Where'd the S197 go?

Questions and answers about CMC and NASA rules

Moderator: Al Fernandez

User avatar
wastntim
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:07 pm

Postby wastntim » Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:12 am

Steve91T wrote:
cozog wrote:Adding 100hp/tq will put us in AI territory. Adding more hp increases cost exponentially. Think of the rear susp issues for SN95/Fox. The whole thing would need to be redone. Not mention brakes, cooling, diffs, etc. that will wear out so much faster.

Personally, I'd love to see a modern Camaro/Mustang/challenger/charger series with limited or spec modifications. Maybe SI will grow into that... dunno. But CMC is prob never going to be at those power levels as it totally changes everything, especially cost.

I think there's more opportunity to dumb down 2005+ cars than trying to upgrade 30 year old fox/3rd gens. What about new v6 cars? They're at 300/280... just saying.


I think 50 rwhp is all it would take, but you are right, it'll add cost. I just hope we can keep CMC alive.

The new V6 cars is a very good idea. Those cars are really cheap and might actually handle better with less weight up front. If they can get them light enough, those cars might actually run well with us.


I don't think it was power as much as it was handling. I would have liked to see us open up rules to the older cars to make them handle better. I don't know what would be cost effective, but I'm sure there are options.
Robert #24
NASA Midwest - CMC2
HeavyImpactMotorsports@gmail.com
Sponsor: Cassidy Tire/Tiresdirect.net & CTW Motorsports

nape
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:50 pm
Location: In the garage

Postby nape » Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:53 am

Steve91T wrote:I think 50 rwhp is all it would take, but you are right, it'll add cost. I just hope we can keep CMC alive.

The new V6 cars is a very good idea. Those cars are really cheap and might actually handle better with less weight up front. If they can get them light enough, those cars might actually run well with us.


50RWHP would put you right at the power of my AI engine. If people think they broke/wore out a lot more stuff from 230RWHP to 260RWHP, bumping another 50RWHP is a real wake up call.

If you're going to bump 50RWHP and you want to run with S197s, just slap some AI stickers on it, tow to Great Lakes, and join the madness. :lol:
TJ Bain
Midwest AI #134
Midwest CMC #66

Supercharged111
Posts: 373
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:18 am
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Postby Supercharged111 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:20 am

I finally got off my ass and cracked open the AI and SI rules. My car with no ballast at 3200# min comp weight could run 355whp and 376lb/ft of torque which should be about 400hp/425tq at the crank. Even a 50hp jump would really blur the line between CMC and AI IMO, I always thought there was a bigger gap. SI at min comp weight of 3350 only allows 285/285.

I really believe that the 5th gen would be a monster to have to fit and that the V6 might help even things out, but does it make the torque? Thing is, even if you are 4,000#, that doesn't mean much in a straight line at high speeds as your rate of acceleration is dropping. The more transient you are, the more you notice the weight. AFAIK, the current CMC cap of 267whp came about because a certain member took the weight with the power and his car went faster. This is why allowing the 5th gen with a V8 to make more power to compensate for its weight would, IMO, make it a real wild card.

I feel I should mention that I don't want to discourage including these cars in the field, rather these are more my thoughts on the challenges of doing so. If I'm full of it, well then, I stand to learn something.
Rocky Mountain CMC Director
#45 Camaro Challenge Race Car

blk96gt
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:23 am
Location: Houston, Tx

Postby blk96gt » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:33 am

Can't an 11+ Mustang already run AI and be fairly competitive with minimal modifications?

User avatar
cozog
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:14 am
Location: Avon, IN

Postby cozog » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:40 am

blk96gt wrote:Can't an 11+ Mustang already run AI and be fairly competitive with minimal modifications?


Yes. that's why AI in the GL/MW region is called Spec Mustang. Hard for anything else but S197 to be competitive.

Ford spent a lot of money developing the S197 to be competitive in racing. If you've got the cash, you can buy a race car right from the factory and win.

Hence the reason why the S197 was so over the top compared to older CMC cars.
Todd Johnston, #59

blk96gt
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:23 am
Location: Houston, Tx

Postby blk96gt » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:46 am

Is the 5th Gen Camaro allowed in AI?

Supercharged111
Posts: 373
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:18 am
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Postby Supercharged111 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:03 am

Everything's allowed in AI from like 1960.

