CLASS RACER FORUM - Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)

- Stock and Super Stock (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)

- - Time For A Transmission Rule Change? (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=80020)

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason (Post 645567)

They are already allowed. Since the Cobra Jet Mustang and the Dodge Drag Pak use a Powerglide or a Turbo 400, that means any Ford or Chrysler can use a Chevy transmissions.

So I could run a metric 200 in a 2.3 Ecoboost J/SA Mustang?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUMP (Post 645509)

May I ask what transmission you run?

From a different thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rory McNeil (Post 645365)

With my old M/S 85 5.0 Mustang, I ran a 3.19 low gear in the Jerico, and with 4.88 gears,

My SB Ford 4 speed G Force bracket car also has a 16.36 SLR,albeit with 31" tall tires, plus an additional 25 MPH,

Same with my old hot rod type cruiser, currently has a 2.78 low Toploader with 3.50 rear and 28" tall tires, a 9.73 SLR, and I am barely hitting 4th gear at the finish line.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUMP (Post 645509)

May I ask what transmission you run?

I now have a G Force 4 speed, previously ran Jerico 4 speed. And these NHRA approved transmissions were behind a 5.0 Mustang engine, equipped with the exact same heads, intake manifold , carb, cam lift, etc, as tens of thousands of 85 5.0 Mustangs that had a VIN and were available ,(with warranty) for the street for anybody who walked into a Ford dealership,and drive one home. Can you say that about your COPO? Or do you honestly believe that there is anything "STOCK" about a hand built race car that never was available for street use, that uses engine combinations unavailable to the public in a street version, with a transmission that GM has not offered in 50 years, and a FORD differential that was NEVER available in a GM car ? Just curious.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Matyas (Post 645556)

Well better take me off your Christmas card list as many of the cars i've raced will fall into that category - like my '57 Fuel Injected Bel Air in the sixties or my '60 Sedan Delivery 348/320 hp with Hydra-matic transmission in the seventies or better yet my Cutlass factory racer in the eighties - then it really gets good in the 90's when I started with the Firebirds and Camaros with the 350/275 LT1's and later L S series engines and finally lets look at my 04 GTO 350/340 HP ...........And then came the COPO'S --don't you get it - there will always be the next great thing -- it's progress - get used to it !!!!!!!

So in your mind "Progress" means allowing engines, transmissions, and rear ends that were never available in a application fits the spirit of a "STOCK" class , against other cars that compete using the same factory installed components as millions of cars that anybody could drive off the showroom floor. AND allow engines with much more performance potential, and at a lower HP ratings, than the engines that similar cars that are actually sold to the public with ? THAT is your idea of "progress" in Stock Eliminator?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason (Post 645567)

They are already allowed. Since the Cobra Jet Mustang and the Dodge Drag Pak use a Powerglide or a Turbo 400, that means any Ford or Chrysler can use a Chevy transmissions.

No, that is not the case. Those cars were sold with those transmissions.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Boy, I'm sure glad that I don't have these problems!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rory McNeil (Post 645584)

Yes, it is progress as during the entire run of Stock eliminator has it received as much ink and TV since 2008 when they started building these factory cars .That plus at least 95% of the time they get to race each other heads up not traditional Stock cars .When a new car races a traditional car its a bracket race - get a light and run the number .You may not be aware that when one of the newer cars run as say A/SA even B/SA they use normal production engines not the same ones that are fitted into Factory Stock classes .

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Kaekel (Post 645378)

There's a perfectly good example why the Cobra Jets, Drag Paks and COPOS shouldn't have been put in Stock in the first place. GM trans in Fords and Dodges galore. Should have been S/S only. I know...I know..that horse is long out of the barn and running loose.

ALL of the stock elin. rules SUCK BIG TIME. Stock should be "STOCK" like in 1970-1971 !

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cbrinson47 (Post 645599)

ALL of the stock elin. rules SUCK BIG TIME. Stock should be "STOCK" like in 1970-1971 !

Is there anything that's the same as 1970/71? Its called evolution wether it's good or not!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rory McNeil (Post 645583)

I now have a G Force 4 speed, previously ran Jerico 4 speed. And these NHRA approved transmissions were...

I'm thinking that we can both agree that allowing this was a good decision made by the NHRA?

Quote:

...behind a 5.0 Mustang engine, equipped with the exact same heads, intake manifold , carb, cam lift, etc., as tens of thousands of 85 5.0 Mustangs...

My COPO runs the same head, block, and fuel system as the production Camaro that was also built in the tens of thousands. The throttle body is 90mm just like the production throttle body. The exception would be the intake and cam lift. But, as I have stated many times before, if this were 1969 and the factories had access to these parts, do you really think that they wouldn't use them?

Quote:

...that had a VIN and were available ,(with warranty) for the street for anybody who walked into a Ford dealership, and drive one home. Can you say that about your COPO?...

The boat sailed on the VIN deal a very long time ago. There are plenty of examples of Body-In-White cars dating back to at least the seventies. There was also a time when you could drive your Stocker to the local track, change a few things, and be competitive in class. The rules have changed quite a lot since then. I think that we can agree that a competitive Stocker is now a designated, trailer riding, race car? A better question would be, "Is your Stocker street legal?".

Quote:

...Or do you honestly believe that there is anything "STOCK" about a hand built race car that never was available for street use, that uses engine combinations unavailable to the public in a street version, with a transmission that GM has not offered in 50 years, and a FORD differential that was NEVER available in a GM car ?

I have been "hand building" stockers since the 1990's. When Woodro called my first Firebird a "street car" I realized how far from stock Stock Eliminator really was. After that reality check, I rebuilt the car with a bunch more aftermarket stuff!

The factories built plenty of "special performance" engine combinations in the sixties that had very limited access. The biggest hurdles that they have to face today are emission and crash test standards that did not exist back then.

The transmissions that we are discussing are aftermarket replacements that meet current SFI standards. Not rebuilt older units. When Chevrolet built the first COPO's they decided that the transmissions had to use all new parts. That's why they all got two-speeds!

In 2011 when I started building a 2010 Camaro Stocker, the NHRA made me put a 12-bolt in it. Some time later, they changed the rules to allow a 9" in any 2008 and up car when replacing the IRS. Since the newer Camaros have an available 9.8" ring gear, I don't see this as a problem. Especially since the rear ends being fabricated do not contain one OEM part.