Black Jack: Working up to slicks

Stiffler's Seat Extender Rails + Corbeau Low Profile seat bracket:
Well, boys, I'm 6'4, and the added height from the LMR seat extenders I used to have that look like this
1752886361716.webp

... worked just fine in Black Jack with stock seats. However, when I installed Corbeau GTS II seats in post #331, which are also well-known to raise height an inch higher, it felt uncomfortably high, and put my helmet into the ceiling on auto-x days. This is why a lot of folks have the cushions shaved 1/2-1" to compensate. However, recently, Stiffler's released a new seat extender that caught my attention when ads claimed that it dropped ride-height by 5/8". This, which I now believe is a dubious claim for reasons I'll demonstrate in this post, is language that seems to have been removed from Stiffler's ad linked above, but can still currently be found on resales sites, like:
Lethal:
1752887135302.webp

Beefcake:
1752887220574.webp

So, I put my order in for both 1 set of the $99 extenders and 1 low-profile Corbeau seat bracket ($139). Tonight/tomorrow, I'll try to figure how to install it, along with being hopeful of restoring my emergency brake cable, in one operation. That said, I'm scratching my head on the supposed height drop. I took some pictures to explain why:

First, the good news, the front seat bracket mounting point does drop, though only something like 1/2", possibly slightly less:
FrontDrop.webp


However, the rear mounting point (more aligned with your spine) is ~1.25" HIGHER :cautious:
RearUp.webp


What kinda sucks about this is that the Corbeau braket now does this:
CorbeauLowOnStifflers.webp


Look at the rear mount area and see how badly angled it is. This isn't something I can just add spacers up front to fix, because this is how much the front would need to come up to flatten the mating surfaces:

1752888875044.webp


So, with the rear mount flat, the front mount is a couple inches above the studs.

Now, if the corbeau bracket was any lower in the back, the rear stud would interfere. However, there may be something I could do, if I can find a welder out here, and I've indicated where-ish with red arrows in the pic above. If ya took a little more off of the vertical part of the mount than the horizontal, you could induce a forward tilt & simultaneously drop the rear slightly more. I think this is what Stifflers should have done in the first place & I don't understand their thinking in raising the back so much. Hell, it almost looks like they could have re-angled the lower bar, and brought the rear mount down to it:
1752889335004.webp


It's not all bad... I have kinda noticed that the corbeau seats with the standard height bracket is a little high towards the knees. So, some tilt forward would be welcome, but this much seems extreme.

Tri-Ax alternative:
While shopping the extension & seat bracket, I remembered appreciating how the tri-ax helped reduce the reach for the shifter. I appreciated that until I broke it in post #283. So, knowing that the shorty Pro5.0 handle is a bit of a reach when my seat position is just right, I took a look, and found this from none other than Pro5.0. It's solid steel, and will hopefully hold on a little better. Not clear in the pic, but it also leans a bit left, which brings it a little closer to the driver. I'm looking forward to trying it out. It's a nice looking piece, though it'll be covered up by the boot in my case. It definitely comes back further and will be, I suspect, in a more comfy position than anything I've used, to date.


Pro50_OffsetHandle.webp




New windshield:

I kinda haven't liked the aftermarket windshield that's been on Black Jack since I got it in NJ in 2014. I read a few threads and realized how hard it used to be to get a high quality Carlite OEM replacement, and also figuring out that I could pick one up in Charlotte, just 2 hours from my house for $200, I drove over and got one. Paid a local company to come out and install. It's pretty nice not lookin' through pitted imperfect glass for a change.
 
Last edited:
Stiffler seat-track extenders Review:

Alright... So, I've got the new shifter, seat extenders & low-profile Corbeau bracket in place, and frankly, I'm concerned about how far back it starts, and how high up it would be, if I didn't combine it with a lower profile seat bracket.

To start with, I found a guy in the neighborhood that welds, and after I cut the front of the rear seat-extender rail mounts down by ~ 0.200, he pressed & welded them, which corrected the angle, allowing me to mount them flush with Corbeau brackets. I then painted and installed everything, today.

