Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello all, I am currently working on a 1989 Mustang GT Hatch for a C Prepared build for SCCA and NASA auto-x. If this should be in a different section, moderators please feel free to move it to the appropriate area.

I purchased the car as a shell, which came fairly complete minus engine and trans. If anyone is looking for interior parts for their car let me know, all interior is pretty well up for sale. I have been around Mustangs all my life and have owned a total of 6 (5 fox bodies and a 1969 Fastback).

Here are the plans for the car...

- Front suspension will be a custom SLA setup either based off of a few different designs that some of the members here have come up with.
- Rear suspension will be a 3 link setup with a Ford 9" axle.
- Car will be fully caged.
- 347 Stroker motor with a dart block and aluminum AFR 205 heads and right now planning on fuel injection.
- Still up in the air on whether to go with an automatic trans with full manual valve body or go with a Tremec 600 TKO or Magnum. Leaning toward the stick right now.
- Using Wide 5 spindles, hubs, and wheels. Wheels will be either a 16x12 or 16x14 in size.
- Plan to make many carbon fiber parts for the car such as front fenders with flares, hood, rear wheel well flares. I may even attempt to do the doors and hatch, we'll see how the other projects go first.

That is the summarized list of things that I would like to do with the car. More than likely this will be on a 3 to 5 year build plan unless I win the lottery.

What stage is the car at now you ask, well I have it pretty stripped down and working on a few rusted areas first off. I pulled the passenger floor pan out and fabricated through the floor sub frame connectors for that side. I also cut out a section of frame rail on the drivers side that was rusted out pretty bad. I have to cut out a little bit of the frame on the passenger side yet and fix a small area on the drivers side front foot well area and that should take care of the problem areas.

I have been taking pictures as I have been going along and will work on posting those up later this evening.

Feel free to offer advice on anything that I am working on, especially if I am doing something wrong or doing it the long way and there is a shortcut that I am missing.

Cheers,
JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Fun!

Good luck with this build!

Subscribed.
Thanks, I am looking forward to the building it out. I just wish we would get some warmer weather to get out in the garage to work on it.

I have some very knowledgeable people that have been helping out with the build so far, I hope that will help eliminate mistakes on my part along the way.

Here is a pic of the car when I got it home.




Here is the rusted driver's side frame rail.



This will be the ride height of the car from the back bumper. (tentatively)



Here is a pic of the tires that I will be running next to the car.



Starting to get'er stripped down.



Rusted out passenger floor pan.





Floor pan removed.



Floor pan mocked into place.



Plus more of an update tomorrow with where I am at in the project currently.

Cheers,
JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
I'm a little confused why you, and I've seen others think this, mention 14" wide wheels being CP legal. I'm looking at the 2015 rule book now:
17.4 Wheels
A. Any wheel not exceeding 12" in width may be used for all classes.
E. ...Original equipment size wheels exceeding 17.4.A are allowed with no additional weight increase beyond those specified.
F. For classes CP, any diameter and width wheel may be used without additional weight adjustments.

A strict grammar/information hierarchy reading would read this as meaning that they simply removed the old weight penalty CP used to have for wheels bigger than 10" wide (and removed the previous diameter mention because it didn't mean anything, i.e., last year I could have run 16*10s or 18*10s with no weight penalty, but 17*12s would have given me the penalty). Otherwise, 17.4.A should read, "Any wheel not exceeding 12" in width may be used for all classes except CP."

