Flying Fred said:
Seems to me that the 2000 R is more suited to be an AIX car anyway... even stock it's not legal for AI.
2005 AI rules are out
- Thread starter b_tone
- Start date
Seems to me that the 2000 R is more suited to be an AIX car anyway... even stock it's not legal for AI.
Just my opinion
Mark can answer your question. I am not sure. Here's my opinion of the NASA classes that the Mustangs can run in (they have a spec Factory Five [Shelby] Cobra class and GTS classes that run in the same big bore group).
Camaro Mustang Challenge (CMC): mostly stock class (no M. Cobra's). This is a great class for someone who is on a budget. Tight rules. Fun racing. I'd go here.
AI: The HP/TRQ to weight rules keep the field fairly competitive. Spec tires. The best engineered car with the best driver should win.
AIX: Mostly wide open. Run what you brung. The guy with the most money wins. You can be the best driver in the field and someone will come in with a acid-dipped BIW, 700 HP NASCAR engine, a wind tunnel aero package, paid crew members, and the lastest and greatest light weight suspension parts to beat you. You better have a fat wallet if you want to do well here. :burnout:
racer726 said:
Mark can answer your question. I am not sure. Here's my opinion of the NASA classes that the Mustangs can run in (they have a spec Factory Five [Shelby] Cobra class and GTS classes that run in the same big bore group).
Camaro Mustang Challenge (CMC): mostly stock class (no M. Cobra's). This is a great class for someone who is on a budget. Tight rules. Fun racing. I'd go here.
AI: The HP/TRQ to weight rules keep the field fairly competitive. Spec tires. The best engineered car with the best driver should win.
AIX: Mostly wide open. Run what you brung. The guy with the most money wins. You can be the best driver in the field and someone will come in with a acid-dipped BIW, 700 HP NASCAR engine, a wind tunnel aero package, paid crew members, and the lastest and greatest light weight suspension parts to beat you. You better have a fat wallet if you want to do well here. :burnout:
From what I've always read in the rule book, Unless your keeping your vehicle some what stock. Everything pushes you into AIX class. Their doesn't seem to be a happy medium.
I was told a stock 2000R would be a legal AI car. The weight to HP and torque ratios are both acceptable. My car with me in it has a ratio of 9.7:1 (limit is not below 9.5 if I remember correctly).racer726 said:
A stock 2000R would get blown out of the water in AIX. Chris Griswold (OH/IN champ), Gene Borton and my friend Jeremy all run that class and all those guys have 700+ HP. Plus the cars are completely gutted (<3000 pounds) and have all sorts of suspension and other mods.
I pretty much agree with your descriptions Doc. I noticed at Putnam that the lap times for the AI guys were all very close. On the track it was not uncommon to see a group of them bunched up (which was great fun to watch at Putnam where you can see the entire track quite well).1995COBRA-R said:
I agree that in general AI rules give "the best driver" a good chance to win. The downside is that because it is so close, this group has a lot of incidents. I guess that's racing.
As for AIX, can you say "money pit"? You are absolutely right about the size of the wallet being the biggest factor.
Flying Fred said:
Aside from the heavy stock wheels, I agree
stang99svt said:
That's not true at all. CMC is basically stock but AI give you a lot of lead way in the suspension (except IRS
). You just have to make the power to weight ratio.
racer726 said:Aside from the heavy stock wheels, I agree
You would have to change wheels any way since 18 rims are illegal in AI.
Dean95CobraR said:
WTF! Exactly my point, stock wheels, stock car illegal... just trying to cheer up Fast Fred regarding the stock R not being legal anyway... I know the wheels would be changed by anyone displaying the slightest bit of common sense. Jeez, OK, I know it wasn't really funny, but let's apply a little logic at least.
Since I got rid of my stock wheels 3 years ago and have only run 17" since, that flew right by me.racer726 said:
Just curious. Why did you use the smaller diameter wheels? Availability of race tires? Does everyone do that? How wide a wheel will fit on the car?Flying Fred said:
I should note another race class for NASA in the big bore group: AIV (American Iron Vintage). The rules are a little vague, and I have no idea if all the regions will let the group run. If you have an older car, they will no longer stick you in AIX.
