't last long). Both times Dan was sent to the scales after a race, he came across 10 pounds over, exactly as scripted.

Dan also spent so much money on tires this year. I think it was a huge waste of money. Why? Even though fresh tires make us faster, every time (which is fucking offensive for club level racing) they didn't do a thing to make us run with Mustangs. Besides, Camaro tires cost more - the car is heavier so it goes through them faster and they are subsidized much less by Toyo bucks than Mustang tires.


Richard P.

[Boudy]

I agree with Richard. These cars under these limited rules are pretty much developed out, there are no revelations left. I would recommend giving Dan or some other driver a Data Collection Pass for the first 2 events and evaluate the results. Give him 50 lbs, 1" back, and see what happens. Make appropriate changes as necessary for everyone else. It's not exact but tossing 50 lbs back and forth across the fence is going to prove pointless for the next 5 years as it has the last. I pleaded for testing and data points on my way out and nothing has evolved yet.

I'm also disgusted with the tires that NASA is taking money from TOYO to make us run, they suck. It took 3 sets (read $4,000) to get through the Nationals last year in Spec Iron. Ridiculous!!! These tires can drop off as much as 2 seconds as early as the 3rd event on heavier cars. As a result front guys are buying 3 to 4 sets for 6 events which I think, more than anything else accounts for the results cited in the OP.

Boudy

[Pranav]

How many lt1 4th gens are able to actually make it below 3300 on the new scales NASA got a season or two ago?

I'm low 3300s but start each race on a full tank, have a cool suit, fire system, and maybe a few extra pounds in electrical than most. I'll have no problem making 3300 with the aluminum block next year, I'll have to ballast up.

Just curious if any lt1 4th gen is close to 3250.

Also why the heck did the 3rd gens also get the same weight minimum as the 4th gens? The weight balance, steering, camber curve, and aero are all worse. If anything I think they should get 50lbs less but that is just my humble opinion.

Right now im fighting to have one complete season on the same engine.

[AI#97]

"ZERO" Piss off! There has been no expense spared preparing the Silver Camaro to the limit of the rules and we have done a bunch of development on it on non-race weekends. What has it gotten us? Dan is doing very well in Camaro-Camaro Challenge. At TWS, he was the fastest Camaro in both qualifying sessions, the fastest Camaro in every race, and the highest Camaro finisher in all four races. His driving got him to the lead of both inverts (on Saturday, that didn't last long). Both times Dan was sent to the scales after a race, he came across 10 pounds over, exactly as scripted.

Dan also spent so much money on tires this year. I think it was a huge waste of money. Why? Even though fresh tires make us faster, every time (which is fucking offensive for club level racing) they didn't do a thing to make us run with Mustangs. Besides, Camaro tires cost more - the car is heavier so it goes through them faster and they are subsidized much less by Toyo bucks than Mustang tires.


Richard P.

Richard, you obviously missed the part where I credited you and Dan for doing your homework so go piss on your own leg. As for "offensive for club racing", try running in Super touring where the top dog is going out on fresh Hoosiers every day and has a $350k Doug Rippie world challenge car with a $30k sequential transmission in it. It's racing and someone will always outspend you. Be Wiley and beat them while spending less or being a better driver.

As has been stated, the Camaro dominated in the past. Sadly, those three drivers haven't raced in a while. If they had, I bet the mustang might not look so good.

[Fbody383]

How many lt1 4th gens are able to actually make it below 3300 on the new scales NASA got a season or two ago? The #39 dynoed at 262/308ish - race weight it 3275. We shoot for 3290.

WITH 70lbs of BALLAST.

I have few to no issues with the scales - due to my bad math I was underweight at MSRH in the #15, we added ballast and came out within 5lbs of what we wanted/needed at TWS.


As has been stated, the Camaro dominated in the past. Sadly, those three drivers haven't raced in a while. If they had, I bet the mustang might not look so good. Under what ruleset with which tires?

At this point I will not claim we've done everything we could (i.e. spend more money than I currently want to) do to the #39. Fresh shocks are on the list; yes, they've been on the car since 2009. Cheap things we can look at over the winter - corner weights, bars, springs, maybe some track time.

I'm more than happy to share data with anyone that wants a copy.

[Trublu]

I generally scale 70# over weight post race. Nothing to do with the car....

Something to consider GM guys.... Loose is not fast despite what Ricky Bobby might say. I've not seen a Camaro that isn't...

[Storm Trooper]

Having BOTH in our garage...I will add that it depends on the track as to which one is better. TWS? Camaro. Cresson? Mustang. Overall? Camaro. Which camaro? Well, maybe a 3rd gen with some pushing of the limits on the rules now that the 5.3 is allowed.

Given there are ZERO CMC 3rd/4th gens pushing the limit of the rules and there are SEVERAL mustangs knocking loudly on that door, I'd say the camaro drivers need to trim their mullets and get all the empty beer cans out of the cars and actually do some serious development on the cars. Dan and Richard probably do their homework but the rest of you guys REALLY need to stop relying on Frrax for help and start throwing time/money at the cars and get some data on what works and what doesn't work. At the very least you will get some seat time. Hell, I'd LOVE to drive Bryan's car for a race and see what I could get out of it sometime. If any of you guys want to come to a TWS PDS event and do some development work, let me know. I'll be glad to work with you since I am usually just goofing off anyway.

I am in! Let me know!

[Storm Trooper]

I generally scale 70# over weight post race. Nothing to do with the car....

Something to consider GM guys.... Loose is not fast despite what Ricky Bobby might say. I've not seen a Camaro that isn't...

Craig, I am still Amazed how you took you your car from what it was, and made it perform! Major Kudos!
I have a lot to learn.

[Supercharged111]

Loose is not fast indeed. My ideal setup is a smidge of understeer until I put down the skinny pedal. At least that's what I've told myself.

[Trublu]

Craig, I am still Amazed how you took you your car from what it was, and made it perform! Major Kudos!
I have a lot to learn.

Thanks Sean. Happy to help you any way I can

[AllZWay]

I am not coming back anytime soon and I wasn't winning much in my last season. Don't remember for sure how many, but I think they may have all been inverts.

My personal feeling and with no data to back it up is at that the Mustangs have really picked up their game from a few years ago and now possibly the rule changes are working in their favor.

I also don't think there is much more that can be gained out of either platform at this point with the current rules.

[RichardP]

These tires can drop off as much as 2 seconds as early as the 3rd event on heavier cars. As a result front guys are buying 3 to 4 sets for 6 events which I think, more than anything else accounts for the results cited in the OP.

Boudy

We aren't seeing a 2 second drop but bringing the tires to a third event? Really? That would be a complete waste of time. And, besides, if I let Dan drive that long on a set of tires, Josh and I would have anything to use at DE's...


Richard P.

[RichardP]

How many lt1 4th gens are able to actually make it below 3300 on the new scales NASA got a season or two ago?

I'm low 3300s but start each race on a full tank, have a cool suit, fire system, and maybe a few extra pounds in electrical than most. I'll have no problem making 3300 with the aluminum block next year, I'll have to ballast up.

