Lap Times? (BWRP, MRLS, CMP)

Grip

Fast Addict
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Posts
150
Reaction score
0
Location
Fort Bragg, NC
So I've been searching around the interwebs and just can't find what I'm looking for. I'm trying to find out what range of times drivers in comparable cars/tires/mods are turning at tracks at which I've gotten times.

Bottom line, does this already exist? Or does anyone want to share their lap times at tracks like Buttonwillow (13CW), Laguna Seca or Carolina Motorsports Park?

Maybe we could even create a database.
 

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
Class out your car as if it were a TT car, and then compare against your class? Seems the easiest to me... I always look at the track records as a goal to shoot for.
 

Philostang

Chrome Hater
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Posts
429
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
You can also check trackpedia, but their "typical lap times" doesn't always include a car you think would be comparable to your own.

Classing your car is a good idea, but if you're using it to see where you fit keep in mind that the points you add are theoretically supposed to reflect an increase in performance. That's the cool part, you get a thoughtful estimation of the worth of different modifications. The bogus part is when you take points for stuff that everyone under the sun knows in no way is going to increase performance. For example, I take a huge 4 pt hit for a "rear spoiler." Ok, rear spoiler is supposed to be good, give more grip, make you faster right...mine is a f'n ducktail spoiler. There's no way that thing is making me faster, and next year it would bump me to another class.

So, there you go, following the guidelines I would "class out" inappropriately; that is, if you're doing this for your own comparison you would end up with a distorted perspective that your car belongs in that higher class. So use some discretion when doing this for yourself and your own comparisons (if you're competing, you have to take the points; or in my case, take off the ducktail `cause there's no way I'm taking 4 points again for that stupid thing). Other than that, I think it's pretty cool to see what other cars in your class are doing.

Best,
-j
 

ArizonaGT

Road Course Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Posts
1,248
Reaction score
3
Location
Phoenix, AZ
4 points for a ducktail? You gotta be shitting me :rofl:

TT classing points are so stupid
 

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
4 points for a ducktail? You gotta be shitting me :rofl:

TT classing points are so stupid

welllll......... In some ways I agree, but on balance what they're doing kind of makes sense. They're operating under the assumption that you're taking a "race car" out on the track, and not a "sweet looking street machine." On the boulevard or at the drive-in, the ducktail (or whatever) absolutely looks stunning, but on the track, it's a non-effective aero mod. The TT rule set basically assumes that you wouldn't modify the car unless it was for a performance benefit. Given that, if you know that an "aftermarket spoiler or wing" will cost you 4 points, then it's really your choice whether to buy a ducktail spoiler, or something that fell off a DC-10. The rule set makes no judgement about how effective a given mod is, just whether it's stock on the base model, or not.

Really, if you want to run TT properly, start with a bone-stock car, and then just add the pieces you want to give you the performance benefit you're looking for. Those of us (like Philo and myself, for example) who hit the TT program after being fairly well modded are paying the price for building without a rule sheet in front of us. Yes, the car is what we WANT it to be, but that doesn't necessarily make it a competitive machine.

One really NICE thing about the TT rule set, at least in the TTA-TTF classes, is that it helps to limit spending by restricting the quantity of things you can do to the car and still stay in class.
 

Grip

Fast Addict
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Posts
150
Reaction score
0
Location
Fort Bragg, NC
Only problem I run into with that, is that there are so few TTC cars, so it's hard to make a comparison. At least it's somewhere to start, I suppose.
 

Philostang

Chrome Hater
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Posts
429
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
I actually second what Dave said. The TT rules are written with a major assumption supporting them: you mod to compete. That makes perfect sense, given that they're competition rules, so I don't have a complaint with it.

What sucks about it is that the assumption leaves little room for folks who want to compete in their "hot rod" car, which was likely modded for completely different reasons (and not surprisingly, to completely different effects). Looking through past efforts on the NASA boards, the appeals procedure hasn't yielded positive results for some fairly obvious stuff (like ineffective aesthetic enhancements). The onus is thrust back on the driver/owner in this way: "Why did you change it if you knew it wouldn't be a performance enhancement, and if you didn't know then but know now, why don't you just change it back? This is a race car after all, you choose to compete with it."

