Just returned from being with the team this weekend down in Daytona (filming the goings-on for a podcast) and am happy to report that all five cars, both Rehagen Racing and Jim Click Racing, showed their strength and were consistantly in the top five all weekend long.

I'll post some links when I have the podcasts ready so you can see the action for yourself.

Al.

 

FlyWheel: Al, I love the GARRA Koni Challenge. It's great to see the Mustangs doing so well in the testing! Alas, GARRA will punish the Mustangs heavily for being fast, as they always do. The performances put in by the Mustang teams probably means there'll be another technical bulletin issued to require another 100 pounds of "awards" weight carried by all the Mustangs in the race--already they are required to raise the weight of the FR500Cs from about 3,130 pounds as built to 3,300 pounds to legally compete--to say nothing of the seventy percent intake restrictor plate, the mandated restrictive exhaust that must be used, the hindering fuel tank location that must be used, and various other restrictive requirements to keep the Mustangs from running away from everything else in the field. If you can't beat 'em, restrict 'em...

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

A press release up on the Grand-Am site regarding the Rehagen Racing Mustangs performance at test days:
http://www.grand-am.com/News/Article.asp?ID=9391

Greg, the FR500C's have had a 3300# min. weight since May . . . and was dropped to 3275# for the 08 season. This was actually the very first event at the new lower weight . . . Don't get me started on the engine restrictions . . . though to be fair, the Mustangs are running a larger displacement than any of the other competitive cars (CTS-V, GTO, and the old F-body cars are all larger though). The fuel tank location is a bit of a trade-off, and was written in because a saddle style fuel cell ended up being pretty costly, and the rear mounted cell proved a pretty hefty cost savings, plus it helps weight distribution a little (though, it doesn't help polar moment of inertia any, lol, or the balance change as fuel burns off).

 

Rara: Thank you for the prompt and courteous reply! Since my last posting I checked out the GARRA regs and found out about the 25 pounds reduction in the passenger floorboard plates! Any reduction helps, and if 25 pounds will increase tire life that is indeed a help.

Yes, the 5.0 'Cammer has a displacement advantage over anything less than 5.0--OTOH some of those competing vehicles are smaller, have much more of their weight over the driven wheels, have lower noses, IRS, and probably have lower COGs. And some of the other competitors may ask for certification of their new 4.2 V8, a that-changes-everything situation unless some changes are made to that intake restrictor plate on the 'Cammer. The big pushrodders haven't been real competition since before the 2005 season--even with major weight concessions.

I'm at the point where I'd like to see a comparo between the FR500C "as is" versus the same car but with the 3-valve 4.6 V8 with comparable engine mods--but no restrictor plates and no "awards" weight. There may be a case for doing this, PROVIDED there are contracts that forbid GARRA from ****in' with the weight or the engine in any way if Ford goes to the expense to change the engines in the Koni Challenge Mustangs and goes through the certification effort and expense again.

Your thoughts on this?

Thanks! Greg "Eights" Ates

 

I'd be interested to see what you describe purely from an academic perspective, but it just isn't going to happen. Ford Racing or anyone else wouldn't be interested in spending the money, and no amount of contracts or whatever would keep the Koni Challenge technical director from monkeying with the rules, lol. Plus, none of the Mustang teams would be interested in starting thier development process over again . . . And, let's face it, the Mustang doesn't have the best aero in the world, so dropping power to decrease weight would really hurt the car on the big tracks like Daytona . . .

 

Rara: Splendid reply! I wrote a previous response but got timed out and lost it. $#&*!@+

Yeah, different engines dropped into an FR500C's engine bay make for intriguing--but likely only academic--conjecture.

Normally, a 3-valve 4.6 would have little to show against a 4-valve 5.0 on even its best day, but an uninhibited* 3-valve might offset a 4-valve 'Cammer that GARRA has hindered with:
1. a seventy-percent intake restrictor plate
2. lead plates in the passenger floorboard box
3. T50 "street shortie" headers instead of serious roadracing tubes
4. T50 cams instead of dedicated racing cams
5. the '93 or '94 Mustang Cobra street throttle body
6. other penalizing items I haven't thought of--or thought of once upon a time but have since forgotten...

Naturally, a no-screwing-with-it-after-it's-certified contract would be necessary so that GARRA's posterior could be sued half off for breach-of-contract or it would not be worth the effort.

I gotta keep this brief or I'll time out again...

*Uninhibited includes, but is not limited to:
1. a pair of camshafts designed specifically for a roadracing 3-valve 4.6 V8
2. a version of the FR500C's intake manifold upgraded to:
A. match the intake passages in the 3-valve's head
B. use a throttle body designed specifically for a roadracing 3-valve 4.6 V8
2. Gearing to suit the power band of a roadracing 3-valve 4.6 V8. This might
include a switch to the GT500's Tremec T6060, or TR6060 if such exists
3. Competition exhaust headers suited to a roadracing 3-valve 4.6 V8
4. Ports, valves, springs, etc. suitable for a roadracing 3-valve 4.6 V8
5. An ignition system and fuel system suitable for a roadracing 3-valve 4.6 V8

Greg "Eights" Ates