Re: Factory experimental
 

LOL...Jim. I cant tell you how close I came to buying a '69 HEMI Road Chicken instead of that Corvette for about the same $$$$. Again they were avaliable off the show room floors.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Evan, I hope that wasn't directed at me! You're preaching to the choir! I don't remember you standing at my shoulder when I was fighting about 4V 260 Oldsmobiles that weren't built! I have no problem whatsoever with the new Mustangs running Stock. BUT, the technical end of the car must be set and not a work in progress! Hey, NHRA doesn't allow 67 L-88 Corvettes in Stock but they were an RPO option. They allow Hemi Challenger convertibles but they only made 7. The last I looked you can't run a "Hurst AMX" in Stock. Itn't that the same thing? I've been one of Hawks biggest supporters and we won't even get into the whole Shelby thing. In the 60s all of the manufacturers played the game and NHRA stepped in and created a new class for them (S/S and S/SA} in Stock. Goinbroke2, what the hell was that all about? I would love to see all of these cars in Stock. I just want to see their tech specs clearly spelled out and in front of me. I just finished a Top Dragster up in my shop does that qualify me as a manufacturer? ARGH!

Re: Factory experimental
 

I don't think it would be so much of a problem if these cars weren't going 138+ on pump gas. I mean come on, that is low-mid 9's! On a 10.90 index!!!

Re: Factory experimental
 

It would be cool to see the weight breaks lowered. Maybe getting more of the early muscle cars (in spite of the cost) to do battle with the current and future cars would breathe even more fire back into Stock. There are a number of classes that have combos in them that are very hard to run with but that's what makes most of us work that much harder to either keep up or outrun them.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Billy, "argh"?That's a bit harsh for you isn't it?

Re: Factory experimental
 

More stocker ink from NHRA than we've seen in years. Look at the FoMoCo contingency.

http://www.nhra.com/content/news/34684.htm


Quit your crying and let's race!
'nuff said.

Re: Factory experimental
 

http://www.nhra.com/content/news/34684.htm

Holy crap! $1000,00 to win a national in a ford?? HELLO!! What is the main gripe here? MONEY! And here is a manufacture stepping back in (which will drag the others in) Paying good money for contingency, pushing exposure of Stock, big names to drive....c'mon guys, seriously, what is the downside? One car that will dominate in heads up until it's factored like lots before it? (and lots to come)

Change the index's to start at 5.00 for A and go to Z

Re: Factory experimental
 

Yes sir. COPO 9561 went down the Chevrolet production line. There were around 1250 COPO 9561 Camaros built in the 1969 model year with the RPO L-72 427/425 big block. There were a few hundred 1969 model COPO 9561 Chevelles that were built with the RPO L-72 427/425 big block. Also in 1969, there were 69 1969 COPO 9560 Camaros built with the 427/430 ZL-1 engine, on the production line. And in 1967, there were 36 Corvettes built with the RPO L-88 427/430, and sold to the general public, and there were also a fairly large number given to road racers.

Re: Factory experimental
 

I applaud Ford for stepping up with the contingency money, and not just for their new cars. I sure wish GM would. If they would give me one of those new cobra jets I promise not to bitch anymore.

Greg

Re: Factory experimental
 

mr. Roehrich is correct,all copo cars were production cars all the way,not made in a race shop...

Re: Factory experimental
 

Alex is right,"quit cryin and race". NHRA has always managed to bend and NOT adhere to it's own rules so I'm done bitching. Let's race!

Re: Factory experimental
 

My God Billy -- mark this day on the calender -- I can't believe it but we agree. You're right -- let get on with it and just race......................

Re: Factory experimental
 

Okay, let me get this straight:

The 2010 Mustang (with a supercharger and a 4-valve cylinder head engine) that never came down a Ford assembly line, and is not available in any Ford dealership showroom can run in a Stock class, but a 1963 Chevrolet Z-11, which IS in the Class Guide as a legal Super Stocker (with 46 year-old technology) at 7.7 Lbs/HP cannot??????

Something doesn't smell very good...

Re: Factory experimental
 

Billy, it was certainly not directed at you. Sorry for the delayed response as my hot water heater blew up so I had to slide a new one in place (Thanks to Jeff and Russ Wernes!). When I post it is usually with facts and nothing more or less. I have my own opinions but usually keep them to myself. There has been much speculation and plain inaccurate facts on the CJ cars posted in this thread. That bothers me and it would bother me if it was about a Chevy or Mopar. For whatever reason, people like to chime in whether they know the facts or not. Then others jump on the bandwagon and those who don't choose to get the real facts for themselves become misinformed and cry, cry, cry.

