is happily being the wheel rather than a rusty old spoke
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Partial cylinder count, off the top of my head. Subject to change. I'm only going to count running engines and not compressors.
Cyls Vehicle Notes
4 44 Ford 2N Tractor
6 89 Taurus SHO (black car, good condition)
6 89 Taurus SHO (red car, runs, but is parts car)
6 94 Taurus SHO (daughter's blue car, great condition)
6 95 Taurus SHO (green parts car, low mileage, runs great, wrecked)
8 85 Mustang GT (SCCA A-Sedan, for sale)
8 91 Mustang GT (track toy for 9 years, bought new)
8 74 Ford dumptruck (555 cu in. Cummins diesel)
8 99 F350 crew, dually (just hauls the car trailer, 7.3l diesel)
9 Fords, totaling 60 cylinders
8 03 Chevy Suburban
4 04 Subaru WRX (the other track toy)
6 77 (?) Dodge pickup (bought from son last week)
8 70's El Camino (sitting in a field, but runs)
6 76 BMW 530i (sitting in a field, ran before I used the coil for tractor
6 62 Austin Healey 3000(restoration project)
6 non-Ford cars/trucks, totaling 38 more cylinders
98 so far
Motorcycles
6 03 Gold Wing (no comment)
3 76 GT380
3 75 GT380 (parts for 76)
1 72 XL250
1 65 Honda 90 (new condition -- called a CM91 or something like that)
1 74 Kaw G3SS (fun little 90cc two-stroke)
4 76 CB750
7 motorcycles totaling 19 cylinders
105 so far and I'm sure I'm forgetting some bikes
Equipment
2 45-ft manlift
4 Case 580SK backhoe
7 4 different generators
2 water pumps
3 JD455 riding mower (diesel)
2 Push mowers
1 Power washer
1 gas-powered air compressor
3 weedeaters
3 chainsaws
6 Ford belt-drive powerplant (unused currently)
1 Toro brush mower (wheeled weedeater on steroids)
1 tiller
Equipment total is 36 cylinders.
Total 141.
I've got to be missing several items. Will print this list later and compare it with reality.
Oh, just remembered a couple more.
1 Honda 4-wheeler
1 Honda-powered go-kart
143 total.
Would that be the last series before they quit making them? If so, yes. Something like 3 or 4 weekends. A typical modern American muscle car. Lots of grunt, better brakes and handling than in the past, but still not enough for the power and weight. IMO, all of the modern American iron (including the Camaro before they quit making them) is really good stuff that can be made to get around a racetrack in a serious hurry, with one notable exception. The Z06. While the others are very good, that one's great. Right out of the box.
Just wanted to give you guys a heads-up that I'm going to use you as leverage. I'm going to be visiting the local Honda dealership Tuesday, present the head of sales (who was just a kid when I worked there as a mechanic) with my business card, tell him the size of audience I speak to on the internet, then ask him what he and Honda can do to make me a happy camper before I go home and write a post.
I took my bike in last week to get some parts replaced that fell off of it and to get two recalls taken care of, one of which was for potential frame cracks.
The 2003's are just supposed to be inspected and if there are no cracks, they pass.
Mine didn't pass. My frame is apparently as bad as it felt. It's felt for some time like there was a hinge in the middle of it when doing spirited riding.
They said they can't release the bike back to me under any circumstances because it's unsafe.
I don't have a problem with that. I wouldn't continue riding it with a bad frame.
What I do have a problem with is that some mechanic who I don't know or trust has to tear my bike down all the way, ship off the frame to get it rewelded, then assemble my bike. The guy from the dealership told me "Think of it as a frame-off restoration.", to which I replied "The only frame-off restoration I trust is one I've done. I've done many, and that is one seriously complicated bike and I don't know that your guy will torque every bolt, nut and screw to factory specs."
But it gets worse.
They said not to expect to see my bike again for at least 2, possibly 3 or more months.
While I'm making payments to Honda Finance.
I will be trying to get them to either buy the bike from me for what I feel is a fair price considering the very low miles, or at the very least either make my payments while it's down or give me an equivalent loaner. Or swap it straight across for a comparably low-mileage 2003 and pay me some cash on top of it since it's unlikely they can get one in Illusion Blue, which is an extra-cost and rare color.
I prefer they just get me out of the bike. I've been waiting for it to get out of the shop so I can ride it to the local BMW dealership and leave with a K1200LT.
I'll stick with the Blues for now on the Mustang since rotors are so cheap. And will try at least one set of Blues on the Scoob since they're already ordered.
After I use up the Blues, I'll try blacks on the Scoob and if I like them, will change to them on the Mustang and see if I still like them.
The front pads are extremely important on the Mustang. They get little help from the rear shoes and are having to deal with a 3600 lb car that has enough torque to build up a ton of momentum that has to be converted to heat.
I got the Mustang dyno'd this weekend and will scan/post the graph for your opinion. I'm a bit disappointed in the results, but it could be that I don't currently have a functional timing light, so have no idea where the timing is at now, can hear a couple of loose tappets, and other than new spark plugs about 5 years ago, this car has had no tuneups or maintenance other than fluid changes and any necessary repairs.
If I remember right, I peaked at 171 horses at the wheels and something like 208 ftlb of torque.
There was also an interesting dip in both torque and horsepower in the extreme upper rev range followed by a climb up to near peak figures. Odd.
They told me to add 15% to my results to get flywheel figures. That's 196 horses at the crank. From an engine that supposedly made 215 (it's commonly agreed Ford's 225 figure was overstated) from the factory, but now (hopefully) runs 13 degrees advance on the timing, has a dinky underdrive pulley (you can easily count radiator fan rotations at idle), Moroso cold air intake, no silencer, and a K&N filter.
I really figured all of that should've taken me up to the 240 neighborhood.
Not that the car feels underpowered. But if I'm down about 40 horses from where I should be, that could make a substantial difference in track performance if I get it addressed and if the brakes are up to the increased workload.
