Project: Dark Horse Racing

[S197BOSS302]

Hi, just looking to introduce myself and what I'm building. Back in 2011 after buying a 2012 Boss302 I was fortunate enough to go to Miller Motorsports Park to participate in the high performance driving school for Boss owners and also stayed another day which was spent in an FR500s. I fell in love with road racing and have been working on realizing my personal dream of road racing ever since. I aquired a NASA CMC2 campaigned '06 GT which had been gutted and caged with fire supression and required safety mods but otherwise was stock besides an APR Wing, MM Camber Plates and front brake ducting.
I am in the process of making major modifications to the car and am currently stripping it right down and seam welding it and starting from there. It will end up being a NASA ST2 car after its transformation, basically getting built like an AIX car but that class does not exist under my sanctioning body which is the WCMA and FIA here in Western Canada where I'm located. I'm really enjoying doing this complete tear down as I'm learning about every facet of the car which I believe will pay dividends in the future as I will know it it inside out. Along the way I expect to require advice and help with technical aspects that I'm not familiar with and thats why I'm here. I'm pretty new to forums so hopefully I'll get this figured out, so far though it's nice to be here I'm managing okay.

For some idea of where I'm heading with this build these are some of the more major parts I already have purchased primarily through American Muscle and Vorshlag. I love seeing that vendors are so involved on this site.

JBA Long Tube Headers and full offroad 3" exhaust
3 core Alum. Rad
Ford Racing Cooling Fan
Ford Racing Front Hubs
Cable and hardware to add a second fire extinguisher pull cable
New Window Net
Right Side Net
New Scroth profii2 Hans Seatbelts
Hoosier P295/30ZR18 R6's
Custom 18"x10" Forgestar F14's
SS Brake lines
Whiteline adjustable rear lower control arms
Whiteline lower control arm relocation brackets
Whiteline reverse rear sway bar
Whiteline rear upper control arm
Whiteline Watts Link
Energy Suspension bushings
Brembo Front Calipers BOSS302 Spec and single piece rotors
GT500 Rear Calipers and Single piece rotors
Ducted brake backing plates
BMR Tubular K Member with 1/2" lower engine mounts
BMR Front Control Arms
BMR Rad Support and two interconnecting braces (basically everything BMR has for the front end)
BMR weld in Subframe Connectors
Steeda adjustable bumpsteer kit
Front and Rear Strut Tower Braces
Hood and Front Fender Vents from Foose
A pre fabbed aluminum supercharger coolant tank from Moroso made to fit where the battery was which I will use as an Oil seperator/catch tank
American Muscle generic "Blue" cold air intake
I'm forgetting stuff already, but you get the idea

 

[S197BOSS302]

Okay so the first issue I'm looking to get advice on is pretty technical and I can't seem to find the answer searching through threads.

I have a desire to remove as much non-essential wiring from the car as possible and move the PCM to the rear seat to free up room for a dry sump oil tank and would absolutely love to get rid of the keyed ignition and passive anti theft component as I'm losing the steering column (I'm looking to have an ignition on/off switch and push button for start) also looking to switch to a return style fuel system to make a fuel cell much easier and want to eliminate 2 of the four heated O2 sensors if possible.
I was really considering just getting rid of everything and buying a controls pack for installing a 4.6 3v into a hot rod as it basically solves all of these issues for me, I'd just need a engine harness from an '07-'09 (does anyone know what the difference is anyway? Is it just a different style connector or something)but the one thing I'm having a hard time figuring out is can I keep my ABS if I do this? I have a factory wiring diagram book and it seems like communication takes place between the ABS module and PCM and this may be an issue.
Help would be greatly appreciated

 

[Hotrodtinker]

So I can't help with the ABS inquiry but HOT DAMN! That's going to be a sexy beast! Def going to watch this thread. Welcome to the forum!

 

[SoundGuyDave]

Relocating the PCM is fairly easy, if time consuming. Pick a point in the harness, say 18" or so away from the PCM connectors, open up the looming, and then one by one cut each wire and add an extension. Solder, do not crimp, and use premium heat-shrink to insulate the splices, with the RTV sealant embedded in it.

