Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

The run did not count. The 427's are safe

Are you sure he is running the 427???

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Dave,
Glad to hear your doing well and I'm real glad to hear they did not do a complete quadruple by-pass on you because you'd really be tearing us all a new one.
Rich

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

If it would got "hit" the 427/425 with alu-heads would had a higher rating than the L88..shows the weakness of the system!

p.s. C/SA lokks really good with 3 different Combos within .025..how that now could have come outta this system..

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

For my $.02 If some was caught taking weight out, or putting weight in after a run. They should be tossed and given a vacation. But I'm sure it won't happen. After all it is a chevrolet.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

If you think about it's record´s during the years..and when it was last factored..(it was down)..well..i dont even remember anymore..Butl thanks to all those slower entry's..it made it.. so far..I guess that engine is the standard that everythings gets compared with...Records in AA,A and now B?...Yeah it.s a Chebbie!

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

The whole picture became a lot clearer to me when I found the two Q3 sheets on DRC. Wish I'd found them both before I wasted twenty minutes trying to figure out how it all went down. They show the sequence of events. I have no further questions or comments. All that is left to do is see how it plays out.

c

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Phil, you are correct Don and I were testing the car at Bakersfield last year. The car was actually sold November 5th of 2005. The car arrived in Sweden about 2 weeks ago. I am sure you are wondering why it took so long and to explain that I would have to write a small book that would shed some bad light on a couple of well known people and the business's they own.

Dave

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Great to hear from Dave Schmitz. When I first met him he had a new 62 Chevy 409. He COULD drive!
Then he had a 63 Plymouth SS/A car. Those days were fun. Dave, my e-mail is sincitybobk@yahoo.com
Would be great to hear from you. BK P.S. Still racing my N/SS Thunderbolt, lost tonight by 4 tenthousaths ..... bracket racing is fun??

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

:-)

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

can a 427 run b? so was it a 396 or 427?

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I have been told that their car had an iron-head 427. A 1969 Camaro with iron block and GM factory heads is rated at 425 horsepower as of today. The classification guide shows that the class HP/weight factor is currently at 8.06 with an automatic transmission. As a natural "A" car it can legally run "B." The shipping weight is 3425#. By my calculations, in B/SA, it would weigh (425 x 8.5) 3612# plus the driver weight for a sticker weight of 3780#.

Three additional horsepower on the combination would bring the HP/weight factor below 8.0 and out of the reach of B/SA.

c

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

thanks chuck

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

If he did pull the weight out of the car to make it too light in an attempt void the run, the run of 1.408 under should be used by the AHFS to adjust the power on that combination.

As for time off for bad behavior, I'm glad that is not my decision !!!!!!

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I was standing at the scales, as well as a jent named john hill, waiting to get our fuel cups, when Hal Sorenson pulled on the scales, old guy. I saw no water being drained out. Incidently, my previous run weight was 3685, I took out 18#, and my current weight was 3650, obviously a scale issue. Several other cars noted weight disparity to previous runs. You should examine your information source a bit more closely before makine these kinds of claims.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Mike........Is your middle name RED as in `RED HERRING`

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I saw what I saw, posted the truth. You can kiss my *** with your smart comment.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

John hills engine is built buy the sorenson bros.is that truth? and boy what a time for the scales to malfunction LOL.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Mike...that kiss my *** reply sure adds a bunch of credibilty to your observations...LOL....Just a wild guess here....will the outcome of this incident possibly have an effect on your combo ??

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Mike,
It's a real funny thing that my sources (4 of them) must have been standing right next to you. You guys were practically rubbing shoulders. They watched the whole thing unfold and pointed it out to Steve Dimbo the scale operator. Can you explain the water under Hal's car and the wet towels being removed. I suspect you didn't see those either. My sources are fellow racers and they didn't have any scale trouble. I believe the Sorenson Bros built John Hills motor so it would be natural for him to defend Hal. This whole deal is no different than when Fred Hensen went 1.40 under at Belle Rose 2 years ago on a red light run. He didn't get the opportunity to come up light at the scales and Monday morning he got 15 HP. The AHFS rule says you go 1.40 under the sea level index you get 3.25% HP. Way to many people saw what happened for anybody to deny it.

