Type 65 driving impressions

Hello

I would like to hear from members about the driving impressions/handling characteristics of the T65C.

Particularly the Type R, but the street version is ok too..

Does it handle more like a “vintage racer”?
Or does it handle. Ore like a modern car?


Im looking at either doing an LS conversion on the FD3S RX7 or possibly the gen3 coupe.

However, Im weary of this because every time at the track the FFR roadsters seem really, really slow.
Why is this? Possibly due to aero, possibly due to low power, but in any case, I would like to hear about the coupe and to see if its much better?

Any feedback would be welcome.

The engine I would be using is a GMPP old Daytona Prototype motor that is a small displacement, higher revving engine and of course a T56 mag that I have sitting around.

Thank you and look forward to hearing from you.

How does under 2:00 at VIR sound to ya'?

Here, take a ride with John George:

https://youtu.be/vuX_B7fih0Y

Jeff

I appreciate that, but it doesn't really answer my question...

I'm interested in feedback into how the car behaves, handles, responds to setup changes, how does it build grip, wear tires, etc.

An old NASCAR can do a sub 2 at vir and so can an 808 or a formula 2000 - but they behave vastly differently.

It would be interesting to hear from someone who has driven a GTM, an 818 and the Coupe - just to hear impressions, not just lap times.

D K,

1. I've only ridden in and driven a budget donor built 302 MK-3, a 392-W Gen-1 Type 65, an over the top Super Charged Modular Motored MK-4 and a very nice 396 FE MK-4.
2. My limited experience riding in and driving these cars ruined me and it is why I am building a Dark Side MK-4 simply because all drove & handled like NOTHING I'd have ever been in.
3. These cars are sophisticated, high tech, low tech and everywhere in between, because all were true reflections of the owners. (All Were Great In Their Own Way!)
4. Yes, I've owned a few peppy cars that handled well, one, in particular, was barely street legal that went swimming in Katrina, but nothing drives or makes an impression like a Factory Five.
5. While LS-powered RX-7 sounds like fun, you need to understand that it will never be a Factory Five.

Good Luck Seeking Your Dream Car!

Steve

1st NASCAR Drive
https://youtu.be/U4wZ8SmsXAY

Family Fun & Daily Driver
https://youtu.be/svZX2BMSDEs

The Dark Side Chevy Cobra
https://youtu.be/PCngiKoopkA

Soon To Be Dark Side Dart Cobra
https://youtu.be/IGYtX-3p7xk

Young Mr. Logano In A Factory Five
https://youtu.be/3iFeDymN5qk

If you can find Joe Logano's phone number, ask him and share his impression with us all.

Steve

You could also contact Karen Salvaggio who has campaigned a Type 65 Gen 1 or 2 very successfully for many years. She is building a Type 65 Gen 3.

“An old NASCAR can do a sub 2 at vir and so can an 808 or a formula 2000”

DK curious what your source was for this factoid ... can you let us know?

Carl

DK,

The basic problem is that the Gen 3 Coupe is so new that there aren't enough out on the road to properly answer your questions. Perhaps if John George or Karen Salvaggio would comment you'd have answers closer to your request.

I'm guessing that you've researched the FFR site and looked at the chassis design and the specifications published by FFR. Their analysis is very favorable for both the street and R versions but this is compared to the older coupe and the roadster. A friend is building a Gen 3 Coupe now. From what I see, know and have experience with it is a very good chassis.

About slow roadsters. Compared to what? The NASA Spec series has many rules and restriction on HP/TQE to weight, certainly this class wasn't intended to be really fast, just racing & fun. NASA ST2 is faster and allows more engine options, it looks like many are moving to this class and this is where I believe the coupes are running. NASA publishes rules and shows HP/TQE/Weight charts.

On aero, well that is the most severe restriction of the roadster body, the coefficient of drag (CD) is somewhere near that of a greyhound bus or as a friend and cobra owner has said they are about as aerodynamic going sideways as they are forward. I've read a variety of reports indicating that the CD is somewhere around .5, the original coupe was supposed to be low .3's.