The ABS is a stand-alone piece, and does not need PCM communication to operate. The PCM gets involved only for TCS functions, but if you're a sofware jockey, and want to integrate the ABS into the comms system, just run a twisted-pair from the CAN HS+ and HS- terminals on the ABS connector to the HS+ and HS- terminals on the OBD2 connector. "T" splice and you're done. That should let you access the ABS via the OBD2 port for diagnostics if you have the appropriate ($$$$) code reader. While on the subject of ABS, you'll want to throw a Boss302R ABS module on the list.

De-contenting the wiring harness is also "relatively" simple, but time consuming. It may be easiest to just pull ALL the harnesses out of the car (the main body harness lays out like a giant letter "H"), and then with workshop wiring manual in hand, start looking at the circuits that you do and don't need. Make photocopies of the wiring schematics, then use a highlighter on the ones you want to keep, then start cutting up your harnesses to pull the unused wire, and a Weatherpack tool to pull the unused pins out of the connectors. Trust me, I went down that road with the stock PCM and SJB, and it was a major PITA. All the wiring I pulled out accounted for around 7lbs, distributed all over the car, so no real savings there on a 3300lb chassis.

What you might want to do is go the controls pack route. Pull all your harnesses out of the car and label each plug as you do. The controls pack harness has enough reach on it to relocate the PCM to an area under the dash, which is plenty cool and plenty protected enough. Most people mount it right behind the glove box lid. The controls pack will accomplish virtually everything you're looking to do, include moving you to a return-style fuel system without having any programming hassles. Note that with the Controls Pack, you lose ALL SJB functionality, like blinkers, interval wipers, and PCM signal to drive the dash cluster. If you're doing an AIM or RacePak data/dash, or analog gauges, then that's no problem at all. With the Controls Pack, you're going to have to add back in some wiring on the car to handle the functions that you lose with the SJB that you'll still need. Mostly this is simple, assuming you have a basic understanding of electricity and can solder. You'll need to install a small load center in the car (fuse box), and then run circuits for things like brake lights, reverse lights (not mandatory, but nice to have!), wipers (if you rain-race), blower motor, and taillights and headlights if you have any though of doing enduros that run into night-time. Also, you'll need power for other things, like the aforementioned data/dash, cool suit, 2-way radio setup, video rig, aux cooler fans and pumps, and whatever else you hang on the car. Again, none of this is hard, but here are a few tricks for you:
1) Run a line in parallel with the switched side of the master "ignition" switch for the car. Run this line to the trigger N/O terminal on whatever relays you want to track the "key on" signal, like for headlights, wipers, etc, particularly high-draw loads which could pull the battery flat if you forget to turn them off individually. It also lets you "pre-program" stuff to automatically fire up when the car is turned on. Relays can be your best friend!
2) For the fuel system, I assume you're planning on installing a fuel cell, rather than using the stock tank? Right behind the rear-seat footwell suddenly becomes a very nice place to mount your diff and trans coolers with the stock tank out of the way... Assuming you have good welding skills, simply add -8 weld-on bungs to the existing fuel line, then run -8 flex hose from there to the cell. Do the same with the EVAP hard-line for the return side of the circuit, and all your undercar lines will be solid and run in a nicely protected area. Also allows you to use a stock fuel filter, which is easy to source at any auto parts store near the track... The stock tank sucks for corner-carving, the stock pump really isn't designed to run at 100% duty cycle, and... Best to add a cell where the rear tire well used to be. don't forget to add a bulkhead between the trunk and cockpit, though, and stick the receipt for the fuel cell in with your logbook to prove date-of-origin. The bladders need replacement every five years.
3) BMR front suspension stuff. The A-arms are suspect, in terms of durability and suitability for hard braking and cornering, and one member on here has had one fold up on him. They are lighter than the stock Boss arms that Steeda sells with poly bushings and extended ball joints, but this is maybe not the smartest place to save weight (and strength)! Does BMRs radiator support have swaybar mounting tabs on it? When they first came out, they didn't, it was a drag-race only piece. I know Steeda and Maximum Motorsports have radiator crossmembers that have swaybar mounts. Immediately sell the subframe ballast, um, I mean, subframe connectors. They aren't needed, and all they do is add weight. The S197 chassis bone stock has more torsional rigidity than a Lamborghini Gallardo, and you now also have a cage spanning the same area. This will buy you nothing.
4) Speaking of the cage, sit down with the rule books for ALL the series' that you may be interested in running. You mentioned NASA ST2 and AIX, as well as WCMA and FIA. In particular look at the requirements for FIA, as they are fairly strict on cage construction. Make sure what you have will meet spec. I can't see from the photos, but do you have a single diagonal in the main hoop, or is it an "X" brace? FIA requires the "X," if memory serves. Now, while you're breaking out the welder to add those little bits and pieces, think about what else you may want to add to the cage. It appears that you already have footwell bars, but if you don't that would be thing #1 for me.
5) Combine your rule sets, and make a matrix of each point, and pick the most restrictive rule for each category. That will make your car legal for all of them. You MAY give up some performance here and there (ST won't allow you to run an aftermarket K-member unless you take the -.4 "non production car" penalty. If you take the penalty, make sure you get your money's worth!!), but you can legally jump from series to series without problem.
6) If you really want to build a race car, and do it properly, gut EVERYTHING that can be unbolted from the car to start. Do your seam welding (assuming the rule sets allow it), and then start bolting things back on. Before you put ANY part back on the car, ask yourself, "Do I really need this?" If the answer is no, put the part in a pile. If the answer is a hesitant maybe, put the part in that same pile. If the answer is yes, then either put it on the car or find a ligher, higher performance version to put on the car. If it doesn't make the car start, stop, or turn, you don't need it. Be OBSESSIVE about weight, particularly in rotating mass. I run two-piece rotors, and the ones I run are EXACTLY the same weight as stock, but that means that the actual ring is more massive, which is what you want for a heat-sink! Teach yourself not to think in terms of pounds, but in ounces. Pick a weight target (as you would for AI or ST), and then try to come in under it. You can add ballast in very nice places. Not so with random weight scattered all over the car... The lightest S197 AI build that I've seen came in at around 3125, so it can be done. If you're over 3300 with a 4.6L, you're too heavy. Also, think about the tracks you run. The shorter the straights, the less a horsepower number pays off. Most of the "club type" tracks will cap out at around 120MPH or so, so having enough power to push you to 155+MPH just adds more weight to brake and get around a corner. Remember, you're all at the same power to weight ratio (theoretically), so acceleration off the corner should be identical. But, if you weigh less, you can brake later, which buys you an advantage in EVERY braking zone. If most of your tracks are like Miller, Mid-Ohio or Road America, though, with insanely long straights, then yes, you'll want to favor horsepower over weight. A restrictor and ballast can be a wonderful combination! Run a restrictor and no ballast for short tracks, then open up the motor and add ballast for the long ones. You'll need two dyno sheets, though!