Just curious if any lt1 4th gen is close to 3250.


Proctor's old car could make weight pretty easy but fourth gen weight was a known problem back when it was built so it was a major driver in its construction with a minimum legal cage, etc. It currently running 10 lbs of ballast and a full tank to stay above its minimum weight of 3260.

Dan's car isn't minimalist in any way. It has a very nice and very safe cage. It also has a fuel cell, subframe connectors, etc. He is maxed out on horsepower for the chart in the rules and still struggles to meet his minimum weight of 3355. We also haven't gotten around to installing the fire system yet. Based on the incident at TWS, and the charred mess drooling multiple fluids onto the floor of our shop, I'm guessing Dan won't want to start the new season without that installed. The fire system will weigh a little bit more than the ballast we currently have. I'm guessing we might have a hard time getting to our minimum allowed weight without fuel starving. Also, Dan isn't the biggest guy and he doesn't run a cool suit. I would be way over if I drove it - I have a much bigger gut and I need a cool suit...

There is no desire or intent to go to an aluminum block LS engine for either of our cars.


Richard P.

[Pranav]

Cool, I'm in the same boat as you. I could've gone minimalist but I like having the coolsuit, fire system+handheld and beefy door bars + cage-mounted seat. I also DID NOT trim my front bumper beam as is common/recommended, because I want that full crash element to be intact.

I don't have subframe connectors (yet) but will consider them next year once I get this thing weighed+ballasted post swap; I think they would weigh less than what I plan to ballast and still be able to hug 3300.

Have you guys considered using Holley Hydramat so you can run less fuel without start?

[RichardP]

Richard, you obviously missed the part where I credited you and Dan for doing your homework so go piss on your own leg. As for "offensive for club racing", try running in Super touring where the top dog is going out on fresh Hoosiers every day and has a $350k Doug Rippie world challenge car with a $30k sequential transmission in it. It's racing and someone will always outspend you. Be Wiley and beat them while spending less or being a better driver.

As has been stated, the Camaro dominated in the past. Sadly, those three drivers haven't raced in a while. If they had, I bet the mustang might not look so good.


I didn't miss where you mentioned Dan and I. But you also said "ZERO" (IN ALL CAPS). That would include our car.

Also, we have no desire to try a class with worse tire rules than CMC. The fact that you signed up for rules like that, especially in a car that works fine in a class without that, is not relevant to the discussion at hand. I understand why a class like that appeals to you. If you beat those expensive and exotic cars, you look like a hero. If you don't, well of course not, your in a Mustang. Your inflated but fragile ego can't take the possibility that racing like for like might show the rest of the world you aren't what you boast that you are.

I don't see how you having a Mustang and a Camaro in your garage gives you any basis to speak intelligently about CMC. Your Mustang hasn't touched a funny angled rear upper control arm or a stock geometry k-member in literally over a decade. Did your car even ever touch a racetrack with those parts still installed? By the time you got your hands on the Camaro, it was well past CMC.

I tracked my Mustang with a stock k-member (and 4-lug 11" brakes). I also went through the stock bushing four link, modified bushing four link, four link with a panhard, and a poor man's three link on my car. Those setups were all more than a decade ago. I don't claim to be able to set up a competitive CMC Mustang because those setups all sucked so bad I didn't want to try and maximize the tune for them. I moved onto a much better, and very CMC illegal, setup that I really do like.

Beyond your claims of technical knowledge and ability, you haven't provided anything technical. You have just stated your opinion that all of the current Camaro drivers suck. This, for a class and group that you don't even run in???


I liked it much better when you were banned...


Richard P.

[RichardP]

Loose is not fast despite what Ricky Bobby might say. I've not seen a Camaro that isn't...

I agree with loose is not fast and Dan doesn't like a loose car. Both the Silver and the Red car suffered from oversteer when we got to TWS this past event and I'm not sure why? Neither were like that the last time we were there. The current softer setup seems to have balance changes not only with different tracks but different grip levels at the same tracks. We didn't have that with the older stiffer setup.

The silver car is running 800 lb/in front springs. The Orange car is at 750. Between the two cars, we have 200, 225, 250, and 275 rear springs available to balance those out with. That's in addition to the 1100/1000 front, 300 rear setup we were running on Orange previously. We also have multiple different front and rear sway bar (and no rear bar) setups available to tune balance. All spring and sway bar sizes in our stock have been tried on one car or another. We have gotten pretty fast at changing rear springs and sway bars at the track. We have mixed and matched bar and spring setups to try to balance the car while fighting with being able to put power down. The new car has also been more receptive to rear track width changes with the softer setup with other side effects that Chris never reported when we did track width testing on my car.

At TWS, the Red car took the smaller rear sway bar out of the trailer (along with some other changes) while the Silver car ended up swapping rear sway bars with another car after other changes weren't as effective as Dan would have liked. We ended up at yet another different rear sway bar size that was not yet in our toy box and the car worked much better.


Richard P.

[RichardP]

I am not coming back anytime soon

We're still bummed by that. We would love it if you came out to watch and visit...


Richard P.

[RichardP]

Have you guys considered using Holley Hydramat so you can run less fuel without start?


We haven't really gotten to the point of working the details of fuel starvation yet. The new tank seems to be pretty good in that regard. We have an annoying problem where the available fuel senders for the fuel cell we are running are either too long or too short. The long one bottoms out before it can be bolted up. The short one leaves a few gallons in the bottom of the tank that we can't measure. It's really hard to know what your weight is when you don't have a good handle on remaining fuel. I'm going to be really annoyed if we have to go back to a dipstick when we have that fancy and expensive digital data acquisition system...

Richard P.

[GlennCMC70]

Perhaps a few well placed dents in the OEM tank will reduce fuel capacity and prevent fuel starvation with a lighter fuel load.

[AllZWay]

We're still bummed by that. We would love it if you came out to watch and visit...


Richard P.


I still want to come out and watch, but the kids sports schedule just hasn't aligned very well. Sadly.. I also lose track of the yearly schedule. Do yall not race ECR anymore?

[Fbody383]

Do yall not race ECR anymore? No; not sure anyone races ECR anymore. That track is one few U-turn and 3,427 bumps away from really cool.


It's really hard to know what your weight is when you don't have a good handle on remaining fuel. Come on now, work it from the other end. We start with a full tank and Scott can almost always tell me +/- 5lbs. what the car weighs when I come off track based on the length of the session and yellows, etc.

[rleng1]

Rob just liked the cup holder and radio in my Camaro.


Tyler,

I wish you had some times in Paul's car that you could share. I'm not smart enough to know how much difference there would be in a Fox (or SN95, SN99) and a fourth gen but the Mustang for sure has a less sophisticated suspension. You could not find a soul that would rather have the Mustang suspension over a fourth gen. so I still believe the Mustang deserves some kind of help. How much help I have no idea. If you can go out and run faster lap times in Paul's heavier car then that would kind of prove the point. Rob has driven both and he says the Camaro is "easier" to drive but easier does not necessarily mean faster. Maybe the difference is so little that we can't use hundreds of lbs. to make things evan. I would be willing to let my Trackmate be used to see if there is really a difference and how much of a difference.