Oh, this weekend was an Integra Type R weekend. What an impressive car!!! I instructed in two relatively unmolested ones and was very surprised at how well they got around the track, even in the rain.
Sheridan's going to let me try out his 318ti in a couple of weeks at MAM. That should be interesting since it's such a great braker and turner, and I'm slowly starting to get used to cars with those traits.
I also got a chance to get in and out of an Elise and it wasn't anywhere near as difficult or painful as it looked.
That's where I got the HPS pads I used this past weekend. They were decent enough. Not as aggressive as the Porterfields, but they did the job.
I have yet to put the car on the lift and see how much life I took off the pads. The Subaru got used a lot more than the Mustang this weekend because the Mustang was (yet again!!!) leaking axle grease. I even tried hammering the diff cover straight and using lots of sealant, to no avail.
The only gaskets I can find are paper ones. The original was cork.
I may have to make my own gasket, once I buy the tools since I can't find my old ones anymore.
And/or get a diff cover from a junkyard if I can find one I know hasn't been taken off and ever over-tightened.
There's a holdup getting Hawk Blues for the Scoob. I don't know if the supply hasn't caught up with demand or if the supply simply doesn't exist yet because of likely light demand.
The car got different brakes in either 2003 or 2004. I've tried 2002 pads and they don't fit. I think 2004 is when the change was made.
Did you happen to notice that iHub has a 4-digit Alexa ranking again, with SI close on its heels?
Can the Hawk Black pads handle the upper temperature ranges the Blues can reach?
I use the blues on the Mustang because, face it, with drum rear brakes, I really am only stopping with two my front wheels. They take a LOT of heat.
I've already ordered the blues for both cars, but will consider using the blacks on the Scoob once the blues get used up. Which should take a while. That little bugger has such great brakes, I STILL haven't quite worked up to their limit. I'm still braking too light and early.
The control arm I removed was on the driver's side of the car. Same side where the panhard attaches to the chassis.
When I arrived in Topeka, my tire and former race setup guy was there for an SCCA board meeting (their HQ is now in Topeka) and I asked him about the setup and it was his opinion that I accidentally removed the correct one. I didn't understand his explanation (something involving "roll center"), but took his word for it.
In addition to putting new tires on the Stang for my next outing, I'm going to put the rear sway bar back on to see how much push that takes out of it. I'll make sure to take tools with me to remove it if it reintroduces the dreaded looseness.
A picture of my Scoob in the foreground, a friend's in the background, and my trailer further in the background. The owner of the other one (a 2002) is the guy who first planted the seed of an idea to eventually get a WRX.
The Scoob, as usual, didn't disappoint in the least until the left front brakes went away. I probably mentioned I'm convinced I managed to get some abrasive media into the caliper when sandblasting them prior to painting them to match the body. Hopefully just disassembling it, flushing it with Safety-Klean, and putting it back together will solve that problem.
At first, I thought the problem might've been with that one because it was doing the most work on MAM's clockwise layout, but it quickly wore out at HPT, which is counter-clockwise. I haven't inspected the other pads yet, but am sure they're pretty close to being toast, so I'm ordering Hawk Blues for it today and a decent set of O'Reilly pads (which proved surprisingly good) for street use.
Unfortunately, the left front rotor is also toast. Too bad. $71.95 at O'Reilly. Kinda surprising since it's a simple hat rather than the Mustangs more complete assembly with hub and bearing races ($29.95 all day, every day), but I'm sure economies of scale factor into the price difference.
I'm not a fan of turning rotors because in my experience, at least with the Mustang, a thinner rotor is far more prone to warping and cracking.
Mustang suspension config for last weekend: Panhard installed (I'd never leave home without it) and the left upper control arm disconnected and bungeed up out of the way.
Leaving HPMotorsports lower control arms with poly bushings, HPM panhard (mounts to the chassis on the left and attaches to the right side of the axle via a long tube with heims at each end), and one very stout upper control arm with poly's on the right.
No axle counterweight, no quads (what I may be incorrectly calling the horizontal dampers -- I'd never dream of ditching the verticals) and no sway bar.
Since it's been a long time since the car was in a slight push mode, I'm not absolutely certain I've got the comparison right, but am pretty sure that the car pushed only slightly more than it used to. Which I don't mind not only because I trail-brake (even on the streets) out of habit, but also because it still pushed far less than the Subaru.
Once it rotated (turned about an imaginary axis running vertically through the center of the car) enough to have a good bead on the apex and exit of a turn, I literally could floor it and launch out.
There are two very tight turns at Heartland where the car could *never* take full throttle mid-turn even with the stock setup, but if the weather allows, I'll find out if it can do it this weekend. It used to spin the inside tire but not get especially loose while doing it. I used to do it on purpose because it was gratifying (I love g's) when the car would settle down and lunge, until someone told me I was burning up the rear-end's clutch plates.
I suspect it won't spin the inside tire even on those turns now because when it did, it took full throttle to do it. 3/4 throttle wouldn't do it. And the rear-end is repacked to supposedly give 30% more lockup between the rear wheels.
I couldn't detect any turning favoritism. I may not be close enough to the edge to feel it, though. The car is different and it always takes me a while to slowly get up to 100% of what it can do.
When I first had the SFC's put in, and no other mods, I found that it was taking a big left-handed carousel at "Oh my God, I can't believe the car's sticking" speeds (I don't recall that the car ever communicated a limit in that turn and the in-car puckerometer wouldn't let me push it any further) but had findable limits in right turns. A call to HPM (when Paul Brown was still there, who really knows Mustangs) revealed that's normal behavior when the SFC's are installed. The car turns left better than it turns right.
I don't remember which way the engine turns, but perhaps the left-turn preference is an effect of engine torque (remember, we accelerate through turns, usually heavily) trying to bury the left side of the car, keeping it more level? Or vice-versa, trying to bury the side of the car that's taking the brunt of the lateral forces?
Hmmm... Now that I think about it, it must be pushing a bit more. I can remember modulating the throttle in that turn, lifting a bit as it pushed, then getting back into the throttle.
