Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Any of that could work, but way more back-half cars available, then legal stockers. Would put most behind already. What I think they want, is to regain the popularity of super-mod. Which involved back-half, and scoops. But no rules committe will please all. The ones who want to run no-breakout will enter, the ones who don't, won't. Could also let any year car in, and give a 75lb. break to cars older then a certain year. The $500 dollar head switch would be a $ saver. Lets say first place car draws a number out of a hat, and exchanges. We all know most dollars are spent on heads, and that would keep anyone from trying anything illegal. At least it works for me.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I started out racing my camaro as a c/sm. That was a tough class to cut your teeth. It was several years before I could run the index. Running the 10.5 tire was tough back then. Clutches were real heavy. I could lay black marks in 3rd gear. The light cars with the small engines were best for the class. My car was not real light so I had to use a 305 Cu In engine. The chevy II cars were better for the class because of lighter weight. There were several guys that were real fast. They were cheating up the cylinder heads similar to the acid SS heads in the day.
The engines made good power but the limiting factor was the tire size and how much power you could hit the tires with on the launch.
The engine, tire and clutch technology is way ahead today from what it was back in the late 1970's when I ran the class.
Given the same set of rules as back then this would be a very expensive class to run
To make an entry level class you would have to limit the mods to the engine. Maybe a spec head with small valves. Flat top pistons. No port work. Small carb like a 600 or 650 Holley. Maybe allow a small shot of nitrous to appeal to the younger crowd. Limit tje max cu in to 330 Stick or auto. Stock front suspension up front and ladder bars only on the rear.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I have no problem with that Mike, other then the nitrous, I would think that could get out of hand. I was thinking a 750 carb, because it's been the norm so long in these classes. I have no problem with ladder bars only, and flat top pistons, but I see no $ savings with flat tops. Explain.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I've never done this exact scenario, but, say, stock cam diameter, stock lifter diameter, .700 lift at the valve roller. No vac pumps, or external oil pumps. Cast intake only. No external mods to intake, brodix spec only, polish combustion chamber, and milling only. Intake, and exhaust ports remain factory specs. They have the word spec cast into both exhaust and intake, and flow virtually the same all 3 manufactorers. Ford has a little better no. on the exhaust, but not enough to get too excited about. Just my ideas guys, not cut in stone. I know it works for the roundy-rounders.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I ran a '69 Camaro in C/SM the first year they had the class. Read and re-read Rick Voglin's Car Craft articles about building his car. First year there was just the one class, which became B/SMif I remember correctly. Never had a problem running under the index. had heads from RHS to begin with then a set from MI (forget the shop's name) then a killer set from Lee Shephard. The other two sets ran the same, but Lee's heads flowed more and were faster. Had a 292", 305", and 317". Never could get the car light enough for the 292", but it was still the fastest.

I seldon had a problem hooking on 10.5" Firestones, but they started to go away after about 15 passes. Usually left, depending on the track, between 8000 & 9500.

It was a fun class. Danny Bird had a fast one.

Those rules were fine, imho. I never knew of anybody "cheating" the heads. Like building an SS car with lumps on the pistons. Some guys were trying to run them like a Modified car, trying to spin them too high. Made that mistake myself for a while. I think the heads would be tougher to police now.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I agree Ed, but if a sanctioned body would put the head policing in the manufacturers hand, it would save time and money. There is a way, but I don't pretend to have all the answers. The heads are so close to equal, I don't know why we couldn'tt at least give them a look. I think I owned Danny Byrd's camaro, a 67 I purchased from Linden Bodnard from Canada in 86 I believe. I ran it in SS|CS and later in C\EM.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

One class is all thats needed. One sealed Circle track 400 hp Chevy motor. Only one trans. Pg or stick. ANY Stk or SS or Comp door car chassis at same lb per cubic inch. One carb 750. WOuld S/g car qualify for that chassis?with ballast? Build it yourself motor could be another variation class but cost would be problem.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

X2!!!

You want to make it a bit affordable and with a limited budget?
Just like others suggested...and few more limitations...

1970 or Newer cars
No FWD Conversion Cars
360 CID max
Cast Iron heads - Inline Only, No canted valves.
Flat Top Pistons
Steel Rods
Cast Aluminum Intake, no sheet metal intakes.
750 CFM carb
10.5" Tire Max
No Crank Trigger Ignition
Wet Sump Oil Pump Only
No External Vacuum Pump
No External Timing Belt Drive
All Steel Body, Fiberglass limited to Hood
No Clutchless trans, limited to a single disk
Powerglides Only.

This will test the engine builder's ability to make power and also the driving skills

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Please, let older cars in. I would have no problem with the rest of your rules, but too many 60's cars ready to go.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Dick, it always appears that in your world the only product or make to race is a Chevy!!!

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

One thing for all to remember is, if we don't turn enough r's, and pull the wheels, and have a lot of clutch and gear action, it will not fly. Also, you need all 3 makes involved. That's why I like the brodix spec head. They did all the homework for us.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

To cut legacy costs

Use commercially sold car fuel
such as
PUMP GASOLINE !!!
or
E85 since it is a new Commercial Product.

