Go Back   American Sedan Forum > Main American Sedan Categories > American Sedan Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-10-2016, 07:20 PM
MarkMuddiman MarkMuddiman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Belleville, MI
Posts: 146
Default And the exodus begins

Here's the first one:

http://www.asedan.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3684

What will the AS participation numbers look like without any Foxes?
__________________
Mark Muddiman
AS #71
Detroit Region
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-10-2016, 07:20 PM
Ted Johnson Ted Johnson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 977
Default

[QUOTE=MarkMuddiman;33917]If you want all the cars to weight the same, then they should all have the same suspension geometry and kinematics.
The Fox has narrow front track, and either a high ride height or a ridiculously low front roll center.
Give us longer lower control arms and relocated pivot points, and the 100# would be fair.

Mark.

To your point of front suspension pick up points. I have been racing against a former a/s spec sa 197 mustang that was very competitive. I won't disclose the name of this former a/s racer but he disclosed to the purchaser that the front pick up points were relocated. This is all legal in ai. But I might suggest that front suspension pick up points be an item of compliance checks. This was a front runner a few years ago. I realize this thread is regarding the fox body mustang but it could be something skewing the data the rule makers are basing their decisions on. Carry on. Peace.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-10-2016, 07:24 PM
scottdolsen scottdolsen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 141
Default

Top 5 Qual 2014 Runoffs

McDermid Mustang 1:38.382
Heinricy Firebird 1:40.165
Bailey RP Firebird 1:40.385
Olsen Fox 1:40.510
Richardson Camaro 1:40.721




Top 5 Race


Olsen Fox 1:41.273
Baten RP Camero 1:41.447
McDermid Mustang 1:38.898
Bailey RP Firebird 1:40.900
Amy Aquilante Firebird 1:41.572



Pop quiz, which car needs a weight penalty?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-10-2016, 10:31 PM
MarkMuddiman MarkMuddiman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Belleville, MI
Posts: 146
Default

Show me how qualifying and race times indicate an adjustment for Foxes.
I'm seeing what Tom Himes is seeing - the big standout is the dog box transmissions.
Attached Images
  
__________________
Mark Muddiman
AS #71
Detroit Region
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-10-2016, 10:35 PM
MarkMuddiman MarkMuddiman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Belleville, MI
Posts: 146
Default

Andy is the other outlier.
He could have dominated with a dog box.
It also looks like the CTS-V's re comfortably in the leader zone.
__________________
Mark Muddiman
AS #71
Detroit Region
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-11-2016, 09:05 AM
PbFoot PbFoot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 204
Default

Great research Mark. Thanks.
I caught two small errors.
Licklider is in a SN95 and Post runs a 4 Gen.

Tom H, Fox body, 5th finisher, but only had the 14th fastest race time

BTW, what do dog boxes cost? I've heard they are way more expensive than the other boxes we run.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-11-2016, 09:34 AM
Danny"TheKid"Richardson Danny"TheKid"Richardson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 444
Default

Mark that is some really good stuff! Very comparative and informative. Thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-11-2016, 01:36 PM
PamRichardson PamRichardson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 800
Default dog boxes

Mark --

I too appreciate your analysis. Let me pass along a bit of a however.

The change in the dog box weight from 80 to 50 was a REC applicable 1/1/2016. For this letter request, there was NO response from the community about the change. For any letter, you can send in a response with your position on the change. Letters are the only official way the CRB/ASAC can respond.

The change in the dog box weight from 125 to 80 was a REC applicable 1/1/2015. For this letter request, there was minimal response from the community for the change. What I could find was 1 for and 1 or 2 against.

To all, if you feel the dog box weight penalty is the issue, please submit letters saying so, not only now, but when the letters appear in Fastrack.

Please also note that I have mentioned a few times the ASAC is looking at other items for potential adjustment. As soon as the research is complete, and approved, we will announce it.

Pam
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-11-2016, 01:52 PM
scottdolsen scottdolsen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 141
Default

Here is a copy of my letter. Please write a letter to the CRB if you feel the same as I do, even if you don't have a Fox. Remember your car could be next on their hit list.





"Return Fox body mustang to its original weight 3100 pounds

Recently the CRB raised the minimum weight of these cars by 100 pounds.

Here are the reasons why I think this penalty was unjustified.

This car has been competitive at this weight for at least the last 12 seasons.

The decision to penalize this car was based on the results of one race, the 2016 Runoffs. That car was never proved to be compliant. It broke prior to the end of the race and did not pass post race technical insction.

Other non fox cars have shown more performance dominance at Majors and Runoffs events and not recieved a weight penalty.

The Fox Mustang was originaly granted a weight reduction due to its suspension design limitations. Maximum suspension performance of the fox was not a priority in the 1970's. Compared to modern performance sports cars currently allowed in this class the fox is at a disadvantage. Current rules have not allowed modifations to correct this.

The two major design limitations are a narrower track width and front suspension lower control arm mounting points. under cirrent rules the Fox has two unfavorable choices when choosing the front roll center. To maintain a proper front roll cener height the car needs to have a unreasonably high ride height raising the ceter of gravity, or if the car is lowered to a proper ride height for a race car the roll cener is lowered to a unfavorable number.

Modern cars are not effected as dramaticaly as the Fox"
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-13-2016, 10:54 AM
aszilagyi aszilagyi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Northville Mi.
Posts: 114
Default

I feel adding weight to the FOX is a mistake. That does more Damage than Good.
Fox body racers are a large part of this club. And adding penalty to all.
On the performance of 1 driver is a mistake.

This kind of rule KILLED G-Production, Look it up!

Now if you added 100# to a Fox Body that uses SN95 front control arms?
You could hang your hat on “something”. That does not hurt a big portion of the class.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.