Factory experimental

Evan Smith · 01-18-2009, 10:22 PM

Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford. It is of course a Ford Mustang, but with Roush's own government certified engine parts, body parts, suspension and most importantly, engine calibration. Roush is not an aftermarket company in this sense, it is the actual manufacturer of the vehicle, as listed on the window sticker. When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang. This is similar to Saleen and Steeda Mustangs Becoming the "manufacturer" takes a huge investment and is far more involved than just throwing on a blower and body kit.

Roush got its cars listed in the NHRA books on its own and they carry a 430 (or 435) and 510 hp rating depending on the package you choose. These are 4.6 liter, 3-valve engines as opposed to the 5.4 4-valve in the CJ. The 435 hp version has a small blower, the 510 has a blower similar to the one on the GT500 and the CJ. Neither is near as favorable as the CJ. From what I have heard, Roush is building one or two of it's own cars for Super Stock, but I don't expect to see a flood of them.

Ford worked for over a year on the CJ with NHRA. If NHRA saw fit to give it a special class, it would have done so. You can't blame Ford for wanting to build a winner. Ford knows the consequences of building a total ringer. I have explained to the powers at Ford in great detail how it would not look good to go out and own Stock Eliminator without some hard work.

Evan

Larry Hill · 01-18-2009, 11:00 PM

All this fuss about "paper cars", I just dont understand.

GUMP · 01-18-2009, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Hill

All this fuss about "paper cars", I just dont understand.

In what way is the Mustang a paper car? Ford actually built fifty showroom available cars that run and drive.

Tand E racing · 01-18-2009, 11:12 PM

I was barely a month old when the first cobra jets hit the track in 1968 and now 40 years later i get to see the new cobra jets hit the track.
Whether we agree if they should be in stock eliminator or not, we should as a whole be happy that detroit is once again getting involved in sportsman racing.
I think personally this is a very exciting time for the class and can't wait to see how they run?
And just like so many have already said i'm sure in time the car will get factored out or into it's own class if in fact it is as KILLER as every body say's it is?
I wish ford would look at the possiblilty of building some of these cars that are naturally aspirated and a little more readily available to Joe blue collar nobody.
my 2 cents

bill dedman · 01-18-2009, 11:27 PM

Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building,"

This is spin #3,428....

Are they, in fact, Fords? Apparently not... in a previous post you have said, "Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the MANUFACTURER of Roush Mustangs, not Ford." and, " When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang."

So, which is it; a Ford Mustang, or a Roush Mustang??? I guess, given what you are contending, it's a ROUSH. It can't be both....

Having said that, what significance exists then, to "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building..."

So, we have a 2010 "ROUSH" coming down a "Ford" assembly line, with Roush building a car that is NOT a "FORD."
RE: "Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford..."

Can you see why this sounds like spin city???

IE: How can it be a "FORD" assembly line" Ford has nothing to do with it, at this point. It's a Roush assembly line; not a Ford... building a car that is a 2010 ROUSH.

That makes it an "aftermarket" car, to me... not that that matters. Nobody cares what I think, nor should they; I'm just trying to sort this out so that it makes some kind of sense. A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it. None of the other cars that were built "off-site," like the Thunderbolts and '68 Hemi Mopar A-bodies were ~ever~ in Stock Eliminator. That's what I mean by "un-precedented." Can you think of any such car, Evan? Not the cross-ram AMC Super Stock AMX's. NHRA wouldn't even let the '63 Tempests with the 421 powertrains into Super Stock, much less Stock... nor, the '63 Z-11 Chevys, at the time. Made 'em both run A/FX...

Besides, I wasn't really trying to prove ~anything~ about the new Cobra Jets; I'm more curious about the '63 Z-11 cars as to why this 2010 car makes it into Stock Eliminator and the 46 year-old Chevy doesn't. Guess that's not your department though; just thought I'd raise the question. Forgive the digressions of an old man...

Try to spell my name right; I'm not dead yet... (gettin' closer, evey day...) LOL!

Bill DEDMAN

GUMP · 01-18-2009, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building,"

That goes back to what I said about Hurst Old which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties.

Quote:

A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it.

Actually, the 2003 Mustang Cobra has been in the books for quite a while now.

Doug Blackley · 01-19-2009, 12:14 AM

On the up side of factory involvement in Stock, maybe that will get Stock at all National events and perhaps Class will be contested more frequently.

bill dedman · 01-19-2009, 12:45 AM

Gump said, "That goes back to what I said about Hurst Olds which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties."
But, that's not what Evan said; he said these cars are not Fords... that they are "MANUFACTURED BY ROUSH."
No one clamied that the Hurst Oldsmobiles were not manufactured by Olds. What does that mean??? I dunno....

Your point on the 2003 blown, 4-valve motor in the Mustang is well taken. I had overlooked that one car. Is it the only example of its kind? I can't think of another one, offhand.

My apologies.

Bill

GUMP · 01-19-2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bill dedman

No one clamied that the Hurst Oldsmobiles were not manufactured by Olds. What does that mean??? I dunno....

The histories that I have read show that they were built off site at a special production facility by Hurst.

