If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ford Racing Mustang GT Wins At Daytona
With less than one day's experience behind the wheel of his new Ford
Racing Mustang GT race car, car owner and driver Tom Nastasi, with co-driver Ian James, claimed victory in the opening race of the 2005 Grand-Am Cup season at Daytona International Speedway. The win marks the first race and first win for Ford Racing's Mustang GT race car built off the new 2005 Mustang GT that is currently available in Ford dealerships. http://mustang50magazine.com/eventco...2w_gt_daytona/ |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
351CJ opined in :
> With less than one day's experience behind the wheel of his new Ford > Racing Mustang GT race car, car owner and driver Tom Nastasi, with > co-driver Ian James, claimed victory in the opening race of the 2005 > Grand-Am Cup season at Daytona International Speedway. The win marks the > first race and first win for Ford Racing's Mustang GT race car built off > the new 2005 Mustang GT that is currently available in Ford dealerships. > > http://mustang50magazine.com/eventco...2w_gt_daytona/ http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-200...ar-Daytona.htm if you want wallpaper, and the original press release Cant believ how hard it is to find NEWS on the freaking race. Like, um what OTHER mfrs were there and who was the real competition in the race -- - Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! - |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Backyard Mechanic opined in :
> 351CJ opined in : > >> With less than one day's experience behind the wheel of his new Ford >> Racing Mustang GT race car, car owner and driver Tom Nastasi, with >> co-driver Ian James, claimed victory in the opening race of the 2005 >> Grand-Am Cup season at Daytona International Speedway. The win marks >> the first race and first win for Ford Racing's Mustang GT race car >> built off the new 2005 Mustang GT that is currently available in Ford >> dealerships. >> >> http://mustang50magazine.com/eventco...2w_gt_daytona/ > > http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-200...Car-Daytona.ht > m > > if you want wallpaper, and the original press release > > Cant believ how hard it is to find NEWS on the freaking race. > Like, um what OTHER mfrs were there and who was the real competition in > the race Ah... duh! HERE it is: http://www.grand-am.com/News/Article.asp?ID=3626 "Nastasi and James led a 1-2 sweep for the new Mustang, as David Empringham and Scott Maxwell came home second in the No. 55 Multimatic Motorsports Ford Mustang in an eventful race. On the second lap, Empringham rocketed past Justin Marks in the No. 96 Turner Motorsport BMW M3 and into the lead in the chicane at the end of the Daytona Superstretch." -- - Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! - |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Backyard Mechanic wrote:
> > 351CJ opined in : The win marks > >> the first race and first win for Ford Racing's Mustang GT race car > >> built off the new 2005 Mustang GT that is currently available in Ford > >> dealerships. > HERE it is: > http://www.grand-am.com/News/Article.asp?ID=3626 > > "Nastasi and James led a 1-2 sweep for the new Mustang, as David Empringham > and Scott Maxwell came home second in the No. 55 Multimatic Motorsports Ford > Mustang in an eventful race. > On the second lap, Empringham rocketed past Justin Marks in the No. 96 Turner > Motorsport BMW M3 and into the lead in the chicane at the end of the Daytona > Superstretch." I'd never heard of this Grand Am series. Imagine, Pontiac takes a name -- Trans Am -- of a series in which it never won a race, morphs it into a made up name -- Grand Am -- that means nothing, and a sanctioning body picks it up as the name for a new series. Anyway, checking out the Grand Am rules, I see this series is very similar to the original Trans Am in that stock unibodies must be retained and that very few mods are allowed. HOWEVER, what's the deal with the " M6007-R50P" 5.0 liter engines being mandatory in the Stangs? I can find no reference to that part number anywhere on the web, but I do know that five liters is a substantial boost -- 25 cubic inches -- over the standard GT's 4.6. At the same time the BMW M3's are stuck with a 3.2 liter six (although they can do a .030 overbore). With a 110 cubic inch advantage it would be pretty embarassing if the Mustangs could not "rocket" past the M3's at the top end of a big straightaway. 180 Out |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Wound Up wrote:
What's going on here, big guy? Did I get myself a Usenet puppy? > > I'd never heard of this Grand Am series. > > Well, now you have. Ow! That stings. > The racing association did not take its name from Pontiac's little > sporty car, but Pontiac did use the Trans Am name to sell cars because > of Trans Am racing. Ask them if this is the origin of name of their > series; I'm sure they'd enjoy a good laugh. P-P-Pontiac's "little sporty car"? You've got to be kidding. Anyway, my comment on the origins of the name "Grand Am" series was what we call a "joke," subcategory "snide remarks." Annoying, most likely yes, but intended to be taken seriously, definitely no. > > five liters is a substantial > > boost -- 25 cubic inches -- over the standard GT's 4.6. > > It's actually 21 cubic inches; 302 vs. 281. The 5.0 is actually a 4.9. > It displaces 4942cc. Sounds like YOU'RE speculating now, and the speculation is a very strange one, that the 5.0 liter engine that the '05 Mustangs are required to run would be a 4.00 x 3.00 inch (101.6 x 76.2 mm) pushrod Challenger motor (301.6 ci, 4,942 cc), and not a 94 x 90 mm (3.70 x 3.54 inch) mod-motor (4,997 cc, 304.5 ci). Anyway, my 25 ci number was off-the-cuff, thinking that 6.1 ci per 100 cc, times 4, would be somewhere around 25 ci. Sorry if I was off by .6 ci. I didn't realize I'd be having some unemployed drug dependent Usenet puppy dog checking my work. So now I know. > > With a 110 cubic inch advantage it would be pretty > > embarassing if the Mustangs could not "rocket" past the M3's at the top > > end of a big straightaway. > > That comparison isn't terribly meaningful, considering nothing else is > held equal. Road racing is not antiseptic numerical analysis anyway. So now a 110 ci advantage is not "terribly meaningful." Look, moron, it was just a throwaway line, OK? The only "antiseptic numerical analysis" was the observation that if you have two production-based race cars and one has a 56% larger engine than the other, then the guys running the big engine car should be embarassed if they were not in the lead at the end of a Daytona Speedway straightaway. > Did you read these sections? I'll give you one guess. What do your quotes have to do with what I wrote, anyway? You're such a fool. > Do your homework, and stop speculating. Today's lesson is now concluded. If today's lesson is that there are an awful lot of idiots in the world, and few are more idiotic than alcoholic unemployed welfare queens wasting time on the Usenet, thanks but I aced that quiz a long time ago. 180 Out |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"351CJ" > wrote in message ...
> With less than one day's experience behind the wheel of his new Ford > Racing Mustang GT race car, car owner and driver Tom Nastasi, with > co-driver Ian James, claimed victory in the opening race of the 2005 > Grand-Am Cup season at Daytona International Speedway. The win marks the > first race and first win for Ford Racing's Mustang GT race car built off > the new 2005 Mustang GT that is currently available in Ford dealerships. > > http://mustang50magazine.com/eventco...2w_gt_daytona/ This will keep prices above sticker a while longer! -- John ThunderSnake #59 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message oups.com... (>snip<) > HOWEVER, what's the deal with the " M6007-R50P" 5.0 liter engines being > mandatory in the Stangs? I can find no reference to that part number > anywhere on the web, but I do know that five liters is a substantial > boost -- 25 cubic inches -- over the standard GT's 4.6. At the same > time the BMW M3's are stuck with a 3.2 liter six (although they can do > a .030 overbore). With a 110 cubic inch advantage it would be pretty > embarassing if the Mustangs could not "rocket" past the M3's at the top > end of a big straightaway. http://www.fordracingparts.com/announcements/news15.asp dwight |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
dwight opined in :
> > wrote in message > oups.com... > > (>snip<) > >> HOWEVER, what's the deal with the " M6007-R50P" 5.0 liter engines being >> mandatory in the Stangs? I can find no reference to that part number >> anywhere on the web, but I do know that five liters is a substantial >> boost -- 25 cubic inches -- over the standard GT's 4.6. At the same >> time the BMW M3's are stuck with a 3.2 liter six (although they can do >> a .030 overbore). With a 110 cubic inch advantage it would be pretty >> embarassing if the Mustangs could not "rocket" past the M3's at the top >> end of a big straightaway. > > http://www.fordracingparts.com/announcements/news15.asp > > dwight > > Go to the grand am forum and read all about it.. Lot of contention about mustang even being in there... and about the showroom availablillty of the engine, Seems FRPP keeps the part number of the crate engine listed as "in development - coming soon" Still, no matter the controversy... the thing won right out of the box, note the race descriptions where it seems the thing seems to handle with the euro cars. -- - Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! - |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Backyard Mechanic wrote:
> Go to the grand am forum and read all about it.. > Lot of contention about mustang even being in there... and about the showroom > availablillty of the engine, > > Seems FRPP keeps the part number of the crate engine listed as "in > development - coming soon" Sounds like 1968 all over again, when the SCCA ruled the 302 ci Chevy Z/28 engine to be homologated for use in Pontiac Firebirds based on Pontiac's false claims that they intended to offer the engine in Canadian Firebirds. Once it became apparent that Pontiac never intended to produce any Chevy powered Firebirds, the SCCA required Pontiac to run destroked Poncho big blocks. This led to the disastrous 1970 season, with zero top six finishes, zero points, and the "factory" team's top driver, Jerry Titus, killed while testing a last-gasp lightweight car. > Still, no matter the controversy... the thing won right out of the box, note > the race descriptions where it seems the thing seems to handle with the euro > cars. There is no way to minimize that achievement. Cars fresh out of the fab shop and drivers with zero seat time, beating teams running cars with years of development and race seasoning, is unheard of. Handling prowess aside, what this says about the design and strength of the factory pieces is what is really significant. 180 Out |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mustang Returns to Sports Car Racing | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 0 | January 29th 05 05:39 PM |
21st Century Goat vs Mustang Shootout | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 1 | January 15th 05 06:09 PM |
Ford to Unveil Latest Convertible Mustang | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 4 | January 6th 05 03:54 PM |
Mustang Fever All Over Again | Jim S. | Ford Mustang | 12 | December 13th 04 09:11 PM |
NEWSFLASH!! John Coletti, SVT Head, "Retires" | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 1 | December 13th 04 05:48 PM |