I strongly suspect the stock sway bar has far less tendency to lift the inside tire than the too-stout 4-link, so I'll put it back on for this weekend but take the right wrench with me to remove it if I find that it's loose again.
Aside from what was probably more push than it used to have (but easily within my happiness levels), the only bad trait the car exhibited was what I mentioned before about the rear tires feeling like they were extra-greasy after several laps. This wasn't even the "We've really had quite enough of this nonsense" greasiness that street tires will exhibit when they get too hot. Street tires will let you know by gripping less but if you take it down to about 90%, they're fine.
This was quite different. The seat-ripping kind of looseness when you enter a turn and the instant you're rotating the car is the instant you realize your outside rear tire is running on steel belts rather than sticky rubber. It's a feeling I know very well. <g> Although I'm more familiar with it happening to fronts. With the massive negative camber I have to use, if the front end is toed even slightly in, you can wear out the inside edges of the tires on the straights, resulting in it being squirrely down the straight, and unable to rotate enough in the turn to flatten the contact patch.
The car would feel like both rears were on belts ("corded", in the parlance) but would settle down some if I applied throttle, but not completely, so I'd have to countersteer. The first time it happened, it happened at the last turn before pit entrance so I went into the pits, checked the tires, and they were hot, but visually in excellent condition. One time, I went ahead and stayed on the track when this started happening, but found that I had to back *way* off the pace to avoid looping it.
I very strongly suspect that my tires have taken on street tire characteristics because of their age and the number of heat-cycles they've gone through.
So I'll pitch the even older tires on the front, move these rears to the front after applying Hot Lap, put new tires on the back, and bring another pair of new tires for the front in case the front-end starts exhibiting the same problem.
I can tell by their condition that these rear tires have never been on the front of the car. And since the car wasn't handling well enough last year to really overstress the front tires, I'm sure these back tires probably saw several weekends. What's more typical is that a pair of new tires will spend one weekend on the back of the car, the following weekend on the front, then the next weekend as part of the turn barricades at home.
I don't really remember what Hot Lap smells like. But I do remember that you apply something like 3 coats, each after the previous coat has set a while, then let the tires set (off the ground) for 24 hours before using them.
I know the hardness that comes from heat-cycling is a result of molecular realignment, so would suspect that Hot Lap doesn't do any molecular realignment, but probably simply semi-disolves the outer surface of the tire to make it softer.
I need to remember to clean and treat those tires today since the car goes back into the trailer tomorrow.
Hmmm.... I wonder what that stuff would do to street tires. The Subaru's tires are finally worn down enough that tall tread blocks (which tend to tear) are no longer an issue.
Oh! Just remembered something that's another piece of evidence that the tires have become more street-like. Tom can back me up on this.
When you've got soft tires on your car and take it out for the first time of the day, you have to deal with a lot of flat-spot sounding whumping sounds from all 4 corners for a lap or two. The tires tend to flatten on the contact patch while the car is sitting for a long time, but they "go round" again after you warm them up and apply a lot of centrifugal force to the outer surface.
It just occurred to me that the Mustang never did that last weekend. Further evidence that my tires have simple "gone street" on me?
I'm thinking refrigerant compressors aren't of the positive-displacement variety, meaning no piston and cylinder. Correct? Thought they used vanes like a water pump.
Ummmmm... You didn't really just suggest that we forbid saying bad things about a company, did you?
Made my night! hehe
I think it's called "Hot Lap" and is supposedly illegal and undetectable. Supposedly it'll give you something like 25 laps with qualifying-quality stickiness.
Hi Bob, Your worn out front brake may be working fine and the other may be coasting. Check for air in the "good" side first. Maybe the worn one was doing all the work.
That was my thinking, too.
It turned out to be the inside pad on the left side. All others looked like they've got nearly a weekend left in them.
It also turned out to have scored the rotor quite a bit, so I'll check on new rotors tomorrow.
The new instruments are arriving tomorrow! Should make this weekend fun!
Getting back to the brakes, I was able to push the pistons back in by hand, feeling no more than the usual hydraulic resistance. Think it could be a matter of having run it on a clockwise track?
"Complaint Department". I love that!
"controlling/removing" negative posters will never be on the agenda here. Chose your URL's accordingly.
I found out quickly that if you do a tally off the top of your head, then run around with a clipboard and get a real count, you'll find many you forgot about. Like the old chainsaw whose only purpose in life is to get the good chainsaw unstuck from a tree.
Hmmmm.... Bicycle pumps. I haven't been counting air compressor cylinders either. I think the spirit and/or letter of most Cylinder Counts is that only operational internal combustion engines are counted, which would exclude air compressors (except for the cylinder(s) of a gas engine that might be powering one), but for the sake of this one, let's include not only air compressors and non-running engines, but also bicycle tire pumps since they wouldn't dramatically affect anyone's count and it simplifies the rules by making it "a cylinder with a piston in it" and not complicating it by requiring it to run (heck, on most of my motorcycles I don't know if the engines currently run or not anyway).
I can think of 7 cylinders here for big air compressors (2 each but one is powered by a gas engine) and don't forget the little air compressors you plug into a car's cigarette lighter socket. And RC toys if they're not electric.
Thanks for the reminder.
I'll reset the ignore lists today of those like you who are using Happy Hour to abuse/circumvent the system and see how much work it'd take to make it so the more egregious abusers can't use Ignore at all.
Although the easier route would be to do away with Happy Hour, which I've been tempted to do because of missed ad revenue and the constant overhead of every page having to check to see if it's currently Happy Hour. Even if it's not currently Happy Hour, the load is still there in having to check.