 

[S197BOSS302]

Thanks so much for the information. Exactly the kind of advice I was looking for.

 

[Mike Rousch]

Dave pretty much covered everything you need to know about the tech. I will try to help you with a few other things. If you do plan on running ST2 you will NOT be competitive with a 3v. From what i remember ST2 is a 8.00:1 power to weight. if that is the case you would have to be about 2900lbs if you make 360rwhp, not a stretch for a well worked over 3v to do that, even then the motor will make no torque, about 330 if your lucky. The usable power band on that motor is about 2500rpms at that point also. You would also spend tons of cash getting the car even close to that weight.

Point being is put a coyote in there and be done with it, you could get down to reasonable 3500 race weight and make 430ish rwhp, not to mention you will be about 380ish on the torque. Your usable power band would also be about 3800rpms. Even if it takes you longer to do the initial build. Some may disagree with me, but do yourself a favor and ditch the 3v.

 

[Hotrodtinker]

Great info from Mr Lowum! Thank you for sharing with us sir. Wish I were in the Midwest so I could take a class or three! I'm slowly reading through all your contributions though and continually adding to my knowledgebase.

 

[Hotrodtinker]

...do yourself a favor and ditch the 3v.

Sorry if this seems a little hijacky but I think the OP may appreciate the question as well...

Mr Rousch: Just to clarify but is this suggestion mainly for ST2 or just in general? I'd love to have a 5.0 myself but building the 3v has (up to now) been my only real consideration. It seems to me a lot of guys are successfully running the 3v but maybe just not in that class? Thank you!

 

[Mike Rousch]

Sorry if this seems a little hijacky but I think the OP may appreciate the question as well...

Mr Rousch: Just to clarify but is this suggestion mainly for ST2 or just in general? I'd love to have a 5.0 myself but building the 3v has (up to now) been my only real consideration. It seems to me a lot of guys are successfully running the 3v but maybe just not in that class? Thank you!

