Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Only 3 Dodges where on hand at NCM Motorsports Park to defend Mother Mopar's honor for Optima Ultimate Street Car Challenge at NCM Ultimate Street Car Association











 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Better the right three cars than ten chump entries... and it looks like that may be the case.
Damn if that’s restomodded entry doesn’t look good!
How did everybody run/stack up?
 

·
Super Moderator
2016 SXT Plus Blacktop
Joined
·
20,635 Posts
The other challenger has a bit of body roll, not flat in turns like Big Red ;)

A Guy
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
we all struggled unfortunately, the competition was absolutely fierce and the level of competition has doubled since last year, when 4 to 6 seconds use to separate the field its now less then 2 seconds.....the 71 was brand new and was trying to sort out handling issues, the Neon appeared to have mechanical issues and never competed on day two, we finished 17th out of 39, and due to some family issues we left early on Sunday and did not finish road course....

Luke:frown:
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
and something that i don't understand is lack of forward bite, no matter what I do I can't seem to improve.....
Luke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
and something that i don't understand is lack of forward bite, no matter what I do I can't seem to improve.....
Luke
IT's a PRETTY BIG CAR for the autocross.........you gotta ask yourself.......even if you've done everything right, left nothing out in terms of improvements you could make to your Challenger chasis, "What is the connection to the pavement and how big a contact patch will you need to compete effectively with Camaros and Corvettes that bring so much less weight and are probably running rubber as big as you are right now?"

Even if you could fit a larger tire than these lighter cars run right now it seems unlikely that GMs lazar like focus on handling will ever allow you that advantage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
The other challenger has a bit of body roll, not flat in turns like Big Red ;)

A Guy
You might want to look again....that older Challenger still looks pretty good in terms of how far it's come from "stock"......I'd like to see his suspension set up. I bet it's about a million miles from where it started.

It's amazing what can be done to older cars these days. Absolutely and completely revised set ups that in virtually no way resemble "OEM" are as easy as ordering from a catalog of well thought out and tested kits these days.....tweaking them from the new starting point can give you an older car that will AMAZE people at the track. The original 1970 challenger suspension was absolutely HORRIBLE......this car looks way better than that.

Looking at both that new and old Challenger suggests both contestants in this competition know what they are doing and both have come a long way from "stock"
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
an idea of what we have done to the suspension

every control arm in the rear replaced, all billet aftermarket, front upper and lower control arms custom made, custom Ultimate Performance coil over system, 30 way adjustable rebound and compression separate from each other......front and rear Hellcat sway bars, front and rear strut braces, subframe connectors, 8 point roll bar, back seat delete,

Wilwood custom brake kits, non fixed rotors, sprung pistons, 6 piston fronts and 4 rears, (massive pistons and different sizes and materials) cannot buy this kit

full containment Sparco racing seats, 5 point harnesses, etc

biggest issue 4080 lbs, the Mustang that won Gt class weight 3400 and makes as much hps as I do, over 800hps

my dilemma, how to loose 500 lbs and still remain a driveable Challenger!!!!
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
and for laughs, John is a really nice guy, and dont begrudge him anything but he shows up in a Freightliner hauler with a stacker trailer, way above my pay grade....lol
:surprise:
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
You might want to look again....that older Challenger still looks pretty good in terms of how far it's come from "stock"......I'd like to see his suspension set up. I bet it's about a million miles from where it started.

It's amazing what can be done to older cars these days. Absolutely and completely revised set ups that in virtually no way resemble "OEM" are as easy as ordering from a catalog of well thought out and tested kits these days.....tweaking them from the new starting point can give you an older car that will AMAZE people at the track. The original 1970 challenger suspension was absolutely HORRIBLE......this car looks way better than that.

Looking at both that new and old Challenger suggests both contestants in this competition know what they are doing and both have come a long way from "stock"
I roll on 19x11 and 305/30/19's all four corners, if Potenza's would make a larger 19 we would run them, but the 305's are as big as they make, I can fit 315's all around

tire choice is also a big issue.....we have to run 200 threadwear

Luke
 

·
Registered
2014 Shaker Boosted 392 Stroker M6
Joined
·
2,718 Posts
an idea of what we have done to the suspension

every control arm in the rear replaced, all billet aftermarket, front upper and lower control arms custom made, custom Ultimate Performance coil over system, 30 way adjustable rebound and compression separate from each other......front and rear Hellcat sway bars, front and rear strut braces, subframe connectors, 8 point roll bar, back seat delete,

Wilwood custom brake kits, non fixed rotors, sprung pistons, 6 piston fronts and 4 rears, (massive pistons and different sizes and materials) cannot buy this kit

full containment Sparco racing seats, 5 point harnesses, etc

biggest issue 4080 lbs, the Mustang that won Gt class weight 3400 and makes as much hps as I do, over 800hps

my dilemma, how to loose 500 lbs and still remain a driveable Challenger!!!!
Maybe it will take a carbon fiber or aluminum body to get the weight down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
cut the skin off and graft it on a race chassis

like our friend Mike Dusold



yes we race again that......:surprise:

That's a "KICK ASS" design if ever there was one for a first Gen Camaro.

Never mind the weight reduction......first thing I noticed was the revised positioning of the engine BEHIND the center line of the front wheels. This is remarkably similar to where the engine is located in my own C3 Corvette. (Driving a C3 is really driving from the "back seat" position....roll down the window and I can easily touch the rear tire). Strange as it seems to be positioned that far back in the car while driving.... it gives not quite but awfully close to a near perfect 50/50 weight balance. In an earlier post you talked about struggling with a lack of forward bite.......bigger tire up front and a suspension set up change may help but ultimately this is picture of how you eliminate that problem completely once and for all.

