Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
i cant wait for my first chance to DUMP a 150+ 9 second car... man i bet i can put him out 1 car in about 3 foot... hehehe.
captain p.s. real safe too ... gerald nivens @ 75mph vs fezell @150+ NHRA > just give em thier own class EVERYONE will be elated ! not a nostalgia racer just f...ing old :) |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
Natural CC car that could run BB - A. Hmmm..... |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Or Captain we could just do away with Q/SA and slower classes in Stock. like Superstock, stock would just stop at P/SA. I don't see a ton of new Q/SA and slower cars being bulit. I don't want anyone in a slow stocker getting hurt in a crash. This could be a good idea in the name of safty. Don't you think this is a good idea Captain?
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
And I agree with Phil: as fast as Barton made the single-4 bbl. motor go I'm sure the 2x4 version would be a terror. I don't know about 8's, but definitely fast. Would weigh 3320 in BB/SA. Going to need to make somewhere in the neighborhood of 840-850 hp to get there and I don't know if that happens with a "stock" head and flat-tappet lifters. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
if so, why the hell are you doing this? btw, i've GOT a job, don't want 2... |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Who do you think got the 2X4 Hemi approved? LOL
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
I agree as well but allowing the newer cars to compete in the same CLASSES as the older cars is just not right because the newer cars operate under a different set of rules. What if the NHRA allowed the older cars to have any heads, carbs, pistons, intake etc. in the manufacturers parts catalog??? That's essentially what they have allowed the new cars to do. They (NHRA) believe that a HP factor can make the cars equal. It cannot. I am not whining..... I am just offering my assessment. If I were racing Stock or SS, I'd have one of the new cars. Without a doubt, they have a distinct advantage. Is it fair???? Who said anything about racing being fair???? This is a game. It's about winning races. If you are here for any other reason, brace for disappointment |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
The "Special Run" cars rule has been there for a very very long time. Maybe even longer than some of the complainers have been racing.
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
Any particular reason you don't want to answer his question? |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Forgive me but I just woke up. What is the factor in AA/S now? Also what is Don Fezell's engine hp rated at? Somebody was asking me yesterday what the minimum weight is for that combo.
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
The 08 Cobra Jet in stock stick is rated at 491 hp.
Chuck |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Do you guys realize how ridiculous all this sounds? You think nobody gives a crap about stock and super stock now , if the average person was to stumble on this and read it or a fan(what few there are) there would be less interest in these classes than there is now. I let my wife read this and she said you guys were worst than a bunch of women and she's an expert, she owns a hair salon. I love stock and super stock but have to admit even my interest is starting to fade with every post on this board. I know some of the older combos may get screwed in a heads up every once in a great while but 99% of the time they are actually going to have to shoe polish them anyway. So what's the big freaking deal?
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
Wait until you spend $50K and a couple hundred hours on a race car, only to get beaten with ease by a car with a bogus factor. Then see how your interest in the class fades. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
Larry, I enjoy reading about all your travels,etc. But everyone knows you hate the new cars. Isn't it time to give it a rest? Chuck |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
That would be two cars, one each in Stock and Super Stock. Considering the 6 classes that the two cars fit all commonly have new cars in them, the odds are not nearly so slim as you think. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
[QUOTE=Peter Ash;322119]What's your point? Mine is that the "Special Run Car" rule has been there for at least 12 years, and possibly longer. It's a bit late for anyone to start to complain isn't it?[/QUOTE
Is the complaint about the new cars or that NHRA dropped the ball with the HP factors?. The whole deal seems pretty classless to me. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
David, That started with the collusion between NHRA, Ford, and Chrysler that turned Stock Eliminator into something it has never been in it's 50 some odd year history. Bruce Noland and a few others pointed this out to you 3-4 years ago. GM is now just playing by the current rules. I suppose I should congratulate Don Fezel here, for undoing some of the ridiculousness. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
charley i am sure you wouldnt care if the rule said j/stock and up only
> you always were a "its all about ME kinda guy"... you once told me i was too old and stuck in the past and now i realize that you were right...and truthfully i really dont care anymore either. i will not EVER build a new stocker motor > i understand i am no longer wanted by NHRA i will race what i have for a while ...as long as it is competitive but no more $$$ so NHRA you get what you wanted, more room for CJ's & DP's on that Q sheet at indy. captain jack WALLY thought stock was a place where a guy with a budget could use his head, buy a car, and if he was smart enough compete with anyone in the class ... not anymore look at charley bob > racing a car he could not afford to buy new... and it is built to race with factory sponsorship and (suprise) he is kicking the **** out of bill sempsprott's old school home built chevy II > at least bob shaw's car was built by GM, bought at a dealer and prepared by BOB himself ... RIP WALLY and all the fairness you insisted upon !! |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Captain I have lost to Bill S twice for class. In my new school home built CJ.