I think we should do a Cylinder Count. I know mine's changed dramatically since the last I did a few years ago. I'll try to do a tally around here soon and see what I come up with. I think I came in at 144 a few years ago but suspect I'm crowding 200 now. It's gotten a bit ridiculous. Lessee. 4 SHO's, 2 Mustangs, the truck, the tractor, and the dump truck. I think that covers all of the Fords. 9. 24 SHO cylinders, 16 in Mustangs, 16 in trucks, and 4 in the tractor equals 60 Ford cylinders. Not counting a spare 302 engine and a spare 302 short-block. 76 if we count them. Probably around 50 in motorcycles, maybe 50 in utility engines (generators, weedeaters, lawn mowers, etc), then a few non-Ford cars. Off the top of my head, 32 in non-Ford cars. Yeah, i think it's real close to 200.
Basically, you just count the number of cylinders in all engines you own and total them up. Cars, lawn mowers, weedeaters, etc. If it has a piston, it counts. No idea how rotary engines are scored. Though I don't own any, I'd think a count of 3 per rotor would be fair. Basically assigning 1 point for each apex seal.
Good Fox cars stabilized in the $5k-$8k range a few years ago and have been there since. I think it's because when compared to the SN95's, their unapologetically muscular look is more apparent. Plus so many of them have been ruined or totalled. They're far from rare, but clean ones are.
I'd never sell my 91 at any price, but it'd probably still fetch a fair price. I think it's got 44k miles on it, which might somewhat offset the dinging it'd get for the mods, all of which except for the SFC's can be put back to stock. I hated putting the SFC's in because it meant I'd have to give up on the tentative plan for the car to eventually retire as a survivor show car, but the car was getting pretty damaged without them. If you look and measure closely (I have), it's obvious that the car was actually pretty twisted when they puts the SFC's on. I really wish I'd had the foresight to have the car put on a frame machine and tweaked a bit past correct before welding the SFC's in, like I heard is common practice when putting in a cage, keeping the cage pre-loaded with a lot of force that'll get relieved under most track conditions rather than it being "neutral" then taking loads on the track.
The only obvious symptom at a glance is the doors not lining up perfectly, but it'd be less obvious with some adjustment.
Well, that kinda makes sense, I think. A good set of Hoosiers is sticky at turn one of the first lap and gets a little more sticky as they get hot. The back tires were acting just like street tires this time around. Good stick when they were cold, but they went away bad when hot.
Fortunately, I've got 4 new ones, so this'll be an easy test if it doesn't rain this weekend.
I'm changing out Scooby's brakes this morning before I go to the office. Currently, I'm suspecting a sticking caliper on the right front. It's down to the metal backing plate of the pad. Fortunately, no rotor damage. Won't know for sure until the car's on the lift and the tires are off, but on the ground it looks like only that set got ruined and the rest have a lot of life left in them, which definitely says I somehow got some abrasive media into the works and it's sticking. At the very least, I'm taking that one apart and it's getting a good rinsing in the safety-klean tank.
Last year, Hawk didn't make pads for this car. The 2004 doesn't use the same parts as the 2003. I'll bet they've caught up by now and my own experience with Hawk blacks is like yours. Good track pads and I can hand the keys to the wife in good conscience, knowing she doesn't have to ride the brakes for half a mile to bring them up to temperature like the blues on the Mustang.
If rotors turn out to be inexpensive I might go with blues for track use and blacks for the street. They're the hat type, which was a surprise since it's an AWD car. One of the reasons I use blues on the Mustang is that despite its rotors being a tougher swap (they're not the hat type), they're only $29.95 a pop at O'Reilly.
I'm trying desperately to get this ordered and quickly shipped:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7972477993
No answer when I called yesterday and haven't gotten far enough through my email to see if I got a reply to my inquiry asking for the combo to have their boost gauge, air/fuel mixture gauge, and oil-temperature gauge. I don't much care about oil pressure (the car's too young to worry much about that) and sure don't care about a voltmeter. The idiot light will certainly cover that.
The camber bolts and manual boost adjuster are on their way. I don't dare install the boost adjuster without a boost gauge, though. And I'd really love to take this thing out with 250-270 horses next time rather than the current 227. With that kind of power on tap plus better turning manners, I get the feeling the WRX will absolutely dust the Mustang. And a lot of cars that currently pass me but don't peel my paint off. Am also considering getting stickies for it but will probably wait until I'm used to the new turning characteristics and increased power (and seeing if the brakes are up for it -- they really seem to be). I *still* am overbraking consistently at a few turns because I haven't gotten used to just how great these brakes are. Compared to the Mustang anyway.
I need to go back to basics on braking. Using reference points.
Because I've driven the Mustang for so long and am so accustomed to its characteristics, I've come to rely solely on my own puckerometer to tell me when to brake. It's going off earlier than it needs to in the Subaru. There have been times I've waited for the sound of the seat fabric tearing before hitting the brakes and the car *still* gets slowed down more than it needs.
Awesome ummmmm..... "vehicle"!!! About 1/3rd the weight of the WRX.
Had glasspacks put on the daughter's car yesterday. My wife is getting a kick out of it. Not so much the sound of the car itself but when she hears my reaction when my daughter revs it in the driveway. During normal driving, it just sounds a little extra healthy. If she revs it a couple of times in the driveway (revs, unfortunately, are limited to 4k in Park or Neutral), it sounds like a Civic with a fart-can muffler.
I'll definitely check for damage to the body-side mount of the upper control arm when the car goes on the lift this week for the new tires, but doubt I'm going to find any. What it was doing on the track, if I'm picturing rear axle movement/control correctly, which you and Tom are greatly helping with, is something that wouldn't be caused even by the mounting point being so damaged as to make the remaining control arm effectively non-existent. My thinking is that uncontrolled wind-up would be the problem and hopping would be the symptom, but it's not hopping at all. No lateral movement is possible with the panhard.
The car was just plain getting tail-happy whenever the tires had some good heat in them. It would still launch out of turns at full throttle in 3rd gear without the slightest hint of wheelspin. That aspect is better than it EVER was. I used to be able to use a lot of throttle in tight turns but flooring it would spin one tire. No longer the case. Partially because of the 3-link variation, I'm sure, but also partly because of repacking the trac-loc.