JJ

[Al Fernandez]

So... all very interesting reading and I appreciate everyone voicing their thoughts. Last time we changed CMC rules about platform parity was for the 2013 season. We took track width away (0.75") from the GM camp and added weight (50lbs) to the GMs as well. I hated adding weight to the GM cars over taking weight off of the Mustangs but back then many GM drivers couldn't make minimum weight so it made things better.

The discussions then were almost exactly like the discussions in this and the other thread...except the platforms were swapped. At the time we did what I consider to be a fair job of trying to use data to help including lap times, number of wins, number of fastest laps, and even theoretical best laps using data loggers. We rationalized needing to make changes, and we did.

Four racing seasons later, we certainly don't have Camaro Camaro Challenge as many in 2011 said we were headed to. Instead, in Texas, we've had a ford win the series four years in a row, and have plenty of fast cars running foxes, SN95s, SN99s, as well as GMs. I'd say the rules changes worked. Perhaps they worked too well, perhaps not and that is why I purposely started encouraging discussion about platform parity that have essentially been dormant for a long time. The reality is we've never made an attempt to reconcile if we had gone too far, not far enough, or hit the target square in the bullseye. As I explained to the rest of the directors, I'm not in a particular hurry to make a change, but I do want to continue discussion and spend time gathering data and analyzing it to see if a change is warranted.

[Suck fumes]

if I were still heavily involved in racing and running nationals I would def build a later LS1 Fbody. Torque diff down low is insane. However the mustang 4.6 does sing a lot better on the top end so. Ideally I would want one of each based on the track haha.

My car has always been about 80pds overweight but I never cared cause it was well balanced at that weight.

[BADVENM]

For NASA Rocky Mountain CMC 2016 (at our local tracks not including cross regional events):

GM (Dustin) won 13 races
GM (Weston) won 2 races
Ford (me) won 2 races

[AI#97]

Beyond your claims of technical knowledge and ability, you haven't provided anything technical. You have just stated your opinion that all of the current Camaro drivers suck. This, for a class and group that you don't even run in???


I liked it much better when you were banned...


Richard P.

Richard, it's obvious you've got something personal against me but get the fuck over it already. When I got my hands on Misty's camaro, it was essentially a CMC car with 400rwhp. It had soft CMC spring rates and factory suspension under it with average aero bits and a cammed LS6 with shocks that I wouldn't put on a street car. I also don't ONLY deal with just our two cars. I have worked with NUMEROUS mustangs, camaros, Vettes, BMW's, miatas and just about everything under the sun over the years at the track, So quit speaking of things you know nothing about, including my "ego". If there is anyone fragile around here it's you. Grow the fuck up and act like a man and end all the personal bitchy bullshit which is where you ALWAYS seem to take this shit. I'm here offering 10+ years of chassis development experience from 10 times more track experience than ANYONE here on BOTH chassis and you are still taking personal shots from the past from when a rookie stepped in and nearly whipped your ass in AI 10 years ago. I have no delusions of my abilities but you seem to have some of your own superiority.

I will stand by my statement that even your two cars are NOT at the full extent of the CMC rules. As much as you speak about all the springs and swaybars you have tested, what shocks are you running? What have you done with valving for both compression and rebound? Have you played with the nitrogen charge or can you due to your shock selection? What have you done with live tire temps? What do your wheels weigh? How consistent is your driver? Is your driver even hitting an apex? What are the corner weights within what you can do in CMC? Have the changes you have made actually made a difference in the car? Is the chassis flexing so much that changes aren't having an effect? How often are you changing out the heim joints? How much flex is there in the pan hard bar? Are you still running an LT1 instead of an LS1?

Just because it's a "same for same" series and the rules are meant to level the playing field doesn't mean that someone isn't going to out engineer or out spend you OR OUT DRIVE YOU. Those that bitch about the rules the most tend to be either one of two types. Bad drivers or bad engineers. Which one are you? Or both?

As for not running in this class...well, I've considered coming back and building a CMC car. I constantly meet others that have considered joining the series as well and I push them toward ya'll often because of the "budget" nature of the series and the camaraderie as well as large fields and close racing. I'd like to build a 3rd gen camaro but since Misty's tub is about to come available or just get cut up, it's nearly free to build a car and join. However, I keep seeing racers in the series constantly asking for rules changes to level the playing field when they themselves don't put forth the effort in testing and development within the rules to be more competitive which could eventually cost me money to reconfigure my build. Thankfully (I can't believe I'm saying this), the directors have done a good job to not listen to most of the complaining and have kept the rules fairly stable except for the track width thing on the 4th gen camaros and admittedly, that could have been damn expensive for some to buy 8 to 12 new wheels.

Basic premise, finish playing within the rules before you ask for a rules change...or better yet, develop the driver without spending money on the car. You might be amazed of the outcome because you certainly don't want a developed driver showing up with the concessions being made to make a particular chassis faster because a group of drivers currently in that chassis aren't fast. You sort of have that situation with Tyler, Craig and McSpaddin now where in the past you had that with Burch, Proctor and the other 3rd gen driver (forget his name) who aren't around any more. Develop the drivers, then develop the cars within the existing rules, then MAYBE look at some leveling....MAYBE.

[Fbody383]

You were thinking of Jeff Wirtz, CMC19.


Basic premise, finish playing within the rules before you ask for a rules change...


The reality is we've never made an attempt to reconcile if we had gone too far, not far enough, or hit the target square in the bullseye.

I don't see these two statements as compatible. If they are, then was enough driver/car development done prior to the last rule change?

The facts are that significant platform adjustments were made AND the tire changed at the same time. I believe the group as a whole has been patient and watched and worked, some to a greater degree than others, to see if we are in a good spot as a series with Texas apparently having the rocket ship mustang outliers.

I'm dollar/fun limited - we softened the springs up 15%, got a couple podiums and some cheap tires, and moved up the order a little in '16. Yes, I need to at least pull the shocks off the car, yes I need more seat time, yes I could run newer tires.

I believe the mid-pack and back may be as close as it has ever been, but at the same time the pointy end seems to be all mustangs off the front.

I'll share any of the Traqmate data we have on the #39 with anybody that wants it.

[blk96gt]

I've got Traqmate data as well if anyone wants it. One thing that needs to be considered when comparing data though is how many heat cycles are on the tires. Comparing someone with sticker tires to someone who has 15HC tires could be misleading.

[ShadowBolt]

So... all very interesting reading and I appreciate everyone voicing their thoughts. Last time we changed CMC rules about platform parity was for the 2013 season. We took track width away (0.75") from the GM camp and added weight (50lbs) to the GMs as well. I hated adding weight to the GM cars over taking weight off of the Mustangs but back then many GM drivers couldn't make minimum weight so it made things better.

