Quote:
Originally Posted by joelster
The only max effort CAMC car that I know of would be that GM test vehicle from few years ago. I only say this because it was able to hit the minimum weight target. That's really the hardest thing to do with CAMC cars. It was that turbo-4 1LE. They got it making really good power, and the F/R balance was excellent. This was before the wing rules. There is one that ran at Bristol as well by John Ward. He had everyone covered by 1.168 seconds on Sat and by .738 on Sun. he was 14th in PAX on Sat, haven't seen the numbers for Sun.
|
This is what I mean when I say that nobody seems to understand what a CAM "max effort" would look like. I was at the 2018 CAM Challenge in Peru and saw that car up close, and I talked to a couple engineers. That was a stock, off-the-shelf 2019 2.0T 1LE with ZLE (I think) wheels and tires, a straight-pipe cat-back, and a tune with anti-lag. That's a lazy ST build at best! Yes, it was fairly light (3270lb as I recall), but it was still above the minimum weight at the time. The fact that this car dominated the season in 2018 is a testament to the disconnect between the CAM rule set and what actually gets entered in the class.
A true edge-of-the-rules CAM build looks like a Sprint Cup car (CAM-C) or a slightly larger version of Kiesel's EM Sprint (CAM-S), but with more wing and on 200tw tires. If you can drive it to the event, fuggedabowdit. The only thing OE on it should be the VIN plate, which is welded to the custom tube frame, and maybe the wiper motors and mirrors so you can pass a state safety inspection.