Limit cam lift to .550 to reduce Valve Trane breakage.
Would consider Aluminum Heads.
Rule limit CC and Valve Diameter.
Intake Manifold with a limit of 2 Inch Hood rise.
EFI Throttle Body
Limit to Iron Blocks
Common Engine Sizes like 355, 396 and 430
9 inch Stocker Slick
Stock Fuel Tanks
Full Interiors

Super Boom Box Stereos :-)

Would like to see a Fat Body Class for Ford LTD/CV's, Bonneville, Wildcats, Impalas, Dodges/Plymouth, Rebel AMC's included.



D

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Who are we kidding? None of this will ever happen anyway.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I don't think a single crate engine would be an option. It's ok for circle trackers because they are all the same anyway. Personally I'm a Ford guy, there are chevy guys and the 2 most die hard groups AMX and MOPAR. The crate engine could work in a specific racing series like NMRA with their Coyote crate engine class.

Why not have rules like the NMCA Mean Street.(it absorbed the now defunct NMRA Pure Street class). That class was exciting to watch. Won't be cheap(again no heads up is) but keeps the spirit alive. You are severely limiting things by not allowing any new engines in.

http://www.nmcadigital.com/cat/rules...reet-Final.pdf

I haven't followed the class much since it absorbed the NMRA Pure Street class. So how it's working out. ??? But kinda the same concept just allows some newer stuff in.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Okay, lets only have ........ Motor, the idea is that I noted chevy sealed motor was available NOW as a good example. Sorry I am a chevy faithful because I never learned another motor. I focused on Chevy for the availability and one set of parts to understand.
Maybe someone knows another brand of sealed motor to be out there.
In general chevy was more widely distributed in stock and SS and might be a better switch for the cars currently available to use.
Thanks
Div your alternative?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Also I would limit fuel to C-10 VP

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Sorry guys, but you need to limit the heads mainly. Nothing exciting about buying a crate motor, and sticking it in. Better hope you get the good one. Heads, and other simple restrictions will keep the cost down. And you need Ford, Chevy, and Mopar.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Dick, like Randy, the key would be having a Spec cylinder head for every brand/make of car and no crate/sealed engine.. There are offerings from Brodix and a few other companies for cylinder heads. Keeping it to an inline cylinder head will also keep the competition even in the class.

Using a flat top piston will put limitations on having custom domes and will also keep costs down in the same fashion as having a steel connecting rod in lieu of Aluminum rods.

The non-use of external oil pumps, crank trigger systems, timing belts and vacuum pumps will also save a lot of money in the class.

Since there are adapters and bellhousing's to use a PG on every engine out there and not allowing the use of a clutchless trans or a multiple disk clutch will keep the competition even too.

I believe this would make the class more even an competitive among engine builders and drivers. Also, with the current technology, a well built 360 CID engine in the class should have the ability to make 600 ~ 635 HP with a 750 CFM carb.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Is the general opinion guys would build a motor that cost this much versus the sealed motor at 4000? I think the scope to check piston domes, sight plug for cranks and rods would be okay and agree with all the other points regarding external drivesfor pumps etc.
again Cost Okay? Would you believe the 365 cubic inch with all brands would be close to same HP for less arguements about need to factor ford or add wt to a chevy etc.?
I like a given Head number for each combination too. What about modifications on heads, NONE?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Here ya go!!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kswkSEyOj8

Look at that crowd!

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I like what I see people saying. I have a little experience with the chevy spec head, and with a domed piston, vac pump, aluminum rods, and a stock block chevy, we made 592 HP. At 10.5 we went a best of 6.29, 109.68 in the eighth. That was clutching, and shifting every gear. We were allowed to angle mill, and polish the chamber. Other then that just a valve job. If you will look up the flow numbers, you'll see the mopar and ford heads flow slightly more, so I think it's a wash. You would naturally lose some HP from flat tops, and vac pump loss, but it would be the same for all. I don't see why it wouldn't be ultra competitive out of the box.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Also, that motor was 289 C.I. and was in a cobalt.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

What!!!! ...a Ford engine in a Cobalt???
Just kidding!!! :)

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I feel the body style should be opened up to any in the NHRA Stock Classification guide. 55 Chevys, 57 T-Birds, early Corvettes, etc. I'm sure you could persuade some of the nostalgia folks to put in a legal engine and come on out. If you want to grow the class, don't put a lid on the possible entries because of body style.

Wade Mahaffey

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Right. But no jelly bean cars. They need to be RWD from the factory with a V-8. Might exclude some ringers like V-8 Monzas.

The spec head with a claimer rule suggested by Randy is a great way to help keep the cost down. Weight bias rule might be worth looking into also.

IHRA SS/Production classes are probably the closest thing to the old Modifieds back in the day. Lots of those cars in the Carolinas and they are worth the price of admission.

