Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

They make them for ford, mopar, and chevy. They all have 67 cc chambers, and 2.08, and 1.60 valves. Edelbrock makes a comparable AMC head I believe. You have to let backhalfed cars in. Where else you going to get the car count? That's my opinion. You have a better idea on heads? Let's hear it.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Other than a Comp or SG, chassis I think if you limit the motor ANY car can then be used.
50 lb less for early Body, Except vega or vette. PG or turbo 100 lb less. Stock or SS cars are sitting waiting for this opening. One cubic inch limit, one wt per cubic. No computer, crank trigger not a problem they are everywhere. Pan access, pull the manifold to check pistons, No Hood Scoops...imo Still want them to fit a current class so they run the day it starts on at least a points meet basis and ask later for Heads up at the event on Friday or Sat AM. Local meets would spring up...

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Dick, I think you hit the nail on the head. Chassis is overated as far as one against another. I'm personally not afraid of a pro chassis, as long as they make minimum weight.I personally want a scoop, but it won't be the deciding factor on whether I race or not. I think one weight,such as 3000lbs. At say, 9 lbs. would be 333 c.i. min.wt.and cube.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

They would have to have a scoop to have a chance to qualfy for any modified vstock class. Also, no engine smaller then 333 c.i., none larger then 360.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Hell I ran a back halfed car in A/SM (11.5 tire rule) for the 1980 season in NHRA. As long as you adhere to whatever tire & suspension rule is formulated what's the problem?

MK

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Growing up in the 70s, there was a pretty large contingent of C/SM cars in the Northwest, so this proposed class is very intriguing to me.
Seeing as I am in the process of turning my old 66 Acadian (Nova to our south of the border friends)bracket car into a Super Stocker, This could be a slightly different direction for me.
The idea of the spec head is a good one but the claimer aspect will be a little difficult to control with 3 different engine combinations. Wouldn't you just have the guys with one combination sharing a really good set of heads and just taking turns using them?
I think keeping modifications allowed to a minimum would be the best route to go, periodic random tear down to check cc's, valve dia and valve angles. If you have the field covered by .20 or if your heads look like they may have been messed with they go back to the manufacturer to be probed and checked.
If it was 4.060" max bore size and say 365 maximum cubic inches, it would keep the oddball big bore short stroke combinations out of it.
A flat top 5cc piston would net 10.28-1 compression at 365 cubic inches or if milling was allowed, 60 cc chambers would net just over 11-1.with this compression, a properly prepared short block with roller valvetrain, stud rockers, 750 cfm carb and a cast manifold should be easily capable of low 10s or high 9s at 3000 lbs.
Teardown would consist of pumping the engine, pulling a head and ccing ports and chamber, check valve dia. and angle and check bore dia.
As far as the clutch actuated shifting, I know there are a lot of super stock cars that have gone to clutchless transmissions and really, how many stick stockers touch the clutch pedal on gear changes? My opinion is as long as it is a non planetary transmission it should be allowed.
If this becomes more than a pipe dream, I may have to have a change in direction!
Oh and one more thing....no sandbaggers!

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

You don't have to have a claimer head, it was just an idea. They let brodix inspect them in the roundy rounders. But they limit the ports, which is fine with me. They allow polishing the combustion chamber, and angle milling. It just makes it easier to police when they are totally looking at the ports. The way we stopped them from shifting clutchless, was had a roll bar mounted camera available for a $25 dollar protest, and protested car would have a chance to make 3 runs, and one must be within.001 in 60 ft, and .002 in the 1/8th mile to be legal. We had a 10.5 lbs. car that had 1/8th mile times that computed to a 9.89 1/4 time, so an 8lb. car should go 9.40's or better. I believe you could approach 700 hp with a 365 c.i. We had 592 out of a 289 c.i. I think making all drivers hit the clutch, makes all drivers better, and may make the auto wt. break obsolete.
i do believe if given the chance, and you do have to have a way to keep the cost down, this class would be big. You would not have just 2 or 3 guys swapping heads, if you drew similiar car numbers out of a hat each event.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Randy,
are these the heads ? http://www.brodix.com/heads/spec.php
looks like a fair shake between the ford chev mopar. However, how fast do we want to go? an example... SS/H 327/299 4 speed car is roughly 336 cu.in at 3020 give or take a few, (at 336 in and a 9 lb break thats 3024, a good example) and they are running high nines and low tens on a good day. has basically the same shortblock we are talking here, (supermod) how fast will it go with these brodix heads, generally available manifold, and 750 holley? Same full bodied back half car, perfect for the class. add a fiberglass hood w/ scoop and there you go..
maybe it will go too fast for the older guys, below 9.99 its neckbrace, gloves, comp license etc. I'd support a cam max lift rule at around .550 to .575 to keep the expense and maintenance down and keep the cars in the 10's

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I don't know if this was posted or discussed on here yet but here's a link anyways...

