In reply to alfadriver :
I'd agree. An injected LS does sounds more relevant. (Then I told JG that we should run a Mustang body on it.)
In reply to alfadriver :
I'd agree. An injected LS does sounds more relevant. (Then I told JG that we should run a Mustang body on it.)
In reply to Lof8 - Andy :
I get 50% credit for Ed Higginbotham. All of his super good qualities are attributed to his mother. My value was in helping to develop his GRM-ness.
In reply to jh36 :
Not to threadjack this, but, yes, Jack is an enabler. For proof, look at all of the guitars in my office....
Well, I'm obviously all for it. JUST DO IT!! This was by far the most fun build I've done...it was fun to have a rough vision and be able to take the car where my mind went...more or less.
And going forward, it's the sort of project that can reinvent itself as the mood strikes...I'm aiming for NASA ST1 with a 6:1 P/W ratio...but what if I want to race against ST3 M3 folks...build a high torque, 250HP engine and have at it.
The track is my oyster.
Did i mention...DO IT!
I would be super interested in following this editorial and seeing where we converge and diverge....and in the end, maybe we get to compete. How neat is that? If others catch the bug, it could become A MOVEMENT. (i.e. Alice's Restaurant)
David S. Wallens said:In reply to jh36 :
Not to threadjack this, but, yes, Jack is an enabler. For proof, look at all of the guitars in my office....
I do my best to lead my friends in the proper direction. You are welcome.
jh36 said:David S. Wallens said:In reply to jh36 :
Not to threadjack this, but, yes, Jack is an enabler. For proof, look at all of the guitars in my office....
I do my best to lead my friends in the proper direction. You are welcome.
If I don't say it enough, thank you.
So, back to the thread, tires. Hoosiers for the Corvette cost like $2000 per set. (This is why we have purchased some used ones.) We also see the ASA car as easier to feed and clothe.
Yes, color me quite intrigued by all of this.
alfadriver said:WRT the engine, no matter what you do, don't do the Hot Rod thing and just put a carb on it. That's so lame, especially if you do any computer modeling of any kind (aero, suspension, structure, etc).
It would be interesting to run a topic search, but it seems that EFI questions out do carb questions by a lot.
Good point. I would simply slap a 4 barrel on the motor because it's easy but there is indeed a lot of questions about EFI so that would likely serve the readership better.
I'm still for buy a ran when wrecked whatever for the V8 and 5 speed and slap that in the chassis.
Tom1200 said:alfadriver said:WRT the engine, no matter what you do, don't do the Hot Rod thing and just put a carb on it. That's so lame, especially if you do any computer modeling of any kind (aero, suspension, structure, etc).
It would be interesting to run a topic search, but it seems that EFI questions out do carb questions by a lot.
Good point. I would simply slap a 4 barrel on the motor because it's easy but there is indeed a lot of questions about EFI so that would likely serve the readership better.
I'm still for buy a ran when wrecked whatever for the V8 and 5 speed and slap that in the chassis.
Start carb on a used budget engine and look at the Holley carb replacement EFI setups and look at tuning with it etc.
In reply to Apexcarver :
Or, assuming LS, HP tuners on a stock ECU and chopped up factory harness before moving to different stuff for more performance if needed?
David S. Wallens said:In reply to alfadriver :
I'd agree. An injected LS does sounds more relevant. (Then I told JG that we should run a Mustang body on it.)
Does the world really need another LS article?
In reply to APEowner :
If the intent is to blaze the trail for old ASA cars, LS is a logical path if you want to keep the cost down. Another option could be to 86 the LS stuff and build up a coyote and go Ford. That is something I toyed with.
APEowner said:David S. Wallens said:In reply to alfadriver :
I'd agree. An injected LS does sounds more relevant. (Then I told JG that we should run a Mustang body on it.)
Does the world really need another LS article?
Especially in a magazine that already has an LS-swapped 350Z and a C5 Corvette as the current projects...
In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
Seriously, I know the LSx is pretty much "an answer" but it doesn't have to be "The Answer"
I mean: https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/211349467766812?rid=4806945409316735&ad_id&rt=1&refID=0&refType=0
why be conventional? An ex-ASA chassis with a Buick Somerset body and a twin-turbo 302? I mean what could possibly go wrong? Who could possibly be offended and angered?
So much hate for the engine equivalent of the Miata (LS). Hmm? Yet no hate for the little MX-5. Interesting.
I find the carb to EFI argument a good one too. Describing how and why you go from base maps to tuning on the Dyno would be nice. Or no dyno? Find a more grassroots means of tuning the EFI.
Okay I've been busy setting up a $2000 Challenge autocross course all day, but I've been watching some of the chatter. Here's some random answers in no particular order.
• It's a 2600lb car, not a 3600lb car. That was a typo.
• ASA cars are LS1-powered, and this one comes with what appears to be most of a motor. The motors were built and sealed by Lingenfelter, and were fairly mild by race motor standards. From what I can gather, it's essentially a 5.7-liter LS-1 with a cable throttle and the ASA cam, which is ironically the same cam spec in our crate LS3 in the Vette. They're fuel injected, and ECUs were passed out before each race to prevent funny business. They're a semi-dry-sump oil system that uses the internal pump for pressure and an external pump for scavenging. Jack can probably provide more details, but from th epic he sent it looked like there was a block, heads, timing setup, fuel injection, oiling system, but I didn't see any bottom end aside from bearing caps. I get that we've done lots of LS content, so we probably wouldn't really focus on much motor stuff for this car, since it's well-traded ground. Only what we needed to focus on to make it relevant to anyone with any engine most likely.