I would think that a coupe with a 427W, as my friend is building, would be very fast on the track and should respond well to suspension tuning due to the chassis' stiffness. He's just building a street car and may not do more than an occasional HPDE. FWIW I'm building a Challenge Car with a 427W, I expect that it will be real interesting but aero limited after 150mph or so. But I'm not racing either.

Not sure if this helps but I hope so.

Jim

absolutely


Anything helps.



I guess the fact that the new chassis is a lot stiffer, makes it a lot more consistent and repeatable, as well as finding that fine tune balance.

Actually what got me interested in all this is the fact that they built the car with 45/55 rearward bias. Thats real good for roadracing. And the fact that they got there without using a transaxle.

This definitely has potential but Id like to know more about it!

I can't give you real info but can fill in w/ a bit of FFR history. They started by building a chassis that could use a lot of Mustang parts. Slowly as people autocrossed them and really dug into making improvements, the SAI mod, the Ackerman mod, the 3 link were developed. All these have been incorporated into production. The SAI mod led to FFR designing their own spindles. I am not sure when each person started at FFR but maybe 6 yrs ago a couple of engineers came on board. FFR also got into a partnership w/ HP(?) for CAD work. They designed the 818 and the 33 from a clean sheet via CAD. They have done the same for the new coupe. Looking at the chassis it is obvious to me that it is a huge improvement over a couple of 4 inch tubes. Go here for a build of a racing coupe if you haven't seen it already.
http://www.johngeorgeracing.com/word...ekend-1-recap/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CraigS

FFR also got into a partnership w/ HP(?) for CAD work.

---

HP for their computers; SolidWorks for their design software.

Stupid question but does anyone have drawings/information regarding the roll centers?

Based on what I've asked from FFR before, I'm guessing that isn't something that will be published or available outside their engineering department. I tried to get a couple dimensions of their frame before ordering and they said it was covered as proprietary information (which I can't really blame them for).

I suppose one of us could try to back-calculate it from the hardpoints on the frame and the spindle mounting locations, but other than that, we're on our own.

Its not too hard to figure out, spcially with the appropriate software.
I dont think giving out roll centers would be too much of an ip violation - its more of a setup thing.

Great article about the car in GRM.

I would suspect that the roll centers of the chassis could change quite a lot with the configuration of the chassis seeing it can be equipped with both solid axle and independent rear suspension, multiple different engine/transmission combos, placement of component's the amount of fuel, amount and position of ballast all changing the center of gravity and therefore roll centers. To get good roll center data each car would have to be measured and weighed in an as raced condition with the driver and ballast in place. Really its the only accurate way.

The rear setup options is one of the main reasons Id like to see what they did with it.

Lot of the other things you mentioned, Im not too worried about since they affect the roll centers minutely.
I would like to se where in general they are at.
Doesnt have to be too accurate at this point...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D K

The rear setup options is one of the main reasons Id like to see what they did with it.

Lot of the other things you mentioned, Im not too worried about since they affect the roll centers minutely.
I would like to se where in general they are at.
Doesnt have to be too accurate at this point...

---

Or You Could Just Refurbish An Old RX-7, Stuff An LS In It Since That Was Your 1st Choice, And Call It A Day!

I dont know if Id call it my “first” choice. More of “a” choice.
My first choice is to build a competitive race car that is easy on consumables and not too hard to repair from crash damage at the track.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D K

I dont know if Id call it my “first” choice. More of “a” choice.
My first choice is to build a competitive race car that is easy on consumables and not too hard to repair from crash damage at the track.

---

I've seen and sat in the new Type-65 last year at Cruising The Emerald Coast.
They had a completed car and a completed rolling chassis at that event.
It is in my opinion their finest effort so far, but I'm not a road racer.
Go to Warehem and see it for yourself.
You Won't Be Disappointed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D K

My first choice is to build a competitive race car that is easy on consumables and not too hard to repair from crash damage at the track.

---

Hi D K, what class are you thinking of running? Everything depends on maxamizing the rules based on what class you choose and that sets the direction of your build of what engine combo, etc.