The discussions then were almost exactly like the discussions in this and the other thread...except the platforms were swapped. At the time we did what I consider to be a fair job of trying to use data to help including lap times, number of wins, number of fastest laps, and even theoretical best laps using data loggers. We rationalized needing to make changes, and we did.

Four racing seasons later, we certainly don't have Camaro Camaro Challenge as many in 2011 said we were headed to. Instead, in Texas, we've had a ford win the series four years in a row, and have plenty of fast cars running foxes, SN95s, SN99s, as well as GMs. I'd say the rules changes worked. Perhaps they worked too well, perhaps not and that is why I purposely started encouraging discussion about platform parity that have essentially been dormant for a long time. The reality is we've never made an attempt to reconcile if we had gone too far, not far enough, or hit the target square in the bullseye. As I explained to the rest of the directors, I'm not in a particular hurry to make a change, but I do want to continue discussion and spend time gathering data and analyzing it to see if a change is warranted.

Al, you are welcome to use my Trackmate to put in different cars to see where we are. Real data is the only thing that counts. Numbers of wins and poles is BS. Track width should be as close as possible IMHO. Why should anyone get extra width? We may have gone too far in weight but I don't know. I do think that if the Mustang was the same weight as the fourth gen the race results would be exactly the same. Performance would be different but I don't see it changing the results......maybe I'm wrong. I know BL is sure I'm wrong. I'm not sure the Fox needs to weigh any less than a SN95 or SN99 but most are way over the min. anyway. Please add 200 lbs. to Tyler and Craig's cars and I will be winning every race........yeah...BS. Okay back to the real world. If the data shows that we should all weigh the same thing no problem.
I know I talked to Derek Wright and he told me point blank that the Camaro was a better race car and he felt he had an advantage. In fact he ask me why I was driving a Mustang. We also have to remember that Mr. Curtis kind of won everything at Hallett two years ago in a fourth gen. I think we are very close guys and talking about wins and poles is not the answer. Lets get some data and if adjustments need to be made so be it. I know guys over 58 should get an extra 50 HP and TQ!


JJ

[blk96gt]

As far as weight goes, up until this weekend I always came across the scales at a minimum of 3260 (usually closer to 3280). This last weekend I came in at 3196.

[Fbody383]

We also have to remember that Mr. Curtis kind of won everything at Hallett two years ago in a fourth gen. I think we are very close guys and talking about wins and poles is not the answer.

Hallett 2014
R1 Rahjes/Jordan/Mosty/Curtis
R2 McCormick/Mosty/Francis/Rahjes
R3 Crumpacker/Jordan/Curtis/Mozader
R4 Curtis/Mosty/Rahjes/Francis/Fernandez - I'm pretty sure this was the mixed RA1/RR year.

[mach1]

How do they deal with platform parity in pro racing, IE World Challenge, etc? So if someone puts tons of effort into improving grip on their car, they will potentially get penalized after comparing data. Also, the driver really needs to be taken out of the equation on the platform discussion.

[mach1]

Hallett 2014
R1 Rajes/Jordan/Mosty/Curtis
R2 McCormick/Mosty/Francis/Rajes
R3 Crumpacker/Jordan/Curtis/Mozader
R4 Curtis/Mosty/Rajes/Francis/Fernandez - I'm pretty sure this was the mixed RA1/RR year.

What about qual?

[Fbody383]

What about qual? "Data not available" Ok, I made that up, but it's not given at the timingscoring.drivenasa.com site.

[Fbody383]

I scanned through the 201/2014/2015 results. Without knowing the cars' tire condition it feels (i.e. I don't have all the lap data, positions gained/loss, racing related issues, etc.) like it's slight mustang advantage that gets magnified at TWS, perhaps that's the weight break affecting accel/decal?

Oh, and you guys should just let me have R2 at Hallett.

[ShadowBolt]

Hallett 2014
R1 Rahjes/Jordan/Mosty/Curtis
R2 McCormick/Mosty/Francis/Rahjes
R3 Crumpacker/Jordan/Curtis/Mozader
R4 Curtis/Mosty/Rahjes/Francis/Fernandez - I'm pretty sure this was the mixed RA1/RR year.

I think Curtis was the fastest car in CMC at Hallett in 2014.


JJ

[Sook]

I'm here offering 10+ years of chassis development experience from 10 times more track experience than ANYONE here on BOTH chassis

Oh great AI#97, please shine down from the heavens upon us with your great knowledge of race car setup and driving technique. May we craft ourselves in your image of greatness. I can only hope to develop a level of humbleness and humility to rival your own. My Trumpisms and use of capitalization pale in comparison to your outstanding abilities, believe me!


what shocks are you running? What have you done with valving for both compression and rebound? Have you played with the nitrogen charge or can you due to your shock selection? What have you done with live tire temps? What do your wheels weigh? How consistent is your driver? Is your driver even hitting an apex? What are the corner weights within what you can do in CMC? Have the changes you have made actually made a difference in the car? Is the chassis flexing so much that changes aren't having an effect? How often are you changing out the heim joints? How much flex is there in the pan hard bar? Are you still running an LT1 instead of an LS1?

I will do my best to answer the questions with an equivalent number of facts and figures provided in your astute analysis of the current CMC camaro performance across the board.
- AST
- A lot
- No, questionable within the rules IMO
- A lot
- A little
- Very, see racehero.io
- Yes
- 1-5lbs
- Yes
- No
- Often enough
- A little
- Yes (for now)

Cold hard numbers typically make a stronger argument in my experience, but as a bad engineer I certainly wouldn't know. We're spending a huge amount of time in test and tune, much more than we spend during race weekends. I believe the test and tune time is evident when you look at the results for the #47 camaro this season, usually at the pointy end of the grid as far as F-bodys go. Regardless of whether or not the F-bodys are built to the full extent of the rules, there are several mustang drivers claiming they're over weight and cannot make weight. Doesn't it point to some parity skew if the fords can't make weight while still dominating the results for the past few seasons? It's great racing, don't get me wrong - but the data isn't exactly pointing to balanced manufacturer rules.


essentially a CMC car with 400rwhp

133rwhp more than allowed by the rules, sounds relevant to me. No one is claiming that the f-body's handle poorly (relative to mustangs)... this is a parity issue. Mustangs may handle like crap, but the data shows that they're consistently faster these days than the camaros.

Anyway, I look forward to meeting you at the track one day AI#97.
-Josh

[Supercharged111]

What about qual?

If you really want to get picky, there are people like me who tend to run faster on Sunday than they do on Saturday.

[mach1]

If you really want to get picky, there are people like me who tend to run faster on Sunday than they do on Saturday.

Well in that case, give the Camaro .75" more track on Saturday only :)

For what it's worth to the group, I have been focusing on my driving the past few years, my car is far from ideal, my driving still needs work too, but for 2017 I am going to step it up on car setup.
I spend time looking at data(not as much as I should though), watching others make fast laps on youtube, looking at sat photos of the track, taking notes from each corner with a track map, worked with a professional driver on some coaching, meditating before the race and on grid, visualizing winning, making practice laps on grid in my head, studying excellence in sports and other areas (mostly NFL), etc etc etc...