Again, that makes sense...except that for folks like me, this isn't a race car! So folks like me are put in a bind to either turn their car into a race car (a path I think Dave is taking), start thinking about an alternative car, or just shut up and drive (knowing you won't be competitive in your class).

So all this to say that the rule set is fine, the application of that set, not so fine. We could easily see some reason being used in the application of TT points, but mostly what I've read in appeals is "nope, it's not on the base car, so it gets assessed points." While it may limit spending on what you've got, in my case it's pushing me towards getting a whole extra car, because I have something just shy of a violent reaction to people telling me what I can and can't do to my car.

In the short term, I am figuring out ways to work around the rules to stay in a class that reflects the actual performance mods I've made (like swapping trunk lids for NASA events). After all, there is something pretty cool about matching up with a comparably equipped group of cars to see how you do, and the TT rules are designed to this end.

Best,
-j
 

Philostang

Chrome Hater
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Posts
429
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
Grip,

As an aside, your sig has one of the few Smith quotes I've managed to burn into my memory...despite actively trying to forget it. I think that is part of why Hemingway felt so highly about auto racing. =)

Best,
-j
 

Vapour Trails

The Renaissance Man
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Posts
2,773
Reaction score
41
Location
Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Last edited:

ArizonaGT

Road Course Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Posts
1,248
Reaction score
3
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Those of us (like Philo and myself, for example) who hit the TT program after being fairly well modded are paying the price for building without a rule sheet in front of us. Yes, the car is what we WANT it to be, but that doesn't necessarily make it a competitive machine.

One really NICE thing about the TT rule set, at least in the TTA-TTF classes, is that it helps to limit spending by restricting the quantity of things you can do to the car and still stay in class.

I'll be in the same boat if I choose to run my street car in TT next year. Right now I'm looking like TTB after TTD base + points (including +4 for my CDC ducktail, lol)

Right now I'm riding out the rest of the year in my buddy's race car in the competition group...I'll worry about this TT stuff later.
 

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
I'll be in the same boat if I choose to run my street car in TT next year. Right now I'm looking like TTB after TTD base + points (including +4 for my CDC ducktail, lol)

Right now I'm riding out the rest of the year in my buddy's race car in the competition group...I'll worry about this TT stuff later.

TTB seems to be a pretty comfortable place for a well-modded Mustang, though to be honest, I would probably have eliminated some of my "frills" mods in favor of more power. Now that I have the suspension fairly well sorted, I find myself having more grip than I do skinny pedal, and screaming "GO! GO! GO!" at the car is a touch frustrating. I haven't dyno'd the current configuration, but I would expect about 305-310 at the wheels, which for a 3600lb car really isn't that much. Now that the season is coming down to the wire, I'm doing ANOTHER round of mods, this time focusing on installing lightness where I can. FR500S mufflers, a Braille battery, and console and washer bottle deletes. Hoping the above will shave 60lbs or so off the pig.
 

ArizonaGT

Road Course Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Posts
1,248
Reaction score
3
Location
Phoenix, AZ
TTB seems to be a pretty comfortable place for a well-modded Mustang, though to be honest, I would probably have eliminated some of my "frills" mods in favor of more power. Now that I have the suspension fairly well sorted, I find myself having more grip than I do skinny pedal, and screaming "GO! GO! GO!" at the car is a touch frustrating. I haven't dyno'd the current configuration, but I would expect about 305-310 at the wheels, which for a 3600lb car really isn't that much. Now that the season is coming down to the wire, I'm doing ANOTHER round of mods, this time focusing on installing lightness where I can. FR500S mufflers, a Braille battery, and console and washer bottle deletes. Hoping the above will shave 60lbs or so off the pig.

You could probably yank your passenger and rear seats for track days, that'll save some weight if you've not already done it. Got an aluminum DS yet?

What I really want to do is just gut the car and make it a track-only beast, but that won't happen until I get more garage space and a trailer+tow vehicle...probably 2-3 years out. In the meantime, it's still my daily driver.

TT would simply be a way to keep my skill up while I wait for the right time to go full-out on this and run wheel-to-wheel again.
 