It was really for any class with the exception of any class that wont allow it ( not sure how that was a CMC car, the 05-10 car in our region is not allowed in that class). Don't get me wrong, the 3v is a great engine. It is just no were as good as a coyote in durability or power/torque. For what you spend in a 3v to get anywhere close to the power a coyote makes stock you could have bought the coyote and control pack. Not to mention your still going to have no torque with the 3v. At 380ish rwhp the 3v is done making any kind of reliable power in a road course setting, the coyote starts with that power stock and is very easy to get 430 or so with just simple bolt on's.

Not to mention the resale, if you/he/anyone ever decided to try and sell the car. It would bring a lot more then the 3v. You can find bunches of cars like this for sale online right now, 3v "AI" cars that sit and never sell, or a coyote "AI" car that finds a new home pretty quick.

 

[Hotrodtinker]

Thank you Mr. Rousch! This is def something I'll be looking into more thoroughly! I've always had a special place in my heart for high-revving 302cid engines. This is why I love this forum so much! So much great info and discussion!

 

[SoundGuyDave]

Since Mike brought it up, being competitive in class, let's take a hard look at ST2. Full disclosure: I jumped into ST3 when the class was announced, and immediately jumped right back out...

The S197 chassis (and really, even the S550) will never be "competitive" in any of the ST classes for a variety of reasons.

First up is the SRA (solid rear axle). It's simply inferior to any properly designed IRS, much in the same way that a strut front end is simply inferior to any properly designed SLA... Before anybody chimes in with "but my buddy and I..." remember that we're talking about being competitive in a race class, where the level of driving is assumed to be non-learning, consistent, and at the ragged edge at all times. So, you have a car handicapped with an acknowledged inferior dynamic geometry setup in the front, and a 50's era stick axle in the back. If anybody's wondering about EXACTLY how much the IRS is better, take a look at the Pirelli World Challenge rule book. The S197 chassis has now been granted the ability to use a full-floating, cambered rear axle... It only costs around $9-11K once you load it up with gears, a diff and brakes... For an axle... In perspective, a Spec Miata bought from a shop can be had for around that much.

Second point is aero. This is an open class, based purely around peak power-to-weight numbers, so aero is wide open, right? Ever take a look at the CD numbers for an S197? Compare it to an Aerostar minivan, and you'll get the shock of your life. It doesn't matter how much splitter, dive plane, diffuser, fender venting or wing you throw at the thing, you're still pushing a barn door down the track.

Third point is the engine. The 3V is absolutely a non-starter in this class, and the Coyote, while light years better, still has a tough time holding up against other power plants. The powerband isn't wide enough, and the peak number is just too peakey. Can one be built to have better "area under the curve?" Yes. Is it going to be cheap to do? No. The ubiquitous LS3, for example, is nearly 30% larger in displacement, and can easily be run with a restrictor to limit horsepower, but with an effective torque boost...

My experience with ST3 was pretty simple. When NASA killed TTA/PTA, it left a very popular car with "nowhere to go," until they opened up TT3/ST3. Take a bone-stock C5Z06, hang huge sticky rubber on it, fix a small handful of issues, and you have a category killer. For the Mustang to be competitive with a 3V, you had to build light, and then still do internal engine work to make the power number, but you'll still get killed on torque. With ST2, you get to play with C6 and C7 Vettes, each with better power plants, better suspension design, and eel-slippery bodies. Trying to run a car with the aero of a brick against them is a losing proposition right off the bat. Also, ST has some fairly "odd" rule restrictions. The biggest one for the S197 is the front subframe. IF you want to run a gucci piece like the Maximum Motorsports piece with does an LCA relocation to maximize the dynamic camber curve when lowered, you have to take a 0.4 hit on your power to weight numbers by classing as a "non production vehicle." The rules are there for a reason, I know, but it really handicaps an "open build" S197 pretty badly.

If you want to stick with power numbers around the 8.0-9.5 range, then I would look hard at NASA AI, rather than ST, but do it with a Coyote, not a 3V. 3300lbs, with ABS, equates to 347HP and 366TQ, easily doable with a bone-stock Coyote, perhaps even restricted down a bit... Too much heavier than that, and you'll wind up handicapping yourself on the shorter tracks. With AI, the tuning is wide open, so you could actually do two tunes for the car, one "restricted" where you massage the peak numbers down, but leave the rest of the curve nice and fat, and another "open" where you just run the motor hot to get all the pull you can on the longer tracks.

