Re: Legal Stocker?
 

Dick.......Slow thinking on NHRA's part is the correct answer.

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

"Super Stock/Stick Automatic"?

Got a photo to verify that one?

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

NO Bret....... SS/S for the stick cars and SS/SA for the automatic cars in 1962. Hayden Proffits 409 (stick) was SS/S. The S/S and S/SA classes was for the year old cars like a 61 SD Pontiac like Carol and Lloyd Cox's car and classes on down from those. Plenty of photos in my old magazines and on the H.A.M.B. Jr. stock site. I dont have a scanner.

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

X TECH MAN The magnesium cross ram manifolds are available in Chrysler licensed reproductions through A&A Transmission and several retail outlets like Mancini Racing. They're expensive, but cheaper by several hundred $ than an original in good shape. As for David Barton's manifold, it's an M-1 crate engine piece that's nearly identical to the original Nascar piece. You may have it confused with the 'bathtub' long track manifold that is not approved in stock. Steve

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

I am familiar with the reproduction Hemi Intakes made by A&A but I dont know if IHRA has approved them or not. Its been about 8 or 9 years since I worked for them. I suggest anyone interested in running one get approval before spending thier money.

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

Ahhh...you guys were referring to SUPER Super Stock/Stick and the equivalent automatic class, Super Super Stock Automatic.

Gotta admit, I forgot about that one. They incorporated the two new-model classes into the eliminator and then dropped the obviously redundant name for '63. This also happened right after the AHRA (and later that year, NHRA) made SS the only category in which the eliminator designation came before the class designation in deference to the poor SSA guys who spent half a year with unflattering letters on the windows.

Good job shootin' me down! (Seriously!)

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

Travis

You must remember one of those names of the 1962 winners list??
Paul Williams, Right after he got caught with the fuel he got a new name at
The old Magnolia Drag Strip (OHIO) FUELER he has lived with that name since.

Hammer

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

Dick, When you “asked” about ‘glass replacement parts for aluminum cars did you include your type of car you were racing that needed to replace the aluminum parts? Did you include facts stating that you were at a disadvantage in the class you were racing to need the ‘glass parts to replace aluminum parts?

The actual racers that asked for a 3-speed automatic trans to replace a 2-speed trans they were limited to DID included their car number and class, the races they ran, and facts showing ET’s where they could not compete against cars built with 3-speeds.

The actual racers that asked for aluminum heads to replace cast iron heads DID included their car number and class, the races they ran, and information showing the company name and part # of the head they wanted to be allowed as a replacement. A new head was then submitted and checked before approval.

There are 2 types of letters to send in to get something approved. A generic version of each follow:

...Dear Sirs: I do not race in Stock or SS and never intend to, however I would like to see fiberglass parts be allowed to replace high dollar aluminum body parts because I think it would be really neat to watch those old rare factory racecars run again. Thank you

...Dear Sirs: I currently race in S/S (number XXXX, class XX) and am having a hard time locating heads to fit my engine. Company XYZ makes an aluminum replacement head part #xxxxxxx that is similar to the head I use. I would like to have that company submit the head to you for comparison to the OEM head in hopes of getting it accepted as a replacement for my engine. Thank you

Now Dick, which letter do you think will get action? If someone wants something approved, there is a correct way to do it.

Travis

(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed by me on this forum are exactly that, my opinions.)

Re: Legal Stocker?
 

Travis, Very Good discussion. Very good examples. As I have no car to question I am sure my input or question is of lessor value to the committee.
I think and third letter example should be included in your discussion though.
Dear Sir. I am a manufacturer and wish to produce a product for profit which is similar to the parts used on cars being raced in Stock or SS in NHRA classes. I wish them to be allowed as a replacement part and legal. They will be Aluminum instead of Steel. THey will be Higher quality due to todays technology. I am a major Sponsor.
or....4) Dear Sir, I have raced 35 Years in NHRA and am familiar with the evolution of the rules regarding S and SS. In my opinion the allowance of replacement Engine parts of Aluminum for steel, Aftermarket reproductions for original parts is progress.
.....Many interesting SS and S cars from the 60s were very limited in production from the factory with ALUMINUM body parts. Today parts are not available in Quantity to allow expanded numbers of participant s with these cars. Prices for the 50 original sets prevent racers in parallel racing programs from Crossing over and participating in NHRA S AND SS classes. THese are potential entries to enlarge the racer pool for our events. I suggest consideration of allowing Kevlar reproduction parts for Fenders, Doors, Hoods, Bumpers for parts originally produced only in Aluminum from the factory to see more of these Classic S and SS cars enter NHRA events.
I think this might also be a reasonable request letter. Fairly close to the letter I submitted.
Again Thanks Travis.