So that got me thinking. How light could one get an f-body. According to the 9.5:1 weight to power ratio 200rwhp car weight 1900 lbs. It could be quite easy to turn, brake ect. that little weight on 275 tires and 14" willwood rotors. Shouldn't it? Can one get an f-body under 2000lbs?

I don't know, but brother-in-law pit crew and I have wondered when someone is going to bring a V6 to AI!

well i have gotten a 95 V8/T-56 car to 2800 under CMC limitations. w/ a V6/T5 and AI rules, i could easily see 2400 being a reality. whats stopping you from boosting power to match the weight if you cant get the weight to match 200 hp?
i'de find a 98 or newer car and use the stock brakes as they are just fine for my 3200lb CMC car (w/ driver). i would do it in CMC if they would cut the minimum weight to 3000lbs for a V6 (w/ driver).

What is the power to weight ratio in CMC? I was looking at the chart in the rules, 2800 looks off the chart, and if you just divide it looks like 13.7:1.
I also didn't see the 3000lb minimum for V6.

One could boost the power, but that was not my point. My logic being lighter is faster in corners, and undrer braking. Lighter being the same as heavier+power under acceleration. Furthermore, building something that weighs as much as a Honda challenge (or less), with twice the contact patch (big ol tires).

CMC is 3200 minimum w/ driver for 4th gens. i had one to 2800 w/out driver and ballast. car makes weight w/ driver and other legal add on's.
my only point was get it as light as you can. if you cant get it to where you want it, add power till your legal.
will you ever get a 4th gen to 2000lbs? if you do, there would not be much left that makes it a 4th gen. most likely will not be legal for AI @ that point.
BTW, V-6's are not legal in CMC.

Less confused now.
Anyway, I am not looking to part with my LS1 anytime soon, so no CMC for me. I was just wondering about AI possibilities.
So, my question still is, how light can a 4th gen get, if a 4 gen could shed all the weight it could shed? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

This post has been edited by roadracetransam: Jun 21 2006, 04:24 AM

Wow! I can't imagin a 4th gen getting to 2400 lbs, although I've never tried. Not knowing much about CMC or AI, what restrictions does AI not have to be able to shed 400 lbs? The V6 is going to be only 50-100 lbs (total guess) of that weight loss.

V6?? You don't need more than 4!!

Keep in mind Glenn's 2800 lb car actually is about a 3000lb car with a driver (AI weighs the car with driver, post race weight meaning all fluids yadda yadda yadda) That said, I'm sure that car could've lost another 4-500 lbs if you started using carbon body panels, lexan windows, etc. Some drivetrain components which can't be modified in CMC but can be for AI could also save weight such as tubular k-members, front suspension arms, torque arm, carbon driveshaft. You can completely chop the front off the car and build a tubular bumper/radiator support. I can see 2400lbs too.

I've mentioned this to folks in AI several times...but no one seems to care because no one has shown up with anything other than a v8. I think the day someone shows up with a featherweight Fox coupe with a 4 banger that rule will get changed (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

AI rules are here:

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/American-Iron-Rules.pdf

Anything that doesn't fall under these rules is subject to the NASA rule book (much larger file):

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/ccr.pdf

So, for AI see 6.1. There's no minimum weight for a 4 or 6 cylinder. Many have contemplated a 4 cylinder turbo Fox Mustang. You can get the Fox body pretty light (not sure how light) and the 4 cylinder doesn't weigh much. That doesn't help the Camaro crowd of course.

I have no idea the lowest a 4th gen could get. Ours is around 3000 empty. There's probably another 100 pounds in there, but I don't see much more than that. Maybe 2800 pounds as the lowest weight? But I'm just making that up based on my experience. I could be wrong.

Jason

Edit - So Al beat me to it. 2400 pounds? That's crazy! But I'd love to see it.

This post has been edited by JKnight: Jun 21 2006, 03:10 PM

3rd gens came with 4-cylinders, although it was the horrible Iron Duke. Sneak a turbo ecotec in there though...

(IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Do you think the Musturd 4 banger was any better? I rented a car with one of their auto V6 cars about five years ago and it could not get out of its own way - and I owned a Monza with an Iron Duke that was faster!

Neither motor is all that great, both of them are 60's/70's designs. Although the Ford 2.3L is pretty tough. I had a 2.0L in a 88 Ford Ranger (same family as the 2.3L) and man was that truck slow.

the more i think about it, the more i wish i had the ability/resources to do it myself.

in all seriousness, it almost sounds too good to be true....hhmmm..

The Mustang 2.3L is at least an engine that has been raced and was available in turbo configuration. It's also OHC which means it should breathe better than the pushrod 'duke.

So, yes, I do think the Mustake 2.3L was a better engine, at least in theory.

It's been done. Ted Schwartz in the OH-IN region ran a 4.3L Chevy in his '99+ Mustang for a while. Not sure the specifics on it, but he's got a 302-based motor in it now... that popped a head gasket at MAM on Sunday.

Just like the saying, it ran really well before it went though...

[edit] And my input on a really light AI car is that it would probably get run down at the end of long straightaways where aero is playing a bigger factor then weight. It is tempting to try it though...

This post has been edited by nape: Jun 21 2006, 10:45 PM

i agree about the possibility of it getting run down in the straightaways. Right along with that, while the others are having to brake, would the v6 car with a severe weight advantage (and comparable abilities as far as brake setup/susp., etc.) be able to go so much deeper into the corner to maybe compensate?

the exit speeds it would be able to obtain might be advantageous enough so that the v8 cars, while having more power, might not be enough to compensate having to make up the speed they didn't have coming out of the corners and then their need to brake earlier into the next.

i'm sure on some courses the v6 AI car would shine more so than on others, but that's the gamble.

While we are on hypotheticals...

Drop a generation and save some weight. Start with a 3rd gen F-body. Can you put the 3.8/5sp in that and be AI legal? Seems to me you could get more lighter (is that a phrase? 'more lighter'? hehehe) with a 3rd than a 4th.

Costas
cars and such...

never read the AI rules...

Costas:

IIRC, the LS1 is a lighter motor then the 3.8L because of the aluminum block. I'll let someone else find the exact numbers though. Not sure if it's enough to negate the gain of having the weight set back farther though.

The idea I've been thinking about if I had an unlimited budget is one of the shorter 5.3L LSx motors out of a Grand Prix GXP. Obviously, I don't have an unlimited budget, so I haven't done much research, but I'm wondering if it's significantly shorter.

Even if you're over on horsepower, add a restrictor like the CMC guys and don't work the motor as hard. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/cool2.gif)

the thing is, all V-8 cars have a minimum of 2800 in AI. if it was a V-6 or smaller, then there is no minimum. i'm thinking a turbo 6 from a 3rd gen or buick in a 4th gen chassis w/ the T5. hell, even the 4.3 V6 would be cool.

2800 with driver after a race is still damn light and probably as light as most (non-trust fund) people could afford to race one.

Once you start chasing those last 200+ lbs, it's going to start getting into megabucks. Do you really want to spend 6 figures to race for medals?

"How fast do you want to spend?"

This post has been edited by nape: Jun 23 2006, 12:05 AM