Now, all that said, if you're not worried about being competitive, and just want to go out and have fun dicing it up with whoever's around you, then just build what you want and enjoy. 3V, Coyote, whatever, who cares!! You're out there, you're racing, you're having fun. If it were me, however, that was building that car, the first thing I'd do would be to sell the 3V and get a Coyote out of a wrecked F150, slap a controls pack and a fuel cell in the car, and then start learning racecraft. Race in every series you can, just get seat time, more seat time, and then even more seat time.

Mike: I ran CMC a few years ago, right when they split the original class from "CMC" into "CMC1" and "CMC2." The S197 was indeed an allowed chassis in CMC2, with an essentially bone-stock powertrain. It quickly became a category killer, and was handicapped with skinnier tires, then more weight, until it got to the point that the things just couldn't STAY competitive through a 35 minute sprint race. They were literally driving the tires off the car... 245mm tires with (IIRC) 3600lb min weight and no ABS up against a lightly built 302 at 3050 on 275mm tires? Yeah, sure... Most of the CMC S197s rapidly became AI cars, and did well. Once the S197 boys saw the writing on the wall, NASA eliminated CMC1, and renamed CMC2 as just "CMC" again, and banned the S197 by removing it as a legal chassis for the series. We used to joke a bit about how NASA really should consider CMC as a "vintage" series... ;-) Great racing, though!

 

[Mike Rousch]

Since Mike brought it up, being competitive in class, let's take a hard look at ST2. Full disclosure: I jumped into ST3 when the class was announced, and immediately jumped right back out...

The S197 chassis (and really, even the S550) will never be "competitive" in any of the ST classes for a variety of reasons.

First up is the SRA (solid rear axle). It's simply inferior to any properly designed IRS, much in the same way that a strut front end is simply inferior to any properly designed SLA... Before anybody chimes in with "but my buddy and I..." remember that we're talking about being competitive in a race class, where the level of driving is assumed to be non-learning, consistent, and at the ragged edge at all times. So, you have a car handicapped with an acknowledged inferior dynamic geometry setup in the front, and a 50's era stick axle in the back. If anybody's wondering about EXACTLY how much the IRS is better, take a look at the Pirelli World Challenge rule book. The S197 chassis has now been granted the ability to use a full-floating, cambered rear axle... It only costs around $9-11K once you load it up with gears, a diff and brakes... For an axle... In perspective, a Spec Miata bought from a shop can be had for around that much.

Second point is aero. This is an open class, based purely around peak power-to-weight numbers, so aero is wide open, right? Ever take a look at the CD numbers for an S197? Compare it to an Aerostar minivan, and you'll get the shock of your life. It doesn't matter how much splitter, dive plane, diffuser, fender venting or wing you throw at the thing, you're still pushing a barn door down the track.

Third point is the engine. The 3V is absolutely a non-starter in this class, and the Coyote, while light years better, still has a tough time holding up against other power plants. The powerband isn't wide enough, and the peak number is just too peakey. Can one be built to have better "area under the curve?" Yes. Is it going to be cheap to do? No. The ubiquitous LS3, for example, is nearly 30% larger in displacement, and can easily be run with a restrictor to limit horsepower, but with an effective torque boost...

My experience with ST3 was pretty simple. When NASA killed TTA/PTA, it left a very popular car with "nowhere to go," until they opened up TT3/ST3. Take a bone-stock C5Z06, hang huge sticky rubber on it, fix a small handful of issues, and you have a category killer. For the Mustang to be competitive with a 3V, you had to build light, and then still do internal engine work to make the power number, but you'll still get killed on torque. With ST2, you get to play with C6 and C7 Vettes, each with better power plants, better suspension design, and eel-slippery bodies. Trying to run a car with the aero of a brick against them is a losing proposition right off the bat. Also, ST has some fairly "odd" rule restrictions. The biggest one for the S197 is the front subframe. IF you want to run a gucci piece like the Maximum Motorsports piece with does an LCA relocation to maximize the dynamic camber curve when lowered, you have to take a 0.4 hit on your power to weight numbers by classing as a "non production vehicle." The rules are there for a reason, I know, but it really handicaps an "open build" S197 pretty badly.

