Mustang MPH? - Page 9

Bruce Noland · 02-25-2009, 02:41 PM

Smitty,
You are forgetting something. It doesn't take 70 grand to get a 2008 clone to the races. Blown up 2005 Mustangs are going for about 4 grand, the CJ motor is going for 18 grand. So it looks like 40 grand, or less, will put a racer at the top of the heap. And some of these cars are being built as we debate this issue.

Ed Fernandez · 02-25-2009, 03:10 PM

You can bet none of the Hayak cars are going to go stupid fast.The only solution is someone running A and AA with a ton of money building a car that Bruce just mentioned and going out and blasting down the track.Boy would that piss off all the blue oval fans who are laughing now.Like the TV commercial goes:
Going 1.70 under the index:PRICELESS.

Ed F.

Floyd Staggs · 02-25-2009, 03:27 PM

I think all I asked for was "Stinnets MPH". I didn't mean to start a 9 page debate.

goinbroke2 · 02-25-2009, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Floyd Staggs

I think all I asked for was "Stinnets MPH". I didn't mean to start a 9 page debate.

Yeah but it was "the dreaded CJ's". Say the chrome trim doesn't look right and some on here will want it banned because it doesn't appear factory stock even though many other cars have long since changed trim,bezals, etc.

There are MANY examples and Dick disclosed a few.

Question: What if this was a regular mustang with no factory involvement and just happened to be a soft combo, would it draw the same response?

YES?? Then why don't ALL THE OTHER SOFT COMBO'S CAUSE THE SAME UPROAR?

NO? Then what you are saying is your against factory involvement or FORD FACTORY INVOLVEMENT?

MAYBE? Because it has a blower? AH! the dreaded blower.
How many other cars out there;
1) run boost
2) are underfactored
3) qualify at the top
..LOTS! but again they don't draw the same anger? And they don't cost $70,000 to build (oops I mean $40,000 right bruce?) No they are FWD turbo cars which are a lot cheaper to build than a CJ.

Not often I agree with Dick, but he's dead on. EVERYBODY should see this as a challenge for mopar and GM. If they can't do anything for a while than let ford carry the weight and back the racers and hopefully bring more exposure to S/SS.

What do you think the guys writing cheques at ford are thinking when they bring out a CJ for S/SS and expect to get kudo's and instead read all this crap?? WHY BOTHER! SCREW THEM ALL! We make more money building a gazillion "specialty" mustangs like foose/shelby/bullit/billybob special/etc, why the hell should we waste money on a car that causes a controversy and makes people hate ford? Let's stick to harley/scorpion/rodhall/etc f-150's where we are applauded for our efforts.

Way to shoot yourselves in the foot guys. Hate ford so much that even if they are the last company that can help S/SS (oh yeah THEY ARE!) you hate them?

Jeff Lee · 02-25-2009, 04:26 PM

I still can't believe the debate is as much about the HP factor than the fact Ford does not build a Mustang with a supercharged 5.4L engine in it. Shelby does and that is a different manufacturer and what Shelby offers is a much heavier car. This Mustang is a factory built race car not sold for public highways and is therefore a factory produced super stocker by every tradition and past example in NHRA history.
But then again I see the "Thunderbolt" 427 / 425 Fairlane is legal for Stock Eliminator. When did that happen? That's another "off highway use" vehicle. But the Hemi Dart / Barracuda & 1969 AMX SS package are still Superstock only classifications.
I'd just like to see some uniformity...

Dick Butler · 02-25-2009, 04:54 PM

Sorry Jeff,
Most guys posting are afraid of uniformity. If it were offered then the "Money card" would have to be "played" By leaving a NON uniform many get a chance to build Aardvark turbo or FWD unknowns to be #1 qualifier and brag how the car is only $4000 total and they drive it to the track to rub it in. It is claimed to be an entry level racer.They are no less BOGUS than the Ford Mustang everyone wants to excitedly discuss here but it fits the top classes where more dedicated racers reside instead of off on the edge where no one is affected. Believe me if a FWD car ran stock in A/S and ran 1.8 under to qualify # 1 we would hear it on EVERY site about the same issues. Thankfully some still like Class racing Heads up and arent afraid to work , spend and drive hard to win in that arena.
We know from history only classes of ONE car combo are uniform. Now they added the stick and Auto to AH and factor them differently, So much for uniformity in that class now people need to build a Stick to get an edge for now.
I respect racers of ALL cars and combos but the issue is not new with a Supercharged Mustang just a new day.