GUMP · 01-19-2009, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bill dedman

My apologies.

I don't think that anyone needs to apogize. These forums exist for discussions just like this one.

Daren

01-18-2009, 10:22 PM	#1
Evan Smith Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Tampa Posts: 400 Likes: 7 Liked 115 Times in 5 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford. It is of course a Ford Mustang, but with Roush's own government certified engine parts, body parts, suspension and most importantly, engine calibration. Roush is not an aftermarket company in this sense, it is the actual manufacturer of the vehicle, as listed on the window sticker. When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang. This is similar to Saleen and Steeda Mustangs Becoming the "manufacturer" takes a huge investment and is far more involved than just throwing on a blower and body kit. Roush got its cars listed in the NHRA books on its own and they carry a 430 (or 435) and 510 hp rating depending on the package you choose. These are 4.6 liter, 3-valve engines as opposed to the 5.4 4-valve in the CJ. The 435 hp version has a small blower, the 510 has a blower similar to the one on the GT500 and the CJ. Neither is near as favorable as the CJ. From what I have heard, Roush is building one or two of it's own cars for Super Stock, but I don't expect to see a flood of them. Ford worked for over a year on the CJ with NHRA. If NHRA saw fit to give it a special class, it would have done so. You can't blame Ford for wanting to build a winner. Ford knows the consequences of building a total ringer. I have explained to the powers at Ford in great detail how it would not look good to go out and own Stock Eliminator without some hard work. Evan __________________ Evan Smith 1798 STK

01-18-2009, 11:00 PM	#2
Larry Hill Live Reporter Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Hickory, Ky Posts: 10,670 Likes: 1,984 Liked 10,906 Times in 2,255 Posts	Re: Factory experimental All this fuss about "paper cars", I just dont understand. __________________ IHM Used Parts https://ihmusedparts.com 888-821-1817

01-18-2009, 11:12 PM	#4
Tand E racing Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Factory experimental I was barely a month old when the first cobra jets hit the track in 1968 and now 40 years later i get to see the new cobra jets hit the track. Whether we agree if they should be in stock eliminator or not, we should as a whole be happy that detroit is once again getting involved in sportsman racing. I think personally this is a very exciting time for the class and can't wait to see how they run? And just like so many have already said i'm sure in time the car will get factored out or into it's own class if in fact it is as KILLER as every body say's it is? I wish ford would look at the possiblilty of building some of these cars that are naturally aspirated and a little more readily available to Joe blue collar nobody. my 2 cents

01-18-2009, 11:27 PM	#5
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building," This is spin #3,428.... Are they, in fact, Fords? Apparently not... in a previous post you have said, "Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the MANUFACTURER of Roush Mustangs, not Ford." and, " When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang." So, which is it; a Ford Mustang, or a Roush Mustang??? I guess, given what you are contending, it's a ROUSH. It can't be both.... Having said that, what significance exists then, to "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building..." So, we have a 2010 "ROUSH" coming down a "Ford" assembly line, with Roush building a car that is NOT a "FORD." RE: "Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford..." Can you see why this sounds like spin city??? IE: How can it be a "FORD" assembly line" Ford has nothing to do with it, at this point. It's a Roush assembly line; not a Ford... building a car that is a 2010 ROUSH. That makes it an "aftermarket" car, to me... not that that matters. Nobody cares what I think, nor should they; I'm just trying to sort this out so that it makes some kind of sense. A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it. None of the other cars that were built "off-site," like the Thunderbolts and '68 Hemi Mopar A-bodies were ~ever~ in Stock Eliminator. That's what I mean by "un-precedented." Can you think of any such car, Evan? Not the cross-ram AMC Super Stock AMX's. NHRA wouldn't even let the '63 Tempests with the 421 powertrains into Super Stock, much less Stock... nor, the '63 Z-11 Chevys, at the time. Made 'em both run A/FX... Besides, I wasn't really trying to prove ~anything~ about the new Cobra Jets; I'm more curious about the '63 Z-11 cars as to why this 2010 car makes it into Stock Eliminator and the 46 year-old Chevy doesn't. Guess that's not your department though; just thought I'd raise the question. Forgive the digressions of an old man... Try to spell my name right; I'm not dead yet... (gettin' closer, evey day...) LOL! Bill DEDMAN __________________ Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 01-18-2009 at 11:30 PM.

01-19-2009, 12:14 AM	#7
Doug Blackley Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Hanover, MA Posts: 430 Likes: 3 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Factory experimental On the up side of factory involvement in Stock, maybe that will get Stock at all National events and perhaps Class will be contested more frequently. __________________ Doug Blackley 1697 STK

01-19-2009, 12:45 AM	#8
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Gump said, "That goes back to what I said about Hurst Olds which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties." But, that's not what Evan said; he said these cars are not Fords... that they are "MANUFACTURED BY ROUSH." No one clamied that the Hurst Oldsmobiles were not manufactured by Olds. What does that mean??? I dunno.... Your point on the 2003 blown, 4-valve motor in the Mustang is well taken. I had overlooked that one car. Is it the only example of its kind? I can't think of another one, offhand. My apologies. Bill __________________ Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 01-19-2009 at 12:48 AM.