http://www.eddyvilleraceway.com/pages/class-racing.html

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

The Eddyville deal is good, but not at all similar. Steve Thompson ran there with the cobalt 3 times, and runner-upped twice, and was either no.2 or 1 quaqlifier each time. I had the 69 nova on the youtube stuff built at LA Automotive a few years back. But that class is open, and ended up with a 358 pro stock motor, and an Al Parker SB2, plus other high dollar stuff. We ran a dart buick by Al Parker and were very competitive, but this is not what we're after. It's dying because of the cost. I first introduced a spec deal, and went to the racers meeting, and all agreed it was good, but after it was excepted, the same guy who tried to destroy Bethany bent their ear, and this is what they ended up with, and we still supported it, till it died. But back to an earlier question, yes, these cars at 9 lbs. will be deep in the nines. I don't think that's all bad, but I'm open for suggestions. I was thinking .700 lift at the valve. A set of K-motion springs will live there. What say you all?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Also, the brodix deal is already proven to be fair. That's a good place to start. And the stuff at Eddyville is OK, it's just that it's totally based off of comp, which is fine, but we already have comp. We need something way more affordable, hence, spec econo mod.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Also, (I'm sure you all are tired of hearing my opinion) I know this is not 1977, but drag racing is unique, oval racing could not go back, indy racing cannot go back, but dragracing can. After all, it is called the national hotrod association, and the word hotrod is the key. There are no true hotrods today, there never will be again. What I'm talking about is bring back the only true hotrods ever in history, the 60's and 70's. Sorry, just the way it is. Do you really think 40 years from now they will say "wow" did you see that 2008 GXP? I doubt it. Did you see where 19 FUNNY CARS showed up at a NOSTALGIA RACE, AND ONLY 4 SHOWED UP FOR A DIVISIONAL?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Bump

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

The term "Hot Rod" was coined in the late 30s with guys customizing/modifying their average ordinary cars into performance machines.
I think in 40 years from now the people that are into "hot rodding" performance cars now are going to be dreaming/drooling over items like the 99-04 F150 lightning, 03-04 Mustang Cobra, 2013 Shelby GT500, Supersnake packages,08-beyond CJ/SCJs, 2012 ZL1 Camaro, 2012 COPO, 05-12 ZO6, 2010 ZR1, Vipers, SRT-10 rams, 392 challengers, Drag Packs. Just to name a few performance marquee cars. JMO though

There will still be a market for the 60-70-80-90s cars. People will be interested in the cars they grew up with and had an experience that touched their lives. That's what makes a legend and why there is such a special place in everyone's heart for a certain car.

For instance me- I'm 29 years old. Ive been into cars since before i could walk. I got a ride in a LX 5.0 5speed and that got me hooked on Mustangs and Ford. A car that just drives me wild is a teal 93 Mustang Cobra. It's on my list of must have cars.

Other cars on that list:
1970 boss 302 grabber blue with "drag pack"
2013 boss 302 School bus yellow laguna Seca
2010-up GT500
99-04 Lightning I owned an 02
03-04 cobra. I own an 03
10 Z06
A Cobra Jet Building one from a BIW as we speak.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Randy, You and I believe ...... I will bet several others would if there could be someone or where to start it. Any car with the base motor at the base wt. with the base trans.... everyone can play Heads Up. ANYWHERE.....Take advantage of the car you have becoming important again at less cost and more fun.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Like I have already posted...sign me up!

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

With all the numbers being tossed around, how about a max valve lift of .600"...a nice round figure.....

This is a compromise of what's been mentioned...and should allow decent performance while keeping parts costs in check.

You DO want a valve lift rule....RIGHT?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Valve lift rule is fine with me. Why not have it also to where we pull the head and measure the stroke to ensure that there arent any exotic stroke crankshafts?

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Valve lift rule fine by me.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

For ease of teardown, I don't think stroke is an issue. Have a plug in the side to be pulled and view for no knife edging, and extensive lightening. Keep checking as easy as possible. Valve lift would be easy to check.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

This all sounds good but who are you going to get to OK it......NHRA.......No Way. IHRA.......not since Bill Bader left. NMCA......nope, they just love nitrous, turbos, and blowers. Probibly just on a local level. Id love to see it but who is going to make it fly !
Love the limit on cam lift and spec head rule. Anything to make it affordable is a good idea.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

My feeling is the KEY to getting this started is set the rules, BUT make them Less than an existing NHRA class already running. Make it so people can build the motor, fit the car and run existing NHRA class name at an event like points meets, even nationals. Then while everyone is still able to participate start local races or offer NHRA evidence the cars are there and post some money(by each racer adding to pot) for a Heads up race at points meets to show the interest and have fun and with this as evidence push to get featured, in the book, in Dragster etc. at the race. It was working for Top SS and Top Stk but too few cars in one division that fit and make a show.
Definitely dont try to make a new set of cars that are out in the Wind for approval.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

Probably would be hard to start, but would catch air once started. Talked with a guy at comp cams, and loved the stud mounted rocker idea, and the spec head. You know the head and cam companys would be on board. The local 1\8 mile tacks are starving for some free shows that may bring in the crowd.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

The worst thing a sanctioning body could say is no.

Re: Bring back super/mod...
 

I agree.