My build was optimized for NASA ST2 with a weight/power of 8:1. Parts were chosen to fit that mold. As for the chassis, it is much much stiffer then my old challenge car, I’ve talked about this in the GRM article. As with any racecar you can make it handle how you like with lots of adjustments, chassis responds really well to changes.

I have a MkII roadster that has the new IRS and the front is also upgraded to as close as I can get to the current FFR spindles setup. I use a program from Performance Trends to look at suspension. Mine is the inexpensive version so I have to use their front suspension to do the rear. Just ran through this two days ago after I installed .5 inch taller front upper ball joint studs. Front RC is 3.6 inches w/ a camber gain of -.81 deg per inch. Rear RC is 4.5. These are both at a ride height of very close to 4 inches. There is no guarantee that mine equals a gen 3 coupe but may give you some idea.

Great thank you!

I have an old Daytona Prototype engine, so Im looking at 5.5-6:1 which would put me at ST1.

Its no doubt the car is fast. A 58 at the full course is not slow! I dont doubt the abilities of the car. Im just trying to get a better understanding of how the car feels, etc. Since Im not able to drive one.

Ive had a couple of students in roadsters (dont know which models) and driving them I didnt think they felt “spohisticated” at all. Granted there may be many reasons for this and I only did a couple of laps. I also dont know the tire, setup, or even if they were solid axle....

So im just gathering info in the best way I think possible and Im super thankful for everyone here for chimng in!

David

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johngeorge

Hi D K, what class are you thinking of running? Everything depends on maxamizing the rules based on what class you choose and that sets the direction of your build of what engine combo, etc.

My build was optimized for NASA ST2 with a weight/power of 8:1. Parts were chosen to fit that mold. As for the chassis, it is much much stiffer then my old challenge car, I’ve talked about this in the GRM article. As with any racecar you can make it handle how you like with lots of adjustments, chassis responds really well to changes.

---

David, the Gen3 Coupe R is a racecar and feel like a tube chassis racecar.

As for your past experiences in a street FFR car on track with unknown suspension/tire combo, it is not a fair comparison or representation of the current FFR brand/chassis and their capabilities on track.

I totally understand that and thats why Im looking for new information.

What sort of spring rates do you run and are you on full slicks or Hoosiers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johngeorge

David, the Gen3 Coupe R is a racecar and feel like a tube chassis racecar.

As for your past experiences in a street FFR car on track with unknown suspension/tire combo, it is not a fair comparison or representation of the current FFR brand/chassis and their capabilities on track.

---

I got an incredibly detailed response back from the engineering team in reference to the suspension design and setup info, so Im super thankful!

David, here are a couple of links that may help you...

My car setup http://www.johngeorgeracing.com/word...r48-car-setup/

Parts list http://www.johngeorgeracing.com/word.../part-numbers/

Build thread http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...ght=JohnGeorge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D K

I appreciate that, but it doesn't really answer my question...

I'm interested in feedback into how the car behaves, handles, responds to setup changes, how does it build grip, wear tires, etc.

An old NASCAR can do a sub 2 at vir and so can an 808 or a formula 2000 - but they behave vastly differently.

It would be interesting to hear from someone who has driven a GTM, an 818 and the Coupe - just to hear impressions, not just lap times.

---

You are asking a question without an answer. A Factory Five car in base form is a good racecar and a great street car. I say good racecar because they are a sturdy tube framed car that is a blank slate with respect to the suspension setup. They can be made to do whatever you want, particularly personal customization to your driving style. This also makes them a constant work in progress because of the vast combinations available both parts and the settings. For example; coilover springs alone, aside of different mfgs, some can run as low as 200lbs and can go up to 1000lb in 50 lb increments.