Have they clarified this somewhere officially? I just find it hard to believe that the old regular trophy getters, who have had setups for 12" wheels for decades, pushed for a removal of the wheel size limit whereas I can easily see that they pushed for the removal of the weight penalty (which was laughably negligible anyhow). I should probably just ask my friend Todd Farris, he'd know as he's served on various advisory boards over the years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Looks like fun, but just in case you weren't aware the 347 will give you a 10% weight penalty and if you go with an aftermarket kmember for your SLA figure on another 10%. Your minimum weight could end up at 3,240#. I suppose if you get that 347 dialed in good it probably won't be a big deal as your power will offset the weight penalty. Might want to look into a well built 308 or 310.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I'm a little confused why you, and I've seen others think this, mention 14" wide wheels being CP legal. I'm looking at the 2015 rule book now:
17.4 Wheels
A. Any wheel not exceeding 12" in width may be used for all classes.
E. ...Original equipment size wheels exceeding 17.4.A are allowed with no additional weight increase beyond those specified.
F. For classes CP, any diameter and width wheel may be used without additional weight adjustments.

A strict grammar/information hierarchy reading would read this as meaning that they simply removed the old weight penalty CP used to have for wheels bigger than 10" wide (and removed the previous diameter mention because it didn't mean anything, i.e., last year I could have run 16*10s or 18*10s with no weight penalty, but 17*12s would have given me the penalty). Otherwise, 17.4.A should read, "Any wheel not exceeding 12" in width may be used for all classes except CP."

Have they clarified this somewhere officially? I just find it hard to believe that the old regular trophy getters, who have had setups for 12" wheels for decades, pushed for a removal of the wheel size limit whereas I can easily see that they pushed for the removal of the weight penalty (which was laughably negligible anyhow). I should probably just ask my friend Todd Farris, he'd know as he's served on various advisory boards over the years.
I definitely see how this could be confusing and makes me even wonder about it.

Check the April Fastrack at the bottom of page 9 and let me know what you think on how to interpret this rule.

Prepared
#12423 CP Wheel Width Allowance Proposal
The PAC and SEB recommend the following rule change for 2015:
Change Section 17.4.F to read:
F. For class CP, any diameter and width wheel may be used.

The link for it: http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/14-fastrack-april.pdf

Cheers,
JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Looks like fun, but just in case you weren't aware the 347 will give you a 10% weight penalty and if you go with an aftermarket kmember for your SLA figure on another 10%. Your minimum weight could end up at 3,240#. I suppose if you get that 347 dialed in good it probably won't be a big deal as your power will offset the weight penalty. Might want to look into a well built 308 or 310.
Rules state that if you run 5100 CC engine or smaller the minimum weight is 2700 lbs, anything over 5100 CC engine is a minimum weight of 3000 lbs.

I will take the torque over the 300 lbs increase at this point. The final build weight that I am targeting will be around 2600 lbs and will add ballast where needed. I am debating on whether to stroke out the engine to a 363 CID or keep it at the 347 CID. I am purchasing an engine from a fellow driver that already has everything for the engine as a 347. So instead of incurring another big expense, I will probably keep it at 347 for now.

As far as the tubular K-member and having to take a 10% weight penalty, you are correct. I never mentioned using a tubular K-member. ;) I am building custom control arms for the LCA's using the stock K member. I will build a custom bracket to hold the upper control arm. I will be using suspension analyzer to optimize the layout along with help from another driver that has built his own SLA for a fox CP car in the past.

So I should be at 3000 lbs for the minimum weight when it is all said and done.

Cheers,
JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Here is some more pics of the car and some progress that has been made on the car.

Here is a pic of the passenger side frame rail. This side doesn't look nearly as bad as the drivers side so I am hoping that I will be able to save most of the frame.





Here is a pic of cutting out part of the floor to install the subframe connectors.





Sub-frame connector cut and welded waiting to be permanently welded in.



Here is the driver side frame rail cut out, you will notice that I welded in a beam underneath for support and measurement purposes.



Looks pretty bad!



Here is the shock tower area all cleaned up and ready for some new metal.



The new panel being mocked up.



More to come...

Cheers,
JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Some more pics of where we are at...

Here is the new piece welded in on the shock tower and getting the frame rail lined up before being welded into its final position.



Here is the rear tire mounted up. This is the new Hoosier radial slick that I plan on running. The tire dimensions are 28x14x16, which as you will see in the pic will require me to make some extra room for.