I talked about "kits" available and I was thinking of my own older Corvette when I suggested it. It rides on a thoroughly modern design from Vette Brake that incorporates Fiberglass transverse springs front and back that replace the super heavy multi-leaf steel out back and the hard as Chinese Arithmetic riding coils up front. This fully adjustable suspension and much larger sway bars and Koni shocks results in a 3200-3300 pd car that can carve corners with capablility approaching the best of anything available today.....the limiting factor on potential in this system is clearly found in the 17 inch summer only rubber that contacts the pavement. Off sett trailing arms allow a little more rubber out back........but it would be cool to find a way to get a 325 under there like a modern Corvette wears and take a shot to see just how close I could get in the autocross on driving skill alone........no computer help in a car this old.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
and for laughs, John is a really nice guy, and dont begrudge him anything but he shows up in a Freightliner hauler with a stacker trailer, way above my pay grade....lol
:surprise:
It is a little bit CRAZY to think you race in the same "class".

There is HUGE difference between a car in basicly stock form that is OPTIMIZED for potential and car completely rebuilt for racing from the ground up.

IT's not racing to my mind when the guy with the biggest check-book is allowed to go crazy with anything he wants to do and then put him up against cars assembled within a budget.

His car is COOL to be sure.......but he should be racing other PURE RACE CARS not street cars optimized.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
That's a "KICK ASS" design if ever there was one for a first Gen Camaro.

Never mind the weight reduction......first thing I noticed was the revised positioning of the engine BEHIND the center line of the front wheels. This is remarkably similar to where the engine is located in my own C3 Corvette. (Driving a C3 is really driving from the "back seat" position....roll down the window and I can easily touch the rear tire). Strange as it seems to be positioned that far back in the car while driving.... it gives not quite but awfully close to a near perfect 50/50 weight balance. In an earlier post you talked about struggling with a lack of forward bite.......bigger tire up front and a suspension set up change may help but ultimately this is picture of how you eliminate that problem completely once and for all.

I talked about "kits" available and I was thinking of my own older Corvette when I suggested it. It rides on a thoroughly modern design from Vette Brake that incorporates Fiberglass transverse springs front and back that replace the super heavy multi-leaf steel out back and the hard as Chinese Arithmetic riding coils up front. This fully adjustable suspension and much larger sway bars and Koni shocks results in a 3200-3300 pd car that can carve corners with capablility approaching the best of anything available today.....the limiting factor on potential in this system is clearly found in the 17 inch summer only rubber that contacts the pavement. Off sett trailing arms allow a little more rubber out back........but it would be cool to find a way to get a 325 under there like a modern Corvette wears and take a shot to see just how close I could get in the autocross on driving skill alone........no computer help in a car this old.

pretty sure Mike's car has abs.....I know for a fact Ken Thwaits has abs and traction control
Luke
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,555 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
It is a little bit CRAZY to think you race in the same "class".

There is HUGE difference between a car in basicly stock form that is OPTIMIZED for potential and car completely rebuilt for racing from the ground up.

IT's not racing to my mind when the guy with the biggest check-book is allowed to go crazy with anything he wants to do and then put him up against cars assembled within a budget.

His car is COOL to be sure.......but he should be racing other PURE RACE CARS not street cars optimized.
we do have have 6 classes, however I do race against him for overall,

rules are pretty simple, and yes big pocket book will eventually win

classes

Classes - The USCA will recognize six classes of vehicles within USCA sanctioned
events and reserves the right to weigh any vehicle at any time during the event or event
activities. Weights are as presented in tech without a driver.

a. GT – 1990 and newer 3200-pound minimum weight 2WD sedans, 4 seater
coupes and late model trucks (example – 5
th Gen Camaro, BMW M3/M5, late
model Mustang)

b. GTS** (Sports car) – 1990 and newer 3200-pound minimum weight factory
production two-seater autos and any all-wheel drive vehicles (example –
C5/C6/C7 Corvette, Mitsubishi Evo, Nissan GTR, Dodge Viper)

c. GTV (Vintage) – 1989 and older 3200-pound minimum weight rear wheel drive
(example – 1967 Mustang, 1987 Monte Carlo, 1974 Pontiac Firebird)

d. GTC (compact/sport compact) – Naturally aspirated or forced induction 4 cylinder
or 2 rotary engines, FWD or RWD, front engine mount with max 107” wheelbase.
Certain pre-1990 4 and 6 cylinder vehicles may run in this class, as well as
certain rear engine models like Lotus or Porsche. All vehicles in this class must
weigh, at a minimum, 95% of the factory published curb weight. Drivers are
responsible for providing documentation. (example – Mazda Miata/MX5,
Dodge Neon/SRT 4, Honda Civic/S2000, Toyota FRS) Vehicles in the GTC class
that are not at least 95% of factory published curb weight will be moved to the
exhibition class and will not receive championship points for the event.

e. GTE (EV - electric vehicles) – Performance cars designated from the
manufacturer as EV, must be pure electric, no hybrids or fossil fuels of any kind.
(example - Tesla, BMW i3, Volkswagen E-Golf, Hyundai Ioniq). This class is not
intended for urban economy vehicles like the Leaf or Smart cars. All EV
competitors must compete at the published factory curb weight or higher.

f. GTL** (Lights) – ALL VEHICLES UNDER 3200 POUNDS – all vehicles
participating in the GTL class must weigh, at a minimum, 95% of the factory
published curb weight. Drivers are responsible for providing documentation.
Example, if your car weighed 3000 pounds from the factory, it must weigh at
least 2850 pounds to compete legally. Vehicles in the GTL class that are not at
least 95% of factory published curb weight will be moved to the exhibition class
and will not receive championship points for the event.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top