Doc
I have 2 sets of 95R 17" wheels and 1 set of 18" steeda ultralight wheels for track tires....the 17" are about $40 per tire cheaper, and thats good enough reason to save $160 on a set of four for me! :thumbsup:
I do like the performance of the 18" a little better, maybe due to lower profile tires and less tire flexing? :shrug:
I do like the performance of the 18" a little better, maybe due to lower profile tires and less tire flexing? :shrug:
A couple of reasons. As Ken noted 17" tires are usually cheaper. Even more importantly there is a far greater range of tires you can select from (both brands and widths). Finally - and perhaps the biggest reason at that time - was that Jeremy really wanted my 18" 00R wheels, so we switched (he had 17x9 95R wheels).1995COBRA-R said:
As for "how wide", my CCWs are 17x10.5 in front and 17x11 in back.
I'm sure your aware of this Fred but you would need to get a set of narrower rims as I limits you to 17X9.5"
Mark and Brian,
Sorry to hear about that. I have been around 1/4 mile and dirt track oval racing all of my life. Same story, different series.
Unfortunately, your scenario is common when asking the official if your intentions are within the rule book. When you were asking they probably didn't have a problem with it. Now that the car has proven itself successful, others are looking at it harder and trying to justify the reason it is faster. That has been determined by "illegal" parts giving you an unfair advantage. (I am using the logic of your competitors and race organizers.)
Racing, no matter the series, is maximizing the rule book to your advantage. Reading between the lines and using all you can is what separates the successful from the wanna be racers. You guys pushed the envelope with this car and for that I commend you. It furthered the series. Now, they have found an infraction (in their eyes) and are holding you to it.
Is there any way you can modify/re-design this arm to clear the frame? Would it be "legal" to weld in a patch in the frame rail to re-create the proper curvature of the frame rail? In short, can you work within the rule book as it is being interpreted and still run the IRS with modifications?
Tom
Sorry to hear about that. I have been around 1/4 mile and dirt track oval racing all of my life. Same story, different series.
Unfortunately, your scenario is common when asking the official if your intentions are within the rule book. When you were asking they probably didn't have a problem with it. Now that the car has proven itself successful, others are looking at it harder and trying to justify the reason it is faster. That has been determined by "illegal" parts giving you an unfair advantage. (I am using the logic of your competitors and race organizers.)
Racing, no matter the series, is maximizing the rule book to your advantage. Reading between the lines and using all you can is what separates the successful from the wanna be racers. You guys pushed the envelope with this car and for that I commend you. It furthered the series. Now, they have found an infraction (in their eyes) and are holding you to it.
Is there any way you can modify/re-design this arm to clear the frame? Would it be "legal" to weld in a patch in the frame rail to re-create the proper curvature of the frame rail? In short, can you work within the rule book as it is being interpreted and still run the IRS with modifications?
Tom
Mark and Brian in HR mag
The famous blue '04 BIW AI car is featured in the Jan. '05 issue of HotRod mag with plenty of ink.
Great stuff! I assume the article was done before the '05 rule package was released?
Mark= 2 features in mags in one year!
The famous blue '04 BIW AI car is featured in the Jan. '05 issue of HotRod mag with plenty of ink.
Great stuff! I assume the article was done before the '05 rule package was released?
Mark= 2 features in mags in one year!
tomshep said:
Tom,
We could add a patch panel but we still couldn't use the modified KB IRS module. The rules honestly don't make any sense and that is the problem. Why would you allow unlimited modifications to a solid axle system but require everything on an IRS system to remain stock except bushings and control arms. We have also proved that you can't make an aftermarket upper arm for an IRS kit without being forced to cast it which is obviously cost prohibitive.
Doc - You'll see a few more articles on the car before it's over. That article was shot in October at the same time they were running the 05 Mustang at Milan.
kevin
New Member
hehehehe.........................hence the moniker...............flying fred.Flying Fred said:
i just couldn't stop myself and me wanted nothing to do with it
Anyone know how the rules effect the S197 platform? It doesn't exclude the '05 (but is written for the Fox platform). :shrug:
I think the '05 would be perfect for CMC and AI. OK, it does need to go on a diet.
I think the '05 would be perfect for CMC and AI. OK, it does need to go on a diet.
I posted that question on nasaforums.com and was told they will be putting out a tech bulletin regarding the S197 one of these days.
Users who are viewing this thread