[BryanL]

It's interesting to share the results and then hear the posturing. GM guys are basically saying hey-should we give this data any consideration as a reason to get data acquisition? Much different than the Mustang whining prior to 2013. Ford guys say the rules are good-shocker. Though it is shocking that Boudy thinks the rules should be reversed to see what happens with Dan. For those that weren't around he was pretty vocal about the Fox being at a disadvantage.

Now the posts between MFW/Richard are the most entertaining. Don't think you could get out of my car currently. I have had Patterson/McSpadden in my car but they haven't gone any faster then me-I think they sandbagged just to make me feel good and I appreciate it but they didn't magically run 4 seconds quicker. My car has Stoptechs, AST's, corner weight/alignment by Texas Track Works and is a good car that is certainly capable of being faster without me behind the wheel.

[Fbody383]

Don't think you could get out of my car currently. I have had Patterson/McSpadden in my car but they haven't gone any faster then me-I think they sandbagged just to make me feel good and I appreciate it but they didn't magically run 4 seconds quicker. I think that proves the point that it's car driver/combo. I think I passed that 24/Patterson combo in 4th at TWS... And the 11/AI-Mosty to be fair.

The MFW/ARC "discussion" points out some things I believe, which is that prep matters and that ARC is doing it. Including, as I understand, getting Kent up to speed in James' car.


If you really want to get picky, there are people like me who tend to run faster on Sunday than they do on Saturday. Me too. I have limited seat time, often skip the practice day, and get faster over the weekend. Remember the money/fun ratio from before?


worked with a professional driver on some coaching, meditating before the race and on grid, visualizing winning, making practice laps on grid in my head... This. It matters. I think the Jordan's unlocked some skill-levelz at Hallett this year with some coaching.


What have you done to setup the car? What does in do in X? How does it react in Y? I often feel like Cole Trickle - I don't know what you guys are saying. They said get in the car and drive. I don't think I have enough quality seat time to think about the car I'm in instead of the race I'm in.

[Supercharged111]

I should probably mention that I rarely practice too. Part of that is cheapassery, and the other part is usually that my work schedule just doesn't always jive with a Friday practice. I feel fast at Pueblo, I've run within .3 seconds of Flyin' Brian's record and I seem to be able to impose my will there. I feel that Pueblo is very similar to Hallett, so if I can be fast at Pueblo I can drive Hallett. High Plains is a whole 'nuther story, I just plain suck there. The surface is different, the flow is different, and I've only managed to get within 1 second of the record there but it wasn't even during a race it was a cool warmup session and I have a difficult time making passes. I feel like the car came together nicely this time at Pueblo, so the only way for me to get faster from here is to start logging data. I literally just show up and drive, half the time I don't even check tire pressures. I bought a notebook this Spring and it's still blank. I'd say at this point I don't know what I don't know, but I do believe that if I want to get faster without outside help I need to take good notes and log data. Once I hit the wall with that method, I'd say it's time to open my wallet for some 1 on 1 instruction.

[dtanker65]

Professional coaching has been the most effective performance improvement on my car/driver combination.

[Supercharged111]

Professional coaching has been the most effective performance improvement on my car/driver combination.

At what point did you approach professional coaching? My biggest fear is being too dumb to utilize it.

[Boudy]

It's interesting to share the results and then hear the posturing. GM guys are basically saying hey-should we give this data any consideration as a reason to get data acquisition? Much different than the Mustang whining prior to 2013. Ford guys say the rules are good-shocker. Though it is shocking that Boudy thinks the rules should be reversed to see what happens with Dan. For those that weren't around he was pretty vocal about the Fox being at a disadvantage.

First off, you don't know what you're talking about. In 2010 Jerry Jordan and myself offered to pay for track time, provide the cars, drivers, and data acquisition equipment from our own pockets to obtain data to either prove our point or shut us the hell up. Nobody, including management at the time would even acknowledge the Mustang complaint was anything outside of car prep and bad drivers so we couldn't get cooperation or buy in to organize the testing. Frustrated, I was done so I offered my car free of charge to the leading CMC 4th Gen driver at the time for a full season. Declined!!! Was afraid he wouldn't do well and would look bad. (His words, not mine.) Then tried to purchase a 4th Gen for Mosty to drive for a full season but Al and I couldn't agree on $$$. So Mr. BryanL, don't try to trivialize the complaints from back in the day as if you asking for data acquisition is some noble idea because Jerry and I were shot down at every turn. (haha, see what I did there...) Your posturing comment is either truly disingenuous or short sited.

What I find interesting is that nobody, yourself included, is acknowledging that the 2013 changes were based on data acquisition from Mosty and Proctor. The data was examined by all directors with consensus given to make changes appropriately. So you want data, have Al email it to you. Instead of acting as though you were somehow slighted in 2013 and performing the same testing is going prove your point.

You started this bitchfest over 2016 wins, or lack there of for the GM. So honestly answer this. Which GM car in 2016 would have changed the results with 50 lbs less and an additional .75"? You? Dan? Let me give you some data points:

2012 -
Pnts Ran Ave Fin Poles Wins
1 James ProCtor 24 2.0 4 10
2 Daniel AllFord 24 3.0 5 8
3 MiChael Mosty 20 2.4 1 5
11 Glenn Landrum 12 5.7 1
16 Cody Powell 8 4.9 1
20 Derek Wright 4 4.3 1
James and Dan ran equally well. Michael had fewer wins but finish ahead of Dan on average. GM took 19 wins to the Ford's 5 wins. Data acquisition showed a change was necessary.

2013 - New rules in affect.
Pnts Pos Ran Ave Fin Poles Wins
1 Michael Mosty 26 2.3 10
2 James ProCtor 23 3.1 3 4
3 Team Jordan 27 4.7 2
13 Glenn Landrum 12 5.3 1 3
15 Daniel AllFord 12 5.8 4
16 Bryan Curtis 8 2.6 2 2
17 Morgan Dawdy 8 6.9 1
20 Aaron MCSpad 7 3.9 3
22 Derek Wright 4 2.0 2 2
26 Bob Denton 3 5.7 1

Michael clearly wins the most races and has the strongest average finish. However the totals are 15 wins Ford to 14 wins GM. Pretty damn even wouldn't you say? 4 separate 4th gens turned in multiple wins so claiming that the changes hurt them is simple BS. Not to mention, the GM's took EVERY SINGLE POLE in 2013.

