2015 Mustang Ecoboost K/SA?

[HawkBrosMav]

Originally Posted by JHeath

I believe this is meant for the supercharged CJ, Copo, and Drag Pak cars.

That doesn't change the fact that the rule is written the way it is and says nothing about an intercooler remaining factory.

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by JHeath

I believe this is meant for the supercharged CJ, Copo, and Drag Pak cars.

^^ I would tend to agree.
It seems to relate to the air to water intercoolers..

6130 :

Might want to get clarification from NHRA on the ic rule if you want to step up to a larger than stock IC.
My gut feeling is that they will say it has to be stock.

[6130]

Originally Posted by ALMACK

^^ I would tend to agree.
It seems to relate to the air to water intercoolers..

6130 :

Might want to get clarification from NHRA on the ic rule if you want to step up to a larger than stock IC.
My gut feeling is that they will say it has to be stock.

Yeah, I would suspect the same.

[6130]

Okay, Alan, let me bounce this off of you, regarding tires, wheels, and gearing.

The Ecoboost Mustang won't take anything smaller than 17" wheels over the stock front and rear brakes (18" in front, if it's a Performance Package car).

The 6R80 cars have 3.31 rear gears (Performance Package 6R80 cars get 3.55 rear gears). 4th gear in the 6R80 is 1.14, and the stock tires are 27" tall. Ford says the horsepower peak is at 5,500 rpm. 110 mph through the lights with 3.31 rear gears, a 1.14 4th gear, and a 27" tall rear tire, is just a little over 5,000 rpm (just about 5,500 rpm for Performance Package 6R80 cars).

I'd want to keep the front tires the same height as the rear, to avoid any problems with the ABS system (don't want to smoke the tires in the lights). I wouldn't want to go any shorter than the stock 27" tires, because I wouldn't want to lose any roll-out in the front. And I wouldn't want to go any taller than 27", because I wouldn't want to lose any torque multiplication or put the engine further from it's power peak through the lights, nor would I want to have to change out the ring & pinion to offset for taller tires.

NHRA says no more than 9" tread width in the rear, and no less than 4.5" in the front.

I'd like to avoid putting radials on one end and bias-ply on the other.

And if I was going to try to save the expense of a truck and trailer, I'd want the tires to be DOT-legal. That would also save me the trouble of having to change them at the track.

I don't think the wheels would need to be anything fancy- again, it looks like these cars will run under without a lot of work. For example, there are Race Star wheels available in 17x10" and 17x4.5" sizes.

What are your thoughts on tires and wheels for this purpose?

[ALMACK]

Since that combo seems to have enough power to easily run the index, I would leave the stock front wheel/tire setup alone for now.
Just air them up to 40 psi at the track

Heck, I bet it might run the index with stock rear wheels and a drag radial

[HR9121]

One thing we all know about the rule book is just because it doesn't say you can't doesn't mean you can lol. I would get clarification on anything before I spent any money on something, most of the time all it takes is an email to Pat C.

[davidhuff]

Originally Posted by 6130

Okay, Alan, let me bounce this off of you, regarding tires, wheels, and gearing.

The Ecoboost Mustang won't take anything smaller than 17" wheels over the stock front and rear brakes (18" in front, if it's a Performance Package car).

The 6R80 cars have 3.31 rear gears (Performance Package 6R80 cars get 3.55 rear gears). 4th gear in the 6R80 is 1.14, and the stock tires are 27" tall. Ford says the horsepower peak is at 5,500 rpm. 110 mph through the lights with 3.31 rear gears, a 1.14 4th gear, and a 27" tall rear tire, is just a little over 5,000 rpm (just about 5,500 rpm for Performance Package 6R80 cars).