Things have not been fair in STK since GM put LT1 in STK at 275HP in 1993. Bob shaws combo vs my CJ combo We are both on a budget We both built our cars. Both our cars are under factored about the same. You could buy both cars from dealers. Shaws under factored combo no one has a problem with when it runs 1.50 The CJ, people cry about 24/7 Captain where is the difference in these two cars? Both are in the guide and NHRA approved I would care if the did away with slow classes I still have a O/SA car |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
As long as the rules benefit gm (drag or stockcar or anything else) the "majority" of racers are happy. As soon as the vaunted chevy is unseated all hell breaks loose. I do remember all the pissing and moaning about hemi's this and that until they got their own class...and then THAT was an issue because mopar was being "favoured". There are too many tangents with this argument and they all continually get mashed together which then turns into a fordbash/moparbash/new carbash/etc. Nitro can tell us exactly how many heads up runs between new/old if he wants as well as who won/lost. So, is the bogus factors the issue? or, factories building the cars? or, rich people "buying" a perceived winning racecar? or, ahfs is too slow? or, time shouldn't march on? or, I'm pissy cause I haven't won a race in forever? or,......... Like was mentioned before, what did the flathead guys say when the sbc showed up? What did the "hotrodders" who did ALL their work in their own garage say when a brand new 409 rolled up to the line? Or a hemi, or a thunderbolt or whatever. My point is, there has been REMARKABLE advances in a short period of time, many times. It sucks to be on the losing side. Personally, are the hp too soft on some newer stuff? It would appear to me, yes. Is there a mechanism in place to rectify it? Yes. Will it be instant or as quick as some would like? no. Hell, pick any turbo car and tell me you can't blast the index by turning up the pressure! |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
As my buddy up in the Bay Area says " Some get it...and some don't " |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
Apparently ,you don't get it either.. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
I'm not sure why I'm even sticking my nose into this thing, but here are some comments from someone who's been a fan of class cars since the early 60s and has watched thousands of passes through the years.
No one gets ahead when we break down into the "your brand sucks" wars. And bringing up previous errors doesn't make the current situation more acceptable in any way. Wrong is wrong and no one wants to see affirmative action in drag racing for the sins of the past. The new cars are killer combinations, but I think a lot of people are forgetting the fact that the street versions are very, very quick even in factory trim. Put up a showroom stock LS6 Chevelle against a new SS Camaro and count the seconds between the cars crossing the finish line. Yes, seconds. So it's not surprising that the race versions are quicker, too. I mention all this because I think the new cars absoutely need to be there on the racetracks - BUT... If they're going to race in Stock, they should have real VIN numbers and be available from any dealer selling the brand. As for the "bogus" parts, that's nothing new. AMC put part numbers on Edelbrock manifolds back in the day and the headers you'd get in the trunk of a 69 Z28 were made by Kustom as I remember. So let the manufacturers put part numbers on aftermarket parts WITHIN THE RULES OF STOCK and if they have to ship them in the trunk, then so be it. NHRA played cute with the factors on the new stuff. I can't see how anyone could disagree with that. And they're being dishonest if they say the current system will take care of any inequity. The AFHS was designed to take care of small differences in the factor and the real world. It was NOT designed to take care of a grossly underrated combination. I've raced various brands and owned even more. But I refuse to get into the GM vs Ford vs Mopar silliness because all of them have built cool cars over the years. The membership pays NHRA to provide a safe place to race along with creating rules to keep things somewhat fair. Glendora chose not to in this case. Unfortunately. off the top of my head I can't remember very many times when they admitted a mistake was made and rectified the situation. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
In other words, you accuse Mark of playing favorites toward GM, while you evidently seem to think this is all "fine and dandy" because it "knocks Chevy off the top of the hill". It was the Hemi guys who got the 67 L-88 tossed, not the other way around. Then the Hemi Super Stock cars got their own class. As an interesting aside, those factory Hemi race cars went where when they came to NHRA? Yeah, that would be straight to Super Stock, where they belonged. Funny people keep asking "how did the flat head guys feel when the small block Chevy was introduced". Exactly what does this have to do with Stock Eliminator? First, there would have to have been a "Stock Eliminator" in 1955, and there was not. Then the 55 Chevy 265 would have to have come in factored at around 75HP, while the flathead was factored at around 125HP. But then, that never happened, either. Really, there's no similarity between the entry of the small block during the era of the flathead, and the introduction of factory race cars to Stock Eliminator. The next thing everyone wants to bring up is the 98 F-body LT-1. Well, my 98 Firebird has an owner's manual that actually has the LT-1 data in it, so at least GM intended to produce a street legal 98 F-body LT-1 car. Further, you can make a 98 Firebird out of a 97 with a front clip change. Once the low introductory factors of the LT-1 and other cars became a problem for existing cars in the class, they got their own classes until they were brought in line with the existing cars. This still has not happened with the new factory race cars, and it isn't likely to happen. Oh, and as it stands, the three new Camaro combinations are 550HP, 500HP, and 425HP, before they've ever competed. Hardly the same as the supercharged Fords, the crate motor Fords, or the Challengers. Seems the Camaro is starting out 200HP higher than the competition started out in many cases. You want to bust Mark's chops about brand bias, but it is pretty evident who has the biggest case of brand envy, and it isn't Mark. |
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Alan there you go getting facts in the way.
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Dead Horse!!!! thump,thump,thump!
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Way dead. Quite dead. This should only be served over a burger and a few beers on the side of the trailer at a race, with a minimum of beers to get into the argument.
|
Re: Ford First "Stocker" Into The Eights
Quote:
Chuck |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:21 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.