Re: Factory experimental
 

One other thing is that who cares if a Firebird is a 97 or 98. It's basically the same car.

Greg

Re: Factory experimental
 

Now that just doesn't make sense when you clearly admit GM did the exact same thing in your next post.

And what difference does it make if it is an "aftermarket built race car" as you claim. Didn't everyone who has an LS1/LT1 take them to the "aftermarket" and make them into a racecar? Who cares where the work is done? They built the required number as per the NHRA rules. And we all know there are countless cars out there with engines that were not available from the factory. This is not one of them. They were available in all 50 cars as per NHRA rules. When one actually gets down the track then you might have an argument on the HP factor, but nobody that can do anything about it will be listening. You should know that better than anyone.

Jim McBean

Re: Factory experimental
 

First the new Mustang idea is good for the sport if used wisely by NHRA.
Arent they part of the plan for a racing Camaro project(cancelled by economy) and the challenger by Chrysler to compete again in one class?
Why wouldnt NHRA put them by themselves? no chevies being built to race, no Chryslers yet? They are ready to run and need tested against something? See how it changes with Challengers arriving.
Body in White Camaro may be produced and used yet.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Check, the LT1 was NEVER 305 HP in anything. it was 300 in the vette but had a different cam and better breathing. It was 275 93-95 and 285 96-97. The LS1 cars WERE factory rated at 305 hp. get your facts straight before you start accusing stuff. I don't have one of those cars and I will agree that 305 was a very soft rating for the LS cars, however that IS what gm advertised to the public

Link to LT1 engine specs
http://www.lt1engine.com/tech/lt1-en...n-power-specs/

Re: Factory experimental
 

Jim I don't think that rating the LT1's at 275 hp was right either, or the LS1's at 305. Just because that happened shouldn't be justification for this bogus hp rating on the mustang.

Greg

Re: Factory experimental
 

Greg Hill:
"One other thing is that who cares if a Firebird is a 97 or 98. It's basically the same car."

Evan,
You are quick to complain about NHRA allowing a new front end on the LT-1 Firebirds and Camaro. I think we have other issues that are more problematic than this. Explain to me how this is a performance advantage. As for the new Mustangs I think they look great, and I have nothing against them; they are in the books so they get to play despite what anybody says about them.




Jimmy Hidalgo, Jr.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Guys,
Pro or Con Factory Experimental, Number 500 will be the last post for this thread; providing it is on topic and does not taunt. It was one hell of a ride. We have had a very spirited debate and everyone has had an opportunity to express their views.

Thank you to everyone who participated in this debate and especially to Kenny for providing a place for all of us to air our opinions.

Good luck in 2009

Re: Factory experimental
 

Chad,
Not accusing anything, you just back-up my observation that we were 'officially cheated' by NHRA for underrating the LT1 and LS1. But that was Ok since Pontiac was the 'official' sponsor and they threw those cars in with us. Now that 'maybe' Mopar and Chebbie has backed out of the American Muscle class because of the financial situation, Ford has not. And this is what Ford has advertised to the public for these cars. So apparently NHRA decided to throw them in with the rest of the classes. They probably did that so they wouldn't have to add a new class for one car and it would be better racing if they ran other cars instead of just each other. You disapprove because it affects you ... sorry about your luck ..

Re: Factory experimental
 

Okay, let's close it down and wait a week and a half and see what happens at the track.