• In regards to "don't just throw money at it." Yeah, we never do. We're on a budget, too. It's a huge consideration for us all the time, because we all have families to feed and mortgages to pay, so it's constantly on our minds. That said, buying the cheapest parts possible and making everything out of used dishwasher parts is sometimes a false economy. I've learned this the hard way on the Corvette going through cheap hubs trying to "save" money. If I had just ponied up and bought the good SKF hubs right off the hop I'd have spent far less than I did in trying to be frugal with parts store garbage. So I'd rather not get hung up on everything being cheap, but rather focus on every dollar spent having the maximum impact. I like to save money as much as the next guy, but few things hurt worse than buying the same cheap thing a second or third time.
• The open wheel specials look tough, but good luck getting into pretty much any events with those. None of the Time Attack groups allow open wheel cars, and there's just no place to run anything like that outside of renting you own track time, which would get expensive, and we've already been over our feeling on that. So, yeah, it's gotta have a body, and one that would look cool in our booth at a trade show or at a Radwood meet.
• In the research I've done, it looks like there were a fee manufacturers of ASA cars, but they were all built to roughly the same blueprints. All the chassis I've seen seem to have a few very familiar common design elements, so I'm assuming there was probably a common set of blueprints. It looks like the concession to oval track racing was to make the wheelbase slightly shorter on the left than the right by mounting the left front suspension a little further back. So supposedly (supposedly doing a lot of heavy lifting here) squaring the chassis should be as simple as moving the left front back to match. Or moving the right front forward, but I'd probably opt for shortening the wheelbase as much as possible because the cars are pretty long as-is.
• Theoretically, you should be able to do a LOT with this car. With a silhouette body and the LS1 returned to (or close to) original ASA spec, you can road race with NASA in Super Touring Unlimited, with the SCCA and V8 Road Racing Series in Super Production Over, or with any of the vintage groups in their appropriate classes. For time trials, you've got options with NASA and SCCA (both of which throw the aero door wide open), and with some of the dedicated Time Attack groups in exhibition classes. And for autocross, it's a legal CP car, although it has to run heavy (3300lbs, which includes a 10% tube frame weight penalty).
• I guess we're thinking this would not necessarily appeal to fans of a particular brand or make, but to fans of racing in general and people curious about what options are out there for dedicated race cars without spending a mint. These ASA chassis appear to be the Army surplus of motorsports at the moment, and it looks like you can go out and pick up a super safe, dedicated racing machine for less than the cost of building an STR Miata. That's a compelling proposition.
Of course, we don't even have a deal to get the car yet, but this thread certainly shows us that there's some interest, or at least curiosity.
jh36 said:In reply to APEowner :
If the intent is to blaze the trail for old ASA cars, LS is a logical path if you want to keep the cost down. Another option could be to 86 the LS stuff and build up a coyote and go Ford. That is something I toyed with.
That's valid. However, if the intent is to generate interesting magazine content then an LS may not the best choice.
I'm not an LS (or V8 guy) but if it brings the cost down then I'm a fan.
I would definitely be down for this content.
As far as ls: articles about junkyard truck motors with bargain basement parts to make them dependable track engines would be good reading. Not the "4k heads, 1k intake, fresh shortblock" stuff.
Bring back the junkyard low buck stuff for a low tech car that would be attainable to younger guys.
I am far more interested in the (expensive but cheap) ex-NASCAR motors than even yet another LS, even if it's all junkyard stuff.
An ASA chassis is interesting because of the cheap-for-their-performance circle-track parts availablity, and that includes engines, transmissions, shocks, and rear axles. Why not fully explore that (even if an SB2.2 is more than a crate LS)?
In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
A cheap used Cup motor is $20k. Decent ones are closer to $25k. Not saying 900hp wouldn't be fun, just saying that may be out of our budget range for a while :)
I got *way* more interested when you corrected to 2600 lbs. And to be clear, I was already interested.
Personally a well sorted 5.3L with a nice torque building cam (think Summit truck grind) and a a sorted suspension with good tires would be an awesome HPDE car.
In reply to Jesse Ransom :
Just to confirm this...I am at 2810 lbs with me and full tank of fuel. And we got to 50/50. I am coming in at about 185 these days, so that's 2600 dry is pretty close.
Regarding interesting content...I agree with JG...the engine can be whatever. You could go LS, you could go with a NASCAR castoff...you could go with a Ford plant. Get the right connecting parts and it could be a lot of different things. The power plant is not the most interesting part of the deal, but I get that there are a few LS centric horses in the barn. I find the light, strong and available chassis with tons of adjustment opportunities to be the tasty part. Cheap parts availability, SUPER easy to work on...it's all good grm stuff.
I would be interested in this content. I'd like to see what tricks I missed and see how I could improve what I have. I am just beginning to test my project "Camaro" and work the bugs of dormancy out but I can feel the potential.
You'll need to log in to post.