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
rear seat was deleted LONG ago, and the front seats are aluminum, but even then, the passenger side is coming out at the track. I need to have it with in the event that I have to take a student (or VIP) out, but I certainly don't need the weight when I'm running competitvely. Four bolts and one pin, and it's out, so no drama. Aluminum shaft is done, as is the Steeda radiator support crossmember, race cowl hood, stripped out trunk, etc. Still scaled at 3605 with a gallon or two in the tank in impound. 3450 is my minimum weight, so I still have a way to go. And before you ask, no, my 5'11" 160lb ass is not available for reduction! After this round of lightness mods, anything I do will have fairly permanent consequences, so I'm deferring that until after the season, when I can assess what my long-range plans will be. I want to be in a caged, comp-ready car next year, or 2012 at the latest, so it's just a matter of determining which one (2006 or 2011) will meet my goals the most economically.
 

ArizonaGT

Road Course Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Posts
1,248
Reaction score
3
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I, as well, am also contemplating a 2011 purchase to convert to a track car. I'm also considering just running my current '06 until the 4.6L gives up the ghost, then slapping in a 5.0 crate engine. The 2011 car is very tempting but it's hard to justify the initial cost of the car vs. just running what I've got.

What are you running for wheels?

PS Thread Hijack Successful!
 

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
Thread hijacked, and about to land in Libya... I did some math on the 5.0 crate motor, and it winds up being quite a bit higher than you think it would be... On a dedicated track car, the exhaust would be fairly cheap, but 3" stainless tubing still costs, and I don't happen to have a mandrel bender in my back pocket, so... Also the fuel system could get pricey in a hurry. The crate motors use a return-style system, so at minimum, you're talking about a pump, bypass regulator, and either some fairly extensive tank mods, or a fuel cell. Also, there's no provision for factory-style gauges, so factor in the usual suspects, like tach, speedo (if you care), oil press/temp water temp, and possibly a voltmeter.

I ran the numbers based on worst-case scenarios (which tends to be my luck, anyway), and came up with about 50% of the cost of a stripper 2011 GT. I need to refine the thought process, of course, and start researching angles and trade-offs, but unless I can figure out how to shave quite a bit off of that, a built 4.6L making AI power levels is an awful lot cheaper, given all the infrastructure bits and pieces. The rest of it is a wash, given that I either own the hardware, or would have to buy it anyway, so no difference there. In column A, you have the 2011, with all factory drivetrain (bulletproof?) and only VERY light mods (struts/springs, CAI, tires), on a fresh, unmodified chassis. In column B, you have a slightly worn chassis, with either a built 4.6 (not as dependable?) or a 5.0 crate, and a LOT of add-ons to make it all work. Since both AI and CMC allow you to retain the stock tank, the cost of a cell becomes a factor. And yes, before you say anything, I know the 5.0 will be illegal for CMC2. It will, however, put down AI power levels with virtually nothing done but a CAI and a tune. Decisions, decisions!
 

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
Oh, for wheels, I run 5zigen FN01R-C Hots, in 18x9.5, +35mm. Two sets of them, one with Dunlop Direzza Z1 Star-Specs, and the other with Hoosier R6, both in 275/35-18.
 

ArizonaGT

Road Course Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Posts
1,248
Reaction score
3
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I hear ya...been trying to decide on the pros/cons and ROI of those same scenarios myself, and now that the BOSS302 info has released, that seems like THE engine to have. Same engine the BOSS302R1 cars are running in CTSCC.

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=33066

HIGH-REVVING FORD 5.0-LITER V8 DELIVERS POWER, SPEED, FLEXIBILITY BEFITTING THE BOSS NAME

* 2012 Ford Mustang Boss 302 engine delivers 440 horsepower and 380 ft.-lbs. of torque without the aid of forced induction
* Purpose-built Boss engine is based on production 2011 Mustang GT 5.0-liter DOHC V8, heavily modified with unique, Boss-specific parts to withstand all-day thrashing
* Revised intake, CNC-machined heads, lightened valvetrain and strengthened reciprocating assembly result in a race-proven engine meeting production durability standards

MONTEREY, Calif., Aug. 13, 2010 – The all-new 5.0-liter dual-overhead camshaft (DOHC) V8 in the 2011 Mustang GT already is the most powerful naturally aspirated production V8 Ford has ever produced. To make it worthy of the Boss name, Ford engineers tweaked more than a few bits of the engine.