If you want to stick with power numbers around the 8.0-9.5 range, then I would look hard at NASA AI, rather than ST, but do it with a Coyote, not a 3V. 3300lbs, with ABS, equates to 347HP and 366TQ, easily doable with a bone-stock Coyote, perhaps even restricted down a bit... Too much heavier than that, and you'll wind up handicapping yourself on the shorter tracks. With AI, the tuning is wide open, so you could actually do two tunes for the car, one "restricted" where you massage the peak numbers down, but leave the rest of the curve nice and fat, and another "open" where you just run the motor hot to get all the pull you can on the longer tracks.

Now, all that said, if you're not worried about being competitive, and just want to go out and have fun dicing it up with whoever's around you, then just build what you want and enjoy. 3V, Coyote, whatever, who cares!! You're out there, you're racing, you're having fun. If it were me, however, that was building that car, the first thing I'd do would be to sell the 3V and get a Coyote out of a wrecked F150, slap a controls pack and a fuel cell in the car, and then start learning racecraft. Race in every series you can, just get seat time, more seat time, and then even more seat time.

Mike: I ran CMC a few years ago, right when they split the original class from "CMC" into "CMC1" and "CMC2." The S197 was indeed an allowed chassis in CMC2, with an essentially bone-stock powertrain. It quickly became a category killer, and was handicapped with skinnier tires, then more weight, until it got to the point that the things just couldn't STAY competitive through a 35 minute sprint race. They were literally driving the tires off the car... 245mm tires with (IIRC) 3600lb min weight and no ABS up against a lightly built 302 at 3050 on 275mm tires? Yeah, sure... Most of the CMC S197s rapidly became AI cars, and did well. Once the S197 boys saw the writing on the wall, NASA eliminated CMC1, and renamed CMC2 as just "CMC" again, and banned the S197 by removing it as a legal chassis for the series. We used to joke a bit about how NASA really should consider CMC as a "vintage" series... ;-) Great racing, though!

That makes perfect since Dave, I have only been into road racing for about 2 years so i had no idea about rules before that time. I could easily see where a S197 would be a class killer in CMC!

For ST2, I have gotten within about 1 sec of the normal pace that our local ST2 cars run with around 8.7 power/weight on 275 toyo rr's and no aero ( VIR ), BUT i can only do that for about 3 laps before the tires are complete balls of grease and start to fall off 1-2 second every lap after that. No way i could compete in a 25 min sprint race much less the 45 min race on Sunday. I agree that AI is his best bet, In all the regions that I know of the fields in AI are rather big vs 3-4 cars that run ST2.

 

[S197BOSS302]

I'm enjoying all the comments. I should clarify something about classing and competitiveness. I'm basically going to race fairly exclusively at one track which is located in Edmonton Alberta. While FIA is the sanctioning body for road course based autosports in Canada different regions have different organizational bodies delegated authority to sanction events. The WCMA (Western Canada Motorsport Association) runs events where I will be racing. Its has used it's own rules and classing structure somewhat loosely based on SCCA guidelines for years, but they're still basically unique rules and classes. We've recently voted to adopt NASA rules for 2016 to standardize ourselves moving forward. We have less 100 cars in total and have decided that the PT and ST classes are all we will be using and they will basically allow everyone to fit in somewhere. So when I say my car will be an ST2 car, while it will conform to those rules, don't think of me as trying to campaign my car competitively at NASA tracks throughout the US. I have an S197 because I feel more comforatable and familiar with it than say a Mazda or BMW. I understand that I wouldn't really be competitive out in the bigger broader world but thats okay, I'm pretty happy to even have what I do have and will be content with it and even look to improve it over time. So while yeah it's not going to set the world on fire with a 3v it will still bring me plenty of enjoyment and I likely will upgrade powerplants in the future, perhaps even skipping the coyote and having the next generation by the time I get to that stage. Hope this makes it easier to understand why I'm doing what I'm doing, but I'm really happy that your all giving me your opinions as I enjoy getting them, I'm here to learn and this forum seems to be a great place to do that.

