482supersnake
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #1
Sponsored
Sponsored
Inside Ford Performance Power Packs & FP350S Production
- Thread starter 482supersnake
- Start date
- Watchers 9
stanglife
Well-Known Member
BS METER PEGGED!
Interesting that he has a specific explanation as to why Ford decided to use the CPC vs FPC in the FP350S. Because Ford wanted to make the FPC exclusive to the road car. I have nothing to refute this but my spidey-sense is tinglin'!
Very cool video, though. I like the stacked CF splitter.
Interesting that he has a specific explanation as to why Ford decided to use the CPC vs FPC in the FP350S. Because Ford wanted to make the FPC exclusive to the road car. I have nothing to refute this but my spidey-sense is tinglin'!
Very cool video, though. I like the stacked CF splitter.
Epiphany
Well-Known Member
Did they even bring up the fact that the work was being done at Watson? Would have been nice to see it mentioned at the very least.
A few observations:
As much as this car is using a "smaller" brake package to allow fitment of an 18" wheel I think the ducts that were fabricated for use here may also work with the larger GT350 caliper and factory wheel. I have a sense that there would indeed be a cooling benefit for use on heavily tracked cars.
I don't like what I see with respect to the FR front tow hook. The front bumper is a bit fragile (and extremely light - it's aluminum) and if you look closely you can see that the fasteners are crushing the bumper. Ford engineers - you can do better. This kit should have been designed to use an insert(s). The torque figure necessary to impart the necessary stretch on the bolts is greater than the tubing can support.
No weights at the rear of this TR3160 thanks to the use of the CPC crank. Also note that the cars are using a two-piece steel driveshaft. The last Boss 302S used the '13/'14 GT500's carbon fiber driveshaft (as well as it's TR6060 transmission).
At least Dave was honest in mentioning that the design for the camber plates didn't originate with FR. Cough, Multimatic, cough. The finished pieces look sharp.
The plates on the PRI prototype FP350S I saw...
I spent some time at PRI discussing the FP350S with Bruce Smith from Ford Racing. He shared all the details. Back then, nobody would admit use of the CPC in this car (he eventually opened about it to me but I did have to pry a bit) so it was interesting hearing Dave Born offer up the GT350 exclusivity argument as mentioned above.
A few observations:
As much as this car is using a "smaller" brake package to allow fitment of an 18" wheel I think the ducts that were fabricated for use here may also work with the larger GT350 caliper and factory wheel. I have a sense that there would indeed be a cooling benefit for use on heavily tracked cars.
I don't like what I see with respect to the FR front tow hook. The front bumper is a bit fragile (and extremely light - it's aluminum) and if you look closely you can see that the fasteners are crushing the bumper. Ford engineers - you can do better. This kit should have been designed to use an insert(s). The torque figure necessary to impart the necessary stretch on the bolts is greater than the tubing can support.
No weights at the rear of this TR3160 thanks to the use of the CPC crank. Also note that the cars are using a two-piece steel driveshaft. The last Boss 302S used the '13/'14 GT500's carbon fiber driveshaft (as well as it's TR6060 transmission).
At least Dave was honest in mentioning that the design for the camber plates didn't originate with FR. Cough, Multimatic, cough. The finished pieces look sharp.
The plates on the PRI prototype FP350S I saw...
I spent some time at PRI discussing the FP350S with Bruce Smith from Ford Racing. He shared all the details. Back then, nobody would admit use of the CPC in this car (he eventually opened about it to me but I did have to pry a bit) so it was interesting hearing Dave Born offer up the GT350 exclusivity argument as mentioned above.
The Chairman
Well-Known Member
Those camber plates are nice. But I would think that changing and measuring camber is much easier than measuring and adjusting the toe after a camber change.
I also see a bump steer kit installed in the video. I have not experienced any bump steer on my lowered GT350 like it did on my ‘99 Cobra.
Very nice video!
I also see a bump steer kit installed in the video. I have not experienced any bump steer on my lowered GT350 like it did on my ‘99 Cobra.
Very nice video!
xt6wagon
Well-Known Member
I think camber plate design was more for ensuring that the camber settings would remain fixed during a race, and that changes are ensured to be correct. This way if they want to put in a bit more camber, there is no guessing on the change as the shim ensures the correct placement of the strut top. Then its locked in so that only mechanical damage changes it.
Sponsored
The Chairman
Well-Known Member
I only made the comment about setting toe because he commented at 7:25 about how using the camber system meant they didn’t have to get on the alignment rack or under the car. Still have to use the rack (or strings) and get under the car to reset the toe.
I agree, its a neat system to quickly set camber, and sets it in a very fixed way. They might have also calculated/tested how much to crank the toe for each of those spacers. That would make the toe reset less hassle as well.
I agree, its a neat system to quickly set camber, and sets it in a very fixed way. They might have also calculated/tested how much to crank the toe for each of those spacers. That would make the toe reset less hassle as well.
J_Maher_AMG
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2016
- Threads
- 9
- Messages
- 1,475
- Reaction score
- 1,197
- Location
- Newfoundland, Canada
- First Name
- Justin
- Vehicle(s)
- 2017 GT350R (HR057)
Not 100% on this, but I believe a big part of the reason that the race series swapped to the CPC was due to the FPC engine vibrating the race headers loose as they don't have the same dampers that our stock headers do. I do remember that it was mentioned that the engine itself was essentially trouble free.
They did though originally state that the FPC was only for the GT350... GT350R-C being the competition version of the car. I imagine with the issues and maintenance with the headers and their desire to switch to a more hardcore setup with the sequential gearbox, the vibrations of the FPC would have been too much. Easy to swap out to their CPC version, and simply name the car something different so that the marketing would hold true.
They did though originally state that the FPC was only for the GT350... GT350R-C being the competition version of the car. I imagine with the issues and maintenance with the headers and their desire to switch to a more hardcore setup with the sequential gearbox, the vibrations of the FPC would have been too much. Easy to swap out to their CPC version, and simply name the car something different so that the marketing would hold true.
Lurker_350
Well-Known Member
That was exactly what Dean told me last year at the IMSA race at COTA. I was joking around with them since they made the switch from the GT350R-C the prior year. His response was to not mess with any tuned mass dampers on the car and it will be fine for a long time. I could tell he was tired of people asking why they made the switch from FPC to CPC.
He also mentioned the BOP restrictions placed on the car really hampered the engine. They replaced with the CPC version and an updated intake (among other things I'm sure) to try and limit any BOP restrictions applied.
And I'm sure there are other reasons too, but those were the ones he mentioned to me.
nastang87xx
Well-Known Member
I also heard that they wanted to retune the characteristics of the car and went cross so they could get some low end back into the car. But yes, I was also under the same impression that the Voodoo based engine was rock solid in its racing application with no durability issues.