2014 - No rule change
Pnts Pos Ran Ave Fin Poles Wins
1 MiChael Mosty 19 3.5 5 6
2 Team Jordan 24 4.9 2
3 Daniel AllFord 22 4.9 3 3
4 Tyler Gardner 20 6.3 1
5 Craig MCCormi 19 6.9 3
12 Glenn Landrum 14 5.7 2 3
15 Kevin Jander 8 5.1 1 1
18 Sammy MCSpa 6 3.5 1
20 Team Purple Fl 4 3.3 1
21 Bryan Curtis 4 3.3 1
23 Sam CrumpaCk 4 11.0 1
Mosty wins again. The wins are 15 Ford and 8 GM. Why? Well Proctor left and Wright didn't return either. To fill that void Tyler showed up and Craig brought his performance up form his previous mid-pack season to both capture an equal number of wins vacated by James and Derek. Poles happened to end up 6 Ford to 5 GM. GM lost 2 A-Game drivers and Ford added 2 A-Game drivers while the rules remained unchanged. Still seems pretty even here too.

2015 - 3rd year with same rules.
Pnts Pos Ran Ave Fin Poles Wins
1 MiChael Mosty 22 4.2 3 7
2 Craig MCCormi 24 3.8 1 2
3 Daniel AllFord 20 4.7 1
4 Gary Robertson 24 8.4 1
7 John Martin 17 8.0 1
8 Bryan Leinart 16 8.9 1
9 Tyler Gardner 16 4.1 1 2
10 David FranCis 17 5.3 3
15 Kevin Jander 8 7.5 1 1
16 Sam CrumpaC 6 10.7 1
17 Aaron MCSpad 4 1.0 4 4
28 Derek Wright 4 5.3 1
Mosty wins again. The wins are 18 Ford and 8 GM. Why? Glenn left taking his average 3 wins with him and Dan didn't turn in his normal performances however he did turn in the GM's only pole of the season. Also Aaron showed up with his "clock cleaner" to tip the scales. GM lost another A-Game driver while Dan had an off season and Ford gained another A-Game driver. Certainly lop-sided but only do to talent exiting/entering the region, not rules changes.

2016 - 4th year with same rules.
Pnts Pos Ran Ave Fin Poles Wins
1 Tyler Gardner 23 3.4 5 8
2 Craig MCCormi 19 4.2 3 6
3 Gary Robertson 19 7.2 1
4 MiChael Mosty 20 4.8 2
6 Daniel AllFord 20 5.1 1
9 David FranCis 19 7.6 2
14 Kevin Jander 10 4.5 2 2
16 Aaron MCSpa 4 2.8 1 2
Tyler picked it up big time over the 2 previous years running the same rules, PERIOD! Totally a dismal year for the GM's but once again Derek Wright didn't return and Dan had a second off season leaving no A-game GM drivers to tow the line. 4 total wins shared by Gary, Dan, and David. Not to insult anyone's ability but Dan is currently the only TX region GM driver who has shown the ability to turn A-game performances since the rules were changed in 2013 yet he hasn't done that since 2014.

The bottom line here is that NO (read NONE, ZERO, NADA) GM showed up in 2016 capable of stopping the current crop of Fords. Current rules have nothing to do with this simple fact.

And although you may think it shocking Bryan, giving Dan a Data Collection Pass would help some people STFU because 50 lbs sure as hell isn't going to fix whatever is wrong with his performance over the past 2 seasons. Furthermore, most of the GM's aren't beating Jerry Jordan who runs 80 lbs heavy so that he doesn't have to add weight for Jay. Chew on that for a minute!

So pick up the phone and get shit straight next time you want to share what you think my motives might be while accusing others of posturing when a simple analysis of race results serves to disprove your point to begin with. (817) 703-1475

Boudy

[GlennCMC70]

I didnt drive the fox all those years ago because there was no winning that deal.
I did well in a 4th gen because I have been driving one for many many years. I DE'ed one for 5 years and then raced another for 6 or 7 more before this was offered to me. If I didn't do well in a new platform that I knew nothing about with a single year to figure it out, all the Ford guys would say "I told you so."

[ShadowBolt]

I didnt drive the fox all those years ago because there was no winning that deal.
I did well in a 4th gen because I have been driving one for many many years. I DE'ed one for 5 years and then raced another for 6 or 7 more before this was offered to me. If I didn't do well in a new platform that I knew nothing about with a single year to figure it out, all the Ford guys would say "I told you so."


Still wish you would have done it. I can't see it taking over a weekend to get used to a different car (once the set-up was to your liking). It would take longer to get the set-up the way you want it than it to get used to it because it is a Mustang and you were used to driving a Camaro.

JJ

[GlennCMC70]

That same can be said today. Let put a fox driver in a 4th gen and watch those track records drop like flies........
Craig validates what the GM folks have said way back in 2010 - about tbe fox not developed. Look @ where his car is now.

As far as me getting back and running up front........ I don't think that will happen. Me drive to win is not there like it was before. I am also not willing to put cubic dollars into it anymore.
I have been told that to be considered having maxed my platform, I need to do a 5 speed conversion, add a fuel cell and 2 piece rear rotors with aluminum hats along with expensive 17x9.5 inch wheels.
I can duplicate my whole current setup for that cost. The series has evolved beyond what I got into it for back in 2005. Back then it was keep it stock and learn to drive. Now it is max the rulebook and hope you can drive better than the next guy.
The sad reality is I have spent more time thinking about where I can race my current car than bringing it back to CMC. The LS conversion is on the table too as I have a 5.3 already.

[Boudy]

That same can be said today. Let put a fox driver in a 4th gen and watch those track records drop like flies........

Call Liebbe, have a conversation, get back to us. Take any previous top GM driver and put him back on the track, the result won't be so lop-sided as in 2016. You averaged 3 wins running partial seasons with these rules Glenn. It's not the rules, there are currently no GM drivers outside of Dan who has proven he can win Qual Races, period. Dan hasn't outrun "Heavy Jerry" for 2 years so how can it be the rules that have been in place for 4 years.



Craig validates what the GM folks have said way back in 2010 - about tbe fox not developed. Look @ where his car is now.

Craig's running the same or strikingly similar setup to mine, Mosty has since changed his. No? Craig also had a new set of tires EVERY event. Tyler is running a completely different setup from Craig so now you're implying that these 2 guys magically found 2 completely different setups from each other that everyone else missed? Bullshit, they both came in each copied one of the 2 popular setups. You can write on a napkin everything needed to make either platform go fast. There's very little development left or even to begin with in these cars so give credit where it's due, those 2 guys are driving there asses off.

The rest of your post we pretty much agree on. I'm only returning because I have a car already and I'll be sharing it with a driving coach.

Boudy

[dtanker65]

At what point did you approach professional coaching? My biggest fear is being too dumb to utilize it.

Right from the start for me. When I was a kid I thought I could teach myself to race motocross by reading every book on the subject, without much success. I promised myself then that if I ever tried racing again I would get training.

Starting out, having the coach in the right seat worked well because I was not a natural. Once I was driving at the club level, the right seat wasn't as useful except to identify something grossly wrong. The extra weight in the right seat throws the cross weight off. The better I get the more subtle the coaching benefits are.

[ShadowBolt]

Dan has beaten Fat ass Jerry more than I have beat him but Dan's old car had something bad wrong that they chased for over a year. I will agree that Dan in the new car is not running away from the 55 anymore but I don't know that the extra weight is the issue (I don't know that it isn't either).