So, right now I'm assuming the rear tires have been heat-cycled to many times and I should put them on the front where they'll wear out more quickly. And I think I need to throw the fronts away even though there's plenty of rubber left on them. Even with the car pushing and getting heavy trail-braking, I didn't wear them out. I drove it enough that they should've really suffered, but they look no worse at all. But since they're the old style Hoosiers, I know they've got to be well over a year old. In fact, I'm pretty sure that they got used a weekend or two, sat unused for a whole year, then started getting used again last year.
Tom, I've got that stuff you paint onto the tires to make them stickier. Any idea if it helps tires that've gotten too hard? I've never thrown away a tire before because it'd gotten too hard and would hate for this to be the first time. When I throw a tire away, (by using it as a corner barrier on our dirt track), it's usually obvious why it's sitting in a field rather than on a wheel.
Possible if I add a server to just handle searches. Unfortunately, I can't really inexpensively test it to see if it'd do any good. It'd be easy enough to have a separate server handle searches, but it has to be quite beefy.
And I'm not terribly convinced it'll work well. SI is very overpowered for the workload it's dealing with and is facing the same limitations and inconveniences with search. It's a problem of scale. The messages to be searched represent a HUGE amount of data.
That explains a lot, including Bob’s perplexity with the large weight that he removed.
That and the quads, which were also removed, but I still can't remember why I removed the quads. The only axle hop I get is when doing a burn-out on a good, abrasive surface, which I did a few times this weekend. I noticed that the rear tires were picking up an amazing amount of track boogers (have never seen it do that before and it might explain part of why the rear-end gets loose after 5-6 laps), so a quick burnout works well to clean the tires.
I'm sure the lack of hop under "normal conditions" is because of the relatively stout single upper control arm and the drum brakes.
Really, the car was very wonderful at first. Loved how the push had returned, so I could trail-brake without fear of looping it, and I could exit turns floored in 3rd without any wheelspin. Last year it couldn't take much more than neutral throttle even in 4th. But late in sessions, it really felt like the rear tires were corded. The back end was *that* loose. It totally felt tire-related. If I don't find obvious problems under the car when it's on the lift (I won't -- anything would've been obvious on the ground, I think), I'll just throw the new tires on it and see how it does next weekend, although they're predicting rain, which means the Subaru will get all the fun.
But like I said before, if the Subaru turns out to be as good as the Mustang and can cheaply be made better, that'll pretty much be the end of the Mustang's track days except for very infrequent use. Probably using it as a backup to the Subaru.
Don't want to get too carried away improving the Mustang any further because if I end up with the Shelby, the Mustang will end up getting converted back to a decent road car. And road-racing springs and stiff bushings aren't part of that equation.
Edit: The truck really worked its butt off on the way home today. Driving into a really strong south wind, I started out getting about 7 mpg and barely able to hold 60 mph on some hills even floored, but when the wind let up, my average came out to almost 9 mpg. Not as good as the 12-14 I usually get pulling that trailer. Cost me about $80 just in fuel to drive from Omaha to KC.
I could tell in the first turn that disconnecting one of the upper control arms was an excellent idea. The car started pushing again, perhaps a little more than it used to (no rear sway bar), but less than the Subaru. I could apply full throttle in the turns and it'd settle down and lunge out.
Unfortunately, this afternoon it started feeling like the rear tires were corded. Felt bad enough that I came in early from a session, but the tires looked great. Will have to see what the heck that's all about. The back end was loose laterally, but I could still apply plenty of throttle.
A friend who is faster than either of my cars is convinced the Subaru is actually a bit faster than the Mustang. He certainly should know. He said it takes him quite a bit longer to reel me in when I'm driving the Scooby.
Unfortunately, I wore out Scooby's brakes and didn't bring the extras or tools to change them. Getting lazy now that I can haul two cars. Figure that chances are pretty low I'll wear out or break both of them. Not this time. Something is apparently wrong with the Mustang, but I won't have much of a clue until I put it on the lift. Like I said, the tires looked really good.
Tom, the Hoosier R3S04's on the back of the Mustang are from last year. I've never actually dealt with old Hoosiers before. Do you know if race rubber tends to get greasier when hot if it's old and has been heat-cycled a few times?
I was running the old R3S03's on the front since I wanted less grip there, and still didn't manage to wear them out. Those tires I'm sure are at least a year old, but surely none of these tires really have many weekends on them. I've never gotten Hoosiers to last many weekends. I'm really scratching my head trying to figure out why I have 4 good 03's at all. Probably has something to do with how loose the car was last year and the fact that it only saw about half duty since the WRX joined the party.
I have another event next weekend and I bought another set of 04's last week, and am thinking maybe I just need to throw them on and use the old ones as spares. It just runs completely contrary to how I usually use tires. I usually put new tires on the back (where they don't get much of a workout but they still get heat-cycled) then when a front one gets ruined or worn out, I move a back one into its place and put a new one on the back.
And I'm going to have to use stouter brake pads on Scooby. These lasted two weekends, one of which was a 3-day without the Mustang joining. Fortunately, the ones that came off looked nearly new, so I can likely get by the rest of the month on them. I'll have to get these off the car and have a closer look, but at the track it looked like the front right pads were gone and there was plenty of life left in the rest. I might've screwed something up sand-blasting and painting the calipers (doubtful -- I was really careful) or maybe I didn't get the brakes bled completely when I flushed and changed the fluid.
Anyway, I'm going to check with the head corner worker and see if he knows if the guy who always times my Mustang might've happened to have timed the Subaru. If so, and if the Subaru is faster than the Mustang (possible) or at least very close (I can believe it), the Mustang might be relegated to occasional use until the 2007 Shelby Mustang comes out next year, and the Subaru get some inexpensive but supposedly very effective steroids.
First thing tomorrow, I'm order the camber-adjusting bolts for the Subaru to help turn-in, and seeing if I can finally make up my mind which route I want to go increasing boost. There are a lot of options out there, some inexpensive, some very expensive. Leaning toward getting a decent boost gauge and the relatively inexpensive manual controller. Supposedly take it from 227 horses to around 270.
