Administrator
Yeah, that little rusty pie tin there attached to the hub. That is the brake disc.
One thing is for sure - the entire TR8 front end, struts, sub-frame, arms, discs, etc. weight only a fraction of what the Mustang front suspension weighs. Probably around 1/4 to 1/3 as much. Something to be said for minimal weight components that still get the job done.
Senior Member
Kinda like Honda does it...Originally Posted by Ron Earp
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
Administrator
On the other hand, Honda doesn't have a chassis that supported 88hp to 390hp engines in a production car - oh, wait, Honda hasn't ever had a 390hp engine in a production car. My bad.Kinda like Honda does it...
Senior Member
they didn't NEED a 390 hp engine. Their chassis and componentry were elegantly engineered and carried no excessive weight.
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
Senior Member
Honda skimped out on the motor thought....
That's actually a TR7 brake disc, slightly smaller diamteter but you get the picture.
Ron, I will try to get by this week and get that stuff out of your garage. Last week/weekend got crazy.
Sorr you guys had so much trouble this weekend. I'm pretty much tied up on my car this week and net finishing it for VIR. Hopefully it will just need brakes for CMP and I can help you guys make the push for the test day at CMP.
NC Region
1980 ITS Triumph TR8
Administrator
The front isn't all bolted together yet, but the spring geometry is much better. Now the perch sits on the pin cocked at an angle and directly points at the upper perch.
Furthermore, the new threaded inserts allow the use of a locking nut on the adjustment pin which improves the strength of the system. We do need slightly longer pins for good adjustment, but only 2" longer and it is only a $13 part.
Good news is that the original springs that I thought could not be used at ride height can be used, yay.
Administrator
Recent dyno plot I picked up from another dyno operator that had done some Ford 3.8L V6 work. This engine hasn't been opened and had some long tube headers, cold air intake, minimal mufflers but still cats, and some timing / fuel work. Not too shabby. 219 ft-lbs of torque and 148 hp, Dynojet at the wheels.
The torque curve rolls off fast thus the power takes a hit, but, I believe that with some serious header work plus all the normal IT-go-fast stuff we do we can get the torque curve to hang on longer and boost that power number. The torque and low-end power is clearly sufficient, the top 1000 RPM is where it needs a lot of work.
Last edited by Ron Earp; 04-24-2012 at 03:25 PM.
Senior Member
revs? Thing hasn't even done the 5250 cross yet!
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
Administrator
No, it hasn't. Been sitting on that one awhile actually. The hp peaks around 4100-4200 RPM. But I think we can shift that and designed our system to do just that. Mr. Young's TR8 was of similar output and RPM peaks way back in the day (maybe six years ago). I think some of the early dyno plots with it were peaking at 4XXX and the torque peak was on the way down at 3000 RPM.
I started researching these Mustangs in 2005/2006 and you'll find old posts of mine on Mustang forums during that time. I laid off it as I got convinced they'd never make the needed power, mainly due to the typically "Ford think" around the engine that convinced me they couldn't do the job. I picked it back up again in 08/09, bought a Mustang in early 2010 for ITR, sold that one based on a bunch of information I'd accumulated, did a bunch more research in 2010, and bought another Mustang in 2011. Here we are.
I still might not be doing the "right" thing building the car, but my research shows it has a legitimate shot. Ironically, the issue I thought I'd have, making enough power, isn't what I'm worried about now. I'm pretty sure we'll have the other heavy hitters in S covered with power and torque - 240/260/280Z, RX7, 240sx, 325, and on par with the TR8. I'm concerned about handling, mainly balance and turn in as well as front suspension travel. I feel the rear will be an advantage compared to many S cars, but the front, nope, not so much. It is an interesting experiment and one I hope doesn't end badly.
It fits with my theory though that I think others have also used, so it really isn't mine: get the largest lowest specific output engine in the class and build that car. Based on experience with other non-racing car activities and intimate hands-on work with the TR8 I'm convinced these engines, which are typically two valve large displacement low revving designs, are "growers, not showers", and have the best chance of seeing large gains in IT trim. For ITS that means the TR8, 300Z, and Mustang, and maybe the 280Z. These are the largest motors in the class with relatively low outputs. If I were a NISMO man still I'd be on the 300Z. I don't think I've seen even a 90% effort on one of these engines and suspect it could do really well with the open ECU rule, ditto the 280Z.
Incidentally, the rule seems to be what Andy and them have dopted in ITR with the Corvette, no?
Last edited by Ron Earp; 02-29-2012 at 07:38 AM.
Administrator
Thanks for the kudos fellows. We have worked tons on these cars but I'm sure we have made, and will continue to make, mistakes. Just part of doing it.
Today is clean up the Kingdom of Stang. I'll get some before and after shots of the storage above my shop. We've got more parts than we'll ever need, but scant little organization. That will change.
Senior Member
When you're done my garage attic...and basement...await your touch.
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
Administrator
Long day today but it was very productive. We started out with this:
And within about seven hours went to this:
Administrator
And further improvements:
We built multiple shelves along two walls, one 16 ft long, one 12ft, and a couple of 6 footers. We also built two lofts.
Up in the attic storage space is a lot of stuff, probably more than you realize:
*Three cross members
*Three trannys
*Two engines
*Lots of heads
*Lots of intakes
*Two bumper sets
*Two doors
*Two front clips
And that is just the big stuff. There are brakes, axles, rear ends, springs, flywheels, pressure plates, etc. and now everything has a place and is pretty well sorted.
Successful day. Win for all.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks