Japan8

The 2005 Mustangs are cleaning up in the Grand-Am Cup series. "In the series opener, the '05 ustang had a one-two finish-- blowing the doors off and completely out-classing Porsche, BMW, and Mazda, who have been dominating road racing for years."

Check it out in the August 2005 issue of 5.0 Mustang & Super Fords.

Dragonrider

It is true that the Mustang took the Grand-Am Cup series in class. Since I did not see any Mazda’s running in that class, I am interested in how the Mustang out classed Mazda.



Now in their own class the RX8 took the drivers, team and manufacturers championship. Seems pretty classy to me.

AbusiveWombat

Keep in mind that the BMW's and Porsche's are running cars that are much closer to their production counterparts then the Mustangs. IMO, it's a little unfair that Ford is able to use a non-production engine...and an extremely powerful one at that. Without the engine the Mustangs wouldn't stand a chance.

BlueEyes

Yeah, there is stuff like that in every series, and I don't like any of it. Look at Mazda in SWC. They pulled some serious shinnanigans to be allowed to use a 5 speed sequential in the Mazda 6, where as, other competitors must use a stock gear box.

Japan8

Mazda was included in that class. There were several pics from during the race where you can see both a RX-8 with the MS kit and the Mustang. There are also pics of pack of M3's and a pack of Mustangs racing side by side.

Also note... this is not an oval course either. As a matter of fact, the previously mentioned magazine lamented that more people don't appreciate this kind of racing in addition to oval track (NASCAR) and drag racing.

As far as the engine goes... I both agree and disagree. Odd huh?

Well the 5.0 "Cammer" engine has been available for anyone who wants one from Ford Racing. $15,000, but you can have one if you want one (as you can with just about any Ford V8). The ones used in these cars has also been tuned. The suspension has been changed... and those parts are all also available from Ford Racing. As a matter of fact, they are doing a TRD/Mazdaspeed kinda thing and offering parts and packages for performance and handling improvements that keep your full warranty. Yep... those suspension bits are available as one which can be ordered fom the dealer that you buy your car from.

Anyway... BMW is running M3's. Mazda has the full MS parts on the RX-8. So Ford should run a showroom Mustang GT? Apples to apples, BMW should have to run a 330, not a M3. The GT500 isn't in production yet and probably has some final tuning and/or bugs to get worked out. So the 5.0 "Cammer" engine isn't fair because it isn't "production"... even though you can buy a crate motor... fine... after it's release change to the GT500 with the "appropriate" or "fair" mods. Special 5.0 DOHC V8 vs S/C 5.4 DOHC V8. 500hp vs "more than 450hp". In race tune I am willing to bet the GT500 engine will do a reliable 500hp with no problem. Are you still going to complain when the Mustang continues to do win?

Anyway, the point of this post was that looks and such aside, the new Mustang does not get enough credit. You test drove one and it handled better than before, but overal O K? So what? The RX-8 has O K power and good (not excellent) handling off the showroom floor. Potential. And suspension mods are a lot cheaper than FI.

And speaking of FI... Kenne Bell twin screw S/C is getting ready to come out for the new Mustang. Entry model... 6psi and 430whp. Bigger S/C and intercooler kit hits something like 530hp. This is the limit for a stock motor according to Kenne Bell. Add stronger internals and a smaller pulley... Price? $4,600 for the entry level kit. Engine tuning? no motec, emanage or other crap here. ECU reflash. And you need it too if you have any idea of how complex this system is... from "drive-by-wire" throttle body to advanced knock sensor to the "S-DAIS-like" intake manifold.

Deny it if you wish, but the Mustang is a great "bang for the buck."

Dragonrider

I find your conclusions based on what you saw somewhat interesting and shows that you are not up on the Grand Am Cup Series.



It is clear you are up on your cars to some degree and you are correct you did see several RX8s on the track with the Mustang GT.



However not one of the RX8s you saw was in the same class as the Mustang. All the RX8s run on the ST class which just happens to run at the same time and as class the Mustang GT cars are in. They run two separate races at the same time in Grand Am Cup.



Again, the Mustang did great in its class, but since it is not competing with the RX8s your comparisons are neither accurate nor relevant to the Grand Am Cup race.