And unlike the Mustang, the rest of the Subaru is largely up to the task of handling some more power.
Ah! Now I get it.
Those people actively use the site. There are a LOT of folks who subscribe but never post, presumably so they can use things like Search and Next nnn.
All that found was "nanoposter" when I did a member search.
I'm not sure I understand the question.
I don't usually post much unless it's about cars. Too busy looking for advertisers and occasionally fixing site problems.
I didn't get any results when I did a member search on "no poster" and got the expected results when I did a public message search on the same string.
I looked through your messages and the clues to your location are really sketchy. I pretty much need a locale name (a little more specific than hemisphere, thank you) or I'm lost.
Well, now we're a 4-SHO family. I was at the local tire place getting one of the WRX's tires patched, where I happened to buy my daughter's 94 and the parts 89, and I happened to see a familiar-looking 95 sitting out in the field, although not in as good of shape as it'd been the last time I saw it.
It was my secretary's son's car. I guess he wrecked it about 2-3 months ago. I'm really surprised she didn't tell me since she knows I like SHO's and especially like parts cars for old American cars I have.
Ended up buying it from her son for $300.
It's wrecked badly enough that it'll never see street use again (got the left front fender, left rear quarter, and I've no doubt the car's tweaked), but it's low mileage (88k), the engine sounds very good, the 16" wheels appear to have survived though the tires got peeled off two of them, and overall it seems to be in really good, but wrecked condition.
My daughter's especially excited because we took the subwoofer out of hers Saturday and found that the cone was complete torn. I turned on the stereo in the 95 and the sub was definitely in excellent condition. Plus, it has an in-dash CD player she'd much rather have than the trunk-mounted 10-disk. I'll have to check the specs because it really sounded to me like this car's stereo was dealing with more wattage than hers, though I'm sure it's got the stock speakers and she's got the good Pioneers she stole out of my 89. We might end up swapping in the amps along with the subwoofer.
Also, her climate control has been a bit flaky and this one seems to work correctly. Betcha it's not a direct plug-in, though. I remember putting a whole dashboard in a Granada I used to have and the new dash came out of the exact same model, one year removed (the car had a plywood and carpet dash with Chevette instruments when I bought it -- don't ask, I haven't a clue) and the wiring was so different it took several days to get everything working correctly.
Best of all, the engine sounds great, it's 3.2 liters since the car's an automatic, and doesn't appear to be leaking any oil.
Bet you're way ahead of me. Rather than rebuilding the leaky engine in my 89, I can just do a transplant and gain 20 ftlbs of torque to boot.
Even the door seals look excellent on this car, so maybe I won't have to spend $100 with JC Whitney in the hopes of keeping the gravel dust out of her car.
The first thing that caught my eye was that unlike all 3 of the other SHO's, the headlight lenses are still clear on this one. They're wet inside, but the lenses themselves don't appear to be cracked, so that might be an easy fix. If I remember right, new lenses are $100+ each.
Gotta love parts cars! Although I'm still going to have to get her new lower control arms. The ball-joints are a bit loose on hers (as are the tie-rod ends) and they don't sell just the ball-joints. You have to get the whole lower control arm, which I've already done for my 89, though I haven't put it in yet. I'm sure the control arms on the left side of the parts car got pretty messed up.
This also solved a mystery for me. A few months ago, someone died going off the road at an S-curve near my house and only a few weeks later I saw a fresh set of tire tracks at the same location, very nearly taking out the memorial that'd been put up for the previous kid. Now I know it was this 95 SHO that put those extra tracks down.
If I understand it correctly, the really big problem there is that the upper control arms are not perpendicular to the axle and this is done to control side to side movement. Movement that simply doesn't exist when you add a panhard, as I've done.
Mike Moss said they're actually working on bracketry that attaches to the stock brackets to allow the upper control arms to be mounted exactly perpendicular to the axle, since anyone who uses their car on the track to any large extent is using a panhard, so making the uppers perpendicular solves a lot of problems.
One choice you didn't mention that's at least the long-term plan. Wait for the Shelby version to come out next year, get a cage, seats, harnesses and other goodies installed immediately, then it should last several years as a track car and occasional street car with little or no fuss.
I had a tentative appointment tomorrow with HP Motorsports to get the single top link installed (easily done at home, but the parts are sitting in Omaha, where I'm headed) but when I called them back today (2 days later), they finally fessed up that they sold their racecar prep business to the guy/company who used to work for them and designed most of their stuff and now has his own shop.
Sooo..... I spent about half an hour on the phone today with Mike Moss (don't recall the company name) and he was extremely helpful and educational.
He said that he can try to squeeze me in for this simple a job if I call as soon as I get to town. However, at this point I'm still undecided whether to go up today like I'd originally planned or go ahead and wait until tomorrow. Besides, there's enough rain in the forecast that the Mustang likely won't even get used much.
He explained a lot to me about Mustang suspensions and confirmed for me that my lift tests weren't going to yield terribly useful results since though I'm getting the desired lift on one side of the car, I'm not adding any load to the other side like it'll see in track use. Makes sense.
When I asked what he thought of removing just one of the upper control arms since the remaining one is poly-bushed, he said he was actually going to suggest that in lieu of being in a hurry to do the heim-joint 3-link.
While I had him on the phone, I should've asked him which one I should remove for a clockwise track. I can't even fathom what the axle gyrations would consider ideal.
He said that axle hop was the worst that was likely to happen (which was a huge problem when I had good disk brakes on the car with the stock suspension -- shouldn't be a problem with drums) and perhaps inducing some push, which is what I'm trying to do.
He suggested I not mess with the front suspension yet. Said a stiffer front swaybar would help keep the rear planted if the car is suitably stiff (it is), but that if I start dinking with the front suspension, there's a LOT more to it than going with a stiffer sway bar. He talked me into it. Since I intend to only use this car on the track for another year (and probably a half), I don't want to do a lot more development when it's destined to be a street car again.