They reengineered an entire dynamometer cell to handle the engine’s projected 7,500 rpm redline; put the first engines into Boss 302R race cars and sent them straight onto the track; and they designed a torture test equivalent to running the Daytona 250 race flat-out more than 175 times – in a row.

Only when the 440-hp V8 passed these tests, ensuring maximum power output without sacrificing durability, reliability and drivability, was it worthy of being called a Boss.

Bulletproof and blower-free

Planning began with a small group of engineers within the 5.0-liter V8 team. Starting with open minds and enlisting the help of two members of the original 1969 Boss 302 design team, the group began working its way toward the ultimate evolution of the new 5.0-liter: 440 horsepower and 380 lb.-ft. of torque, along with a broad, flat output curve all the way through its projected 7,500 rpm redline.

The Mustang team knew a supercharger would be the simplest way to extract significant power improvements from the new 5.0-liter V8, but they elected not to pursue forced induction for the 2012 Boss to stay true to the original Boss 302 engine.

“The core group of engineers on the Boss 302 engine understands and respect the heritage of the name and the history behind the original engine,” explains Mike Harrison, Ford V8 engine program manager. “The first Boss 302 was a specially built, free-breathing, high-revving small V8 that gave it certain desirable characteristics on a race course – and we capture that essence in the new engine.”

The team also realized the additional hardware meant more weight, the bane of any racing program and the opposite of what the Boss design team was attempting to achieve. Instead, the same technology that has made the new Mustang GT engine such a formidable force was applied to the Boss 302.

“In keeping with the spirit of the original, the new Boss 302 engine achieves its maximum power output at speeds at or above 7,500 rpm,” says Harrison. “Unlike the original engine, however, low-speed torque and driveability are uncompromised thanks to twin independent variable camshaft timing (Ti-VCT) technology and computer-aided engineering design tools.”

Harrison and his team began exploring Boss 302 concepts starting with the engine’s ability to breathe – essential to the production of horsepower. Because credible track performance requires high power production between 5,000 rpm and 7,000 rpm, the team needed a new approach to intake manifold design.

Borrowing from the Ford Daytona Prototype engines, the resulting short-runners-in-the-box design virtually eliminates lag when the throttle is snapped open while producing peak power output at high rpm.

“The effect of the new intake design is dramatic,” says Harrison. “When I took the prototype car to Mustang Chief Engineer Dave Pericak, he took a short drive, tossed me the keys and said ‘Book it…it’s in the program.’ He knew what we were onto, and that’s really the point where the Boss 302 was born.”

To take advantage of the racing intake manifold, cylinder head airflow was fully optimized by CNC porting the entire intake and exhaust port and combustion chamber. The painstaking machining process takes 2.5 hours per head to complete.


To accompany the higher peak-power engine speed, the team had to engineer a lightweight, high-speed valvetrain and bulletproof reciprocating assembly that would not only hold together for 150,000-plus miles but also produce power at peak rpm.

“What most people don’t realize is that engine stresses increase exponentially as engine speeds rise,” explains Harrison. “So moving up from GT’s 7,000 rpm redline required significant re-engineering of many different parts. Sacrificing reliability and usability over the GT engine was never an option.”

Some of the Boss-specific parts contributing to the Boss 302 V8’s output and durability include:

* Revised composite intake system with shorter runners, inspired by Daytona Prototype racing engines, for high-rpm breathing
* Forged aluminum pistons and upgraded sinter-forged connecting rods for improved strength, needed for the higher combustion pressures and engine speeds
* New high-strength aluminum-alloy cylinder heads with fully CNC-machined ports and chambers for exceptional high-rpm airflow without sacrificing low-speed torque
* Lightened valvetrain components to provide excellent dynamic performance up to speeds well above the engine redline
* Sodium-filled exhaust valves for improved heat dissipation
* Race-specification crankshaft main and rod bearings for higher load capability and improved high-speed durability

* 5W50 full-synthetic oil with engine oil cooler for improved oil pressure and longer-lasting lubrication during extreme racing conditions
* Revised oil pan baffling for improved oil control under racing conditions and during cornering loads greater than 1.0 g

Close connection with race teams

Contrary to normal engine development protocol, the first batch of durability test engines weren’t installed in an engine dyno. Instead, thanks to a request from Ford Racing, they went straight to the track.