 

[Hotrodtinker]

I'm enjoying all the comments. I should clarify something about classing and competitiveness. I'm basically going to race fairly exclusively at one track which is located in Edmonton Alberta. While FIA is the sanctioning body for road course based autosports in Canada different regions have different organizational bodies delegated authority to sanction events. The WCMA (Western Canada Motorsport Association) runs events where I will be racing. Its has used it's own rules and classing structure somewhat loosely based on SCCA guidelines for years, but they're still basically unique rules and classes. We've recently voted to adopt NASA rules for 2016 to standardize ourselves moving forward. We have less 100 cars in total and have decided that the PT and ST classes are all we will be using and they will basically allow everyone to fit in somewhere. So when I say my car will be an ST2 car, while it will conform to those rules, don't think of me as trying to campaign my car competitively at NASA tracks throughout the US. I have an S197 because I feel more comforatable and familiar with it than say a Mazda or BMW. I understand that I wouldn't really be competitive out in the bigger broader world but thats okay, I'm pretty happy to even have what I do have and will be content with it and even look to improve it over time. So while yeah it's not going to set the world on fire with a 3v it will still bring me plenty of enjoyment and I likely will upgrade powerplants in the future, perhaps even skipping the coyote and having the next generation by the time I get to that stage. Hope this makes it easier to understand why I'm doing what I'm doing, but I'm really happy that your all giving me your opinions as I enjoy getting them, I'm here to learn and this forum seems to be a great place to do that.

Aren't all your tracks just snow and ice?

Jk of course! Sounds like a good time! Best of luck!

 

[Apex50]

Enjoying this thread, look forward to updates


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SoundGuyDave]

I'm enjoying all the comments. I should clarify something about classing and competitiveness. I'm basically going to race fairly exclusively at one track which is located in Edmonton Alberta. While FIA is the sanctioning body for road course based autosports in Canada different regions have different organizational bodies delegated authority to sanction events. The WCMA (Western Canada Motorsport Association) runs events where I will be racing. Its has used it's own rules and classing structure somewhat loosely based on SCCA guidelines for years, but they're still basically unique rules and classes. We've recently voted to adopt NASA rules for 2016 to standardize ourselves moving forward. We have less 100 cars in total and have decided that the PT and ST classes are all we will be using and they will basically allow everyone to fit in somewhere. So when I say my car will be an ST2 car, while it will conform to those rules, don't think of me as trying to campaign my car competitively at NASA tracks throughout the US. I have an S197 because I feel more comforatable and familiar with it than say a Mazda or BMW. I understand that I wouldn't really be competitive out in the bigger broader world but thats okay, I'm pretty happy to even have what I do have and will be content with it and even look to improve it over time.

Copy all, and completely understand! Your main goal is to have fun, and there's NOTHING wrong with that at all! The S197 is a great car for general-purpose road racing, even if it really won't be a leading-edge competitive car in the "open" classes. Out of curiosity, is there a specific reason that you're aiming for ST2, rather than either ST3 or PTB? With a CMC base build, you won't have that many points against you to start with, so you very well may be able to fit in PTB, where you stand a decent chance at seeing podiums if your driving is up to the task... It's been a while since I've done the points-math on an early S197. What year is yours? It'll either start in PTD with a 14 point handicap, or PTC with no points. That leaves you between 39 and 45 points to "spend," and you can get quite a bit of goodness in there if you spend wisely. Keep the rest stock. 275 Hoosier R6, the best dampers you can afford, and run as light as you can, and you'll be a pretty competitive PTB car! No, you won't have all the fancy parts on it, but you'll have a solid, dependable build.

So while yeah it's not going to set the world on fire with a 3v it will still bring me plenty of enjoyment and I likely will upgrade powerplants in the future, perhaps even skipping the coyote and having the next generation by the time I get to that stage. Hope this makes it easier to understand why I'm doing what I'm doing, but I'm really happy that your all giving me your opinions as I enjoy getting them, I'm here to learn and this forum seems to be a great place to do that.

If you're sticking with the 3V, then I would absolutely look hard at fitting yourself into PTB. A lot of stuff on your list is what I would condsider "fluff," and not going to get you the benefit you "pay" for it in terms of points, but... Assuming an '07 chassis, here's what I would do:

You start at PTC, no points, with a race weight of 3356.
Tires: 275/35-18 Hoosier R7 (17 points for width and compound)
CAI kit: 1 point, but really opens up the engine response: tuning is free!
Torsen T2R diff: 1 point. (semi-optional: stock diff is fine, rebuild monthly)
---At this point, you are still in PTC!!!---
Delete the cats, do whatever you want with the exhaust: 3 points.
Non-remote-reservoir dampers with shaft under 40mm: 3 points. (spend your $$$ here!)
replace all four springs: 2 points
Swaybars and endlinks, front and rear: 2 points
Upgrade brakes to '07 GT500 spec, 2-piece rotors: 2 points.
Replace panhard bar with rod-end version: 2 points
Replace all other bushings with poly or Delrin: free!