And while the Mustang GT is technically a production car, it is not a converted street car to racing, the Mustang GT is an out of the box pure race car, not quite the same.



I hear that next year there will be a few custom RX8s in the GT class. While they will appear to be production cars, however they will be pure racers. Rotary power is once again on the move.



Rotary power took the Grand Am Cup championship two years running in ST class, rotary power has returned to Lemans racing in Prototype cars with a second place podium finish first race out, and soon to invade GT class to take on Cadillac. Shows some real class.



Is the Mustang GT a great race car? No question about it. It will fun to watch its progress. Who knows, maybe someone will build a rotary car to take on the Mustang GT in its class next year in the Gand Am Cup, we will see. As Mazda RX8s set the benchmark in their class the Mustang GT did so in its class, as Cadillac did in GT. That is the whole fun of watching different class racing.

It is understandable that you are a Mustang fan, but try not to lose control of yourenthusiasum.

Japan8

See my location listed under my avatar...

We don't get it here. Just like we don't get NASCAR, NBA, MLB (except the World Series), NFL, etc.

AND

I never once stated that I've seen a race or even follow it.



Thanks for the backhanded compliment.

I'm actually fairly well up on PRODUCTION cars and not ignorant of race cars, although my knowledge is admittedly limited.

I had actually considered that possiblity, however, seeing as how I had no other information to go by... Further, my original post was based (and includes a quote) from a magazine. Not my words.

Like I said... how the hell do I know? Nor did I say that the Mustang was spanking the RX-8 in races. The post and article said "MAZDA."

Huh? Um, Mr. Know-it-all... the Mustang GT is not just technically a production car, it is one, period. The FR500C used in the races, now that is different. However, even then it is built upon. the exact same chassis the rolls off the factory assmebly line. The upgraded suspension is offered through dealers. The only real groound you have to stand on here is the engine. And as I pointed out earlier, the UPCOMING GT500 engine prepped for racing could probably do the job... unless FI isn't allowed. Even then a prepped 3 valve 4.6 could still lay down some respectable numbers... and like I said before... comparing that engine toa M3 is not an apples to apples comparison.

Good... I look forward to seeing the results.

And your point is?



I hope Mazda does build a car to take on the Mustang. BUt you are missing the point. People here consistently diss the Mustang saying it is only good for drag racing... that it could never be a good track racer. This thread was started to show that it can and has been doing so.

Uh... ad hominem arguement.

As anyone who has been on this forum for a long time knows, I like the RX-8. I think it's a great value. I also like the Mustang. This new one has been proving to truly be the best one made yet... and not just for drag racing. Many want to rag on the lack of IRS or supposedly not having other "high tech" features on it... the truth of the matter is that the revised live axel rear suspension does its job well. NOt entirely as civilized as IRS, but it sticks for racing and with the improvements made, it's not a bad ride on the streets. It has "drive-by-wire", traction control, a highly advanced knock system, variable valve timing, variable upper intake...

Some people will buy RX-8's and some will buy Mustangs. Different strokes for different folks, but give credit where it is due. We can all admit that the RX-8 could use more low-end grunt. It can be admitted that the Mustang's handling could still be better. Potential. Add Fi to an 8 and you've got an even better package. Upgrade the Mustang's suspension and you've got a great package. What's wrong with admitting that?

6speed8

I don't really follow Grand Am cup racing all that much, but I do watch it when it comes on and If I have the time. After doing some research, it appears new models do have some advantages that get addressed the following season. The RX-8 has had weight added, Different gears, lower Rev limit, etc.. And other cars in the RX-8 class have been made lighter and are allowed other exhaust/intake to help make them more competative.

The Mustang did great this year, let's see if it can pull it off two years in a row like the RX-8 did.

Tirminyl

I believe they do seperate GS and ST then an overall class win. Even so the quickest Mustang (overall leader) time at VIR was 2.12.264. The RX-8 was 2.20.243. Just to add fuel to the fire, I went back three other races and the 8 had slower times.