Bottom line to all this is that Ford wants to be involved in Class racing and hopefully GM and Mopar will follow suit. All the parts on the CJ are (or will be available) to anyone who wants to "create" one of these cars. If you read the second paragraph in the current rulebook it explains exactly what it takes to make a car eligible and this Ford meets the criteria.

So, Mr. Deadman, you are dead wrong. The 50 CJ Mustangs were available only at the dealerships. They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building, much like many other projects by the BIG THREE.

Re: Factory experimental
 

What's this about the 740 HP Toyota?

Re: Factory experimental
 

Evan,
There is some confusion about which cars some of the guys are posting about. The Roush cars are the After Market units and the CJ's are finished off in the Roush building. Can you help us out with the distinction between Roush cars and cars that are completed in the Roush building? Roush and Ford seem to be tied together at the hip.

John Calvert will get these cars straightened out and they will go straight down the track and do all sorts of special things for Ford. We'll have a good idea in just a couple of weeks. It would have been a very unselfish act to ask nhra to put these cars in a class where they could strut their stuff and yet not cause problems for the other racers. Bringing out a 700+ Horsepower Supercharged bullet and running it against cars from the 60's and 70's, no matter the OEM, seems to be a bit too much.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford. It is of course a Ford Mustang, but with Roush's own government certified engine parts, body parts, suspension and most importantly, engine calibration. Roush is not an aftermarket company in this sense, it is the actual manufacturer of the vehicle, as listed on the window sticker. When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang. This is similar to Saleen and Steeda Mustangs Becoming the "manufacturer" takes a huge investment and is far more involved than just throwing on a blower and body kit.

Roush got its cars listed in the NHRA books on its own and they carry a 430 (or 435) and 510 hp rating depending on the package you choose. These are 4.6 liter, 3-valve engines as opposed to the 5.4 4-valve in the CJ. The 435 hp version has a small blower, the 510 has a blower similar to the one on the GT500 and the CJ. Neither is near as favorable as the CJ. From what I have heard, Roush is building one or two of it's own cars for Super Stock, but I don't expect to see a flood of them.

Ford worked for over a year on the CJ with NHRA. If NHRA saw fit to give it a special class, it would have done so. You can't blame Ford for wanting to build a winner. Ford knows the consequences of building a total ringer. I have explained to the powers at Ford in great detail how it would not look good to go out and own Stock Eliminator without some hard work.

Evan

Re: Factory experimental
 

All this fuss about "paper cars", I just dont understand.

Re: Factory experimental
 

I was barely a month old when the first cobra jets hit the track in 1968 and now 40 years later i get to see the new cobra jets hit the track.
Whether we agree if they should be in stock eliminator or not, we should as a whole be happy that detroit is once again getting involved in sportsman racing.
I think personally this is a very exciting time for the class and can't wait to see how they run?
And just like so many have already said i'm sure in time the car will get factored out or into it's own class if in fact it is as KILLER as every body say's it is?
I wish ford would look at the possiblilty of building some of these cars that are naturally aspirated and a little more readily available to Joe blue collar nobody.
my 2 cents

Re: Factory experimental
 

my guess would be because they are a brick without it. Thats just about the only way to make mod motor run from what I've seen.

Re: Factory experimental
 

In what way is the Mustang a paper car? Ford actually built fifty showroom available cars that run and drive.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building,"

This is spin #3,428....

Are they, in fact, Fords? Apparently not... in a previous post you have said, "Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the MANUFACTURER of Roush Mustangs, not Ford." and, " When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang."

So, which is it; a Ford Mustang, or a Roush Mustang??? I guess, given what you are contending, it's a ROUSH. It can't be both....

Having said that, what significance exists then, to "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building..."

So, we have a 2010 "ROUSH" coming down a "Ford" assembly line, with Roush building a car that is NOT a "FORD."
RE: "Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford..."

Can you see why this sounds like spin city???

IE: How can it be a "FORD" assembly line" Ford has nothing to do with it, at this point. It's a Roush assembly line; not a Ford... building a car that is a 2010 ROUSH.

That makes it an "aftermarket" car, to me... not that that matters. Nobody cares what I think, nor should they; I'm just trying to sort this out so that it makes some kind of sense. A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it. None of the other cars that were built "off-site," like the Thunderbolts and '68 Hemi Mopar A-bodies were ~ever~ in Stock Eliminator. That's what I mean by "un-precedented." Can you think of any such car, Evan? Not the cross-ram AMC Super Stock AMX's. NHRA wouldn't even let the '63 Tempests with the 421 powertrains into Super Stock, much less Stock... nor, the '63 Z-11 Chevys, at the time. Made 'em both run A/FX...

