Originally Posted by Charley Downing (Post 284985)

Greg don’t talk if you don’t know what you are talking about.
How do you know what has been done to these new motors. If you and Andrew believe everything I say about these motors you are both fools.
Jimmy’s combo and mine have good race pistons and rings just like your combo. Good stocker cams from comp cams, countless hours on a dyno with The BEST tuner in the county, Good race springs, professional race prepped transmissions and some of the best race parts money can buy.
Where do you get you info that these motors have ZERO drag racing development done. Truth be told this combo has more race development in it then your car will ever have.

Andrew your combo is soft.

325hp vs 325hp
350ci vs 302ci
acid ported head vs NON cic ported heads
acid ported intake vs stock plastic intake

But so is the 302 CJ

Originally Posted by R J Sledge (Post 285025)

Jody

Yeah, I had a car like that once.....showroom stock 390 Mustang, 3.25 R/E with equa-loc, It was a dog, ran some 15.50 at Carlsbad Raceway in California in late 1966. I realize not all the 5.0's cars have the same performance, just like my 15.50 390 Mustang. All I am saying is what he told me, he could have had a air box (what the hell if that?), I looked under his hood and it all looked original to me.

What I am saying is this, the 5.0 is a 10.50 and better car running D/S or D/SA at 3220 lbs with about 10 or 12 items changed, gears, headers camshafts, springs, suspension mods for Stock Elim, transmission and convertor/clutch and take out 400 to 500 lbs . You don't need to go any deeper into the engine than the cams and springs, etc. and you could have a car that will out run 98% of the Stock D/S and D/SA cars out there. They have a cast type piston in the 2011 factory version and 11-1 compression, smaller camshaft and Ford rates that motor at 412, while the NHRA version rated at 325 hp has 12.5-1 compression and quite a bit more lift and any valve spring. In other words, they will make an honest 550 hp with just simple add ons and that adds up to 10.50's or better running D at 3220.

I am a Ford person, but these New cars that are so underrated is pure BS, and I am talking about all makes and models. This is the problem with Stock as the majority see it, and if it contiunes it will spell the end for a lot of competitors. You would think that NHRA realizes it and does not see it as a problem.

RJ

Originally Posted by troublemaker427 (Post 285030)

I agree with you RJ, I think the new cars are great and I'd have a CJ in a heartbeat if I could but NHRA needs to give them their own class (call it A/FX, B/FX, etc.). It appears Div.1 is trying something at the Dutch but I don't hear much about it. Last I checked there was only 4 or 5 CJ & DP's signed up. It appears to be a pre-entry only type deal.

Originally Posted by BlueOval Ralph (Post 285124)

Pro Stock is not same! How many NHRA races did he win? IHRA is a lot easier than the 500 CID. Don't knock the old line Engine Builder's they paid their dues! Unlike Charile Boob!

Originally Posted by Charley Downing (Post 285086)

Your right Greg and Andrew
Holbrook who has worked on prostockers has no clue what he is doing.
I forgot Parson and Myers is the only engine bulid that can make HP.

Looking forword to racing you next year with our new 2013 CJ 302ci in D/SA and this one has the Boss intake.

You guys really think the red car Jimmy drove last week can't run low 10's has it sets?

Originally Posted by Charley Downing (Post 285138)

Spoken like a ture no name key board racer ralph.
I never said Parson and Myers were not one of the best in the game. Greg and Andrew just were beating up on my eng builder.

Your right ralph have been racing in Stock for over 10 years and going to racers for over 20 but I still have not paid my dues. But yet I never see your name on the sheets?

Chuck D still racing on line and on the track.

Originally Posted by Andrew Hill (Post 285167)

I was most certainly not beating up on your engine builder, it just seems like many of the engines he builds for the new cars are not built to their full potential because they don't need to be to go fast. Look at Chris' own car, he only went .86 under in the class final Indy, and I'm sure that's not because the potential to go fast isn't there. It's barely faster than he went in stock last year. What I am saying is that if you take one of these new motors and built it like the really fast guys' motors in stock or super stock (which lots of different engine builders, including Holbrook, can do), they will be faster than they are currently running.

Originally Posted by BlueOval Ralph (Post 285124)

Pro Stock is not same! How many NHRA races did he win? IHRA is a lot easier than the 500 CID. Don't knock the old line Engine Builder's they paid their dues! Unlike Charile Boob!

Originally Posted by dwydendorf (Post 285179)

Maybe Chris was doing the same thing you were at Columbus. He might have been on the brakes to keep from going too fast just like you did. You only went 105 miles per hour in the class semifinal. You think anyone didn't notice that? Could it be that you didn't want to trigger a AHFS hit?

Originally Posted by JHeath (Post 285180)

OK, Ralph,I would think most IHRA Pro Stock racers would dispute your comment about IHRA being a lot easier, I think Holbrook won 5 races and the IHRA Pro Stock championship in 1999, what have you done???

Originally Posted by Andrew Hill (Post 285187)

Well that's pretty obvious I would think, I was on a single, didn't want to trigger it twice at one race. I'm just wondering why he was only running mid .80s under (at 134 mph) at class in Indy. You would think he would at least set up for close to 1.00 under if he could, it is Indy after all.

Originally Posted by dwydendorf (Post 285201)

Sorry I meant to say first round, but you were on the brakes every round of class and you are not showing your potential either, so don't rip everyone else for the same thing you are doing.

Originally Posted by CBS (Post 285222)

Andrew.....if I remember correctly.....Chris was chasing a gremlin at Indy.....I'm sure he would have gone a little faster otherwise....


Nice job last weekend in class.....

Rock

Originally Posted by Wayne Kerr (Post 285194)

Yes the new cars are underfactored.
What most "Old School" guys don't understand is that the new engines are way closer to their maximum potential from the factory. Racing technology helps improve production technology, correct?
The stock piston rings in a supercharged CJ are 1.5mm, 1.5mm and 2.5mm with a plasma moly top ring and a napier second. The pistons are from Mahle and are anodized and have skirt coating. This is better technology than NASCAR had in the 90's.

Hope this helps.
See you at the races,
Wayne Kerr

Originally Posted by troublemaker427 (Post 285008)

RJ, I don't have a dog in this fight but I find it hard to believe a '11 GT is going 11.90's by just adding drag radials and granny shifing it. I would bet it at least has a tune and a cold air intake. I'm not saying a GT won't do it but it takes a bit more than drag radials to get there.

I have one and have been around these cars a good bit lately. They make great power but 11.90s is a bit of a stretch stock...

I still like my FE too though.....:D