Anyway, I agree with all that Japan8 has said!

rx8wannahave

But what do you expect? There are alot of "haters" out there and it's sad to see. (not saying there are haters here)

Some people are loyal to a fault and reject cars simply if they aint built by X or Y company. I've heard the comments here...American = crap type of stuff and that's just sad.

I agree that American car companies (as their financial status shows) have been neglecting their products and customers for a long time, but that does not mean that everything they build is crap. (Enter the Vette, new Caddy's, and recent increase in quality products overall)

I test drove the 05 Mustang GT and I think it's a good car, but it's interior quality (door panels mainly) was very cheap and the rear headroom SUCKED. You can't fault its V8 and overall it's a MUCH better car that's for sure. FORD is selling alot of them and I'm happy for them. While I like their looks...I don't love it, I wonder what will be next, and I really don't like how heavy it is. But for its price and performance numbers...it is a very good bang for your buck.

So, don't stress over the "haters"...they are going to hate, it's a shame that some people can't be objective but that's a rampant problem seen all over the place in this world. People don't like seeing or hearing truth, they prefer "their" skewed version of it.

With that said, it's obvious that mag is bias by shooting misinformation and skewing reality.

mpt_yellowRX8

The Mustang ruled the series this year but I expect to see some modifications next year. The BMW's and Porsche's racing against it can't just be bought from the manufacturer for $130,000 with all of the high performance goodies already there. I liked seeing the Mustang back at the top of the standings, but it does seem a bit unfair when you look at what they are racing with compared to their competitors.

AbusiveWombat

Here's my issue with the engine. The M3s run basically the same 3.2L I6 generating ~350 hp...the Porsches are running their 3.6L(?) flat 6 that's making ~320 hp (basically stock) and then you have the Mustang running a 5.0L V8 making 420 hp. That's 120 hp more than the stock production 4.6L V8! That's the issue that I have.

I have no problem with Ford entering a GT500 next year but the current top dog of Mustangs is not the Mustang GT with cammer engine, it's the Mustang GT with 3v 4.6 V8. At one time I looked up the weights of the 3 cars running in Grand Am and they're all roughly the same. So IMO, it's a bit unfair to run a 420 hp Mustang against a 350 hp M3, and 320 hp Porsche.

But the idea is to have close and exciting racing, and if the Mustang didn't have the 420 hp cammer, it wouldn't be close.

Dragonrider

I first became aware of the politics in racing when the Mazda Rotary engine was banned in ’91 from racing because it was almost impossible to beat, then Fords GT40 which some say was possibly one of the fastest road cars in the world found itself banned. In GT class, Cadillac proved it had a winner in road racing and it got heavily penalized.



It is sad that innovation is punished in racing rather than setting a new benchmark to reach. I would rather see competitors strive to reach the new benchmarks than to see racing politics punish innovation. Besides in reality, HP only has benefit in the straights, the corners are the great equalizer. In road racing it is handling and the skill of the driver in the corners. HP can mussel in the straights, but gearing and other techniques can increase quickness to the next corner.



The fact that the Mustang could mussel its way past the competition in the straights should motivate innovation, not encourage retribution or penalize innovation of ford. The rules could limit size or HP output of the engines in each class to limit the ability to simply mussel a car to the front and establish more a match race. But again how does limits on innovation encourage innovation. This is competition, not in just driving but for the teams and the manufacturers.



I hope that complacency does not discourage aggressive competition in innovation in road racing. The lack of long straights and abundant corners keep the max speed down limiting the requirement for a lot of HP. A car that is well balanced, with good handling characteristics and quick out of the corners will fare better than a car equipped with nothing but raw HP. Ford seems to have a well balanced car in the Mustang. The Porsche teams seem to be nipping at the heals of the Mustang. Next year will be interesting. I just hope Ford is not penalized for its innovation with the Mustang.

KYLiquid

I saw 2 grand am cup races in person this year, as well as the 24hr rolex and F1 a hand full of nascar and some other races, anyway, the Mazda RX8's you see/hear running in Grand AM are NOT mazdaspeed RX8's. The have the body kit for the mazdaspeed, and use a stock engine (differnt intake, stock header but differnt header back (NO CAT) and a custom tune ECU) They also run a differnt suspension setup (changing what they can in their ST class) anyway they are good cars, but I can tell you from standing in the pits when they work on them, as well as the mustang.....even race rules aside these cars are in 2 differnt classes.

AbusiveWombat

I'm all for not penalizing innovation but there's really nothing innovative with the Ford Mustangs. What I'm complaining about is that the Mustang gets a crate motor while the M3 and Porsche have relatively stock engines. BMW could very easily shoehorn in the M5 V8/V10 and Porsche could very easily drop in the GT3 engine. So why the special treatment for the Mustang? I hate racing politics more than anyone, and I'm all for pushing the limits with new ideas and new technology, but there's no innovation here. If one manufacturer is allowed to pick any engine in their catelog then they all should. The main problem is today's racing is all based on handicapping all cars so that they're essentially equal...killing innovation.

BlueEyes

I don't think it kills innovation. In fact, I would argue, it breeds innovation, albeit, a different kind. If rules are attempting to make all things equal, innovation is what could give you that *** hairs edge on the competition that will make all the difference in the world. Unfortunately, much of this cleverness is hidden from plain site, making it seem as though the rules are stifling innovation.

Just look at f1. One of, if not, the most, heavily scrutinized racing series around, and one of the most innovative. Creative interpretation of the rules in place to make things equal is how those teams gain an advantage. BAR at the beginning of the year, for example. When they were suspended for the fuel balast tank. You know things like that are going unfound every race.

And, I agree. I don't see anything innovative, on the surface, about the Mustang.

Japan8

I understand your point... but do you see mine?

The M3's I-6 isn't the top model engine. It's the special model engine... the "type-R", "SVT"... "M" series engine. The 3 valve 4.6 V8 is only the GT engine. Horsepower aside (BMW will quite often be the loser here anyway)... the equivalent model to a Mustang GT would be a 330 coupe, not a M3. The upcoming GT500 goes against the M3.

I agree entirely. It is a bit "dirty" to slip in the modified 5.0 Cammer since it isn't a regular production engine. And even as a crate motor... it's freaking $15,000!!! You can buy any other Ford V8 (302, 351, SOHC 4.6, DOHC 4.6, etc.) for about $4-5k. But yeah... a close race is an exciting race, so... c'est la vie for now.

One question... is FI not allowed in this series? From what I've read the 3 valve 4.6 V8 "breathes" as well as the DOHC 4.6 in the last Cobra (which is why it makes so much hp). I wonder why Ford didn't just drop in stonger internals and add a "blower."

Japan8

Uh... that IS the Mazdaspeed RX-8. The one that has been sold in JDM. To my knowledge... other than seceret test mules and personally modded cars, there are no FI Renesis or other "tricks" for racing. It's either Renesis or 20B (PP).

Japan8

What's innovative about the Porsche? What's innovative about the M3 (from a racing standpoint)? The Carrera GT... that's innovation (and beautiful). For a production car the M3 is innovative. The Mustang? Honestly the rear suspension is... just like the GM LS engines. Refining old technology that can compete or beat current "high tech." The engine... come on... 300hp from 4.6L NA and lots of computerization on this one (according to not the mag, but Kenne Bell). How big is GM's LS... 5.7L? In terms of the race car? Well the only real difference with the production car is the engine (suspension is the same design with a better setup). The 5.0 Cammer used in the FR500C is actually different than the crate motor. The crate motor puts out about 420hp. This engine puts out about 500hp. The intake runners and upper intake manifold are different. There were several other small changes made, but I don't have the mag with me today, so I can't say much else.

rotary crazy

the only thing that keeps the mustangs in competition is the hp avantage, in traks with short straits they get completly kill by the M3's.

the crate engine is not a bad thing if any one can use a crate motor, maybe this will allow a 20b RX-8 in this class.

most racing series will allow a new team to bend the rule a bit if the cominment is big like fords, another thing to consider is that wen ford introduce the new mustang to grand am the nissan 350z hat pull out and there were only 2 brands ( porche and bmw) in the gs class.

AbusiveWombat

I'm not sure what you mean that the M3's I6 isn't the top engine. From my point of view, it certainly is the top engine for the model. No different than a SVT engine. I understand that when the Gt500 debuts, then it will match up to the M3 and the GT will match up to the 330 but currently there is no SVT model...so the GT must step up to the M3. It's probably better because the GT has better weight distribution and lower overall weight. Personally, I'd like to see Ford drop an Al block 5.4L + IRS into the Mustang (GT350). That combination could be even more dominent.

I don't know if FI is allow. My gut says "No" since I can't think of a single car that uses FI in grand am. But Ford really doesn't need a blower. I've heard of folks getting 385 whp from the 4.6 without a blower. I'm sure that if the aftermarket can do it then surely Ford Racing can.

280RX-8

They sure can. While they are not as easy to hop up as LS series mills, they are still plenty of ways to squeeze more power from Ford's V8's. And GM has done some good stuff with pushrods, but the LS engines are also getting bigger and bigger. The next Escalade is going to have a 6.2 liter.

Japan8

I meant that the M3's engine is not a "regular" engine... it's a special edition engine. The new e90 came out, but no e90 M3 yet. But the 330 definitely came out at the same time as the 325. The new mustang came out, but no new SVT car yet. The GT definitely came out at the same time as the V6 "standard" model. The M3 will always match up to the SVT car, no exceptions. Price, performance, market, etc. all make that a fair comparison. Comparing the GT to the M3, even if there isn't currently a new SVT model available, isn't a fair comparison.

Personally... I love the looks of the GT500. That's how I wished the GT came out. Oh well. I basically agree with your assessment... even if the revised live axel works good in racing, they'd do even better with IRS. I can understand keeping it on the V6 and GT... with the changes/development it handles well enough...properly setup it can handle well, and it'll keep costs down. But on the SVT model... the GT500 should have been given IRS plain and simple. As far as engine choices go... they should have stuck closer to the Ford GT engine (same basic engine with wet sump and 500hp instead of 550 hp). Or... I think the 5.0 Cammer would have been badass. At full production levels, the costs should go down and going back to the go 'ol "5.0" badging from the Fox body days would be good for marketing. I imagine if they added the high tech stuff from the 3 valve 4.6... variable valve timing, variable intake and such to the 5.0 Cammer... the'd have a NA beast... no need for a S/C (and it'd let them keep it in racing).


Same here... my gut says that FI is not allowed. I also agree that Ford needs to get away from "easy" hp solutions like blowers (GT500 and Ford GT). That's just adding weight and possibly cost. They're getting 500hp from the racing 5.0 Cammer engine and 420hp from the crate motor. They surely could have gotten 550hp from the Ford GT's 5.4L engine without the supercharger.

The 3 valve 4.6 has a lot of potential (as I mentioned in an earlier post). Supposedly it has the same intake area as the S/C DOHC 4.6 from the last Cobra. It makes 20hp less WITHOUT the use of a blower. Both Vortech and Kenne Bell S/C are easily make 400-430hp with 6psi. Fast Fords and Mustangs mag got the 1/4mi down to 12's with just a catback, tires, intake, springs and ECU tune/flash. Total was like $2,000. No doubt 300+rwhp is possible.

AbusiveWombat

Just found this write-up on a MazdaSpeed RX8 GT racecar for Grand-Am:
http://www.autoblog.com/entry/1234000360068482/

In short, Mazda is preparing a turn key GT grand-am race car. Featuring extensive carbon fiber, tube frame, and ......the 3 rotor 20b engine. I guess Ford won't be the only one raiding their parts bin for an ace of a motor.

One comment though, this car sounds stacked. A stock RX8 is 3000 lbs...imagine how light a tube frame RX8 will be. Then you throw in the 20b. This almost sounds unfair. Anyone familar with the 20b know what kind of horsepower it's capable of in race trim?

Japan8

Agreed. Especially given the level of the M3 and Ford's crate motor, I'd allow Mazda the 20b. Maybe even some CF parts like hood and trunk lid. But a tube frame and CF body.... that's getting out of control. The body/frame should be restricted to the factory production model. What's the point if you don't? It just becomes like a NASCAR race car... race tube frame, race engine with a production car look-alike body. Lame.