At first glance, the extender rails more closely conform to the floor pan, which I guess is a good thing:
1753579357964.webp


Height is just about dead even to the passenger seat, though the passenger seat doesn't have the extender nor the low-profile bracket. So, the take-away is that the extender rails & low-profile Corbeau brackets basically offset each other in regards to seat height. Here's the driver's seat (with extender and low-profile Corbeau bracket vs. the passenger with the standard Corbeau standard-bracket bolted directly to the floor pan:
1753579464758.webp

The difference is that the driver's side is fully-forward, whereas the passenger is fully back on its slider. This also gives an indication of how the driver's seat base cusion is tilted slightly forward compared with the passenger seat, which is a good thing. The Corbeau bracket lowers the front more than the rear and so does the Stifflers seat extender rail. Both have the effect of tilting forward. It may be hard to see in the pic above, but it is there. The seat base cushion inclines/tilts more to the front than the passenger side.

One nice thing about having a moon-roof car (not generally recommended) is that I have a consistent point to measure to:
1753580625550.webp

1753580642870.webp

With the stiffler's extender & Corbeau low-profile bracket, the height from seat cushion (no shaving) to ceiling is ~37.5". Note that the measuring tape is flush with the seat-back and continues straight to base cushion until it curves away, and starts to bend right around 37.5":
1753579715769.webp


Whereas, on the passenger side, it is very close to the same:
1753579786321.webp

I went back and forth at least 4 times. The seating position is definitely within 1/2" of each other, but I think it's very, very close to identical, despite the drop from the Corbeau low-profile brackets.

The conclusion, therefore, is that the Stiffler's brackets DO NOT lower the seated position, in comparison to bolting to the floorboard. In fact, I am certain based upon the measurements I showed above, and the fact that the Corbeau low-profile seat bracket is visibly shorter than its standard counter-part, that the Stiffler's extender, itself, sits higher than the floorboard mounting points, and by about 1".

I also have to say that my biggest concern after installation is that depsite working for me (6'4 with a 36" inseam), the seat in the fully forward position is perhaps not forward enough for focused track & auto-x driving. I wish it allowed ~1 more inch of forward seating position. In situations where I'm really pushing the car, I like to be a little closer than when I casually cruise. When casually cruising, it seems that with the new extenders, my position is 1 to 2 clicks from the fully forward position. I think < 2% of the population is going to feel comfy driving. I should also mention that at full-forward lock... literally nobody is going to be able to comfortably sit behind the driver, unless they have meth-legs:
1753580032895.webp


Now, I no longer have the LMR seat extenders to measure for comparison, but if I had it to do from the start, my best guess is that at my height, the LMR seat extenders are best, b/c they are at least approaching as low-profile as the Stifflers, and I believe that they allow a slightly more forward seating position. They're also ~$50 instead of the the $100 Stifflers. So, all-in-all, if you're shorter than 6'6, I think I have to recommend the LMRs, but you need low-profile brackets or shaved Corbeau GTS IIs. I doubt I'll ever be able to toss Black Jack's keys to a designated-driver, again. I might try another set of the LMRs again, now that I have the low-profile Corbeau brackets, to compare.

ps. The Corbeau's are an unusually high-sitting seat, and that makes a big difference. Mileage may vary with other seats, and I would buy them again, but only because I pickedthem up with rear covers for $300 out of pocket after selling my worn black stockers. I got a smokin' deal on them, but stockers sit lower, and my Recaro SE's sit even lower still. The SE's are genuinely the best fox seat I've had the pleasure of using. Soft & comfy, yet supportive bolsters, low, even with a standard Corbeau bracket, seem to sit further back on the bracket such that full rear lock takes everything I've got to fully depress the clutch pedal. Here's the SE's for reference, and they are worth the money:
 

Attachments

  • IMG-20171203-WA0072.webp
    IMG-20171203-WA0072.webp
    84.7 KB · Views: 72
Last edited:
Pro 5.0 offset handle:
The Pro-5.0 handle yields about another ~1.5-2", and make shifting from a more rearward seating positions slightly nicer. However, there are 2 things you should know if you're interested in getting this handle. 1. The stock Pro 5.0 handle has narrower bolts:
1753580825260.webp


... and, so as it turns out, you'll need to drill out the base stalk that it mounts to with a 3/8" drill bit to achieve the diameter needed for the new bolts that are supplied with the handle.

On the test drive, I liked the handle with my new seating position. If I'm being super picky, I wish the angle of the handle, at the top, was the same as the base Pro-5.0 shorty handle. And so 2. when shifting to the forward-most gears (1-3-5), the handle leans ever-so-slightly too far forward. That said, that's being super nit-picky. The handle is clearly better than the base handle would be on its own.

Edit: Also, just changed oil at 85k. edited for my own records without bumping the thread.
 
Last edited:
Good vid @limp ! It confounds me that people trying to make a “living” on YouTube won’t spend three minutes cleaning their car prior to shooting. Dude’s vette looks nasty and certainly doesn’t project an aura of “professional”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: limp
Good vid @limp ! It confounds me that people trying to make a “living” on YouTube won’t spend three minutes cleaning their car prior to shooting. Dude’s vette looks nasty and certainly doesn’t project an aura of “professional”.
This place sells a special type of bushing for C4 suspensions which is how I got the algorithims...
His car has been sitting for a year or so as they haven't been able to get to it to fix it, or so the story goes....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85GT4V
B-springs, and they've been on the rear since before the first I owned the car. Previous owner never installed the front springs and it sat with a Carolina Squat (reverse rake) until I installed them in '22.

Normally B-springs drop the front 1-1.5" and the back ~3/4", and that should give it a forward rake. However, I think that the Lakewood traction bars, which lower the LCA mounting point to the rear end housing, drops the rear a bit more. To my eye, it's close to flat, but maybe still has a very slight reverse rake.

No rubbing or anything, and also does NOT seem to have the understeer that most foxes do on the autocross. Also, really did great on stock sized Goodyear all-seasons when it had 4.10 gears and a T5 by cutting a 1.83 60'. So, win/win, though I do like the look of a slight forward rake.
 
Looks amazing I think it would look even better with 17 inch pony rims...
Lol... It's amazing how awesome both the 10-holes & the Pony-Rs look in 17".

That said, I've got these bullits, which might be my favorite, the Cobra Anniversary wheels with drag radials and summer performance fronts, which are pictured elsewhere in this thread, and a set of beat up real R58 Cobra Rs I've owned for 20 years with autocross tires on them. I love em all, and I'm pretty tapped out on buying wheels.

Edit:
9/1/25: An update worthy of an edit but not a new post. For my own future reference: topped off the T56 after worrying about the fact that it slings a little from the output shaft seal that's evident on the underbody in that area. It only took 4 oz. I think a T56 takes 3-4 QTs. So, this only a trivial amount of loss. I didn't have that much dextron/mercon to put in; so, I only topped it off. I'm sure this is the first time I've touched the fluid since installation. Not sure how many miles ago that was in Feb '23, and the odometer didn't work until the Abbot Cable-X, but the next update after moving to NC was ~57k in Oct'23, and now we're in the 85k range. So, I'm thinking it's around 35k on the same fluid.

9/13: In the last couple weeks, I've had some minor repairs to do, including a hatch striker, replacing the temperature control (rear plastic that pulls/pushes the blend door cracked), and I didn't realize how firm the clutch pedal was getting until my shifts got too notchy and even after adjusting the cable at the firewall it would be notchy again within a couple days. After about 2 weeks of this, I finally swapped the cable, and the pedal pressure dropped by ~30-50%. Fortunately, I had 3 Steeda cables waiting for me. No telling how many miles were on the old cable. I'm pretty sure it's been on the car since I owned it the first time. I've noticed a squeal from the front brakes when I apply them after backing up. I pulled the pads and applied anti-squeal, but it didn't really work. I did notice uneven wear on one of the pads, and it has me wondering if the caliper is bad. I plan to replace these pads when its time and if it happens on a second set, then I'll replace the calipers. If it is bad, then I guess this is what I get for doing the SN95 Cobra Brakes affordably. Finally, I'm getting a rattle from the dash in front of me, and I think it could be the plastic cowl vent, which I noticed is cracked, as I couldn't seem to find anything inside. So, the cowl vent is on order.

