CLASS RACER FORUM - AHFS Foibles

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)

- Stock and Super Stock (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)

- - AHFS Foibles (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=82968)

Re: AHFS Foibles

Billy, I have not seen a rule book in several years but it but it used to say that el Camino's and rancheros are allowed to run with the cars.

Re: AHFS Foibles

For starters, if you get automatic horsepower the car should be looked at.

As far as this being a truck, I was at the center of that with this exact vehicle in 2018 when Bob Shaw and I decided to qualify number one with it.

This was a bit of a convoluted debate but after it was determined this vehicle was sold under the truck line and was in the truck brochure. The tipping point was unlike other Chevelle/El Camino predecessors this vehicle has a frame that would not fit under any malibu of its time and there were no Malibus even produced at the time. Im in agreeance that if it had a malibu frame then it would be a car but it has just about the same wheelbase as my full size C-10 pick up.

The vehicle underwent a complete teardown and was in the barn for over 6 hours a record length tear down for me.

Re: AHFS Foibles

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Wong (Post 667112)

The tipping point was unlike other Chevelle/El Camino predecessors this vehicle has a frame that would not fit under any malibu of its time and there were no Malibus even produced at the time.

and with that being said, NHRA SHOULD immediately fix their Classification Guide and their Engine Blueprint Specifications to reflect the fact/error of it being a Truck.
Again, there are NO 1987 Trucks listed in the Engine Blueprint Specs and, from what I've always been told, "if it's not in the guide, it doesn't exist.

Re: AHFS Foibles

Billy, I was just kidding when I said I was mad at you. I have nearly forgotten about that .001 light you put on me at Indy 18 years ago. But that was pretty mean.

Re: AHFS Foibles

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy Nees (Post 667115)

Bingo.
So it's not a truck then. It's listed with Monte Carlos ,which are also 108 wb.
NHRA, in it's infinite wisdom, has decided it's close enough.
Bear with me now.. Trying to help a few of y'all.
The Elky, being in the car section , needs to go back to the small cam ,and the hp , back to 140.
Otherwise, it needs to go into a new 87 truck file.
Speaking of..We know GM made an 87 262 C 10..auto or STICK..It should have been put in the guide.
What do you think, Larry Hill?

Re: AHFS Foibles

Ed Bennet, the McFarlin’s, and some other GM people help me get information so NHRA would allow the 1985-86 C-10 V6 truck in stock. After some time passed the V8’s appeared in the guide. Since I had my combination working pretty well I did not work on getting the later model trucks approved for competition.

Re: AHFS Foibles

In other words paper combos? Bennett learned from the best at Oldsmobile!

Re: AHFS Foibles

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Shaw (Post 667118)

Billy, I was just kidding when I said I was mad at you. I have nearly forgotten about that .001 light you put on me at Indy 18 years ago. But that was pretty mean.

Bob, even if you WERE "mad" at me, I couldn't be "mad" at you anyway.

You could look at that .001 light a couple of different ways. You were so much faster than me that it was my only means of surviving the humiliation of being "train lengthed" in the Class Final! OR it was just a bad job of red lighting.

18 years huh? Time does fly!

Re: AHFS Foibles

My C10 truck is a real 1986 v6 Q-Jet stick truck. The only Paper Parts are the title and a record or two.

Re: AHFS Foibles

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Wong (Post 667112)

This was a bit of a convoluted debate but after it was determined this vehicle was sold under the truck line and was in the truck brochure. The tipping point was unlike other Chevelle/El Camino predecessors this vehicle has a frame that would not fit under any malibu of its time and there were no Malibus even produced at the time. Im in agreeance that if it had a malibu frame then it would be a car but it has just about the same wheelbase as my full size C-10 pick up.

For whatever it's worth, this does align with the "definition" of a "platform" from the AHFS page:

Quote:

Body platform: Both screening reviews are only in effect for the specific car model being evaluated. The body style is generally classified by the OEM auto manufacturers' definition of "platform", i.e., the Camaro and Firebird body are both based on the same platform and therefore considered the same with regard to body platform classification.

As for the V8 C10 trucks - Rich Muhlenhardt (RIP) was the first one to show up with the 350in V8; I'm pretty sure he had a hand in getting it approved. I remember a lot of debate on whether the 350 was a legitimate or paper combination but I'm not touching that one here. ;)
The 305in V8 was added earlier this year.