see, your getting it. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Printable View
see, your getting it. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
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
[img]http:\\www.jpmotorsports.biz\smilies\popcorn.gif[/img]
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.
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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
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?....Quote:
Originally Posted by Fbody383
Let's get past this already and start talking about LS1's in Mustangs for -2!!! LOL!!!! :P
THANK YOU! just don't want Jason to be the only one out thereQuote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
What is TOTAL cost?... and does it include engine controls?Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
IS IT!! I really need to know...Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Gary did you look up Rosehill performance? What about rebuild kits?Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
I have 3 on the shop floor that need rebuilt and 2 more need road racing 5th (5 5th gears total)
AMEN BROTHER... (did I just agree with Mitch? actually I usually do)Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
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!Quote:
Originally Posted by David Love AI27
Reality is a bitch sometimes.....BUT, make a freakin' decision already!!!
DAMNIT... could you just stop being Matt for just a second?!?! :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by AI#97
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Love AI27
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.
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:Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelmosty
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...
Shouldn't you be dragging Mitch into something? Not me...Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
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.
Like "lets throw 50 lbs on the problem... that will fix it" :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelmosty
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Love AI27
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.
here is an option: masterbating with sand paper while banging your head against the wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by AI#97
your words, not mine
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Love AI27
Dude, what are you talking about? :lol:Quote:
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.
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.
Sorry for buttin' in on the off topic discussion :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
I know, I know... Rookies...
the poor health of your motor is your problem. my motor was a 80K junkyard salvage that made 280/320hp/tq unrestricted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fbody383
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.
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.
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....?Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Not placing blame... I understand the progression... as a racer you always want to have more power and to go faster, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
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.
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!
before I agree... do you want to edit yours and I'll delete mine 8)Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
Cuz I will... otherwise I like 230 for aLL
Fine; but resolving it for either class may, or may not, be inexpensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fbody383
plate size and hp/tq numbers again please?
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
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?
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
I completely agree!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
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 :PQuote:
Originally Posted by michaelmosty