S197 Carmin - T3 Project Build Thread Profile - S197 Mustangs

[ajaquilante]

1. If you want to run T2, go with a 5.0L.
2. T3 has different rules and allowances than T4. The T4 car has been allowed to upgrade to a lof 11-14 GT parts
3. The modifications or changes aren't just limited to what is on the specline. You've got to read all the Touring (T2-T4) allowances and apply what is allow for all T-Classes. Then more confusion when some rules say T2 only, or T2/T3 only.
3a. Shocks are basically open, and springs are open up to a certain rate(you don't want to go above that rate anyway) Swaybars are limited to the Ford Racing Bars
Cooling is basically open with some limits, ( engine oil, trans, diff, radiator) exahsut open past the stock manifolds. and so on.
4. The spec line parts are parts you can use if you want. So the rear control arms, panhard rod and some bits from Ford Racing are allowed. The shock tower brace is just dead weight.

 

[Bill Pemberton]

You have two options, and as a member of SCCA and NASA, I can say both have their strengths and weaknesses. You car should probably fall in the ST/TT4 category with NASA and it may not be as difficult to meet the standards. Just a thought, because you can check both series and see what would be the easiest to accomplish. Andrew stated quite well to really dig into the specs and if he states you need to go only with a 5.0 take it for gospel -- he is a multi time SCCA National Champion and he and his father have set up vehicles for many other National Champions and competitors.

Rules seem to go in cycles , the minute things get simpler, a new Board is installed and a new stamp is put on things. Good luck and welcome to the Credit Card of the Month Club , ha.

 

[Kitakaze]

1. If you want to run T2, go with a 5.0L.
2. T3 has different rules and allowances than T4. The T4 car has been allowed to upgrade to a lof 11-14 GT parts
3. The modifications or changes aren't just limited to what is on the specline. You've got to read all the Touring (T2-T4) allowances and apply what is allow for all T-Classes. Then more confusion when some rules say T2 only, or T2/T3 only.
3a. Shocks are basically open, and springs are open up to a certain rate(you don't want to go above that rate anyway) Swaybars are limited to the Ford Racing Bars
Cooling is basically open with some limits, ( engine oil, trans, diff, radiator) exahsut open past the stock manifolds. and so on.
4. The spec line parts are parts you can use if you want. So the rear control arms, panhard rod and some bits from Ford Racing are allowed. The shock tower brace is just dead weight.

I appreciate the advice.

Yeah, I'm under no otherworldly belief that I would be remotely competitive in T2 with a V6. Especially not when most everything else would outclass me by quite a bit of power, torque, and grip. If I ever get bored and want to remove the restrictor off the V6 in many (add a few more many's here) years time, and they still allow the 2011 V6 to compete in T2, I'll try it then.

Unfortunately, I think I'll have to rely on the advice of Bill and blacksheep's advice on consulting the SCCA tech guys. I've been pouring through the rules and that's where I've come across things that both make sense on paper but not as much in practice. And to that, for 3a you mentioned shocks are basically open. I'll ask the tech to confirm, but, to the best of your knowledge, does that also include struts (or switching to coilovers)? Or is that explicitly just the shocks?

And yeah, my plans do include grabbing a bunch of the Ford Performance parts, or a like-substitute since that rule was introduced (if, again, I read it right) in the March regs update. A little sad to hear the brace is just dead weight. I guess I'll keep it around for looks until I really get the car in race ready condition.

And again, thanks for the input! Every little bit that I can learn helps.

 

[Kitakaze]

You have two options, and as a member of SCCA and NASA, I can say both have their strengths and weaknesses. You car should probably fall in the ST/TT4 category with NASA and it may not be as difficult to meet the standards. Just a thought, because you can check both series and see what would be the easiest to accomplish. Andrew stated quite well to really dig into the specs and if he states you need to go only with a 5.0 take it for gospel -- he is a multi time SCCA National Champion and he and his father have set up vehicles for many other National Champions and competitors.

Rules seem to go in cycles , the minute things get simpler, a new Board is installed and a new stamp is put on things. Good luck and welcome to the Credit Card of the Month Club , ha.

Oh, every little bit of advice from everyone, whether they are national champs or weekend warriors, is definitely taken in. I'll look into NASA rules, too. I'll admit to being a bit less informed about NASA purely because I haven't given them as much thought as they deserve or as I should.