Dave

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

So if Sorenson was supposedly so scared of his -1.40 run that he felt the need to drain water, take out weight, etc etc that he is accused of, would'nt you think he would slow his car down?! No, he went right back up there and made a -1.39 blast , just thousandths from triggering the -1.40 AGAIN. If the orignial poster had a problem with Sorenson, take it up with him and NHRA at the track, don't go flame a guy behind a key board.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

None of them are close to the bros on the track so they have to use the internet. Better start working on your stuff. Are we sure the car didn't overheat? Did you guys ever think of that? At least he runs his to 1320 instead of the EAST COAST 1000'.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Where is JERRY VALENTINE when we need him ????

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

THAT might be the best answer to all the s*^%$

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

With regards to scales not being consistent , I can say that many racers, including myself, were seeing numbers fluctuating as many as 20 lbs from one run to the next .
MP

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I think you have those runs mixed up..the -1.39 run are listed in round one qualifying! Maybe they did not expect to run faster later that day than the "morning run" and left the "tuneup" alone!

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

It's real hard to get an accurate weight on anything when the wind is blowing. Steve was having a tough time getting the scale to settle down so I doubt any of the weights could be considered right on. My car weighed 3505 after the first pass and 3475 after the second pass (on a 3470 minimum) and it uses less than 1/2 gal per pass and I didn't change anything.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

If what was reported is correct what bearing does fluctuating weight on the scales have to do with someone draining water from their car?If the scales were that screwed up because of the wind could they have lined up cars on both side of the scales to block the wind and stabilize the scaled cars?
At Numidia Raceway in PA. their scales (wood) were notorious for wild swings.Rain in the pit was a concern.If there is a scale condition,It's the drivers job to be careful how much ballast to carry in the car.
I usually run my car 25-30 lbs. over minimum.In 10 years the closest I've come to failing weight was 5 lbs.
The fact remains the guy went 1.39 under on run 2.Why push the envelope when no one was even close to him for #1 qualifier.
BTW nice runs in the Pacer.That's one fast fish bowl.

Ed

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

How many of you guys where there? How many of you where at the scales?
WHAT DID HE WEIGHT? I NOW WHAT THE WEIGHT WAS?
I think it is funny you all poping off, and have no facts, A reliable source, Come on know, how about A reliable CRYBABY thats more like it. You all have no facts just suspicions. so quit bashing a couple of guys that work hard on there stuff.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Right.If they're from Division 1 they're cheaters.If they come from out West they're hard workers.
Theres Div. 1-3 rules then there's West coast Gracia/Glendora rules.


Ed F.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I dont have a dog in this fight, although we are building a C/SA Mopar. But I had my 3rd grader read your post and he agreed with me that you need to see his teacher for a few weeks to clean this up. Have a nice day.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I was thinking the same thing Herb. Three total posts and no name, ok, you changed my mind....... not! Jim

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Good one Herb. Might that C/SA car be a 69 Road Runner by chance? Very favorable combo

Dave Schmitz

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

I agree with GD! If your reliable sources had any nuts they would step up and say I saw "X"! Until someone has the stones to use your real name and say what you saw. It's just a bunch of rumors and lies. So come on bring it! Lets get the "Reliable Sources" off their ***'s and tells us what they saw, where he "Drained the water" and how light he was! If any of them took 7th grade physical science they would know the car could have not been that light even if water was drained!

P.S. And yes Old Guy, Hal does build my engine but that has nothing to do with facts!

Tommy Gaynor

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Lets see water is 7lbs per gallon, my crate motor NON STOCKER as you NHRA guys call it holds over 4 gallons of water. So I guess I cant get rid of 21 lbs read quick figuring only the radiator and top of heads. 3 gallons.

Anyway no not going to build that combo 69 440 but close. Keep guessing and Ill let you know.

