HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock
Register Photo Gallery FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-14-2018, 08:13 AM   #1
JHeath
Senior Member
 
JHeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 786
Likes: 2,876
Liked 370 Times in 101 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6130 View Post
Yup. Anything M and faster. 16.1 harness and 3.2A/1 jacket/pants also.

I'd like to be able to find a commercially-available NHRA-legal 1-3/4"x.083 chrome-moly 6-point roll bar for one of these.
Watson Racing might have a roll bar/cage kit.
__________________
Jerry Heath
I/S '93 Cobra
FS/J 2010 Mustang "Ebay CJ"
JHeath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 01:44 PM   #2
6130
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHeath View Post
Watson Racing might have a roll bar/cage kit.
Thanks. I took a look.

Watson makes a chrome-moly 6-point bolt-in roll bar, but it's 1-5/8" tubing, so it wouldn't be NHRA legal, and it has a road-race type diagonal within the main hoop, which is unnecessary for this purpose.
6130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 04:37 PM   #3
ALMACK
VIP Member
 
ALMACK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bardstown, KY
Posts: 1,937
Likes: 131
Liked 369 Times in 127 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6130 View Post
Thanks. I took a look.

Watson makes a chrome-moly 6-point bolt-in roll bar, but it's 1-5/8" tubing, so it wouldn't be NHRA legal, and it has a road-race type diagonal within the main hoop, which is unnecessary for this purpose.
Is there a particular reason it has to be chrome moly and not mild steel ?
ALMACK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 05:08 PM   #4
6130
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMACK View Post
Is there a particular reason it has to be chrome moly and not mild steel ?
It doesn't HAVE to be, but this thing would be a little bit of a porker, so saving an extra 20 pounds of steel seems like a good thing to do.
6130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 05:12 PM   #5
6130
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Wow.

This 2015 Ecoboost Mustang with an automatic ran UNDER the K/SA index, hundreds of pounds overweight and stone stock right down to the tires, except for an aftermarket "tune" that picked up 64 horsepower:


Last edited by 6130; 06-14-2018 at 05:17 PM.
6130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 05:27 PM   #6
Jesse Kershaw
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 108
Likes: 6
Liked 122 Times in 11 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

I'm glad to see this combo getting some attention. I submitted it before leaving Ford and after some back and forth with Pat Cvengros (who read over the TI like a hawk!) it was accepted pending a sample turbo. I had the turbo in a box ready to ship and asked for it to be sent on my last day. Not sure if it took them 18 months to ship it or if NHRA hadn't gotten around to putting it in the guide but it's nice to see it there now.

Jake Sealey was looking at running it as a SS/GT combo but I think he went 5.4L instead. I know Drew Skillman had been asking about it as well for a Stocker but that was years ago. I had a paper to build a one-off 2016 CJ with Ecoboost with giant turbo and ultra lighweight. I figured an 8.9 ET 4-banger showcar at SEMA /PRI would grab lots of attention.

I'm guessing you guys figured it out but 264 is 85% of 310. That was the agreement NHRA made for these new cars. Unfortunately they would not go back and alter the 2011-2014 Mustang GT's from 385hp.

And regarding IRS I had many conversations with NHRA tech about that. My opinion was that because all new muscle cars have IRS they should be required for street car stockers and the package cars would still be submitted and require approval for FS classes. I agree that a late model VIN'd Stocker should not get a stick axle conversion.
__________________
Jesse Kershaw
Jesse Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 05:45 PM   #7
Jake Sealey
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 38
Likes: 1
Liked 10 Times in 3 Posts
Post Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

If only you didn't have run a V8 in SS/GT. We still have the engine, just need a body to make a stocker or a rule change to run GT .
__________________
Jake Sealey
2507 Stock
2075 SuperStock
Jake Sealey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 05:52 PM   #8
ALMACK
VIP Member
 
ALMACK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bardstown, KY
Posts: 1,937
Likes: 131
Liked 369 Times in 127 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse Kershaw View Post
I'm glad to see this combo getting some attention. I submitted it before leaving Ford and after some back and forth with Pat Cvengros (who read over the TI like a hawk!) it was accepted pending a sample turbo. I had the turbo in a box ready to ship and asked for it to be sent on my last day. Not sure if it took them 18 months to ship it or if NHRA hadn't gotten around to putting it in the guide but it's nice to see it there now.

Jake Sealey was looking at running it as a SS/GT combo but I think he went 5.4L instead. I know Drew Skillman had been asking about it as well for a Stocker but that was years ago. I had a paper to build a one-off 2016 CJ with Ecoboost with giant turbo and ultra lighweight. I figured an 8.9 ET 4-banger showcar at SEMA /PRI would grab lots of attention.

I'm guessing you guys figured it out but 264 is 85% of 310. That was the agreement NHRA made for these new cars. Unfortunately they would not go back and alter the 2011-2014 Mustang GT's from 385hp.

And regarding IRS I had many conversations with NHRA tech about that. My opinion was that because all new muscle cars have IRS they should be required for street car stockers and the package cars would still be submitted and require approval for FS classes. I agree that a late model VIN'd Stocker should not get a stick axle conversion.
It looks like your talk with NHRA on the newer cars had some effect after all Jesse.

Too bad the OBD II cars could not get a break, but at least all the newer cars entering the classification guide from now on will get the 85/85 ratings
__________________
Alan Mackin Stock 3777/ SS 3377
P/SA & SS/PA Fox Thunderbird
I/PS '95 Mustang GT
ALMACK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 06:10 PM   #9
6130
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
Default Re: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse Kershaw View Post
I'm glad to see this combo getting some attention. I submitted it before leaving Ford and after some back and forth with Pat Cvengros (who read over the TI like a hawk!) it was accepted pending a sample turbo. I had the turbo in a box ready to ship and asked for it to be sent on my last day. Not sure if it took them 18 months to ship it or if NHRA hadn't gotten around to putting it in the guide but it's nice to see it there now.

I'm guessing you guys figured it out but 264 is 85% of 310. That was the agreement NHRA made for these new cars.
Thank you.

And yeah, I know about the 85% thing.

I'm thinking that the 2105 cars are now almost four years old, and could probably be picked up pretty reasonably.

The "Performance Package" car comes with bigger heavier brakes, stiffer springs, and a couple of other odds and ends that add weight, so I was thinking of a non Performance Package" car.

Like I said, I'm just kind of spit-balling here, but I think a 3" mandrel-bent cat-less downpipe dumping open under the car and an appropriate "tune" would be the only horsepower-increasing modifications needed.

The required safety equipment we've already discussed, and since it needs a roll bar and 16.1 harness, maybe a pair of lightweight racing seats. Other weight-loss areas might include jettisoning the spare tire, jack, lug wrench, rear seat, exhaust system, front sway bar, radio speakers, carpet padding, sound insulation, and a few other odds and ends. It seems apparent that they will run under index overweight, with power brakes, power steering, and air-conditioning systems intact.

I've looked at smaller/lighter brakes, but now I don't think the car even needs them to be able to run under. So maybe a set of 17" Race Star wheels to clear the stock brakes, DOT-legal front runners, 9" wide DOT-legal drag slick type tire in the back, and I'd even be able to leave the jack at home.
6130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.