Oh, take it from me. The rubber bushings, though I don't know if it's their intended purpose, DO quiet the car and make it more civil.
After changing to the new control arms and bushings, I no longer need lithotripsy when I have a kidney stone. A few brisk rides down my gravel road and I'm right as rain.
Hmmmmm.....
Perhaps now that I have a lift rather than doing this on the ground, I should revisit that forward locator. Reason I'm thinking this is that I've already dropped the weight off the rear axle (never could figure out its purpose in life) and the quad shocks. I'm not sure why I removed the quads since I remember that reversing them gave me better tire clearance.
I removed the forward locator because it belonged to the racecar, which I'd like to sell soon, and because I was having some problems with it such as the head of the bolt rubbing the exhaust crossover hard enough it looked bound to rub a hole through it eventually, and never quite figuring out the correct arrangement of its forward rubber bushings. It has to stay mounted solidly enough to prevent/limit axle twist, but also has to allow it to pivot when the rear suspension moves up and down.
Seems a perfect application for a heim joint, plus I never liked how little ground clearance there was with the one I've got, but since the car has to get into the trailer Wednesday, I don't have time to fabricate a new one.
Sounds like putting the forward locator back in would not only be the quickest potential fix (along with removal of the upper control arms), but then if the problem persists, I can place the blame squarely on the bushings in the lower control arm.
After having slept on it, I'm also wondering if I shouldn't put a stouter front sway bar in. The current setup allows up to 4cm difference in height between sides in the turns and if I stiffen the front, perhaps it'd be less inclined (pun intended) to use up all the travel the rear can work with.
Really hate all this trial and error. I could live with it if it were a racecar and I was trying to get rid of a problem that costs me tenths. But this isn't a racecar, it's a toy. And the problem is probably worth seconds rather than tenths. The worst part being that it was just fine with the stock control arms and bushings (until the bushings were cooked out of the uppers) then when I had the control arms and bushings replace, the car suddenly lost its best trait: just enough push that it required trail-braking, but would absolutely lunge out of turns. Initial turn-in hasn't changed, to my recollection, but it's extremely tail-happy mid-turn and you can't use throttle to correct oversteer because with the inside tire barely (if at all) touching the pavement, no weight transfer is happening. It's a wonder I haven't spun it yet.
Another possibility I just might have time for is to make an appointment with HP Motorsport, who happens to be in Omaha (where I'm running this weekend) and from whom I've bought nearly all the goodies, and have them reinforce the top mount and put in the single upper with the heim joints. That way I wouldn't need the front locator at all. And again any remaining problems would be the fault of the lower control arms/bushings or a need to stiffen the front of the car, which has gotten nothing but the cc plates, springs (all 4 are the Eibach blue road-race springs) and poly sway bar bushings.
I just checked out of curiosity, and I think the bushings that sandwich the front swaybar ends are actually rubber still. Can't imagine why I wouldn't have replaced them since they surely came with the kit, but they feel like semi-hardened rubber and with the car on the lift, the top ones are squished ike rubber.
And to make sure my preparations for Omaha are more interesting, the WRX has a flat rear tire. Joy. I've got a tire changer and cement and patches, but Snap-On didn't deliver the tire-spreader and buffer that were supposed to arrive last Tuesday. Guess I need to call my tire guy and while getting new tires for the Mustang (which it'll probably need sometime this weekend), pick up the Toyo's he told me he's got that I'd love on the Scoob and that he can sell me dirt cheap because nobody runs that size.
Well, removing the upper control arms is definitely not an option, like that article seems to indicate. Geez, I hope nobody took their advice then put their car on the road. Picturing all kinds of bad things that could happen.
The only connection the panhard makes to anything directly connected to the rear axle is via a single heim joint on curbside. No way the panhard does anything to even slightly impede axle rotation. That's all on the upper control arms and the lower shock mounts.
Here's my thinking. The car is usable and good for some grins even with this condition present. It'll just be a lot better if the condition goes away. If I leave the left upper control arm disconnected, nothing bad should happen. And it's possible the rear-end will stick better in the turns. I can't imagine the condition getting worse this way.
So, rather than replacing the bushings right now, I'll leave the one control arm disconnected and will bring the sway bar with me just in case I get lucky and need it.
If the car's still foul-handling, I can still use it this coming weekend or if I'm really unhappy with it, I'll also have the WRX with me.
If it's tail-happy, I'll replace the upper control arms with stock ones and if that doesn't do the trick, I'll switch to the lower control arms that use heim joints. That'd leave zero potential for binding.
FWIW, I thoroughly checked the front-end to make sure something isn't wrong on that end that'd cause the rear to feel loose, but everything looks really good. It's also possible that the cure to the rear-end problems may simply be finally upgrading the front-end. Nothing's been done there except the CC plates, poly bushings around the sway bar, and Eibach springs. Still the same sway bar and shocks.
This is incredibly frustrating. Because I really loved the way the car handled with the stock control arms and bushings until the upper ones went away. It used to be able to floor it exiting most turns, and that's now impossible in any turn. And in most of the tighter turns, much past neutral throttle results in wheelspin.
And I'm convinced it was the old exhaust system that ruined the old bushings.
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/howto/37458/
This article says to use the stock uppers. That's a vote in favor of going back to rubber bushings. Heck, I might get lucky and have some old stock upper control arms laying around, too.
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/howto/79219/
I found this paragraph interesting and I don't believe it for a second:
A Panhard rod controls lateral body movement and that’s all. Thus, with a stout Panhard rod installed, the Mustang’s upper control arms can be removed, thereby giving all the fore-and-aft chores to the lower control arms and the lateral forces to the Panhard rod.
I'll have to look more closely at how my panhard works, but I'm pretty darned sure that if I remove my upper control arms completely, the axle will be able to twist an awful lot forward and backward, changing the pinion angle and letting the axle hop like crazy. I don't think my panhard can prevent this without the upper control arms in place.
