Lonesome Ford Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 It probably would Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandyBorlace Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 haha best of all, you can run a variety of tires, g60's big hoosiers, big mccreary's/american racers, whatever you find lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ford12 Posted January 20, 2006 Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 ford12 Thanks! Do you have an opinion about the cost compared to Chevys? Do you have any ideas on what might conveince more people to build a Ford? Anything? PAPA I will admitt Fords are gonna cost more BUT its gonna take less to go fast. When i had my mustang i bought the intake,roller cam.and carb. and i was beating chevys that had heads cam intake ect... I race a mustang in cc the 4cyl. si a whole anther world. Its funny cause these SS drivers say minis are cheap there WRONG. It cost just as much if not more to build ministock motorthan a super street motor. Build the ford if you have any ?s email me and i more and likely answer them for ya if its about a ford motor. FORDS1221@YAHOO.COM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted January 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Lets keep this thing going!!!!!!! Anyone have any other ideas on how we can get the Fords/Mopars back on the track in the Sportsman class? What would it take to get people motivated to spend a little more? What is needed for someone to say" Now I'll build one"? Just think about adding 10 to 20 more cars to the class. Maybe more..Who knows. Like I said before, "It will happen". We just have to figure out how. Speak up!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ford12 Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Just tell them wanna be "FAST" build a FORD haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonesome Ford Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 For something that big to happen PAPA, there would have to be an all out effort by Ford to "revive" it's grassroot racing across the country. Either that, or some Ford guys need to start hitting the lotto and start building cars. Personally, I would take either scenerio I for one would give it a try even with the current rules; but as every good ole' boy racer, I don't have the budget. There's only a handful of teams I know of that currently run Fords (or would) so there are a few more teams with knowledge but all w/ no budgets. I would love to be joking, but unfortunately I'm not. With the playing field a little more level, some of these guys might filter back in but I doubt we'll see an onslaught of Fords & Dodges....unless of course if they also give a 300# weight break & a little more left side percentage as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thumper Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 A serious weight break to run a 302 or 347 with decient heads would attract more people.The 302 is a dependable and inexpensive engine but lacks torque.A stock lower and GT40p heads which are also stock might have a chance with a 400# weight break,using handeling to make up for less power.And would be cheap to build.Imagine a 302 Mustang racing with the Chevys.In most ministock classes around the country the weight thing is 1# per cc.This could work for V8 classes too,weight per CI.Look at mini classes like Pro Sedans to find the answers you are looking for.Too much minimum weight and the small engine cars cant keep up.With the same requirements,the cheapest and most powerful engines is all you will see.The Mustang is the most widely used car in ministocks and can be made to handle great.Ask the Gilpens.But not at 3500#s even with a 302.I dont know what about Chryslers,since the 340 the top performers are Mitsubushi built.Maybe a supercharged 4 cyl in a chassis like a Daytona.Flexable rules will open the doors for more involvement but that takes research and comminiment fron track owners and promoters and from what I have seen they like things as they are now.If things dont change racing will be for the well funded teams only.We need to start racing what the factories are building or we will be out of affordable cars and do our racing watching Nascar on TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted January 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 If a motor was supplied at NO CHARGE who would be willing to build one of these cars and race them weekly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandyBorlace Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 thats a good deal there papa, too bad my car has front jackbolts and tubular upper a arms... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crewcheif21,73 Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 I would drive it. And i would even set the motor up and keep it tuned. I know alot of tricks I have messed with fords the age of 14 and now fixin to be 25.Ask Thumper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonesome Ford Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 Well, looks like I got beat to the punch but if an engine were supplied I would be more than happy to finish out the sportsman car I have. I have a roller car, just have to hang a mustang body on it, put the engine & trans. in it and go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
w2racing Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 You guys are really starting to sound serious. Only 1 problem. There are no rules that support some of the things that are being suggested. I know this is more of a round table topic, but I don't think you would be able to sell the idea of weight breaks and stroker engines. Well maybe weight. You let the ford guys start running 347's and the chevy guys will start saying that it is not fair. But what car would be the best that is out there now to run? Mustang's don't have the wheel base. Most fords don't have the adjustablility that the chevys have. I know it can be done with the bigger ford cars. But the mid size cars are a little harder. Shock towers, what was ford thinking of. I do have a friend that is building a Granda for the 06 season at SAS in the sportsman class. The problem is still there, stock shock towers. What a pain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budman Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 w2racing, You just hit on a point I've been holding off on until now. Can the 347 stroker really be considered a "stock" motor? I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted January 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 w2racing Thats what we are trying to do...Get ideas. Maybe we wont get the stroker or the weight but something has to be done and we need ideas to get it done. We do know that the OEM GM chassis can be used as long as you hang a Ford/Mopar body on it. As far as the stroker...All the figures Ive seen so far says its the closes thing to the Chevy. And I really dont think the Chevy guys will complain. They have a good combination already. Im hoping the powers to be will allow someone to run the 347 and see how it compares. Maybe do some weight things along the way to even the field. Something will happen to get these cars back on the track. We just need more data. Your friend that is building the Granada is someone we would love to hear from about this. What is the chance of getting him on here? Thanks again. PAPA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonesome Ford Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 I would think if they allowed the 347, there would be no weight break or other benefits. They could even start small and give the Fords / Dodges a 250# weight break and/or allow more left side weight and just go from there. Oh and let me tell ya, trying to find a 108" wheelbase Ford car for a body is fun! On the same note, I'm trying to find an early 80s Thunderbird. Any help on this will be greatly appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted January 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 John What you gonna do with that T-Bird? w2racing Can you tell us more about your friend who is building the Granada? How is it going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
97car Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 89 and up T-bird I beleive is 113" wheelbase and independent rear suspension and came with a 302 a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonesome Ford Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 PAPA - the early 80s t-bird is 108.4" wheelbase. I just need the body, I have a Nova I want to hang it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budman Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 John, Wouldn't that be a little like tryin' to stick the positive ends of two magnets together? Wouldn't want you to get hurt, now! I heard those Chevy and Ford parts would repel each other. Just messin' with ya a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hopeing to keep this subject going. Has anyone come up with any ideas about getting the Ford/Mopar cars back on the track? Is anyone building one for this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted February 6, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 I've asked many different people for help in trying to get these guys back on the track but havent made much progress. I know there is something or someone that can get them back. Im asking again for info from you. I know there is a couple of guys trying to get one together but dont know much more about their progress. Please let me know of someone to contact or your ideas on this. IM NOT LETTING THIS GO AWAY!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tps22 Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 papa, my blood runs ford blue but like john said, ford doesn't really build anything to compete (with the rules the way they are). when converting from drag racing to stock cars i ended in the pro sedans so i could keep runnin fords. (besides the fact it is a class organization). john, isn't the early 80's t-bird a box? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted February 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2006 Can someone tell me why the Top Loader is not allowed? What rocker ratio is used on the Ford? And what is the cc volume on the Ford heads? I want to compare them to the GM cars. Any info on the Mopar ratio and cc is needed also. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted February 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 Ok, here is my idea. Please help me fine turn it. Do away with the 108" WB. Let the Mustangs be used. Put either the 351W or the 347 stroker in it. Run the top loader. Use weight to adjust to the GM's. Thats the BASIC idea. Help me with the chassis rules and the motor rules. By the way...SAS Sportsman rules state: " All engines must use a 1.5 ratio rocker arm." Fords dont use 1.5 rocker arms. The 351W uses a 1.6 and the 351C uses a 1.76. Typo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted February 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Looks like everyone has lost intrest in this. NOT ME!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.