CrateCamaro · 02-25-2009, 05:17 PM

It don't matter how much bench racing we do on this site, it won't change the fact that the CJ's are running in stock and they are legal. You think for one minute NHRA will change there minds because there has been over 100 hits on this subject and 8000+ views? They don't care. Eventually someone will want to be the big shot and hold it though the lights and go 9.30 at 275mph and it will get hit with HP just like all the other 15000 classes have in stock/superstock. Don't get me wrong, im not for the blower stuff. I can't stand that there is a power adder being used in Stock because its not traditional. But on the other hand we should be happy that one of the big three has created a new age muscle car that does have some heritage. I like the car and think its pretty cool...BUT it should be fuel injected with no power adders. Now...if Chevrolet could only build a car that could run with it we would have a race. Win on sunday, sell on monday.

chris ok · 02-25-2009, 05:31 PM

I watched the nhra sportsman show last night taped from pomona. no sportsman cars but alky. lots of conversation and wasted time that could easily be edited out. not one mention of these historic cars ford built. nhra already does not care.

Bruce Noland · 02-25-2009, 05:39 PM

Let's try to make this as simple as possible.

40 to 50 Horsepower is soft.

100 to 150 Horsepower is grossly under-factored.

Now that hunk of tin doesn't know who made it. But it is a 100 to150 Horsepower under-factored hunk of tin. Comparing the Firebird debacle to this CJ mugging is just plain lame.This car does not belong in regular Stock classes; it's an A-Rod car.

Believe me, we all know that nhra is too pathetic to do anything about this. Most of us are debating this issue because we feel like we are on the right side of history; no matter which side they are on. And some folks are posting snarkie posts because they don't have a car to race or haven't grown up yet or both.

hadtobethere · 02-25-2009, 06:16 PM

LOL.....most don't know what kind of deal did Ford have with NHRA, I don't know, but would bet....something to the effect, 'we need a HP rating favorable to Ford to make these cars the shining star of Stock Eliminator and be able to outrun anything that exists' and in return we will..........

02-25-2009, 02:41 PM	#81
Bruce Noland VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,855 Likes: 83 Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? Smitty, You are forgetting something. It doesn't take 70 grand to get a 2008 clone to the races. Blown up 2005 Mustangs are going for about 4 grand, the CJ motor is going for 18 grand. So it looks like 40 grand, or less, will put a racer at the top of the heap. And some of these cars are being built as we debate this issue. __________________ Bruce Noland 1788 STK

02-25-2009, 03:10 PM	#82
Ed Fernandez Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NOO JOISEY nexta NOO YAWK Posts: 5,879 Likes: 38 Liked 100 Times in 45 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? You can bet none of the Hayak cars are going to go stupid fast.The only solution is someone running A and AA with a ton of money building a car that Bruce just mentioned and going out and blasting down the track.Boy would that piss off all the blue oval fans who are laughing now.Like the TV commercial goes: Going 1.70 under the index:PRICELESS. Ed F. __________________ Former NHRA #1945 Former IHRA #1945 T/SA

02-25-2009, 03:27 PM	#83
Floyd Staggs VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Cucamonga, CA Posts: 1,522 Likes: 157 Liked 229 Times in 99 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? I think all I asked for was "Stinnets MPH". I didn't mean to start a 9 page debate. __________________ Floyd Staggs 787 SST

