Re: Runner Volumes
 

No thanks, I'll pass. I have no desire to see or participate in "aftermarket GT crate motor crossbred stock eliminator".

Re: Runner Volumes
 

I guess you will be staying home or taking up Golf or some other activity then as "ITs A Coming". Soon to theaters near you. In some cases its already here with the Edelbrock heads on the 390/428 Fords and others.The hand writing is on the wall already.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

X tech man
I know you are a purist about this tech stuff but nhra is never going crate motor racing.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

What's the deal????? We already have specs that we have been working with for years - carbs, combustion chamber volumes, bore, stroke, etc. If you find a carb in the junk yard that is over size on spec, you don't use it 'cause you know it won't pass tech. Same with the runner volumes. Don't use a head that won't pass or make it pass. Just because we haven't had a spec for runner volumes before is no reason to get your shorts in a wad. Deal with it like everything else. If you think NHRA's spec is wrong, appeal the best you can. If you have spent maximum $$ for a heads that are now illegal, such is the environment of NHRA class racing. This area has been an issue for years and now that Glendale has spoken, you have your supper on your plate. Are you going to eat it or starve? Since the way they have dealt with the SRAC is very telling about their procedures, your belly-aching probably is a waste of energy.

The "measure and add 1 or 2 percent" idea was used during the establishment of the current SS specs. Maybe not consistently across the board, but that was the intention so that there would be some cushion. Of course, you had some enterprising factions who made their ante over the top during the time the tech people were gathering data, but many of the current specs have a bit of extra built in. I'm sure there are exceptions.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

Bart I used to feel this way to, but not as brazen. But I was not up to snuff on the valve changes and the bottom angle (bowl porting) vavle jobs. Now allowed by nhra. It is totally possible that a stock (unmassaged) head can go over the cc's. If I had a (really) legal head and it was kicked out because of what nhra allowed me to do I would be more than upset.
On the other hand the massaging of the head stuff started back in the 70's and has been a snowball rolling downhill ever since.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

I dont blame them.....they have enough people throwing $$$$ at them already and the pits wouldnt have the room for all of them if they did......lol.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

You hit the nail on the 'head'......Stockers have known for years what the SS head specs are, and NHRA should have had their heads out of their XXX's and used these specs for stocker guys from day one.....After you guys used all of the tricks the SS guys used to do and then added bowl cuts, trick valves, etc, now you got 'BIG heads....cause NHRA now says, we are going to use the SS specs for Stock....I think most of you guys always knew that someday NHRA was going to do exactly this.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

Welcome to CHEVY Stock Eliminator.Brought to you by NHRA and George Orwell.The way tech is going just let the federal govt. take over,they couldn't *#@# it up any worse than the morons in Glendora.
BYE bye S/SS.

Ed F.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

This is probably a discussion for the racers only forum on this site, because we have too many non racers and no names out here mixing it up with current racers on this issue.

Re: Runner Volumes
 

""In addition, cylinder head runner volumes will be monitored during 2009. Runner values may not exceed the current Super Stock Cylinder Head Volumes as listed on www.nhra.com.

Regardless of the poured volume measurement, any modifications to intake and exhaust runners are prohibited. Any evidence of modifications from the original castings will be grounds for disqualification. Final decision at the discretion of the Technical Services Department.

A revised list of Stock and Super Stock accepted runner volumes will be adopted for the 2010 season ""

Is that last sentence still in effect? If so.. why would they DQ. Stockers acc. the current SS list this year of 2009 if they then possible could be legal 2010?