9/20: Car started with an occasional misfire. So, I swapped out the plugs. Without going back to verify, they've probably been in since I did the nitrous 1.5 - 2 years ago. Autolite 3923s are 2-3 steps colder than stock, so they don't clean themselves as well. Other than recent misfires, I've never had a problem. I also replaced the crack plastic cowl vent, and while I was there, I repainted the windshield wipers.

This car sure keeps me busy, but I still look forward to every drive.
 
Last edited:
In May, I loaded an 87 Octane tune, by essentially copy/pasting the stock A9L timing tables back into Black Jack.

I've been meaning to install the quarterhorse's 8-way tune switch for a while, and between @Mustang5L5's recent tuning escapades & @85GTStangGuy's recent call out against his mystery car at the foxtoberfest track day, I finally got it done so that I can run an extra 6* of timing everywhere. I've got it working but did run into a minor problem:

When the switch is in physical position 1, which I assume is fully counterclockwise, it reads the tune loaded into tune4. When the physical switch is in positions 2 & 3, the QH reads tune3. Physical position 4 is back to tune 4, and 5-8 switch back and forth but always read only tunes 3 & 4. I cannot get it to read the other 6 loaded tunes. I tried the QH in both mode 1 & 5, but both cases, it was the same result.

To ensure I wasn't mistaken or getting confused about anything, I cleared all other tunes than 3 & 4 from the QH, which if it were properly selecting them, it would not even allow the car to run. It ran just fine. So, it really is only switching back and forth between tunes 3 & 4. I further verified/validated the only difference in tunes 3 & 4, which is an extra 6* of timing everywhere, by watching the dashboard/datalogger and seeing the commanded timing jump.

So, the good news is that I just loaded the 87 octane tune into tune4 and the 93 into tune3 & accomplished what I set out to do. So, I'll be ready for ya Larry! Now, I can just flip the switch, pump in the 93 octane, and turn on the nitrous.

So, anyways, has anyone experienced this? Is it just a bad switch or is something else going on? I don't think we have a lot of QH & BE guys here, but might as well take a shot, while also posting on eectuning.org.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mindseye007
Something's definitely going on,,,, just don't know what.

Better be safe and run it on the 87 tune.

:hide:



Edit - Hey! I saw your laughing emoji. This isn't funny, bud.... I'm serious! I'm genuinely concerned for your motor.

Please run the 87 tune. And, no laughing gas either.

Pretty, pretty please.


(Note to self - try to get race bet changed from pink slips to a cold beer)
 
Last edited:
In May, I loaded an 87 Octane tune, by essentially copy/pasting the stock A9L timing tables back into Black Jack.

I've been meaning to install the quarterhorse's 8-way tune switch for a while, and between @Mustang5L5's recent tuning escapades & @85GTStangGuy's recent call out against his mystery car at the foxtoberfest track day, I finally got it done so that I can run an extra 6* of timing everywhere. I've got it working but did run into a minor problem:

When the switch is in physical position 1, which I assume is fully counterclockwise, it reads the tune loaded into tune4. When the physical switch is in positions 2 & 3, the QH reads tune3. Physical position 4 is back to tune 4, and 5-8 switch back and forth but always read only tunes 3 & 4. I cannot get it to read the other 6 loaded tunes. I tried the QH in both mode 1 & 5, but both cases, it was the same result.

To ensure I wasn't mistaken or getting confused about anything, I cleared all other tunes than 3 & 4 from the QH, which if it were properly selecting them, it would not even allow the car to run. It ran just fine. So, it really is only switching back and forth between tunes 3 & 4. I further verified/validated the only difference in tunes 3 & 4, which is an extra 6* of timing everywhere, by watching the dashboard/datalogger and seeing the commanded timing jump.

So, the good news is that I just loaded the 87 octane tune into tune4 and the 93 into tune3 & accomplished what I set out to do. So, I'll be ready for ya Larry! Now, I can just flip the switch, pump in the 93 octane, and turn on the nitrous.

So, anyways, has anyone experienced this? Is it just a bad switch or is something else going on? I don't think we have a lot of QH & BE guys here, but might as well take a shot, while also posting on eectuning.org.
have you had it on a dyno to compare how much horsepower you gain and loose switching between using 87 octane and 93 octane?