And, since this is coming down the line, I did get Ruby some new dancing shoes... in a bit of a bargain bin type deal. I happened to find a good deal on Firehawks, even though you are right and there are much better tires, even in category, available. So while they won't be the best 275s I'll ever strap on the car, it should be an upgrade over the stock tires (225s, because Ford definitely helped the whole "rental car" vibe with as much efficiency as possible) and will probably give me a better appreciation for those much better tires in the future.

 

[ajaquilante]

Shocks and struts are open, coil overs allowed as long as it fits between the OEM mounting points. You can use camber plates. Springs are open up to a spec'ed rate. They can be "racing" type small ID springs vs the oem/oem replacement types.

As far as parts go, its has to be what is on the specline, UNLESS the general rules are open. The example they give is for a shock part number, which was probably more geared towards T4 because that class rules were more limited ( T4 only allowed non-adjustable, and on some cars were spec'ed as to what they could use. Example, The T4 Mustang could only use the FRPP kit until recently.)

Sorry to ruin the strut brace thing, when we got to the point of looking for weight to take out, it was in the wrong place and easy to pull, never looked back since.

IMO its tricky to slowly build a car to a racing rulebook like the SCCA's because the rules are tougher to understand and you have to use certain pieces. The NASA path is easier as (most) everything is open, but you could spend a ton going one direction and then have to re-do things as you change other things. Neither is cheap however.

To me, for an S197, in the T3 speed realm, like the V6 car, the parts list allowed, coupled with the rules makes a fun car, reliable, but also decently quick car. A lot of stuff from Ford Racing goes into that doesn't break the bank and works quite reliability. The only piece that is allowed that I don't recommend and we stopped using was the prothane front control arm bushings. Those things were junk and only lasted a session or two sometimes.

 

[Kitakaze]

Shocks and struts are open, coil overs allowed as long as it fits between the OEM mounting points. You can use camber plates. Springs are open up to a spec'ed rate. They can be "racing" type small ID springs vs the oem/oem replacement types.

As far as parts go, its has to be what is on the specline, UNLESS the general rules are open. The example they give is for a shock part number, which was probably more geared towards T4 because that class rules were more limited ( T4 only allowed non-adjustable, and on some cars were spec'ed as to what they could use. Example, The T4 Mustang could only use the FRPP kit until recently.)

Sorry to ruin the strut brace thing, when we got to the point of looking for weight to take out, it was in the wrong place and easy to pull, never looked back since.

IMO its tricky to slowly build a car to a racing rulebook like the SCCA's because the rules are tougher to understand and you have to use certain pieces. The NASA path is easier as (most) everything is open, but you could spend a ton going one direction and then have to re-do things as you change other things. Neither is cheap however.

To me, for an S197, in the T3 speed realm, like the V6 car, the parts list allowed, coupled with the rules makes a fun car, reliable, but also decently quick car. A lot of stuff from Ford Racing goes into that doesn't break the bank and works quite reliability. The only piece that is allowed that I don't recommend and we stopped using was the prothane front control arm bushings. Those things were junk and only lasted a session or two sometimes.

That's good to know for the shocks/struts/coilovers. That part will make a difference once I understand what my Mustang will and won't do. I'll upgrade those down the line once I have a bit of track time under my belt and a better understanding of my car.

As for that shock part example, I was reading it more as allowing for like-parts to be substituted, not so much a T4-type ruling. Is that how they have been interpreting that so far for the new addition that was added? If so, then that doubly damns the strut tower brace since the one I have is for the Boss 302 and isn't the M-20201-F that they show in the spec line (not that I can find that anywhere anyway). But good to know in general that the strut tower brace isn't worth the weight it comes with. I'd rather know that early on and plan for it than not know at all.

I did take a look at the NASA rules, and this may just be me, but I'm under the opinion that the SCCA rules, while convoluted at times, still makes it a bit easier (at least for Touring). Mostly because they lay out a lot of the parts that you can use and, in most cases, you can assume you just can't use parts that aren't listed. The points system for the power to weight in ST/TT does actually follow closer to what I want to shoot for in GRIDLIFE eventually, but still seems a bit confusing to me.

