ITR, When???

I know it was fairly anemic from the factory, but the eighties were just coming out of the dark ages emissions wise, so I am curious about what the motor can make .."uncorked". Shoud be easy to find out..we can always check with the PCA guys.

They were heavy! I was at Callaway in the Indy car days, and they had a twin turbo version...it smoked!
 
Originally posted by lateapex911@Nov 23 2005, 07:02 AM
I know it was fairly anemic from the factory, but the eighties were just coming out of the dark ages emissions wise, so I am curious about what the motor can make .."uncorked". Shoud be easy to find out..we can always check with the PCA guys.

They were heavy! I was at Callaway in the Indy car days, and they had a twin turbo version...it smoked!
[snapback]66437[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Our local alignment man knows 928 engines very well and builds them, hence that helps in our selection! He recently had an S4s engine on the stand they were putting a positive displacement blower on and it ended up turning 618hp at the wheels on a fairly modest amount of boost.

Thing about the cars is they look cool. Requirement one for a race car.

Ron
 
list of cars that could work:

Acura
ITR
RSX
TSX (in a couple years)

Audi
A4 (first gen)

BMW
3 series (E36 & E46 variants)
Z3 roadster and coupe

Chevrolet:
possibly some V6 camaro variant

Dodge
the SRT4 might work here, but might be too quick

Ford
maybe some v6 mustangs

Honda
S2000 would be a great car here

Lexus
IS300
old GS300's???

Mazda
6
Mazdaspeed protege and miata are possibilities

Mitsubishi
second gen eclipse

Nissan
NA Z32 300ZX
350Z is probably too quick

Porsche
all sorts of 911's
would some 944's work here?

Toyota
NA Supra
turbo 2nd gen MR2
MRS??

there are plenty of cars that could work here, although i do understand the club's hesitance to try and regulate boosted cars at the regional level. either way, it's a class that can only grow in terms of potential cars that fit.
 
wouldn't a early to mid 80s mustang 5.0 fit well..
stock i think they were around 205-215 HP and 3200lb and there suspension is not the greatest..
I have an 86 GT parked out side my house collecting dust,birds,rats ect, that i would build for a ITR car if I was allowed..
 
Mustangs scare me a little. The power potential of a V8 is a tough thing to nail down. Plus there were so many versions, deciding how to bunch them would be a real pain. Anyway, chew on this:

1979: 134hp - 302ci
1980: 119hp - debored 302 (255ci)
1981: Same
1982: 157hp - 5.0HO intro
1983: 175hp - Holly 4bbl on 5.0
1984: 165hp - new TBI
1985: 210hp - hydraulic lifters
1986: 210hp
1987: 225hp - EFI
1988: SAME
1989: SAME
1990: SAME
1991: SAME
1992: SAME
1993: 200hp - change in SAE rating method, Cobra 235hp

Body style change
1994: 225hp / 245hp for Cobra
1995: SAME
1996: 225hp / 305hp for Cobra (modular 4.6)

Shall I continue? Holy shizzle!

AB
 
The big limiting factor with the mustang is the suspension sucks:)
but honestly the heads are what keep the HP level corked..and in IT you can mess around with the heads to much, at least not enough to make a diffrence on the 5.0 motor.

but all and all this looks like a real intresting mix of cars.
Oh the SVO mustang would also be a fun addition for this class


BTW also if your going to add turbo cars into the mix the WRX would be a good add for this class as there are a tone of them out there
plus the older Toyota All Trac..whine not made in great numbers..still a fun car:)
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 25 2005, 01:04 PM
1987:  225hp - EFI
1988:  SAME
1989:  SAME
1990:  SAME
1991:  SAME
1992:  SAME
[snapback]66644[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

The late 80's Mustangs were known to have inflated HP numbers from Ford. I think they would be a great car for IT. Very cheap to buy (and very beat on.....).

As Jay said, the suspension sucks, along with the brakes. Hmmmm, not a good combination for a high horsepower car :119:
 
Originally posted by JLawton@Nov 25 2005, 02:50 PM
The late 80's Mustangs were known to have inflated HP numbers from Ford.  I think they would be a great car for IT.  Very cheap to buy (and very beat on.....).

As Jay said, the suspension sucks, along with the brakes.  Hmmmm, not a good combination for a high horsepower car  :119:
[snapback]66652[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Or a racecar.
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 25 2005, 08:10 PM
Or a racecar.
[snapback]66654[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Fellows,

I've fooled with Mustangs and Ford V8s all of my adult life, starting at 15 years old. These cars below in ITR for sure - if a 300z and naturally aspirated Supra does then certainly the old 5L mill does. The E7 head castings on the motors til 95 suck and it'll hold down power. So will the intake which has long folded runners for torque peak at about 3000 RPM. I'll bet some Benjamins that a well prepped 87-95 5L motor won't make as much power as a well done Z motor or Supra, all of which people accept.

The SN95 body that came in in 1994 brought with it rear discs, but it also bought more weight. The 84-94 models are essentially the same bar engine changes and have rear drums as well as a poor suspension.

If 911s, Supras, Zs, S2000 and lots of others work in ITR then so will this car. And, it'll attract a good number of racers because of what it is. And no, before someone says it "Race it in AS" there are a lot of reasons not too:

*AS cars are expensive to build. I've seen people here write they are not expensive, but they have not built one nor have they looked at the rules for AS. "But you can buy an AS sedan for $20k" Yeah, you can always buy race cars for PENNIES on the dollar.

*AS does not have a lot of competition in some areas and many people, like me, prefer more competition to run/race/learn from.

They'll fit fine.

R
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 25 2005, 05:19 PM
About what, specifically?  ITR or a certain car?
[snapback]66665[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


ITR feasability mainly. what cars would work, what needs to be done to make it happen, if there's anything the average guy can do to help, or if it'll just happen whenever the BOD/CRB/ITAC decides they want it.

IT needs some rejuvination. the last round of shuffling cars around and changing rules were absolutely fantastic in my opinion. adding ITR for newer cars only helps ensure the success and longevity of the IT idea.
 
Originally posted by tnord@Nov 25 2005, 10:57 PM
ITR feasability mainly. what cars would work, what needs to be done to make it happen, if there's anything the average guy can do to help, or if it'll just happen whenever the BOD/CRB/ITAC decides they want it.

IT needs some rejuvination. the last round of shuffling cars around and changing rules were absolutely fantastic in my opinion. adding ITR for newer cars only helps ensure the success and longevity of the IT idea.
[snapback]66672[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

This is a club that is really mostly member run....but the members who run it have to do so in framework that's been in place a long time.

They need to hear from you. Your comments about the "new" direction IT is heading in are great and much appreciated by the ITAC members, I am sure. (Well I do at least, LOL).

I think you can do two things.

1- Write a ltter to the CRB telling them you like the recent direction that IT has taken and you support the ITACs moves. If you want suggest that you support the current proposal before them, which is more of the same, that would be even better.

2- Write a letter requesting the addition of a car, or cars that you would like to race that don't fit the current structure, and as a secind part of the letter, request an additional class to house this level of car.

It won't happen overnight guys, and it surely won't happen if it isn't needed. This club should not be about adding classes without due diligence.

Never be afraid to write a letter voicing an opinion. Your buddies in charge need to read them.
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 25 2005, 06:04 PM
Mustangs scare me a little.  The power potential of a V8 is a tough thing to nail down.  Plus there were so many versions, deciding how to bunch them would be a real pain.  Anyway, chew on
[snapback]66644[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


Andy, there were not really that many versions and they should not scare you. Chew on this:

Factory Five spec series uses 5.0L ford V8s, exhaust is free, no balancing, 0.030" overbore, compression to within 0.20 of stock, all OEM valves, pistons, intake, stock cam, NO porting, stock tranny, stock brakes, pads are free, etc. Spec weight is 2450lbs with driver.

These cars recently raced at VIR and the best of the best turned a 2:11. Chet Whittel in the Orange ITS BMW has turned a 2:13 at VIR.

So, same engine and suspension and drivetrain, although engine in slightly less (cmopression 0.5 bump, port matching) than ITR trim, but probably at 900lbs less than an ITR Mustang.

You don't need to be afraid. I can supply incredibly detailed specs of every year if needed, as can a number of websites and other Mustang enthusiasts.

Basically if one sticks with the "normal" Mustangs and ignores the Cobra/SVO models then you have an 87-93 5.0L at 225hp with rear drums, and a 94-95 5.0L at 215hp with rear discs but higher weight. 86 5.0L is an odd man out and would not be used due to air metering systems that sucked, 1985 5.0L is a gem since it was carbed and the first roller cam motor, but rare (I had a notch back one of these). 83-84 would not be as competitive as other years but could be classed if wanted. So, you have:

85 5.0L Fox
87-93 5.0L Fox
94-95 5.0L SN95

R
 
Ron,

Excellent info. Would you combine any of those on a spec line in order to make building easy? Geez, they could almost all go on the same line...that would allow nice, easy engine swaps as well as give everyone disc brakes...

225hp stock...would make for a good 2850lb racecar...racing against a 3000lb E36 M3 and a 3050lb RX-8...would they come out?

AB
 
Originally posted by tnord@Nov 25 2005, 09:57 PM
ITR feasability mainly. what cars would work, what needs to be done to make it happen, if there's anything the average guy can do to help, or if it'll just happen whenever the BOD/CRB/ITAC decides they want it.

IT needs some rejuvination. the last round of shuffling cars around and changing rules were absolutely fantastic in my opinion. adding ITR for newer cars only helps ensure the success and longevity of the IT idea.
[snapback]66672[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

That's kinda what this thread is all about, isn't it?

I don't think IT needs rejuvination as a whole. S and A are solid. B is decent. C is all but dead in most areas with pockets of life.

A class above S is a great place for T2 and T3 cars coming out of SS. It could add to Regional car counts as there isn't much SS racing. I will float the idea to the CRB OFFICIALLY on Monday night, show them Darin's work to date - and get an approval to move forward with a proposal in 2006 for addition in 2007.

I think it can be done.

AB
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 26 2005, 03:27 PM
Ron,

Excellent info.  Would you combine any of those on a spec line in order to make building easy?  Geez, they could almost all go on the same line...that would allow nice, easy engine swaps as well as give everyone disc brakes...

225hp stock...would make for a good 2850lb racecar...racing against a 3000lb E36 M3 and a 3050lb RX-8...would they come out?

AB
[snapback]66688[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

I think you'd have their weight too light Andy. And I'm not sure about having them all on one line.

97-93 are the lighter ones for sure, but I'd class them in around 3000lbs to start with. That peak hp and peak torque doesn't win races, the area under the curve does, and a 5.0L V8 has a lot of torque area under the curve.

The 94-95 have a little less peak hp but still the same torque curve and disc brakes, give them a little bit more weight.

Both will respond equally well to the usual - headers, compression, exhaust tuning, elimination of mech fan, pullies, extra cooling, etc.. Both use Ford EEC-IV engine control that, with all the programmers for 5.0
L Ford's out there, will make Motec not incrediblly useful.

It'd be better to class them heavy and give them a weight break a year from now or whenever. We know what happens when you class them too light and try to add weight - a la E36 325.

Yes, they would come out and race. Despite being committed to building a ITR car with Jeff I'd put one of these together and so would two other racers I know that love Ford stuff. So, you'd get three at least and a bet a lot more than just three since they are cheap and plentiful. There would be no comparison in price between, say, a naturally aspirated Supra build and a 1990 5.0L Mustang build.

I'm a ford nut, yes, but I'm objective and like anything. For the Mustangs I've owned an 80 I6 (fast with work!), 85 5.0L, 86 SVO (really fast on lotsa boost), 90 5.0L LX, and 95 5.0L GT, as well as a 91 Mercury Cougar 5.0L with a blower. I've messed with a few.

Ron
 
:023:

Yep!
This class fits nicely between the calsses where most of the pony cars are runing here on the west coast, CMC and American Iron. ( http://www.camaromustangchallenge.com & http://americanironracing.com/ )

Marcus

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 26 2005, 08:27 AM
Ron,

Excellent info.  Would you combine any of those on a spec line in order to make building easy?  Geez, they could almost all go on the same line...that would allow nice, easy engine swaps as well as give everyone disc brakes...

225hp stock...would make for a good 2850lb racecar...racing against a 3000lb E36 M3 and a 3050lb RX-8...would they come out?

AB
[snapback]66688[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
 
Sounds like the Mustang 5.0 would be a good fit, also maybe the 305 camaro..just for some Ford Vs Chevy stuff.
BTW I think the 86 guys should be allowed to convert to later model injection..
just cause i got an 86 5.0 and would build it for this class:)

BTW how hard would it be to get Fi cars classed here and Fi AWD cars..
I think the Subaru and EVO might like to play..
 
Even if we assume a 30% gain in IT trim, they shouldn't weigh more than 2950. Remember, we don't want to create an overdog but we also want everything to work within the framework of the process...plus I want people to build them!

(When I talk about weight, I am using a totally hypothetical target power to weight ratio of 10.0/1 in order to figure out what could fit.)

AB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top