JJ

[Rob Liebbe]

The sad reality is I have spent more time thinking about where I can race my current car than bringing it back to CMC.

Yeah, me too. Part of it is not wanting to damage the car and another very big part is the current tire. I've experienced the thrill of a fresh set of RR's and the agony of defeat 5 heat cycles later. I will admit that I have done nothing to tune the car to the new tires but my car is balanced and predictable on both the RR and RA1 tires. Crumpacker made some amazing moves on me at TWS, on sticker RR's. Michael Mosty does amazing on fresh RR's but has said that he runs slower on cycled out RR's and accepts and manages this based on his chosen racing budget. this . Every time I turn around, there are fresh tires on Craig's car. Pedersen said earlier in this thread that they don't let Dan put too many cycles on RR's because they wouldn't have anything to run in DE's. I'll call a friendly bit of bullshit on that statement as I think Dan is a fairly competitive person and prefers fresher tires, I know I would. And here is my point about the tires, they are too costly to run and stay at the front consistently. McSpadden managed to do it by winning all the time and subsidizing with Toyo bucks and selling his cycled tires. That's great for those who can do it which seems to be against the grassroots and "low" budget form of racing that we all signed up for. With the RR it has become "spend to win". I could probably afford to put new tires on the car for every event, but then I might not be able to make every event due to the increased tire budget. (I know I'm am part-timer anyway) BRING BACK A REASONABLE TIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED A DIFFERENT AND MORE CONSISTENT TIRE. And I know several of you have expressed interest in this as well.

Oh and while you are analyzing all the data, did you include the number of heat cycles in your analysis?

As for Camaro v Mustang. I feel they can both be driven well and fast within the rules but the driving styles are different. For me I like a car that is balanced and easy to drive and I have personally built and tuned a Fox, an SN95, and an LTI 4th Gen Camaro to do this. None of those cars with me driving were trophy queens. The Fox ran at the back of the "front" pack with 5 seasons a fair amount of development and a younger more dedicated driver. The 4th gen Camaro ran in the front of the mid pack within one season after taking that car from a horrible car to a good car with good prep work and some tuning. The SN95 is a fresh "copy" of the Fox with not much racing time under its belt and more development needed for both the car and the now older less dedicated driver.

Isn't this fun!!!! At least that's what I am in it for. And that is also a factor that each and every one of us has to decide for ourselves. We have to decide, within whatever the current rules are, what our goals are within the realm of highly competitive to less competitive. I think we are all competitive to a degree, some more than others. Each of us can decide how much we want to put into it with regards to time, expense, balance the rest of your life, etc. for how far up the race results you want to be. It is unfortunate that the current tire also introduces a significant spending factor.

Sorry for the long post...flame on.

[Boudy]

Well said Mr. Liebbe. However, NASA and Toyo have vested interests in how much we spend on tires. I wish it could be different.

Boudy

[ShadowBolt]

No flame from me Rob. As I have said many times I would like us to go back to 230/300 (I know that will never happen) and a tire that would not fall off and last a season or at least half a season (don't know if that is possible). None of this would get the 55 to the pointy end but would save a lot of money.

JJ

[Boudy]

Now I realize that some Know it All thread Nazi will drop in to remind us that Toyo offers Toyo bucks and so they have to make a profit or it's just not worth it. My response will be that NASA and Toyo have struck a bargain to both gain at our expense. NASA wasn't happy that we pay entrance fees, they want sponsorship dollars too. That's fine and all but at what point do you stop marketing yourself as the affordable spec racing series and acknowledge you're now the big money league just like the series' that you started out to better.

Rules changes have more than doubled the cost to build a competitive CMC car while the new tires has run up the cost of running up front by 3 or 4 times. Two sets of R1A's used to be enough but with increased demand due to upgrades and the change to RR's it seems that it now takes 6 sets of tires to run up front.

Boudy

[Fbody383]

(New tires are) great for those who can do it which seems to be against the grassroots and "low" budget form of racing that we all signed up for. BRING BACK A REASONABLE TIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED A DIFFERENT AND MORE CONSISTENT TIRE. And I know several of you have expressed interest in this as well. My only big push back on Boudy is that the rules and tire changed at the same time. Would the rules have changed the same if the tire had been in play for a year or two prior?

Calling the CMC National Director - how do we the masses get you National/Regional guys to take this up-stream?

At any event(s) we want, we can run any tire a good number of folks choose and just grid AIX.


7.2 Tires/Wheels
Any size readily available commercially sold tire is allowed (racing slicks or DOT tire.) However, AIX
competitors may only use a maximum 18-inch diameter wheel with a maximum width of 13 inches. Tire
shaving, tire grooving and tire treatment is allowed.

[ShadowBolt]

So what do we say to the Mustang guys in every other region of the country that are getting killed by the fourth gen? In Colorado last year (if I read the post correctly) seventeen races and two of those were won by a Mustang. So now we are going to tell those guys they need to add pounds to their car because in Texas the Mustang is winning? Go back and read Al's post. I think he is on the right track in wanting to get data to make sure we did not go too far when the changes were made.

JJ

[cjlmlml]

Oh my gosh that's a lot of words I just read


We can solve this all very easily,


Spec iron

[Boudy]

David, please explain how the tire change effected platform parity in your eyes.

I've given a pretty damn accurate account of the timeline and results we saw for the 4 years since the rules change. This was also accompanied by a logical and reasonable explanation to what happened to GM wins and why they dwindled each year to present. Some guys just don't want reasonable, they don't want logical analysis unless it agrees with them.

What in the eyes of the slighted would actually prove your point here? What markers or results would actually satisfy the perceived grievance? I've stated many times here that, "If we can prove my car needs 25 lbs, then I certainly don't want 50. If we can prove it needs nothing then I'll STFU." We've since got access to data from both platforms, what more is needed? Mosty got his ass kicked in 2012 by Proctor at a 2:1 margin and the data backed it up. So again, WHAT'S THE DESIRED RESULT OF THIS TREAD? Everything needed to substantiate or squash the complaint is painfully obvious and has been provided.

Boudy

[Fbody383]

David, please explain how the tire change effected platform parity in your eyes. Sure.

Were the rules now in effect proposed with or without the knowledge of the impact of the RR?

My position is that the rules and tires changed together - 2 variables at once. The change was made best on analysis of "best available" data, though not necessary on all obtainable data, and appeared to be a reasonable compromise until now. Not that your outside-in view is wrong, I'm saying my in-the-car view is that the mustangs have an advantage approaching such a level that it should be reviewed.

I've said repeatedly I'm kinda-but-not-entirely on the fence. I take Team ARC at their word that they're trying, HARD, to close the gap. I am skeptical that there is any "proof" that under the current rules the RR works as well consistently across the platforms. If it does and we're in the "spend to win" era of CMC then we need to drag that clearly into the sunshine for the CMC racers - so that's part of the desired result.


