Equal power (to weight) for everyone

[SedanMan]

In a recent Forum topic there has been some discussion about the current horsepower disparity in AS between Ford and GM engines. To make the class more equal and to give GM cars a legitimate chance of doing well at the Runoffs (Mr. Heinricy’s stellar results notwithstanding), it seems that we need to create a list of GM horsepower increasing options for the SCCA Competition Board to consider.

After talking to some engine builders, chassis fabricators, and race car drivers I thought I’d get the ball rolling by suggesting some options. Perhaps people can add to the list and then among us we can decide which ones to present to the Board (present again, or again, in some cases).

1) Allow a GM block with a bore and stroke similar to a Ford block. Currently the Ford 4.00” bore X 3.00” stroke seem to be able to rev higher than the GM 3.74” bore X 3.48” stroke. Higher revs mean not only more power but also the use of a lower rear end ratio which results in better acceleration. A GM 350 block has a 4” bore and if used with a (283) 3” stroke crank would level the playing field. The 350 was available in most, if not all GM AS cars, and the 283 crank is also a GM part. Externally the 350 block is the same as the current 305 block. With the allowance of aftermarket cranks these days as long as we use a 3” stroke then the GM engines would end up with the same displacement, bore, and stroke as the Fords.

2) Allow a GM Performance block (if there is such a thing). Currently the Ford Motorsport block is allowed whereas the GM blocks have to be stock.

3) Allow .500” valve lift. Currently the Ford engines are allowed .500” of valve lift whereas the GM engines are limited to .480” lift.

4) Allow a different head other than the (2) stock cast iron GM heads. Currently Ford engines are allowed the ‘high performance’ GT-40 heads whereas there are no alternate heads (other than the 2 stock heads) allowed for GM engines.

5) Allow porting of the current (2) cast iron GM heads. Instead of a different head, allow porting of the current heads.

6) Allow an alternate firing order. Currently the Ford engines are allowed (2) different firing orders whereas the GM engines are allowed only one.

7) Add weight to Mustangs. Although this doesn’t address the horsepower disparity directly, in term of power-to-weight ratios it has the same net effect. If we add 150lb to the Mustangs then it will theoretically make up for about half of the current Mustang horsepower advantage. (See the Forum thread ‘New Crank Rule’ for the logic and some math.)

Ok, there’s a start. In my opinion none are perfect and some are better than others. Cost, ease of updating, impact on other engine parts/systems, and in some cases unpredictability of the net horsepower increase all make choosing one/more a difficult task.

If allowed to pick one (or more) right here, right now, to be put into the GCR tomorrow, I’m not sure which I’d pick. Do you know which you’d pick? Perhaps people could add some more to the list and then after we have a bunch to choose from we could submit the ones that seem to make the most sense. May the Force be with us…….

I would start with options 3,4 & 5 under the assumptions that with the proper work they can reach the parity we want. They seem the easiest and least expensive relative to the other items. It also won't make immediate enemies of Ford owners since they wont have to worry about weight.

The other thing is casting as wide a net as possible so we either need to get the email addresses of all AS Camaro drivers or post this thread on the asedan email. It might also help to have one collection point for the responses and then run a query to find the order of most accepted item to least.

just my .02

Well a couple of good ideas, .500 lift would help alittle, the Gm stock heads flow very bad, compared to a gt-40p so a better set of heads would be great, maybe the vortech or something aftermarket ...

the 350 block with the 3 inch stroke is alittle much and would cost alot more to change . even though the 305 blocks are getting alittle harder to find..

I think a good start would be heads and cam change, that would be a good start , and you wouldnt have to build a whole new motor, just swap a few parts..

either way a 305 block or the 350 with the smaller crank, you'd still be in the same boat trying to build alot of power out of block or combo of parts that no body really would try to build if there rules didnt say it had to be that way

The 302 has been a Hi po motor for awhile and mustang guys have been making them scream for years. the 305...not so much. It can make some good power but its still an odd combo.

Im not complaining, i see alittle bit of difference in HP but the cars are pretty close. I just think the GM stuff needs just alittle help.

the fords are the cars to buy you can see that in the retail prices, a good A/S ford starts out asking 20k, a gm product starts around 12-14k.

my .2 cents

[SedanMan]

Well, it's not my intent to alienate anyone or make anyone mad. Not Ford owners, not JH, and not the Board members. Fairness in racing, or parity as we've been calling it, is elusive at best. As a driver of a GM car I just want a legitimate shot at a top spot at the Runoffs. Or should I say I'd like the car to have a legitimate shot. Naturally we're all at different levels in our driving ability so to judge a car's potential based on trap speed on a straight, for example, is a bit assuming.