I'd want to keep the front tires the same height as the rear, to avoid any problems with the ABS system (don't want to smoke the tires in the lights). I wouldn't want to go any shorter than the stock 27" tires, because I wouldn't want to lose any roll-out in the front. And I wouldn't want to go any taller than 27", because I wouldn't want to lose any torque multiplication or put the engine further from it's power peak through the lights, nor would I want to have to change out the ring & pinion to offset for taller tires.

NHRA says no more than 9" tread width in the rear, and no less than 4.5" in the front.

I'd like to avoid putting radials on one end and bias-ply on the other.

And if I was going to try to save the expense of a truck and trailer, I'd want the tires to be DOT-legal. That would also save me the trouble of having to change them at the track.

I don't think the wheels would need to be anything fancy- again, it looks like these cars will run under without a lot of work. For example, there are Race Star wheels available in 17x10" and 17x4.5" sizes.

What are your thoughts on tires and wheels for this purpose?

Call Larry Hodge Racing and he can help and answer all your tire and wheel questions.

[6130]

Originally Posted by ALMACK

Since that combo seems to have enough power to easily run the index, I would leave the stock front wheel/tire setup alone for now.
Just air them up to 40 psi at the track

Heck, I bet it might run the index with stock rear wheels and a drag radial

The closest I can find is DOT-legal drag radials made in a 275/45R17 size by M&H, Mickey Thompson, Nitto, Toyo, and Hoosier. But they're all 26" tall, which is 1" shorter than the stock tires.

But Hoosier lists the tread width of theirs as 9.2", which is over the 9" maximum width, so I don't think that particular tire would be legal.

M&H and Mickey Thompson make 26" tall DOT-legal radial front-runners for 17" wheels. And it looks like there are numerous street-type 205/55R17 (26" tall) tires available.

I can't find any DOT-legal drag tires for the OEM Performance Package 19" wheels that are not over 9" tread width.

And I haven't looked for 18" tires yet (some people with Performance Package cars run 17" wheels in the rear and 18" wheels in the front, to clear the larger front brakes).

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by 6130

The closest I can find is DOT-legal drag radials made in a 275/45R17 size by M&H, Mickey Thompson, Nitto, Toyo, and Hoosier. But they're all 26" tall, which is 1" shorter than the stock tires.

But Hoosier lists the tread width of theirs as 9.2", which is over the 9" maximum width, so I don't think that particular tire would be legal.

M&H and Mickey Thompson make 26" tall DOT-legal radial front-runners for 17" wheels. And it looks like there are numerous street-type 205/55R17 (26" tall) tires available.

I can't find any DOT-legal drag tires for the OEM Performance Package 19" wheels that are not over 9" tread width.

And I haven't looked for 18" tires yet (some people with Performance Package cars run 17" wheels in the rear and 18" wheels in the front, to clear the larger front brakes).

" Tires may not exceed 10 inches wide regardless of wear".....that is from the 2018 rule book.

I was told one time by an NHRA tech (when asked how wide the tread can be..." 10 inches as measured"


FWIW: I bracket race a 2005 Mustang and my front tires are 28 inch and the rears are 27 inch.
I have not had the ABS light come on.

[6130]

Originally Posted by ALMACK

" Tires may not exceed 10 inches wide regardless of wear".....that is from the 2018 rule book.

I was told one time by an NHRA tech (when asked how wide the tread can be..." 10 inches as measured"


FWIW: I bracket race a 2005 Mustang and my front tires are 28 inch and the rears are 27 inch.
I have not had the ABS light come on.

Thank you, Alan. That does open up some other choices for the 17" wheels.

M&H makes a 275/50R17" Drag Radial (28" tall, 9.5" tread) and a 4.5/28R17 DOT-legal radial Front Runner.

Mickey Thompson makes a 28x11.5-17 LT ET Street R Bias (28.5" tall, 9.5" tread).

And still not seeing any rear tires that will work for the 19" wheels on the Performance Package, but as I pointed out earlier, 17" wheels will fit over the rear brakes of those cars. Not a big deal either way, as I think the non Performance Package car makes more sense.