My dad Herb McCandless Sr is probably one of the best fabricators in the country, my son is 14, he told me he wants his grandson to run a car he built. After doing this wagon 3 weeks ago I realized he might be 65 years old but can work magic with metal and his knowledge on this stuff is amazing. Stay tuned. And as far as the 1.40 under deal, he went 1.39 so if he then went 1.40 and now is trying to get it not to count thats his deal not mine. But if I go that close I'm adding weight or dumping at the 1000.

herb jr

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! Hal was 40lbs light! Check the scale log! 1 core radiator 1.5 gallons top end maybe 2 gallons. 24.5lbs far short of the 40lbs he was light. They screwed up moving weight in the pits get over and go work on your ****! I also think it is funny to compare this to the Henson/Libby scandals. They drove past the scales and last time I checked it has a lot of detail on bypassing the scales in the rulebook. Even if the water Scandal of 2009 happened I still can't find anything on it in the rulebook. What page is it on Old Guy? Oh yeah and how are Sherlock Holmes and the boys you had at the scale coming with the info? I gave you the easy one he was 40lbs light! If they saw it where was he at? I gotta hear this one.

Tommy Gaynor
A real racer with a real name that was there!

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

This subject is a prime example why S/SS is in decline.!lb 50lbs it doesn't matter.The guy was tempting
fate when he ran the 1.40 under.A guy with Sorensens experience doesn't make a 40 lb mistake.That's a big weight swing.The point is what consequences you face depends on WHO you are and where you are.And of course "my friend" would never do anything wrong,he works hard on his combination.
In the end this board is a place to pass time and just raise controversy.It also is,when used correctly
a great place to get information.

Ed F.

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Tommy, Come on!!! While I appreciate your loyalty to your engine builder, it does not do any good to try and defend a blatant wrong doing. As was my thought on the previous incident that was somewhat similar last year at Sanoma by a different racer, Good for them, they pulled a fast one and got away with it. Both cars can and sometimes do run in my same class and yes it drives me nuts knowing that the last time I got hit HP, one of my tallies was a complete "ACCIDENT" simply because I just did not think the car would go that fast. Maybe I am stupid, but when I got my time slip the thought of losing weight before the scales somehow never crossed my mind. From what I read, it looks as if your saying they would have been light regardless of "WATER DRAINING." If so, why would they bother going through the trouble? Seems to me when they went up to make the pass they had every intention of making a legit run to set the record and "ACCIDENTALLY" went to fast and then proceeded to alter weight before the scales to make sure they would be light. I am pretty sure that just shouldn't be done. Just so happens that the scales were fluctuating to make it seem they were lighter than they really were. I have heard numbers of 15 to 20 lbs. in fluctuation in the scales which would make them only 20 to 25 lbs. light. What were those numbers you were figuring in your previous posts? 28.5 lbs. They got lucky and good for them.
Now on to another thought, the Sorensen brothers are very intelligent, there is no doubt about that. Every thing they have ever had has been fast, real fast. But obviously that combo needs hp if they are legit. I would like to think that when it comes to my combo I have come pretty close to max on potential. I have all the good parts and the right guy building the engine. If that said right guy were to have my car he may be able to squeeze another seven hundredths to a tenth out of my car max. By what I can figure, Sorensen would have had me covered by about four tenths. So if said guy had my car he would have it covered by three tenths. He could take the hp and still have me covered by at least two tenths. That really erks me when I got hit six hp last year because I made two runs just barely over -1.15 under and I can get outrun by four tenths. I wouldn't be surprised if they had some left to boot. I was always curious how fast that car really was and now I guess I know. Or do I?
Regardless, 1 lb. or 50 lbs. light very impressive run.
Maybe my wife was onto something when she asked, why do you spend all that money making your car fast? There will always be someone faster than you!

Chad Loge
7355 b/sa
Brentwood CA

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Maybe my wife was onto something when she asked, why do you spend all that money making your car fast? There will always be someone faster than you!

Chad Loge
7355 b/sa
Brentwood CA



Perfect ending to your post!!! As fast as the brothers go, they will not hold a candle to the cobra jets

ps not trying to change focus here just stating my opinion and although i have enjoyed this thread I'm done with it

Thanks all!!!

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Henson lost on his run, he went red, why would he scale. Do you scale when you lose? Just curious.

Herb Jr

Re: Sorenson 1.408 under at Boise
 

Chad, I still what to know who saw what? Still rumors till someone has the stones to put there name to it!

Herb, I never knew Henson's was a loss. I would not have scaled either. Libby's bypass was on a time shot, I only come up with one reason for that.

Tommy Gaynor