At that point you have ticked all the "must do" options, and would have 6 points left to spend. Dropping your race weight down to 3275 would eat them up, and give you a solid benefit. Or, you could do your 295 R6 tires, and have 2 points left to spend (3356 weight). Or run the heavier weight, but add headers and underdrive pulleys. Or... From that point, it's really up to you! Just make sure that the points you "spend" are actually "worth" the "cost." For example, the BMR rear control arms relocation brackets will cost you six points, exactly the same amount as doing cams, and won't give you anywhere near the same benefit. You get the idea.

A note on bopping up the engine: PTB has an a minimum power:weight ratio of 10.50:1, so be careful that you don't actually pop over on power! Also, realize that the tire width affects the ratio, as well. With 275 tires you gain a +.4 modifier to the ratio, but with the 295s, you don't. There's also a weight modifier in there as well.

So:
Weight: 3356, 275mm: 338HP. 295mm: 319HP.
Weight: 3275, 275mm: 324HP. 295mm: 312HP (over on points).


The 295mm numbers are easily doable on a bone stock internals 3V, with good CAI, tune and headers. The 275mm numbers are a little harder to hit, unless you do cams (6 points!!) or run E85 or race gas or something silly like that (2 points for injectors/rails pumps, regulators, etc).

Just a thought.

 

[Sky Render]

Cool build, but why the frak are you doing all that awesomeness only to use poly bushing control arms? Rod end that shiznit.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk

 

[SoundGuyDave]

If he stays in "number classes," he can do that with no problem, and I would if I were in his place. If he wants to squeeze into the pointy end of the "letter classes," though, the points for replacing the control arms and for the spherical bearings would kill his build...

 

[S197BOSS302]

Well I suppose there's nothing to stop me from changing out bushings for bearings, why I have what I do is both a function of ignorance and what seemed available, also nothing's really set in stone yet, but for financial purposes I'll be intending to use most of what I've already bought.
As for classing there's one big change that I really want to make right away that will limit me to ST2 and not a PT class. That being my desire to have straight cut trans gears and a sequential shift pattern. Why? You ask. Because I feel like I really want to end up there and would like to have that driving method engrained in me from the very start of my amateur racing experience.
By the way it's an '06, which brings me back to something: Does anyone know the difference between a main engine harness from an '05-'06 as compared to one from an '07-'09? As I will be using a controls pack after learning that ABS will be able to be kept. Which brings up one more question; any more changes required to use a 302s ABS module? I had previously thought of using one for a fr500s but it also required using a hydraulic control unit from a GT500.

 

[SoundGuyDave]

Don't know the specific differences in the harness from early to late 3V, but they are there. Junkyard would be the cheapest source. I just did a quick look over the 2006 and 2008 ECU pinouts from the electrical shop manuals (2006 and 2008MY), and there are a LOT of changes... A few examples:

C175B (body harness):
Pin 33: 06: P/S pressure switch. 08: Clutch pedal position switch.
Pin 37: 06: Not used. 08: PCM relay control

C175E (engine harness):
Pin 4: 06: A/C clutch cycling pressure switch. 08: High speed fan relay
Pin 6: 06: Low speed fan relay 08: EVAP can purge valve control
Pin 43: 06: IMRC monitor circuit. 08: Not used.
Pin 50: 06: IMRC control 08: Charge air cooler pump relay control

That's by no means a comprehensive list, as I didn't feel like investing 8-10 hours in studying pinouts, tracing circuits, etc. Suffice it to say that if you want to use the Controls Pack (and/or the FR500S body harness!) you'll need to swap out to the later engine harness, or spend a LOT of time moving pins around!

The ABS module is now a "one part number" deal as far as I can see... The original FR500S module has been replaced (updated) with the 302S module. I do believe you need the GT500 HCU in either case. If you have a CMC build, the HCU has most likely been yanked off the car anyway, so no big deal. They're not that expensive any way you look at it compared to the advantage you get deep in the braking zone.

On the trans, what are you looking at the will give you a sequential box? All the ones that I found were around $13K or so just for the box! Note that if you're simply using a sequential shifter mechanism to control a standard H-pattern box, you should NOT have to take the penalty points for the trans! You will, of course, if you change the helical gears out for straight-cut. As long as you're in there and paying the labor (and points), you might as well face-plate the trans and turn it into a dog-ring box and eliminate the synchros all together.