GM Stocker rear end - Page 3

HandOverFist · 12-13-2013, 11:44 PM

Nowhere in the rulebook does it mention part numbers required. The new rear-end comes in the new car, the car is approved for Stock, therefor the housing is from the same manufacturer regardless of who built it. As long as the width is legal for the donor car it should be accepted.

Bill Harris · 12-14-2013, 05:27 PM

Through the woodland, through the valley....

FINESPLINE · 12-14-2013, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njk53

The COPO should have to use a 10 or a 12 bolt, the Dragpack cars a Dana 60 or an 83/4 Chrysler and the CobraJets a 9 inch or an 8.8 Ford unit. I am limited to a 10 or a 12 bolt, it should be the same for everyone. My point is the factory cars get to use all of the new technology components and the rest of us are stuck struggling with old technologies.

Just trying to make it harder to campaign an older stocker. Their way of slowly trying to push the high dollar cars on the people who want to compete.
It is going to bite them in the ***** in the long run.

HandOverFist · 12-14-2013, 08:57 PM

If that be the logic I will just go run NMCA...

ss3011 · 12-14-2013, 09:52 PM

What's the point of wanting to run a 9" rearend ? Strength ? A typical 12 bolt is lighter, and has better efficiency. Why would you want to use a slower rearend ?

Drag Pac, Cobra Jet, and COPO are all inclusion cars (paragraph 3, section 10A), which are not "factory-production assembled, showroom available, and in the hands of the general public" (paragraph 2). That is why the 9" is not considered an OEM rearend for a Chrysler or GM, and therefore not a legal replacement .

HandOverFist · 12-14-2013, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ss3011

What's the point of wanting to run a 9" rearend ? Strength ? A typical 12 bolt is lighter, and has better efficiency. Why would you want to use a slower rearend ?

Drag Pac, Cobra Jet, and COPO are all inclusion cars (paragraph 3, section 10A), which are not "factory-production assembled, showroom available, and in the hands of the general public" (paragraph 2). That is why the 9" is not considered an OEM rearend for a Chrysler or GM, and therefore not a legal replacement .

Don't want a 9"...just saying by the rules it is fair game.

"OEM may apply for inclusion of any special production runs into
the Official NHRA Stock Car Classification Guide. Special run
must include a minimum of 50 units of an already accepted body
style, need not be showroom available. Applications evaluated on
an individual basis. Acceptance will not imply precedent."

Nowhere in that paragraph does it imply it is not a legal part. Once included in the Stock category it is the same as any other car in the family. NHRA is going to have to include more wording in the rulebook to convince me otherwise.

Dwight Southerland · 12-15-2013, 09:52 AM

Somewhere in this conversation I miss the urgency of the argument and the "purity violation" factor. There are so many aftermarket rear ends in use now (how many 12-bolt rear ends did GM make that would bolt into a 3rd-4th generation F-body?) that the argument loses its effectiveness. If you think its necessary to keep mfr to mfr consistency, I guess that's okay. In the "old days", it had to do with durability, but the aftermarket has solved that, so I do not see why anyone would think there is an advantage using a rear end assembly based on another manufacturer's design.

Billy Nees · 12-15-2013, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Somewhere in this conversation I miss the urgency of the argument and the "purity violation" factor. There are so many aftermarket rear ends in use now (how many 12-bolt rear ends did GM make that would bolt into a 3rd-4th generation F-body?) that the argument loses its effectiveness.

Thank You! This ship sailed years ago.

Paul Merolla · 12-15-2013, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ss3011

What's the point of wanting to run a 9" rearend ? Strength ? A typical 12 bolt is lighter, and has better efficiency. Why would you want to use a slower rearend ?

Drag Pac, Cobra Jet, and COPO are all inclusion cars (paragraph 3, section 10A), which are not "factory-production assembled, showroom available, and in the hands of the general public" (paragraph 2). That is why the 9" is not considered an OEM rearend for a Chrysler or GM, and therefore not a legal replacement .

Finally, some logic enters the discussion...thank you.

XSTOCKER · 12-15-2013, 11:28 AM

Thanks, I didn't expect this much conversation on the request. My reasoning for using the 9" was the convenience of gear changes in a multi purpose vehicle. Additionally, the 9" style rear might look a closer to the original 56 rear than a 12 bolt....and there's a 9" laying in the shed.
Thanks for the responses.
Mike

12-13-2013, 11:44 PM	#21
HandOverFist VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Gulf Breeze, FL Posts: 1,655 Likes: 8 Liked 33 Times in 16 Posts	Re: GM Stocker rear end Nowhere in the rulebook does it mention part numbers required. The new rear-end comes in the new car, the car is approved for Stock, therefor the housing is from the same manufacturer regardless of who built it. As long as the width is legal for the donor car it should be accepted. __________________ Rich Taylor I/SA - 321

12-14-2013, 05:27 PM	#22
Bill Harris Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ooltewah, TN Posts: 420 Likes: 13 Liked 26 Times in 13 Posts	Re: GM Stocker rear end Through the woodland, through the valley.... Attached Thumbnails __________________ Bill Harris ex 2172 STK ex 2272 S/S

12-14-2013, 08:57 PM	#24
HandOverFist VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Gulf Breeze, FL Posts: 1,655 Likes: 8 Liked 33 Times in 16 Posts	Re: GM Stocker rear end If that be the logic I will just go run NMCA... __________________ Rich Taylor I/SA - 321

12-14-2013, 09:52 PM	#25
ss3011 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Southeast Michigan Posts: 890 Likes: 63 Liked 226 Times in 105 Posts	Re: GM Stocker rear end What's the point of wanting to run a 9" rearend ? Strength ? A typical 12 bolt is lighter, and has better efficiency. Why would you want to use a slower rearend ? Drag Pac, Cobra Jet, and COPO are all inclusion cars (paragraph 3, section 10A), which are not "factory-production assembled, showroom available, and in the hands of the general public" (paragraph 2). That is why the 9" is not considered an OEM rearend for a Chrysler or GM, and therefore not a legal replacement .

12-15-2013, 09:52 AM	#27
Dwight Southerland VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything. Posts: 1,982 Likes: 54 Liked 726 Times in 177 Posts	Re: GM Stocker rear end Somewhere in this conversation I miss the urgency of the argument and the "purity violation" factor. There are so many aftermarket rear ends in use now (how many 12-bolt rear ends did GM make that would bolt into a 3rd-4th generation F-body?) that the argument loses its effectiveness. If you think its necessary to keep mfr to mfr consistency, I guess that's okay. In the "old days", it had to do with durability, but the aftermarket has solved that, so I do not see why anyone would think there is an advantage using a rear end assembly based on another manufacturer's design.

12-15-2013, 11:28 AM	#30
XSTOCKER Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 147 Likes: 19 Liked 8 Times in 3 Posts	Re: GM Stocker rear end Thanks, I didn't expect this much conversation on the request. My reasoning for using the 9" was the convenience of gear changes in a multi purpose vehicle. Additionally, the 9" style rear might look a closer to the original 56 rear than a 12 bolt....and there's a 9" laying in the shed. Thanks for the responses. Mike