Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Spoke to Dan today about adjustable caster/camber plates & was told he needed feedback from the drivers before making decision. In past rules from 1992 thru 2000 that I have copies of these were allowed.In 1992 the rules stated :inner fender panels & strut tower may be removed & replaced by steel plates & pipe supports . Top strut mounting plate may be slotted to allow for changes in the caster / camber settings.The question is has this been allowed or not in recent years? Are there any cars running this way? If not, is this an option we would want? Now is your chance-let's here some opinions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bountyhunter Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 my opionion is yes..... we built a new car this year and thats what we done to it... last year the strut plates cracked and i felt this was unsafe and replaced the ones on the new car with plate so i hope it stays the same..... also i believe in solid motor mounts too... last year we were in a wreck where the motormounts broke(stock) and hung the trottle wide open and almost cost me a motor and car....... i had a chain on it to but didnt help so these are 2 things i would be totally for having in our class... #2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neon14 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Anybody got a set of rules from last year handy? What does it say about suspension rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stang21 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 yea i wont race with stock motor mounts that wont work they will brake. and just cost more money and work to have to replace them just weld them and get it over with............. but now you cant you have to have the rubber in your mounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 2004-2004 Tx. Thunder rules: Suspension-NO AFTERMARKET SUSPENSION PARTS! NO EXCEPTIONS!Spring spacers OK. Word for word.That's all it sats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bountyhunter Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 well the two items i stated seem to be safty issues and what i have been told is that safty is first so i say solid motor mounts and modify the strut towers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neon14 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 So it says nothing about changing the mounting points of these parts? Nothing about altering these parts like heating and bending your spindles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Look, if you assume some one won't work with you,they probably won't. Can't work with you if I don't know what you want/need! What if we just weld one motor mount? That & a chain is what I used on my Opel.Don't be so negative. We just might accomplish something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 RWD?FWD rearends/frontends must remain stock for that car.No changing of mounting. All engines must be stock mounted in stock location.That's the rule now but what is being run already & by how many cars?THat's what we"re trying to find out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwk6740 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 well gt the mustang i am building for this season we have already welded the motor mounts solid too. everyone i have talked to says thats the safest thing to do. It will also save money in the long run. If the engine comes loose it could cost us some money for radiators, fan, hell even engine parts. Not only that it could get someone hurt. jmo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poorboy Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Are people actually worried about rubber motor mounts? Why even have that as a rule , forget about motor mounts. I personally think you should allow caster and camber adjustments by whatever means neccesary. I don't beleive thunder rules allowed completely cutting out strut towers but atleast you should be able to slot or bend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neon14 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 The rules for the TX Thunder cars are not that detailed and can be interperated in many different ways. I figure don't ask and then plead your case. If you ask something about a rule then it is easy to say NO, but if you dont ask and you do it and they ask you why you did it then you say it didn't say I could not do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Poorboy, the strut towers crack & flex.Neon,understand what you are saying but Dan likes to enforce rules as written. That's why details need to be worked out. With good rules you can build a car you don't have to worry about being illegal no matter who is teching. That's all I want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neon14 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Pappy, alot of cars are built this way already and have been racing under these loosely written rules. I am sure these cars will be welcome this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poorboy Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 There you go, I had no idea that the strut towers cracked. That is an issue that Dan needs to address. Is a repaired strut tower better than a stock strut tower? Who cares, add what penalty by performance and it will all come out in the end. I feel you should allow entry level cars to adjust and experiment, that is what RACING is all about. If you don't want that then run a cookie cutter car like an Allison Legacy series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Will, that's what I told Dan but I didn't know who or how many cars.He just wanted more input on subject & that's what I trying to do.Poorboy,you know I love this class because of the chance to experiment with different ideas.This is one of the few classes where no one -except GB -has been running the same stuff long enough to figure it all out.GB & Will screw up the curve for the FWD's. & Will is still learning I'm sure. He's the one to worry about cause GB & me only got a few good years left! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiTech Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 dan did not enforce half the rules in minnies before no one has in along long time most of the time they didnt have people nore the equip to check over the last 4 years the cars haveout grown tech .they said no racing springs thats hog wash . i know there are cars out there that are lstock tipe sit up but very few i would love to see dan check cars but i have been in this class sence 1985 the only time the cars were tech was when we had our own tech man we paid 2 dollars apiece and you did not know what he was going to check and the track stood behind the tech ] pappy i like you man but you get to carried away with rules and trying to get perfect wording it wont happen . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 oldtimer, I know I'm a pain in the butt & the rules will never be perfect but the better they are the less accusations of cheating & favoritism. I know most of this stuff is already being run & I have no problem with it but GB's friend at the meeting asked if the steering column had to be stock because of the way the rules are written.Rules that state this is what it is just make it easier to build a competitive car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thumper Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 I agree with the rubber mount thing and the camber plate or whatever is needed for camber adjustments.The front end and rear end rule was refering to the differentials and should have used that word.They are talking about changing a 4 link to a 3 link as example.The rubber mounts are danderious and that rule...stock mounted ...was refering to the location of the engine,meaning no setbacks or left side positioning.There are many things that get altered in reprinting rules packages.Different cars need different things and thats why Thunder rules are so open.Its good to get interpretation from the teck people but I dont think theres an iron fist involved.You have to remember Dan has been out of the track involvement for a while and is trying to catch up.It is imperative that he show strength in leadership to succede.We are the ones who know best what we need so he has no choice but to work with us.And he will.We will probably need small adjustments all year and clairifications too but to rewrite the rules in general to give any brand of car an advantage will not work.You need or want something to help your brand,petetion for it.Remember the purpose of these rules in the beginning was to evolve the modern car into our ranks to prevent ministock racing from becomming obsolete by being too expensive or not enough cars to get racers from.And we have seen this work.The V8 Chevrolet did finally overcome the flathead V8 over time.The fastest Ford is only slightly slower than the fastest FWD and half of that is gone with the transmittion ruling.I dont need solid mounts or camber plates but I am all for it.I dont want to be hit in the head by someones engine flying out.Lets try it:lets petetion the track to allow solid mounts and camber alterating devices because we show they are needed.I vote yes.Thats 1 vote now.Who else?What else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Thumper ,you got my point ! I don't want all new rules. Just want the ones we have clarified. We all know certain rules don't mean what they say ,but poor wording makes it easy to justify illegal parts being used. We all know what racing springs means but now some want to use the "I got them at a junkyard " to justify using them. Dan made it clear to those who stayed that he wants this to work,But not give in to pressure from people who want this to get even more out of hand. BTW, I vote YES to both issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poorboy Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Can somebody tell me what the difference is in a 12 inch tall 300# spring from Afco and a 12 inch tall 300# spring from a junkyard. It still acts the same on the car doesn't it. Who really cares where it came from. If you buy a spring rater and buy all your springs from a junkyard that is almost as good a racing spring. Maybe the rule should say spring needs to be atleast 20 years old, will that take the grey area out of that rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cRt racing Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 ok strut towers on the fords is a safety item when we built the first mustang the old strut towers were rusted and bent up the car had been wrecked (we are talking when pops ran with the minis ) so we replaced them and every car we built since then has been done that away so that i know of probally at least 15 cars now if you make them illegal thats losing a lot of cars if you dont do it the first fender bender you get into that car is junk cause it will be twisted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy_GT13 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 You have a spring rater?There's NO difference that I can see. Maybe the rule needs to be OEM stock type spring in stock location? I don't know.I do know getting all this straight now will reduce stress during racing season.CRT, good point. My first car was so rusted it needed re enforcement in several areas just to be safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cRt racing Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 another point when you change the strut tower it doesnt affect the spring at all cause the spring sits in it buckets all you are really doing is making the shock mount stronger the mustang dont have upper a arms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMWMPOWER10 Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 I think that ol pappy13gt should stop his worry over rules and try to figure out how to catch everybody else on the track. Quit trying to figure out what each rule means. Just go racing and if they tell you change something change it. Quit complaining about the grey areas. Everyone is cheating, they just haven't got caught, which means its not cheating until you get caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.