And I think that's why my racecar has no upper control arms, but not only has a panhard, but also a brace (I can't remember what it's called) that bolts to the pumpkin at one end and has a 3-foot long arm that bolts to a cross-member toward the middle of the car. That brace would be unnecessary if the panhard were enough to stop the axle from rotating.
The reading and confusion continue....
Edit: No way that article's right. I remember now that my first clue that my upper control arm bushings were gone was a loud "thunk" under heavy braking as the axle suddenly rotated forward and slammed the control arms against the bolts.
It's not the positioning of the panhard. Perfectly centered. When I raised the rear-end to ride height, the upper control arm slipped right into place without having to be moved at all. And measuring everywhere I could also indicated the rear-end is perfectly centered at ride height.
So, I'm still pretty stumped. Trying to decide whether to take out the axle and put in the rubber bushings. Shouldn't hurt. It's just an awful lot of work for something that may or may not fix the problem. On the other hand, if I decide to go with different lower control arms with the spherical bushings, the rubber upper bushings would probably still be a good idea.
Another interesting discovery. I may be testing this all wrong. With the suspension completely unloaded, both sides were showing the same distance to the rim that I was getting before with just one side raised.
Which proves that when the right side comes off the ground with the lift, it's not bind that's raising it. It's the shock reaching its travel limit.
I suppose a more correct approach would be to lift the right side only until a certain amount of weight is on the right rear tire. Like 500 lbs. On the track, I'm sure it's not a matter of the rear tire coming off the ground. It's just getting too little weight on it.
You don't suppose the presence of the panhard could be an issue, do you? With such stout bushings, the panhard certain isn't needed anyway.
Know if Pete's around this weekend? Could you check with him and see if he minds if I call with some Mustang-specific questions and PM me the number if he's alright with that?
For now, I'm going to remove a panhard end-bolt and re-test height differences even though I'm convinced my method is flawed now.
Edit: Reading up on panhards right now. At first glance, I'm not sure if the panhard is helping the control arms bind in the turns by forcing the rear-end to the side when a side of the car is raised, or if it's preventing bind by limiting how much lateral motion occurs.
Well, Tom, color me confused and frustrated.
The short version is that when I pulled the car onto the lift and raised just the right side of it enough to barely get that tire clear of the ground, the distance from the fender lip to the lowest part of the rim was 68cm. On the left side, 64cm. And the distances have remained the same through the changes I've tried so far. Also, I wrote it down but don't remember the figure off the top of my head, but I think it was something like a 72cm distance on both sides if I raise the whole car.
First thing I did was put the car all the way up, then use the cherry-picker to lift the rear axle until the panhard was horizontal and it was just starting to try to lift the car off the rear lift pads. Then I loosened all of the control-arm fasteners, upper and lower, and re-tightened them.
Upon close inspection, HP Motorsports' explanation started making sense. The control arms clamp firmly to a metal spacer that runs through the poly bushings.
Tightened everything back up, lowered the car, raised the right side, and still just a 4cm difference in height.
Raised the car back up and, with a LOT of effort (just like the previous exercise in re-tighening), I removed the axle end of the left upper control arm and suspended it with a bungee.
Same 4cm difference.
I'm starting to think the real culprit here is the hard bushings in the lower control arms.
I'm glad I went through this exercise, though. The bolt for the front lower left arm was loose. Isn't anymore.
Not really sure what to try next. But I'm not convinced that replacing the upper bushings with rubber ones is going to help unless my test method is faulty. Seems this has to be a valid test, though. I could try lifting just the right rear of the car and see what happens since the front-end is likely to stay more planted on the track because of the heavy engine. Although the car is so incredibly stiff, I would think that on the track, both ends of the inside of the car are lifting comparably. It wouldn't be exceedingly difficult to remount the removed control arm and test raising just the right rear of the car.
Guess that'll be my next test.
If I can find *any* scenario that gets me at least 1cm greater difference in heights when one side is lifted, I'll consider it ready for track testing. Unfortunately, there's nowhere nearby where I can safely test-drive it at the level at which the problem occurs.
I still don't have the rear sway-bar installed.
Guess I'll try the test I mentioned above, then will try loosening all the bolts for the lower control arms, although with how stout these arms are and how stiff the bushings are, I really doubt that'll change anything. If it does, I might just go with the lower control arms on the website I referenced earlier.
And I suppose another test would be to remove the other upper control arm, although I know from experience that means the axle will tilt forward to such an extent that it'll be very difficult to reposition it to get the control arms back in. But if that results in a >4cm difference from side to side with the right side lifted, then that might justify all the work to put the rubber bushings in.
These HPM control arms are VERY stout, so it's plausible that a single one with a poly bushing is still enough to keep the rear-end too bound up.
I almost hope that particular test fails, though. It really does look like that as much work as is involved in completely removing the rear-end, it might be the easiest route for replacing the bushings.
Oh, one other thing to check. I might still have the panhard adjusted wrong. When I removed the axle end of the left upper arm, it shifted left of the ear on the axle. I know I adjusted the rear-end to the right a long time ago to stop the driveshaft rubbing one of the mufflers, but with the new exhaust, that's no longer an issue. I really don't remember if I ever adjusted it back to center once the new exhaust went in.
And if I've got the rear-end about an inch too far to the right, which is what the removed control arm is indicating, that would definitely explain a lot of binding.
I guess *that* will be my first test.
Back in a while to report results.
This weekend? Almost exclusively in the workshop. Yesterday, doing a bunch of work to my daughter's car. Today, trying in vain to get a major handling problem addressed on my Mustang.
I see you posted that pretty early.
I haven't looked at Alexa much lately because it's really so inaccurate. Users of both sites are in the upper echelon when it comes to computer savvy, so most don't use the Alexa plug-in.
If you look at what they're showing now for today's stats, both sites have plummeted. I suspect that a pretty high percentage of the folks who're hard-core enough to be here on a weekend are even less likely to use the Alexa plug-in.
Do as you like on that, although I personally just don't like the word "Ignore". But a fart by any other name.....