thin ring grooves

[John Duzac]

Just a thought, thin ring groves over stock groves. Engine builders would love to have the thin ring groves. Not having to deal with the stupid spacers would help reduce the man hours on building an engine. Not to mention the cost savings to the racers. How many of us had the spacers stick and not allow the rings to seal? Then you had to take apart the engine to free up the spacer and the rings. I have a new set of pistons on order as of last week. I would love to be able to legally have thin ring groves and never use spacers again.

[Billy Nees]

Didja ever notice that every off-season SOMETHING NEW pops up that is going to require most Racers to spend money on their Stockers to make them less stock? Why is that?

[Ryan Horensky]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

Oh, you mean like JR.Stock in 1971?
I'm surprised we're not already back there...and where would you like the ring groove to be placed?

Maybe they had the rule structure right back in 1971? I understand people not supporting different rule changes, or proposed rule changes, because of the cost associated with it. I get that. I also don't think you'll find too many people happy with having to spend money on the spacers every time they freshen a motor. That is a consistent purchase all the time. The only people happy are total seal because they get to charge you for it.

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by Ryan Horensky

I also don't think you'll find too many people happy with having to spend money on the spacers every time they freshen a motor.

They don't "have" to buy them. They "choose" to buy them.

Sometimes, being one of the COOL KIDS costs money....

[Rick J]

The ring grooves are flat, the rings are flat, those spacers are not.

Best way to go is to back cut (a lot), and gas port the OE width rings....... seals better and runs faster, but ring sales guy (whose never built a motor his entire life) won't be on board with that as it costs less lol

[mnmaxwedge]

Originally Posted by GUMP

OK, I'll bite. How about we do away with all of the "enhancements" for all makes, years, and models?

A couple of years ago, I got a to build a couple of Camaros to test all of the factory drag parts. I'm not afraid of your proposal at all. That's as long as it applies to you too....

Ok with me, but no "factory drag parts" have to use parts the cars came with including the OE wheel diameter. I know that there are 17" front drag wheels and tires but am not aware of and slicks that fit 17" wheels other than fuel dragster tires. I suppose these late model cars will have to run some sort of rally tires on the back.

[J.R. Haddad]

Does that mean that most 8 & 9 second GT cars will run 12 or 13 inch
wheels?

J.R.

[mnmaxwedge]

Originally Posted by J.R. Haddad

Does that mean that most 8 & 9 second GT cars will run 12 or 13 inch
wheels?

J.R.

We're not talking about GT cars, or Factory Stock/Super Stock or any of those classes. Just talking about the late model cars that are allowed to run in traditional Stock Eliminator classes. Also,if we are being genuine, all of our cars must revert to the original OE horsepower ratings, none of this subtract 12% business. I admit I have a small gift on my car, I would have to add about 50lbs. From what I see most late model muscle cars would have to add about 600lbs. or so. That would seem to even things out.

[mnmaxwedge]

Didn't mean to hijack this post, I just found it a little odd that someone with a late model stock eliminator car wants older combinations to use stock piston rings when the late model cars have enjoyed a wealth of "gifts" from NHRA. Why don't they just limit Stock to 2009 and newer cars.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by mnmaxwedge

Ok with me, but no "factory drag parts" have to use parts the cars came with including the OE wheel diameter.

Ya know, this means that your Mn. Max wedge will have to use 14" wheels!