Does "period correct" mean it was something possible because all the bits existed or does it mean something that would have been actually done during the time period?
Does "period correct" mean it was something possible because all the bits existed or does it mean something that would have been actually done during the time period?
I don't think anyone will have a problem with a 2.4 liter turbo minivan and I think it would be a great vehicle for the class.
We just need to be consistent, I am afraid if we allow a 1998 2.4 swap folks are going to want to enter ls engine every thing, and we end up with a special class that just about every challenge car is eligible for. That's fine and will make for an 80's tastic challenge with virtually no difference between regular cars and the special class. I will be on board with whatever consensus we reach.
In reply to pimpm3 :
I think GRM 1999era would do weird swaps like say a 90 Q45 engine into a free Conquest. That's why I suggested 95 as the limit for engine donors. It's realistic in that a 97 Corvette LS would have been too expensive in 99 for this bunch of cheapwads*.
* I say that with great respect.
On that vein, would I be limited to an early 90's 1UZFE and not be open to the 97+ vvti variant for an engine swap donor?
So, would a bolt on 97 neon with 200tw 17s be radwood? Again, nothing that was not available before 1999 except for the stereo and tires.
Specifically this one:
So, is the idea of the class more "show" than go, or are we trying to build a period correct car that'll do well in the challenges? Sounds like a lowered convertible mini truck with wild graphics is absolutely in the spirit of the class, but a tired bone stock 1986 Integra, also in the spirit of Redwood, would cream it in the drags and autocross.
Basically, is the idea a Redwood inspired car at Challenge prices or a Challenge car with Redwood inspiration?
Or does it really matter? I'd love to build a wild mini truck for the event (for less than $2020), but it would suck from a performance aspect.
-Rob
In reply to rob_lewis :
Build a wild mini truck and gain the unending love and respect of your peers.
In reply to rob_lewis :
both?
Stampie said:In reply to pimpm3 :
I think GRM 1999era would do weird swaps like say a 90 Q45 engine into a free Conquest. That's why I suggested 95 as the limit for engine donors. It's realistic in that a 97 Corvette LS would have been too expensive in 99 for this bunch of cheapwads*.
* I say that with great respect.
They were, i got a 01 5.3 in 03 for $1200 and it was cheap for the time. A $2000 budget ls swap in 1999 was impossible
It kinda sounds like it would be a "don't be a dick" rule for engine swaps.
Maybe we need to find someone with a whole lot of back issues of GRM and other car magazines. Car Craft was into budget builds back then right?
In reply to slowbird :
Car craft wasn't doing 80-90s cars in the 80s and 90s though.
In reply to rob_lewis :
I think the idea is that we should find a way to make a lowered convertible mini truck with wild graphics somehow be faster than a bone stock Integra. 
Old SuperStreet magazines would be a place to start.
Mini-Truckin' is what you want.
In reply to Daylan C :
I guess I was thinking more along the lines of, if they could do a cheap engine back then, well then we can do that same cheap engine now but in a car from back then. I'm not explaining this very well, but the chassis it goes into is less important than the engine itself. Anything that was a feasible budget engine in that era is valid for any Radwood car, is what I mean. So everyone start getting ready to put a big block Olds into their tubbed and caged Chevy Corsica.
(Actually now I remember someone who put a big block V8 in the back of a CRX...that would be very Radwood and motorhome engines are cheap, I hear.)
In reply to Dusterbd13-michael :
Yes. For bonus points though, you should replicate the colorful "Neon" graphics of the race cars.
I went looking thinking this was Car Craft but it was actually Dulcich in Mopar Action from a 2001 issue.
I should just do an M-body so I know how bad they are and can get them out of my system...
Daylan C said:I went looking thinking this was Car Craft but it was actually Dulcich in Mopar Action from a 2001 issue.
I should just do an M-body so I know how bad they are and can get them out of my system...
That's another idea I had. I think a dippy on cop car wheels with a 440 shoved in is totally in the spirit of the class.
slowbird said:In reply to rob_lewis :
I think the idea is that we should find a way to make a lowered convertible mini truck with wild graphics somehow be faster than a bone stock Integra.