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/amer ... _rules.pdf

4. Eligible Manufacturers/Models/Configurations
a) All 1960 through present, American-made sedan vehicles/body styles certified by the United States
Department of Transportation for street use at their date of manufacture. (OEM and aftermarket “Body in
White” type vehicle shells are allowed provided the body style is the same as original DOT manufacture.)
b) 100-inch wheel base minimum.
c) Front engine.
d) Rear wheel drive
e) Solid rear axle or approved independent rear suspension (IRS)*
* See Rule 6.1.3 and Rule 6.2.3
f) No full tube frame chassis conversions will be allowed.*
*See Rule 7.3.3
g) Vehicle must retain its stock front clip, floorpan, and subframe, but certain modifications are allowed
per the rules.
h) “OEM” for purposes of these rules is defined as Ford Motor Company, General Motors, or Chrysler
Group LLC. OEM also includes tuner/racer package cars such as Shelby, Roush, Saleen, Hennesey,
FR500 and others provided the vehicle body meets the rules herein OEM does not include small volume
specialty manufacturers such as Short Wheelbase (SWB) Thunderbirds where base vehicle bodies
dimensionally differ from the final OEM product.
Rocky Mountain CMC Director
#45 Camaro Challenge Race Car

blk96gt
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:23 am
Location: Houston, Tx

Postby blk96gt » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:29 am

I think that CMC is the wrong place for the 2011+ Mustangs and 5th Gens. They either need their own class or run in AI. The purpose of CMC is low cost racing. I think this includes cost to build and maintenance costs. While I think the maintenance cost has the potential to be lower for a 5th Gen or Mustang due to them being newer, the up front cost to build the car is much higher.

I'll use a 5th Gen as an example since I know more about that car. The car itself is going to run about $25,000 for something with less than 100k miles. You will definitely need some new wheels, and from my research when I had my Camaro you're looking at around $2,000-$3,000 for two sets of good 18" wheels. I'm not sure how much a cage would cost, but probably somewhere in the $3000-$5000 range. Add in seats and other safety equipment and you're at $1000 or more depending on what seats/belts you go with. Add in another $2,000 for all the other random crap you'll have to do, and you're up to $33,000 to build this car, and I believe that's a very conservative estimate. You could build a very competitive CMC car for less than just the cost of a 5th Gen.

I would think a 2011 Mustang would have similar costs.

Supercharged111
Posts: 373
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:18 am
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Postby Supercharged111 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:38 am

Which is part of why I think that it's going to be a while before people are going to want to CMC a 5th gen, if ever? I think a lot of this is region specific too. Out here in CO, old cars don't rot and the winter's are more cold than snow, so I see a lot more of these sports cars here than I did back home in MI. Makes me wonder if building a newer car isn't more appealing in the snow belt where rust free examples don't fall from the trees? Then there's TX, where any class with a Camaro or Mustang thrives!
Rocky Mountain CMC Director
#45 Camaro Challenge Race Car

User avatar
TX#11CMC
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby TX#11CMC » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:38 am

I purchased a used 09 S197 three years ago with the purpose of driving it for a few years and then converting it to my next CMC car. I was extremely frustrated when the rules were changed to super skinny tires, then back to normal tires but super heavy with low HP. I didn't think these drastic measures needed to happen.......until I drove my street car on track.

I have a 99% stock S197 (has flowmasters!!) and with a worn out set of bald RA1's ran 4 seconds off the CMC lap record at our local track in Fort Worth, TX. Lap record was a low 1:24 and I ran consistent 1:28's. This was at 3700 lbs, stock shocks, stock alignment, stock brakes / fluid, etc.
The platform clearly is the weapon to have, unless major changes were made to the rules.

I now have no clue what the future is for my car. I'll continue to race my Fox in CMC and see how SI grows.
-Michael Mosty
TX region #11
"Fox" driver and lovin it!!!
Texas Region - CMC Director

Sidney
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:09 pm
Location: Bloomington, IL

Postby Sidney » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:40 am

cozog wrote:Hence the reason why the S197 was so over the top compared to older CMC cars.


Todd,

You need to go back and review the results from the Midwest & Great Lakes when Anders was running his S197. Kent, Bob, and others all had their day beating him. For Christ sakes I even beat him at Putnum with an underprepped 3rd gen. Anders was a fast driver in a brand new build but he did not run away with every race.