02-25-2009, 04:26 PM	#85
Jeff Lee VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Anthem, Arizona Posts: 2,766 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? I still can't believe the debate is as much about the HP factor than the fact Ford does not build a Mustang with a supercharged 5.4L engine in it. Shelby does and that is a different manufacturer and what Shelby offers is a much heavier car. This Mustang is a factory built race car not sold for public highways and is therefore a factory produced super stocker by every tradition and past example in NHRA history. But then again I see the "Thunderbolt" 427 / 425 Fairlane is legal for Stock Eliminator. When did that happen? That's another "off highway use" vehicle. But the Hemi Dart / Barracuda & 1969 AMX SS package are still Superstock only classifications. I'd just like to see some uniformity... __________________ Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX

02-25-2009, 04:54 PM	#86
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? Sorry Jeff, Most guys posting are afraid of uniformity. If it were offered then the "Money card" would have to be "played" By leaving a NON uniform many get a chance to build Aardvark turbo or FWD unknowns to be #1 qualifier and brag how the car is only $4000 total and they drive it to the track to rub it in. It is claimed to be an entry level racer.They are no less BOGUS than the Ford Mustang everyone wants to excitedly discuss here but it fits the top classes where more dedicated racers reside instead of off on the edge where no one is affected. Believe me if a FWD car ran stock in A/S and ran 1.8 under to qualify # 1 we would hear it on EVERY site about the same issues. Thankfully some still like Class racing Heads up and arent afraid to work , spend and drive hard to win in that arena. We know from history only classes of ONE car combo are uniform. Now they added the stick and Auto to AH and factor them differently, So much for uniformity in that class now people need to build a Stick to get an edge for now. I respect racers of ALL cars and combos but the issue is not new with a Supercharged Mustang just a new day.

02-25-2009, 05:17 PM	#87
CrateCamaro Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Ontario Canada Posts: 411 Likes: 1 Liked 19 Times in 7 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? It don't matter how much bench racing we do on this site, it won't change the fact that the CJ's are running in stock and they are legal. You think for one minute NHRA will change there minds because there has been over 100 hits on this subject and 8000+ views? They don't care. Eventually someone will want to be the big shot and hold it though the lights and go 9.30 at 275mph and it will get hit with HP just like all the other 15000 classes have in stock/superstock. Don't get me wrong, im not for the blower stuff. I can't stand that there is a power adder being used in Stock because its not traditional. But on the other hand we should be happy that one of the big three has created a new age muscle car that does have some heritage. I like the car and think its pretty cool...BUT it should be fuel injected with no power adders. Now...if Chevrolet could only build a car that could run with it we would have a race. Win on sunday, sell on monday. __________________ Tony Valerio 1968 Camaro 1700 IHRA H/CM 1701 NHRA SS/?A

02-25-2009, 05:31 PM	#88
chris ok Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Long Island, New york Posts: 592 Likes: 131 Liked 46 Times in 29 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? I watched the nhra sportsman show last night taped from pomona. no sportsman cars but alky. lots of conversation and wasted time that could easily be edited out. not one mention of these historic cars ford built. nhra already does not care.

02-25-2009, 05:39 PM	#89
Bruce Noland VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,855 Likes: 83 Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts	Re: Mustang MPH? Let's try to make this as simple as possible. 40 to 50 Horsepower is soft. 100 to 150 Horsepower is grossly under-factored. Now that hunk of tin doesn't know who made it. But it is a 100 to150 Horsepower under-factored hunk of tin. Comparing the Firebird debacle to this CJ mugging is just plain lame.This car does not belong in regular Stock classes; it's an A-Rod car. Believe me, we all know that nhra is too pathetic to do anything about this. Most of us are debating this issue because we feel like we are on the right side of history; no matter which side they are on. And some folks are posting snarkie posts because they don't have a car to race or haven't grown up yet or both. __________________ Bruce Noland 1788 STK Last edited by Bruce Noland; 02-25-2009 at 08:37 PM.

02-25-2009, 06:16 PM	#90
hadtobethere Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 243 Likes: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Mustang MPH? LOL.....most don't know what kind of deal did Ford have with NHRA, I don't know, but would bet....something to the effect, 'we need a HP rating favorable to Ford to make these cars the shining star of Stock Eliminator and be able to outrun anything that exists' and in return we will..........