Rules changes have more than doubled the cost to build a competitive CMC I simply disagree. We are still running a throw-down rebuilt LT1, a self-rebuilt T56, LS1 brakes, the Auburn diff I put in the car in 09, and the shocks from 09. Biggest expense today vs. then is the trans cost.


If we can prove it needs nothing then I'll STFU" Nah... just wouldn't be you. Be good to have you back... bring extra clecos.

[mach1]

Everyone is talking tires, I haven't had anyone agree to run RA1's for 2017, why not, we have nothing to lose, and they may be better with the cycles?
Few other things, Mosty set the ECR record on 15+ HC RR's if I remember, I set the record at Hallett this year on 9HC RR's, I won every race at NOLA on 10+ HC RR's vs Craig's stickers.

[Boudy]

I simply disagree. We are still running a throw-down rebuilt LT1, a self-rebuilt T56, LS1 brakes, the Auburn diff I put in the car in 09, and the shocks from 09.

And maybe, just maybe... This is the real reason for your particular in-the-car view of the Mustangs running $2,500 shocks, $2,300 brakes, $1,000 diffs, $2,500 wheel sets, and 2HC tires. Believe me, I'm not trying to insult you buddy, just pointing out what's hurting you way way more than 50 lbs on your floorboard.

But none the less I hope to see you next season. And all my clecos are all in my dash panel, sorry.

Boudy

[Fbody383]

And maybe, just maybe... You just made the point - what are the CMC rules supposed to do? The big brakes are here to stay and I see both sides.

Wheels could cost $10k but as long as they make minimum weight who cares? If we need to raise the wheel weights (ahem... with permanently attached spacers or not) we can.

Tires are part of the problem. We've yet to make rules changes in light of the current data including the RR.


Everyone is talking tires, I haven't had anyone agree to run RA1's for 2017 I would be open to it if we can get some critical mass.


But none the less I hope to see you next season. ME?!? Where you been... I've been sandbagging for 2 1/2 years so Dan and Al could get a rules breauxk.

[mach1]

I would be open to RA1's if we can get some critical mass.

Alright so thats 2 of us, is anyone opposed to RA1's? Lets make it happen.

[GlennCMC70]

Perhaps we make a new rule.
Drop a finish position for each wear indicator visible on the tire. Cap the limit to 5 spots.
Corded tires advance you two spots.

[AllZWay]

The tires and big brakes were my breaking (braking) point. I just couldn't justify $2500 for effing brakes.

I did look at other places or ways to race my car, but just couldn't find a better place than CMC. The cost just pretty much reached my threshold of willing to pay to play.

[ShadowBolt]

I'm good to go with RA1's. In fact we talked about this once before at the end of the first year the RR came out (mid season if I remember) and I bought two. At the end of the season I had Toyo bucks I had to use. Showed up at Houston and everyone was on RR's. I almost gave them away.

JJ

[mach1]

I'm good to go with RA1's. In fact we talked about this once before at the end of the first year the RR came out (mid season if I remember) and I bought two. At the end of the season I had Toyo bucks I had to use. Showed up at Houston and everyone was on RR's. I almost gave them away.

JJ

Awesome, that's 3, I started a poll to get a solid count.

[Trublu]

Ahhhggggggghhh fuck. Spent an hour waxing lyrical then hit post and the fucker dissapeared into Camaro poo. bugger bloody bum

[BryanL]

Ahhhggggggghhh fuck. Spent an hour waxing lyrical then hit post and the fucker dissapeared into Camaro poo. bugger bloody bum

Hah. I did that to the other day too. I'll get to it next week sometime. It's a long off season.

Though how about a posting rule if you haven't raced in Cmc since the rules change or ever then your not allowed to rent and attack everyone else in a thread about parity. Lol.

[Boudy]

Though how about a posting rule if you haven't raced in Cmc since the rules change or ever then your not allowed to rent and attack everyone else in a thread about parity. Lol.

+1

Also ban anyone with an opinion that differs from Bryan's. Lol.

Boudy

[dtanker65]

Ahhhggggggghhh fuck. Spent an hour waxing lyrical then hit post and the fucker dissapeared into Camaro poo. bugger bloody bum

Darn! I was looking forward to some lyrical waxings :-)

Some of you guys want to run the rain tire in the dry?

[Fbody383]

Some of you guys want to run the rain tire in the dry? Before the RRs, and before the then current version of the RA1s you could, as I remember it, literally run competitively the entire season on 6-8 tires, flipped and well managed as long as they stayed round. One of the reasons I bought a tire machine - I counted up close to $300 worth of tire stuff I needed done.

[dtanker65]

Before the RRs, and before the then current version of the RA1s you could, as I remember it, literally run competitively the entire season on 6-8 tires, flipped and well managed as long as they stayed round. One of the reasons I bought a tire machine - I counted up close to $300 worth of tire stuff I needed done.

I am asking, not trying to create controversy. I ran my RA1's in the on and off rain at Cresson this season. They are not shaved and 3 years old, run only one other time in the rain. When the track started to dry out they were noticeably slower than the RR's and looked pretty ripped up after one stint in the semi-dry. The current RA1 is 40 utqg same as the RR and they are no cheaper.

I don't begrudge the guys able to run at the front for going out on new, free rubber that they have won.
To the victor belong the spoils. I was grateful to get some of the McSpadden's scrubs. It let me work on the driver and setup in practice without wringing my hands about using expensive new tires for training.

[ShadowBolt]

I thought the "thin to win" was with the old RA1 before the 888? I'm not sure the RA1 is any better at not dropping off with heat cycles but I'm willing to try them again.

JJ

[Fbody383]

I don't begrudge the guys able to run at the front for going out on new, free rubber that they have won. You're asking the right question.

The reaction, or pushback, is that with the "old" RA1, you didn't have to have new tires to run up front. The common "thin to win" phrase originated there, that guys would put on well worn RA1s that had been conditioned into slicks. As I remember I used to get a think 4.5/32" shave on the RA1s to not chunk tread.

Not sure about the new RTriple8 - I will tell you my recollection of a year on 888s and thought they were absolutely horrible.

[marshall_mosty]

I agree the original 888's were awful. Several "pro" series also changed to that for 2098 and hardly lasted a season...
The "old" RA1's could just about go to the cords and not fall off. The only guys doing the one set per weekend seemed to be the Miata group since they can cover 30 cars with 20 feet of track they are so close and need every bit of advantage.

[dtanker65]

It would be interesting to see how a new set of shaved RA1's do with a very consistent driver. I wonder if the current RA1 compound is the same as the old tire. When doing some tire research I remember being told the RR was developed to replace the shaved RA1 due to the problem of the shoulders cording on shaved RA1's. They increased the rubber thickness on the shoulder.

How do the historic lap times compare with today? I sometimes feel like I am chasing a moving target, most of the group seems to get faster every season. Just when I think I am getting close, the goalposts move. I like it!

[Pranav]

Let's all just run the Nitto NT-01s if they are truly the original RA1 compound.

To keep NASA and Toyo happy let's just go with this route:
https://www.tirestickers.com/tire-stencils-tire-paint-overview/