If you were in a so so FFR then either the car was 250 to 300 rwhp and/or the driver didnt know how to use the car. A 400+ hp car driven on the edge will get your attention. As far as models, the Coupe and GTM are capable of highest top speed the roadster’s speed is limited by its design. I am not sure of 818 top speeds but as far as handling, they are also at the top.
Have you seen this thread?
http://www.ffcars.com/forums/68-road...es-thread.html

Will your LS conversion on the FD3S RX7 be a competitive car? Dont know but I am confident that an equally powered sorted out Gen 3 Coupe should be able to out run it. The question to you is how much time and $$ are willing to devote to have the Coupe racecar of your liking?

I started with getting my Roadster in 2007 so I could build my dream car. Early in my build I was introduced to what I call gentlemen racing, no wheel to wheel competition. I had no idea that I was not only building my bucket list “Cobra” but, I also owned a very capable racing machine. My 3 link kit had Billstein coil overs and Sumitto tires, close to a death machine between snap oversteer and hockey puck tires. I have been changing and tweaking since 2010 with final upgrade to Gordon's front and rear control arms this past spring. I now run Koni’s all around, Eibach 700/400 springs, and Hoosier A6/A7 tires for competition in AutoX, ¼ mi fun and occasional track days. Also, I leave older Hoosiers out back in summer for ultimate street fun. You need to decide what you want your car to do. Factory Five's can be setup as stiff suspension track only with wide sticky tires or tune the car to feel like a refined modern sports car. There are and have been very technical suspension discussions on FFCars.com for years. The trade off I live with is street driving comfort vs stiffer springs and expensive tires to become more competitive. I like where I am, I can outperform most production cars scare the pants off of most with 0 to 60 acceleration and not have my teeth jarred loose on bridge bumps on I-95 going 70 mph.

So I guess to answer your question: Does it handle more like a “vintage racer”?
Or does it handle more like a modern car? That is up to you my friend .....

^^^
Very eloquently put. Thank you.
I understand my question was a bit of a loaded one in some ways, but thankfully between here and FFR, I have gotten quite a bit of information on the matter.

Ironically enough, both the RX7 FD3 and the type 65 G3 have identical wheelbase and weigh about the same. The RX7 is wider though. Both are reasonably aerodynamic, but only the G3 Coupe has the 45/55 to the rear.
The RX7 is a very capable car, but one huge down side is that they are hard to find clean, and even then, are quite expensive.

I look forward to keep getting more info and hopefully making a decision soon.

David

Thank you.

PS I used to live in Middletown.
Did some work with Gearhart racing back in the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johngeorge

David, here are a couple of links that may help you...

My car setup http://www.johngeorgeracing.com/word...r48-car-setup/

Parts list http://www.johngeorgeracing.com/word.../part-numbers/

Build thread http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...ght=JohnGeorge

---

LS2 with the 6 speed in my coupe, love it! Just dynoed at 408hp/410 torque at the tire, who needs a Coyote? $5300 for the crate motor. Its a highway star, with at 3:50 rear end 1700 RPM at 80 in 6th, around town 1-4 is a blast. Standard steering at bit vague, and with power steering the feel is not great. Drives like a big go-cart, pushes or understeers a bit, you can remedy with the gas pedal. Easy to drive in the rain no bad habits. No track time its my daily driver!

Daily driver???

Bravo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plschulten

LS2 with the 6 speed in my coupe, love it! Just dynoed at 408hp/410 torque at the tire, who needs a Coyote? $5300 for the crate motor. Its a highway star, with at 3:50 rear end 1700 RPM at 80 in 6th, around town 1-4 is a blast. Standard steering at bit vague, and with power steering the feel is not great. Drives like a big go-cart, pushes or understeers a bit, you can remedy with the gas pedal. Easy to drive in the rain no bad habits. No track time its my daily driver!

---

Well driving it since late April, over 8K miles! Sorry man looking at it in a garage or trailer just doesn't do nothing for me! I'm wailing on it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plschulten

Well driving it since late April, over 8K miles! Sorry man looking at it in a garage or trailer just doesn't do nothing for me! I'm wailing on it!

---

Thats the way it should be, drive it into the ground rebuild repeat....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D K

Daily driver???

Bravo!

---

What, you mean there are guys who have Coupes and don't drive them daily?? WHaaaaat??? hehe