A speed like that has as much to do with the chassis as it went through the corner preceeding the straight as it does with the driver who had the car at the edge of control (or over it) through the turn.

But a drag race is a drag race and all other things being equal a top Ford car will walk away from a top GM car. Period. Yes the Mustangs didn't used to handle as well but it appears that the handling gap is much smaller than the horsepower gap.

Also, you've never heard me once propose that the GM cars should have MORE power than the Ford cars. Just equal. Or near equal if there is still a handling issue at hand, which it sounds like there isn't. Yes the competitive side in me would like more power....the more the better.....but it's unrealistic and unfair. Sounds like a racing oxymoron (no, I'm not the moron....lol) to want to have things "fair" if you really just want to win. But I've never been a cheater and I don't plan on starting now.

But back to the thread. Please don't think that my list is all inclusive and just vote on it. I haven't been in AS as long as most of you have so all you other folks that have been thinking about the horsepower issue for a while please add your options to the list.

Thanks for your feedback so far.

Sorry but I think I might have made you think that I was suggesting your ideas would alienate or make anyone mad. What I was trying to get across is that we should stick to pushing for changes that affect our cars only. I agree that the objective is parity nothing more. I think your ideas are a great first start and I hope more will comment and offer additional suggestions.

You have alot of good ideas, i think heads and cam would make it pretty equal, only thing ive noticed about scca is alot of people talk but not alot of people follow thru ,write letters and get things done, ive sent several letters and emails and will continue to do so, its just gonna take alot more then my effort to make anything happen, the comp board doesnt seem to get things done to quickly and I think enjoy watching use squeal. yes but it would be nice to catch a ford or atleast stay door to door on a straight away

[koscieldrk]

Money Money Money and you can make anything go fast. Your dealing with some guys that have unlimited budgets and resources to go fast. The Camero's and Firebirds that are fast don't seem to have any trouble keeping up. JH from what I hear doesn't even own the car he drives. You take away the Getty Up Go guys and the field pretty well evens out. Seems to me it is more handling and driving experience than horsepower. Reason I say this I had a top ten driver drive my car and he was 3 seconds faster in it than I ever have been and that was only after ten laps in a car he never even sat in before. My .02 cents

[SedanMan]

Originally Posted by koscieldrk

Money Money Money and you can make anything go fast........The Camero's and Firebirds that are fast don't seem to have any trouble keeping up.......

The only GM car that can "keep up" is the one driven by JH. If you're describing why JH wins in a Firebird then I think you're correct. He's an extrememly talented professional race car driver that in my opinion belongs in other racing venues, not at the SCCA Runoffs. Not to mention the vast resources he has access to that the rest of us don't. But we're talking about comparing apples to apples (GM v.Ford engines) and a JH driven car prepared with a virtually unlimited budget is an orange. Or is it a banana? It's surely not a lemon.

Take him, his resources, and his car out of the equation and what you have left are Ford cars that finish higher and make more power than GM cars, everything else being equal. A lot of people have commented on how the top Mustangs out accelerated JH's Firebird. Why do you think the Mustangs can do that? Are you saying that those particular Mustangs are driven by people with more money and more talent than JH?

Take JH's Firebird and any top running Mustang from a rolling start and have them drag race through a couple of gears. The Mustangs will always win. The point of this thread is to address this difference, not to belabor the point that we don't have his experience or resources.

just wondering here but has anyone gone back and looked at the finishing order for the various regions over a few years time?

[t4wallace]

Originally Posted by socalta

just wondering here but has anyone gone back and looked at the finishing order for the various regions over a few years time?

I have done some analysis by region, but only to support Runoffs invite to be based on participation. What I DID see is that CenDiv is representative of the class as a whole and that you can use CenDiv as a benchmark for AS performance.

Something that I did do was analyze the 04 qualifying and race results. Here's what the data says:
There were 43 cars (27/16 for Chevy/Ford)
Average qualifying lap time: 1:40.222
Average qualifying lap time for Chevy: 1:40.676
Average qualifying lap time for Ford: 1:39.528

Race times, as we expect were slower, but the data shows the trend with the Ford lap diffrence actually greater:
Field Ave.: 1:41.115
Ford Ave.: 140.263
Chevy Ave.: 141.660

The race lap times for Lavigne and Doll were not taken into account, so the data sample is 41 for the race with a 26/15 Chevy/Ford split.

Something to chew on...

T. Wallace