Besides, I wasn't really trying to prove ~anything~ about the new Cobra Jets; I'm more curious about the '63 Z-11 cars as to why this 2010 car makes it into Stock Eliminator and the 46 year-old Chevy doesn't. Guess that's not your department though; just thought I'd raise the question. Forgive the digressions of an old man...

Try to spell my name right; I'm not dead yet... (gettin' closer, evey day...) LOL!

Bill DEDMAN

Re: Factory experimental
 

Geez...I hope when you prepare your taxes your not as easy with the zero's!
Here's the real deal:

Wolfe said, "There are a number of reasons why this is significant. Ford has not been involved in Sportsman racing for quite a few years, but now we're going to be paying $1,000 in contingency earnings for anyone who wins an NHRA national event title in a Sportsman category, from Comp through Super Street. The new Cobra Jet is hopefully just the beginning of other similar projects to come in the future. We hope to offer a 2010 MY Cobra Jet, and details about that car should be available either late in the spring or the early summer."

Re: Factory experimental
 

Evan,
Thanks for the response. You mentioned the deal about the Mustangs coming out of the Roush building?

I don't think the Ford executives listened when you spoke to them about running a ringer. I spoke to several of them at the SEMA Show and they were in full gloat over their plans for Stock. You know the deal at SEMA we have both done the Show for 20 years. I thought the Ford guys had a concept car and were just blowing smoke, but I know now they were not.

Good luck. I hope you guys enjoy your little rocket.

Re: Factory experimental
 

That goes back to what I said about Hurst Old which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties.


Actually, the 2003 Mustang Cobra has been in the books for quite a while now.

Re: Factory experimental
 

On the up side of factory involvement in Stock, maybe that will get Stock at all National events and perhaps Class will be contested more frequently.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Gump said, "That goes back to what I said about Hurst Olds which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties."
But, that's not what Evan said; he said these cars are not Fords... that they are "MANUFACTURED BY ROUSH."
No one clamied that the Hurst Oldsmobiles were not manufactured by Olds. What does that mean??? I dunno....

Your point on the 2003 blown, 4-valve motor in the Mustang is well taken. I had overlooked that one car. Is it the only example of its kind? I can't think of another one, offhand.

My apologies.

Bill

Re: Factory experimental
 

The histories that I have read show that they were built off site at a special production facility by Hurst.

Re: Factory experimental
 

I don't think that anyone needs to apogize. These forums exist for discussions just like this one.

Daren

Re: Factory experimental
 

Gump your post about the hurst olds made remember the new hurst challenger is also supercharged wonder where it will fit in all of this???? seems like it was rated at 572 hp

Re: Factory experimental
 

Bill Bill Bill. You need to do more fact checking and a little less pounding on the keys. After all the rants about the "turbo dodges" I thought you would have known that the 1986 "Shelby" GLHS is in the stock car classification guide.
Chrylser sent these plain Omni's to Caroll Shelby's plant. Shelby installed the turbos, intercoolers, radiators, interiors, Etc.The cars were numbered cars and most of them were titled as "Shelby's not Dodges.
I'm sure there are other cases similar to this. I'm not an expert. And I'm no longer in stock eliminator.
If these cars go out and fly. Maybe nhra will hit them with a 9% horsepower increase (Art Leong AHFS rule) at one time like they did to me.
Let the cars run then lets see what happens

Re: Factory experimental
 

I think what Evan was stating is they are different cars. There is a Roush Mustang and a Ford Cobra Jet. Different cars, different manufacturers. Roush is a manufacturer just like Shelby was/is.

Take a minute and read the press release on NHRA.com. You won't see the name Roush anywhere.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Let's do some math if numbers help people understand.

Let's start with the current class record for AA/S - 9.71 held by a 68 Camaro (396 factored at 400Hp). Using a simple (by no means perfrect) Hp/ET calculator from the internet at the class minimum weight for the Camaro of 3170lb for AA/S this car must produce 669Hp to produce a 9.71 ET. That is a power to weight ratio of 0.211 HP/LB

Applying it to the Cobra Jet at an NHRA Factor of 425Hp the Cobra Jet must weigh a minimum of 3357lbs for AA/S. If intention is to be equivalent to current competition, assume that same power to weight ratio at the Camaro and the Cobra Jet must produce 708Hp to produce that same 9.71

Now it doesn't look like these cars are that soft and given some of the points Evan pointed out that make this chassis less than ideal for a stocker these cars will be at the top end of the class but won't have any significant advantage.

Problem I see is the short sighted vision of people that fail to remember that the HP numbers in NHRA's system aren't real HP if they were a AA/S Camaro should only be able to run an 11.52 @ 117 mph.

Also Eaton Supercharged powertrains have been in the NHRA classification guide since 1992 but not too many people have chosen the Pontiac Bonneville SSEI as their race car of choice!!!

