Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

There are very few older combinations that have characteristics that make them favorable without some power rating reductions. Prior to the late '60s, car manufacturers used "optimistic" horsepower numbers for marketing impact. But the technological development for most of the engines was at such an unsophisticated level that the component parts do not lend themselves to the same potential for performance as later designs. An example: 1962 Oldsmobile 394-330/330 hp with small carb (~525 cfm), small valves (1.88x1.56), poor heads and intake, .435/.437 cam vs. 1969 Oldsmobile 400-325/315 hp with Qjet (750 cfm), 2.07x1.63 valves, better heads and intake, .440/.440 cam. This example has common characteristics when comparing older engines to later enegines and is evidence that even before the net ratings in the '70s, the manufacturers were toning down their power ratings. To include more older models, some review of power ratings would have to happen else they will mostly be rejected because they will not be able to be competitive. That's part of the reason there are no more participants with the older cars now, even though the only real choices have been the pre-1960 Chevrolets. BUT, IHRA has attempted to increase participation by reducing the power ratings on several popular older combinations without any evidence that it has generated real interest. Considering the cost of building a basic Stocker, how many older cars will be built, especially if it's dicey that you can make one competitve?

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

Dwight,

All the more reason "sound minds" @ NHRA should be allowed to intervene for a HP reduction if a formal request is made and the combo in question has NOT been seen or heard on the strip in say, 5 or 10 years?

I saw that happened here recently and some (or one?) complained loudly to NHRA and the HP reduction was reversed; the argument being that the AHFS and only the AHFS can determine HP adjustments.

All well and good if the combo is actually built and running down the track but if ya'll want new blood in the sport with long forgotten or ignored combo's, it will never happen following the precise letter of the law of AHFS. Why would somebody spend a dime on a '55 Chevy 265-283 with a 2bbl if there's no way it could get in the same zip code as the class competitors?

Drop the HP to a reasonable level, let them get built and THEN the AHFS can take control.

Note the emphasis on looking at combos that are never seen.

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

Watch the movie "My Cousin Vinny" for more information concerning the first year in which the 327 was available in a Chevy.

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

Isn't there a young lady (Shelby I think) that runs a 55?

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

Kinda what I thought, and I am at 4100ft at that lol. I saved the car from the crusher, it will make for good tradin' stock anyways...

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

Shelby Hurley from Hebron MD has a P/SA '55, her dad Steve has a SS/OA '55. Nice cars and nice people. Shelby has run some IHRA as well as my S/SS races, and they have run a few NHRA races as well with the change in pre-1960 cars permitted.

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

265 CFM, I thought that would be enough to run well on a 307 considering that my 230s went fast with a 210 CFM Monojet. So far, I have been wrong.

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

I appreciate these cars and would like to see more of them in Stock Eliminator and agree that the factors should be reviewed and adjusted downward.
With the new cars (CJ,DP&COPO) making a huge impact, all of the older factors need serious review to balance the playing field.
The Indy qualifying sheet should be interesting.

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

nhra can start by giving the 283's the same intake they gave wade owens and all 64-67 283's...(the rare 327 - 459) seems like discrimination :)

jack

oh did I mention 57-61 283's...i'd kinda like it too :)

Re: 55-57 Stockers?
 

I agree...