“Ford Racing had challenged the Boss engine team to give them the first available Boss 302 engines,” explains Harrison. “They came to us in August 2009 and told us they needed engines as soon as possible to build a limited number of Ford Racing Boss 302R cars for the January Daytona race. They got the engines 12 weeks later and the team got five Boss 302R cars prepped for the January race. This gave us a fantastic opportunity to be able to get full-on race experience with the engine so early in the program.”

The Boss engines have run reliably all season without a single mechanical failure. Boss 302R cars have also racked up the most laps led so far this season in Grand-Am racing.

Using race telemetry, the Boss team has been able to gather on-track data to help optimize engine calibrations, oil pan designs and cooling. In order to engage in virtual racing whenever they needed, the team used the telemetry data to re-create a hot lap at Daytona on the dyno back in Dearborn, allowing further fine-tuning.

“Working with Ford Racing has been invaluable,” said Harrison. “They were a wealth of information for setting up torque and power curves for road racing and for identifying areas of concern during track runs that we wouldn’t have considered if we were just building a hot street engine. Every Boss 302 owner will benefit from their contributions to the program.”

Production engine durability testing

Despite its racing heritage – and the rigors of track-day testing – the Boss 302 V8 is still a production Ford engine, built alongside the 5.0-liter GT engine at Essex Engine Plant in Ontario, Canada. That means it has to meet or exceed all the standard durability testing every Ford engine is required to complete.

The high-winding engine presented a challenge: The engine had no trouble staying together at its redline, but the Ford durability dynamometers weren’t designed to operate at the speeds the Boss engine was capable of.

“Ford had no engine test cells built to run at that kind of sustained speed,” said Harrison. “Ford Racing had one, but it wasn’t instrumented to do production durability testing. So we had to re-engineer the dyno cell with new balancers and jackshafts so the dyno wouldn’t fly apart running at redline hour after hour.”

Once an adequate test stand was configured, the Boss engine was run at its full rated output for tens of millions of cycles, eventually outperforming its specifications at every stage of testing. Engineers calculated that the test regimen was equivalent to running the Daytona 250 race flat-out more than 175 times – in a row.

Team members also devised an additional durability test specific to the Boss 302 engine – one that reflects the unique demands of Boss drivers. The engine was subjected to a regimen simulating 1,500 quarter-mile races typical of events at drag strips across the country.

“Even though the production Boss engine is designed to be very close to a full race engine, it had to achieve the same vehicle durability signoff any other production engine requires,” says Harrison. “Then it went on to get the track durability test signoff too. It’s really an engineering accomplishment that a Boss owner can thrash his car on the track and still expect the same outstanding reliability that the owner of a regular Mustang GT will enjoy.”
.

"Fortunately" I don't need to make a decision anytime soon, so hopefully I can take advantage of depreciation or at least take the edge off of sticker shock for mods.

As far as the 5.0 fuel system goes, I hadn't thought that far into it, although a Fuel Cell is definitely part of the equation.
 
Last edited:

SoundGuyDave

This Space For Rent
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Posts
1,978
Reaction score
29
Oh, believe me, I've seen the press on the LS model. Isn't it kind of heretical to mention "LS" in a positive way on a Mustang forum??

I'm betting that the sticker on one of those bad boys will be in the $70K range, more if the dealers repeat the GT500 game. WAYYYY far north of my budget line! I would also bet that the engines alone are going to be on a par with the price on the 5.0 "Cammer" motor. Again, north of my budget. OTOH, I've got absolutely no desire to get into the AIX spending war, so something in the 360-380RWHP range (AI) would be about all I would need/be able to use. My first season goal in a comp group would have to be "don't get hit, don't get run over." It would most likely take me a season to develop enough racecraft to warrant really dumping money into a car to shoot for a championship.
 

ArizonaGT

Road Course Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Posts
1,248
Reaction score
3
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Yeah, forget the LS, that's gonna be way out of normal 'stanger's price ranges probably. But the engine is identical between the two cars...so if you get a "Base" BOSS302, you get all the hardcore engine bits.

Of course the "easy" alternative is to just go out and buy a used C6 Z06 and walk all over Mustangs, but that's not an option if you want to race AI :eek:

When you thinking about going "all the way" with your car?
 

Support us!

Support Us - Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Back
Top