Sidney

User avatar
BADVENM
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:00 pm
Location: Goodland, KS

Postby BADVENM » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:11 am

TX#11CMC wrote:I purchased a used 09 S197 three years ago with the purpose of driving it for a few years and then converting it to my next CMC car. I was extremely frustrated when the rules were changed to super skinny tires, then back to normal tires but super heavy with low HP. I didn't think these drastic measures needed to happen.......until I drove my street car on track.

I have a 99% stock S197 (has flowmasters!!) and with a worn out set of bald RA1's ran 4 seconds off the CMC lap record at our local track in Fort Worth, TX. Lap record was a low 1:24 and I ran consistent 1:28's. This was at 3700 lbs, stock shocks, stock alignment, stock brakes / fluid, etc.
The platform clearly is the weapon to have, unless major changes were made to the rules.

I now have no clue what the future is for my car. I'll continue to race my Fox in CMC and see how SI grows.


Whats the base horsepower and torque? I'm guessing more then your CMC car thus faster lap times? Or was the hp per pound about the same as your CMC car?
NASA Rocky Mountain - Camaro-Mustang Challenge car #8 Team Incidental Contact
3rd Place CMC - 2010 NASA National Championship
3rd Place CMC - 2015 NASA West Coast Championship PTB

suck fumes
Posts: 458
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:21 pm

Postby suck fumes » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:40 am

Base power avg is 270ish HP and 290ish tq bone stock.
2013 CMC NATIONAL CHAMPION

Motorsportheaven.com

User avatar
TX#11CMC
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby TX#11CMC » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:43 am

BADVENM wrote:
TX#11CMC wrote:I purchased a used 09 S197 three years ago with the purpose of driving it for a few years and then converting it to my next CMC car. I was extremely frustrated when the rules were changed to super skinny tires, then back to normal tires but super heavy with low HP. I didn't think these drastic measures needed to happen.......until I drove my street car on track.

I have a 99% stock S197 (has flowmasters!!) and with a worn out set of bald RA1's ran 4 seconds off the CMC lap record at our local track in Fort Worth, TX. Lap record was a low 1:24 and I ran consistent 1:28's. This was at 3700 lbs, stock shocks, stock alignment, stock brakes / fluid, etc.
The platform clearly is the weapon to have, unless major changes were made to the rules.

I now have no clue what the future is for my car. I'll continue to race my Fox in CMC and see how SI grows.


Whats the base horsepower and torque? I'm guessing more then your CMC car thus faster lap times? Or was the hp per pound about the same as your CMC car?

I have never dyno'd it but almost all stock S197's I have heard make around 265 hp.
-Michael Mosty
TX region #11
"Fox" driver and lovin it!!!
Texas Region - CMC Director

Den34
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 6:54 pm
Location: Eureka IL

Postby Den34 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:03 pm

OK I will take the bait and be the contrarian but this is the way I see it.
Boil it down to a 2010 Camaro and a 84 Camaro, These cars are miles apart Horsepower,IRS, engine technology, Suspension technology and 18 pound wheels :) :lol: ......the same goes for the Fox and the S197... CMC came to a cross roads about two years ago and the choices where bring the old cars up to higher competitive levels or bring the few new cars down to current levels...The choice was made to handicap the newer cars and it really did not work out. So now we have chosen to eliminate the newer cars and I am just fine with that.

CMC no longer has to worry about getting new cars to "Fit" and the old cars no longer have to worry about upgrades to keep up with the newer cars that would keep coming into the class. CMC now has its boundaries 1978-2004 Mustangs and 1982-2002 F bodies. There are lots of classes that have boundaries. Spec miata, Spec E30, Spec 944.
I realise that CMC is not a Spec class but it may evolve in that direction. With multiple models it will never be a true spec class and that is what makes CMC so great. From here on out I think the rules will become much more stable. Stable rules will make for a healthy class. With boundaries we will be much easier to tweak the rules for healthy and even competition between the platforms. With the new rules additions it will allow the competitor some sensible and lower cost solutions to getting a competitive car on the track. Keeping the costs down and the cars reliable is the key. Continue to do that I think CMC will be just fine.
Bob Denton
CMC #67
2000 Pontiac Firebird
Midwest Region Series Director


Return to “Rules Questions/Answers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest