May 2009 Fastrack - It's the end of the world as we know it

[JeffYoung]

Chuck, look at page 6 -- I think IT, SS and SM are still excluded from complying with the FIA fuel cell rules.

[joeg]

Victory donuts....what's next? Champaign spraying in impound?

[RedMisted]

I welcome the competition from the older V-8 pony cars. My V6 is in their stock HP range plus I have a lower weight. Should be good competition and add an American flavor to a class that in my opinion is too German, and needs desperately to grow. ITR could be A Sedan Lite...

Please don't whine about any sacred IT philosophies/tenets/traditions/etc. being compromised by the inclusion of V8s. Times and circumstances change, which necessitates that people change their ways of thinking. Let's wait and see how it all shakes out before we start any bitching...

[chuck baader]

Thanks, Jeff....what I get for not reading everything. Chuck

[madrabbit15]

With all of the cheap go fast goodies so readily available for these cars, my guess is there is going to be a need to police them, and it will be quite difficult task at that. Other than that, they should be a great addition to ITR.

[JeffYoung]

No different from Mazdas, or Porsches, or VWs or Hondas or any other car with lots of aftermarket/tuner support.

With all of the cheap go fast goodies so readily available for these cars, my guess is there is going to be a need to police them, and it will be quite difficult task at that. Other than that, they should be a great addition to ITR.

[Griff944T]

Hi guys,
This is great news. Time to start looking for an F-Body w/o T-roofs. I recall reading the initial proposal some time ago. Are the Camaros/Firebirds classified the TPI 305 or the carbed version or both? I recall them both having 9.3:1 compression.
Thanks.
Joel

[CRallo]

Hi guys,
This is great news. Time to start looking for an F-Body w/o T-roofs. I recall reading the initial proposal some time ago. Are the Camaros/Firebirds classified the TPI 305 or the carbed version or both? I recall them both having 9.3:1 compression.
Thanks.
Joel

the TPI 305 (LB9) is the engine being called for here. I am pretty sure the HO carbed 305 (L69) was gone by that point although it may have still been available in '87. Or were you refering to the TBI 305 (LO3) engine?

[CRallo]

So what are the odds of getting the TPI 350 approved? its only 10 or 15 more horse...

[Ron Earp]

the TPI 305 (LB9) is the engine being called for here. I am pretty sure the HO carbed 305 (L69) was gone by that point although it may have still been available in '87. Or were you refering to the TBI 305 (LO3) engine?

I didn't deal with the VTS sheets on the GM cars but I'm certain we're only speaking about the 305 tuned port engine. If various engines were available with various transmissions this engine (excepting the 5.7/350 automatic) was the best one and the one with which the classification made.

Was the 350 even available with a manual transmission for the 3rd Gen F body? Torque would put it outside the envelope. The cars classed are just inside the envelope.

Ron

[Butch Kummer]

Victory donuts....what's next? Champaign spraying in impound?

Hey! You could put somebody's eye out with that cork! :eek:

As much as I'm tired of the smokey burnouts that have become standard after every NASCAR race, I fought it (and lost) when the stewards wanted me to put prohibitions against "burnouts, victory donuts or other celebrations" in our Supps. I don't know if they really thought he was being unsafe or they just were tired at the end of long day, but IMO the DQ was WAY too over the top in this case.

That said, I'm more impressed when Emmitt would just hand the ball to the ref after a touchdown - act like you've been there before.

[joeg]

Butch--I wonder if he went underweight because he burned off some rubber and fuel during his Donut session.

[xr4racer]

Andy, does 10hp really equal 140 lbs? The early car does still have rear drums, what would the weight difference be if both cars had the same brakes front and rear.

Thanks,
matt

[JeffYoung]

Drums didn't change teh weight, they are not part of the process weight on this car. The difference is entirely due to stock hp, although Ron is pretty convinced the early car will make more power in IT trim as well.

[xr4racer]

Thanks for the response, the early car should have been rated at 205, Ford admitted that it was overrated at 225 and they upped it by 10 from 205 in '93 to 215 for '94 via the EECIV to EECV switch. I uderstand that this is immaterial due to the ECU rule. The fact is the car to have if it can make weight is the 94-95 with its more aerodynamic, stiffer chassis and rear discs.

matt

[Parrish57]

Chuck, look at page 6 -- I think IT, SS and SM are still excluded from complying with the FIA fuel cell rules.

I hope I'm reading this wrong but it appears to me that while IT cars are exempt from having to have a fuel cell those of us who do install one will have to comply with the FIA standard. Thoughts?

[JeffYoung]

I puzzled over that for a while, but it looks like to me the intent was to require cars that HAD to have fuel cells use FIA; without affecting those that are not required. I think that is the better interpretation, but I agree it is not 100% clear.

[Greg Amy]

...while IT cars are exempt from having to have a fuel cell those of us who do install one will have to comply with the FIA standard. Thoughts?

https://improvedtouring.com...ad.php?t=23937

(I'm gonna sticky it in the Rules section...we get this question every once in a while... - GA)

[JeffYoung]

Thanks Greg, I didn't realize this had come up before. I don't think the change has any impact on the debate, and I do agree with Dick...but see the other side (and have an FIA cell in my car).