But thanks for the advice about what may and may not work as well for the V6. It's still early days on this build, but I'll hope to have some more pictures and updates of the build in the next week or so.

 

[ajaquilante]

As for that shock part example, I was reading it more as allowing for like-parts to be substituted, not so much a T4-type ruling. Is that how they have been interpreting that so far for the new addition that was added? If so, then that doubly damns the strut tower brace since the one I have is for the Boss 302 and isn't the M-20201-F that they show in the spec line (not that I can find that anywhere anyway). But good to know in general that the strut tower brace isn't worth the weight it comes with. I'd rather know that early on and plan for it than not know at all.

Are you refering to this new line or something else? - "Spec lines may include modifications that are “permitted” or “allowed”. This means that they are a permitted as alternatives to the allowances written into the category rules. For example “Koni shock #xxxxxxx allowed” implies that you could use the Koni option or any option that complies with the category rules."

SCCA Touring rules stops you from going too far off cliff. Doesn't allow crazy stuff (like aero and big suspension changes(like pickup points, or watts/torque arm stuff)

Nasa is just a different way. Easier to run what you already have, but putting absolute faith in running a car on the dyno for compliance is a bit hard for me to take seriously.

 

[Kitakaze]

Are you refering to this new line or something else? - "Spec lines may include modifications that are “permitted” or “allowed”. This means that they are a permitted as alternatives to the allowances written into the category rules. For example “Koni shock #xxxxxxx allowed” implies that you could use the Koni option or any option that complies with the category rules."

SCCA Touring rules stops you from going too far off cliff. Doesn't allow crazy stuff (like aero and big suspension changes(like pickup points, or watts/torque arm stuff)

Nasa is just a different way. Easier to run what you already have, but putting absolute faith in running a car on the dyno for compliance is a bit hard for me to take seriously.

Yeah, I'm referring to that new line. I'm talking with my region's local tech guy to see what he thinks the interpretation is. But I had read it as "if part x is allowed, then any part that does the same function as x is also allowed."

And yeah, I can see what you mean after looking at the NASA rules for ST/TT. It definitely allows much more freedom to build the car how you want, but you have to make sure that you are compliant by checking up on the points system and verifying your numbers versus what you submitted. SCCA seems easier in that regard where it feels more like "did you run this part? Can we check?"

 

[Kitakaze]

Ruby now has new shoes. Just need to put some wheels inside them and get them on. (I know it's not pics of the actual car, I'll get those in a few days!)

 

[Kitakaze]

While not a spectacular update, I was able to finally get some work done on the car this weekend (thankfully it was finally and properly warm). I'll still need to go back and clean up my engine bay, so I'll do that before rotating spark plugs, but hey, heavy and semi-useless strut tower bar installed! And while this isn't something that can be seen, the new clutch spring from Steeda feels nice, too. Better feeling and just lighter in general.

But things are going well so far. Going to be finishing the maintenance items up next week before taking the car to get the new diff and rear axle gears installed. I'll see about getting dyno number as well since that is always a fun, but mostly pointless contest to compete in.

 

[Kitakaze]

Added a few new bits and bobbles to the Mustang. Finally got around to installing the Dynotech driveshaft that I ordered. Though I realize now that if I want to do the MGW shifter in the future, the 4" drive shaft might have been a bad choice. But we'll get to that point when we do. Managed to slice my finger while trying to lift a jack, so I convinced my dad to give me a hand. I don't think he was aware of the photo op.




The driveshaft itself was a bit... stuck, to say the least. I don't think it had been taken off the car since it rolled off the assembly line. But lots of PB Blaster and a lot of wrenching with a pry bar got the old thing off the car and out of the way for the new one.



Also had a chance to get the car over to Modern Muscle, local shop near me, to get the rear diff put together and have the Eaton TrueTrac LSD installed. And while they were over there, I was able to get the initial power numbers from this eleven year old V6.



So I guess I'm working with about 257 WHP and 267 LB-FT of torque. Not a bad day, in my opinion. Next up will be getting some new pads and rotors on the car. The old ones are getting a bit rusted and I'm looking to upgrade the pads anyway for HPDE, and later for full time track use. Had some help from TMO friends KNS Brakes so hopefully their selection will do me some good.