Re: Factory experimental
 

If my father made 669 hp, he would be going 9.20s

Re: Factory experimental
 

Art said, "Bill Bill Bill. You need to do more fact checking and a little less pounding on the keys. After all the rants about the "turbo dodges" .... etc., etc,. etc..."


And, I replied, "Art, Art, Art... (I'm not half-blind anymore, after my recent cataract surgery, so I now recognize my name when I see it, even if I only see it ONCE... lol!) I don't know what you're getting at. I was never advocating that these new Mustangs NOT be included in the Classification Guide, regardless of whether they were FORD Mustangs, or Roush Mustangs. My contention was that if they ~are~ ROUSH Mustangs, they are, as Bruce contends, "aftermarket" cars, and not "Stock Eliminator" material, regardless of the deal that was worked out for the Shelby-constructed turbo Chargers. It says in the rulebook that on a deal like that, "acceptance will NOT imply precedent." (the capitalization is mine.) I would think that they more appropriately belong in Super Stock with the Thunderbolts, etc., since those cars, along with the S/S Hemi 'Cudas and Darts were built "offsite," too., and were not OEM assembly-line cars"


Art also said, "Chrylser sent these plain Omni's to Caroll Shelby's plant. Shelby installed the turbos, intercoolers, radiators, interiors, Etc.The cars were numbered cars and most of them were titled as "Shelby's not Dodges. I'm sure there are other cases similar to this. I'm not an expert. And I'm no longer in stock eliminator.
If these cars go out and fly. Maybe nhra will hit them with a 9% horsepower increase (Art Leong AHFS rule) at one time like they did to me.
Let the cars run then lets see what happens."

And, I replied, "Well, I'm sorry you got hit with such so much horsepower, and all at once; 9% is a whale of an increase!!! I can't see NHRA doing that to these cars, though.... too much in the way of "politics" involved.
The only problem I have with this whole deal is this: ~IF~ NHRA de-factors that 700hp car to a figure that will allow it into Stock Eliminator (at 700hp it would have to weigh 5,250 pounds.... not gonna happen for several reasons), I think its performance capability would render everyone else in that class a moot point. De-factoring of engines works to a degree, with over-stated outputs (like with pre-72 cars that were rated with an SAE number for GROSS HP), but that is not the case, here. I'd bet that this is a bonafide 700HP mill, or Ford/Roush wouldn't have clamed the number. It would be of NO benefit to them, to over-state the output. As such, I guess we'll just have to wait and see what NHRA tries to do with the car. You know that there are guys out there (and, some on this board, and, you're probably one of them) that can, and will, add another 150HP to that 700 number, if the time comes, and they have the opportunity."

Then, I added... "One thing is certain; no amount of ~my~ input is going to make NHRA do ANYTHING they don't want to do... I might as well be talking to a wall. But discussion boards serve a purpose in allowing idiots like myself to rant about whatever, and sometimes good ideas come of it.... sometimes."

And, finally, I continued, "Thanks for listening, Art, and good luck with your Super Stocker; it looks awesome! I love innovative cars. My own "race car" (daily driver, with ~some~ bracket activity) is a Vortech-inspired 360 Magnum-powered '72 Valiant 4-door sedan. Is that weird enough for you? LOL! People think it's an old taxi... one guy said, "Hey, that's a Joe Friday car!" :)

Bill

Re: Factory experimental
 

That's a nice piece that John Jodauga wrote about the new Mustang. He mentioned a couple other cars that Ford debuted at the Winternationals; one in Super Stock and the second in A/FX.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Like I said the calculator was crude (from TCI website). My point was the car MUST produce well over the 400HP that it is rated so if this Cobra Jet motor is capable of 700HP the NHRA factor to be comparable to the existing class would not be based on that actual measured HP value.

Re: Factory experimental
 

Tim,
The 425 Horsepower rating for the new Mustang is supposedly a best guess figure because they don't have any history on this car's performance. The 400 rating on the 396 is based on 40 years of evaluations. The 720+ Horsepower figure was given to me at SEMA. The most potent Stockers on the track make 80 to 100 horsepower less than the new Mustangs. nhra and Ford should have put these cars in Factory Experimental or a class like AAA, if they were at all interested in fairly classifing these cars. It may take them awhile to get these cars settled down; but they will. Indy should be the proof in the pudding.

Re: Factory experimental
 

..........ahhhh....THAT'S why they audit me every year.........Thanks Jeff! LOL!

Point was though, $1,000! Compare that to the standard $100 to win and $50 RU.


(can't help but think after seeing all these pages that if it didn't have the dreaded blue oval, the responses would of been different)

Re: Factory experimental
 

Bruce;
I didn't know NHRA had F/X and AAA/S classes.LOL