Randy, what kind of cost is involved in those spec head sprint car engines? What other engine rules are involved?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Yes, any body style. I think the older cars would be the draw.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

The cost, let's see. I had $850 in the heads bare. $1000 in valves, $400, in springs, and retainers, $600 in work from Al Parker, $300 in a used block, $245 in a used crank from Karl Lampkin, $500 used pistons from Patterson, $200 in a used pan off the net, $1700 in a star pump, $400 in a strip dominator, $200 in a used set of T and D rockers, $700 in new groden rods, $500 in rings, and bearings, a used jesel belt for $250, a carb from dambest at $1000, (i sent him a carb) $85 in a supersucker, $200 in pushrods, and comp lifters at about $350. I'm just trying to be honest here. You could spend more, but the results would be similar. That's $10,280 total, carb to pan. Take out the vac pump, and you could have a good block. You could also outlaw the titanium valves.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Why not a claimer engine rule? Say $5,000.00. with a spec carb, say a 750
Any American rear whell drive body, full interior, stock body, nine inch tire. ect
Roller cams and rockers, flat top pistons...

At the end of a race the 16th qualifier has first shot at claiming the motor of the winner, 15 th gets second shot and so on...

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Sorry, I didn't read all your post, the spec head sprint engines are still costly, but about $20,000 cheaper then the 410's. They let them do some extensive work to the spec head. We did not.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Make the claim a realistic $10,000, without the carb and pan, and you got a deal. Everyone knows everyone has a carb they wouldn't trade to get their wife back, and the pan may only fit a certain chassis. Also, I think just trading heads would be the cure, with just a $500 trade. What say you all?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Sounds pretty good. A question though-

How do you prevent a couple or three guys from trading killer heads amongst themselves, or passing around a ringer of an engine? I know claimer rules exist in roundy rounders, just curious how they prevent such a phenomenon?

What problems did you have that made you decide to close the track down?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

If anyone, I mean anyone, at any time, can claim your heads with identical exchange, that would stop the ringer deal. I closed the track mainly because I didn't have the time I truly needed to put into it. The constant bitching from people I knew well was just the final straw. That would not be a problem in sanctioned racing. We were accused of favoring our car, when the rules were exactly the same for all. It takes a lot more time to run a track then people think.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I would be totally into this. I think a $500 claimer rule on heads would help help level the playing field. Would the old clutch assisted Nash 5spds be allowed like the old modified days. This new class would help pull out a lot old outclassed modified and superstock cars from the back corners of shops and bracket classes.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I like the idea of any clutch assisted 5 speed. Doug Nash included. I did a back to back with a Nash and a faceplate G-Force, .001 difference in the Nash's favor. That's just driver variance. But we were clutching every gear, literally. To make sure people are using the clutch, we had a roll bar mounted camera that under a $25 protest, would be put in the car and had to do a back-up run within .002. The 9 in. tire deal won't work because most cars have tubs that are sitting. I like a spec 11.5 tire myself. But we all will never agree on all points. I definetely think no computers, or multi disc clutches.Pro tree only. With clutching and driver ability coming back into the race. Pro tree equals less redlights by far.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I can't imagine any one of those working. LOL

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Great ideas here...some are...well..a bit un-realistic?

How about 1960 and later cars....or 1965 and later? Not sure about letting the '50's stuff
in there...

Are you ready for a '62 Nova Super-Mod car?

Cam lift....somebody mentioned .700" max....another .550"...that's too SMALL! How about a compromise @ .650"...would require lower-cost valve springs than the higher lifts.

I LIKE the following.....

Single-disc clutch

NO cranktrigger...NO belt-drive...NO vacuum pump....NO aluminum heads or rods.....

Stud-mounted rockers...except Mopar engines...

Could be "swayed" into 10.5 tire...although I think 9" could work....

Someone mentioned ladder-bars only...would allowing traction systems like Cal-Tracs
or similar styles NOT be in the best interest of this class?

Have a problem with clutchless trans....MUST be clutch actuated IMHO!

Think small hood scoops could be allowed...or fibreglass hoods with scoops....Think that flat-hood ONLY rule would cause "identity" problem with Stock and SS cars...especially with the FANS....

WE DO want to put "fannies" in the stands....right GUYS?


Anybody?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

What I meant by the fans was that maybe this class might "stir" some interest with the younger set...getting them to think....

Hey, maybe I can DO that!

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

You have so many back halfed older cars sitting, is my reasoning. Plus, people of all ages still love them. Super mod has never been a 9 in. tire deal. I think 10.5 was the smallest, and IHRA allowed a 12.5 if I remember right. You will lose lots of participants by allowing too much, or limiting too much. I don't care what lift they run on the cam, but needs enough to make them high winding, but I think there should be a limit to save the valve train. The limiting money factor could, and should be the heads. You want a man's heads? Give him $500 and your heads, and there you go. The protester should not be allowed to give them a damaged set in any way.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I think any year old car is fine. The crowd of all ages loves them And to an earlier post, chevy only makes iron heads at the original 23 degree. They have not cast anything, of any other degree in iron. Ford has a 10 degree iron, and I think mopar has something other then the factory 18 degree. Someone will tell me if I'm wrong, but chevy casts nothing in iron other then 23 degree. Believe me, I know.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Randy, you have experience with this class at a track? You discussed dropping the track due to complaining. Were the complaints about this type class? IF so what were the complaints?