I picked up some 16x12 wide 5 wheels and wilwood hubs for the car.



 

·
Authorized corral.net Advertiser
Joined
·
579 Posts
. I am debating on whether to stroke out the engine to a 363 CID or keep it at the 347 CID. I am purchasing an engine from a fellow driver that already has everything for the engine as a 347. So instead of incurring another big expense, I will probably keep it at 347 for now.
Assuming you are still getting my old engine, it is already 363. JJ's weight with this motor will be 3000# as he noted.

Any width wheels are definitely legal now. I agree the wording in the book is terrible (as noted) and it might be worth a letter to get it clarified.

HTH,

DaveW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
Just curious, do you know why they changed it? Who wanted wheels bigger than 12"? Maybe bigger tires just didn't used to exist but now they do? Wish they would make the weight penalty mean something.
 

·
Authorized corral.net Advertiser
Joined
·
579 Posts
Just curious, do you know why they changed it? Who wanted wheels bigger than 12"? Maybe bigger tires just didn't used to exist but now they do? Wish they would make the weight penalty mean something.
Well, the most recent Hoosier rear slicks are much wider and might be happier on 14 inch wheels. I have both 12's and 14's and plan on testing that theory this season. The new front is also 25.5x14 instead of 12.5 and might be happier on a 13" wheel versus 12". Also hope to test this, but I don't have the 13" wheels yet to do so. Keep in mind my bodywork is wider than my wheels with either the 12" or 13/14" so there isn't any penalty in overall car width for changing. If I had a CP car where the tires were the widest part and it was harder to put width on the inside, I might feel differently. :)

Also, on some cars using some allowances, a 13" wide wheel was already legal.

Finally, if one wanted to take advantage of the removal of penalty for +16" diameter, you might end up wanting a wider than 12" wheel.

So, I see it more as a leveling of the playing field for various options not a huge deal overall, but i might be wrong. :)

DaveW
 

·
Authorized corral.net Advertiser
Joined
·
579 Posts
FYI, SEB Member Mark Andy just clarified for me on FB that the unlimited width wheels are legal. They omitted a change to 17.4.A by accident and will clarify/change in FastTrack soon.

DaveW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
Thanks for clarifying. I think I'm still going to toy around with the 18*12 idea this year. Depends on funds, I might just co-drive Kent Kroll's ESP car instead.
 

·
Authorized corral.net Advertiser
Joined
·
579 Posts
Thanks for clarifying. I think I'm still going to toy around with the 18*12 idea this year. Depends on funds, I might just co-drive Kent Kroll's ESP car instead.
FWIW, on a 12 or 13 or 14 inch wheel, the new Hoosier 16" Radial slick has put an end to the "A6 is better" days on a purely technical basis. I understand, of course, that there are a lot of other factors that figure into tire selection.

DaveW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Dave, for some reason I kept thinking that the engine was a 347. That makes me happy that it is a 363! :)

Thanks for the clarification on some of those rules. I need to start mapping out how I am going to do the rear suspension. I noticed that on a few cars that were being built that they removed about a foot section of rear frame rail for axle and coilover shock, now is this legal? If so how does this rule play into effect... "Clearance between the modified chassis, frame, or subframe and the suspension, steering, and drivetrain components is not to exceed 4.0”."

Cheers,
JJ
 

·
Authorized corral.net Advertiser
Joined
·
579 Posts
That 4.0" specification is relatively new so you might be seeing cars that were built before that rule and took a little liberty. Although the 9 inch axle tube is 3", plus 4" forward and 4" back is 11" :)

It should be relatively easy to work within the 4" rule and do what you need to.

DaveW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
FWIW, on a 12 or 13 or 14 inch wheel, the new Hoosier 16" Radial slick has put an end to the "A6 is better" days on a purely technical basis. I understand, of course, that there are a lot of other factors that figure into tire selection.

DaveW
But has it put an end to the "A7 is better" days?

I may have to delay my first run at CP until 2016 due to financial concerns. :(
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top