How early were 2.3 rangers around? That plus turbo=screamer. There's also the Mazda b series with all the f2t shenanigans that are technically possible and certainly period correct, Then there was the Mitsubishi Might Max- I know good and goddamn well they were doing 4g63 swaps back then. Or even an s10 with a carb'd small block. Sure, an LS is the e-ticket, but guys were putting v8's in that chassis about 4 minutes after they were released from the factory.
minivan_racer said:Daylan C said:I went looking thinking this was Car Craft but it was actually Dulcich in Mopar Action from a 2001 issue.
I should just do an M-body so I know how bad they are and can get them out of my system...
That's another idea I had. I think a dippy on cop car wheels with a 440 shoved in is totally in the spirit of the class.
I was thinking more 5.9 Magnum, but If I didn't already have my Caprice I'd totally be hunting for one of these.
Small block S10 would be incredibly period correct. There were 3 at my high school and it wasn't a big high school. Two of them were 305's but they still made good noise and could smoke the E36 M3 out of one rear tire.
In reply to Mndsm :
I don't know when people first started putting the turbos on Rangers, but they had the N/A 2.3 from the beginning, so I think it's a valid idea. I do seem to remember 5.0 swap Rangers being a thing in the 90s, and there was a Ford-built prototype Ranger with a SHO engine.
pimpm3 said:I don't think anyone will have a problem with a 2.4 liter turbo minivan and I think it would be a great vehicle for the class.
We just need to be consistent, I am afraid if we allow a 1998 2.4 swap folks are going to want to enter ls engine every thing, and we end up with a special class that just about every challenge car is eligible for. That's fine and will make for an 80's tastic challenge with virtually no difference between regular cars and the special class. I will be on board with whatever consensus we reach.
I'm ok with being told no. If the spirit of the class is "think about what modifications would've been done in '95-'99" then the 2.4 is out. That would also rule out ls swaps and 2j swaps and also limit options for Honda swaps. I'd rather see a rowdy d series anyway.
slowbird said:In reply to Mndsm :
I don't know when people first started putting the turbos on Rangers, but they had the N/A 2.3 from the beginning, so I think it's a valid idea. I do seem to remember 5.0 swap Rangers being a thing in the 90s, and there was a Ford-built prototype Ranger with a SHO engine.
There was definitely 5.0 ranger swaps. Now, doing the 4.6 would probably be against the rules- I don't think that engine was cheap enough by then, but you could certainly get a fox body 5.0 for peanuts when guys are dropping 351s in.
slowbird said:I don't know when people first started putting the turbos on Rangers...
I can tell you my first one was 2001, and I wasn't THE first one by any stretch of the imagination.
A ragged out '86 Integra wouldn't have held a candle to this back in the day
Mndsm said:There was definitely 5.0 ranger swaps. Now, doing the 4.6 would probably be against the rules- I don't think that engine was cheap enough by then, but you could certainly get a fox body 5.0 for peanuts when guys are dropping 351s in.
For a standard 4.6 the only ones cheap enough didn't make any power, so swap guys were still into the 5.0 for obvious reasons. Now, there was the DOHC 4.6 mkviii available in '93 that was starting to get swapped around in the late 90's. Mostly into Fox chassis cars once the sn95 trickle down came into effect, not so much into the Rangers.
minivan_racer said:pimpm3 said:I don't think anyone will have a problem with a 2.4 liter turbo minivan and I think it would be a great vehicle for the class.
We just need to be consistent, I am afraid if we allow a 1998 2.4 swap folks are going to want to enter ls engine every thing, and we end up with a special class that just about every challenge car is eligible for. That's fine and will make for an 80's tastic challenge with virtually no difference between regular cars and the special class. I will be on board with whatever consensus we reach.
I'm ok with being told no. If the spirit of the class is "think about what modifications would've been done in '95-'99" then the 2.4 is out. That would also rule out ls swaps and 2j swaps and also limit options for Honda swaps. I'd rather see a rowdy d series anyway.
H series in a crx!
You'll need to log in to post.
