Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

98 Firebirds and Camaros are no different than 97's. These cars were way under rated to start with and it's taken 16 years for the LT1's to get the rating they now have. I had to race against the LS1's when they were rated at 305hp. They are now 369 or 373 in the Camaro's and Firebird's. Why do you think the fuel injected classes were implemented? It was the failure of NHRA to properly factor these cars. I have no doubt that Pontiac being the official car and GMC being the official truck was the main reason these cars didn't get properly factored. That being said this is way more bogus than anything GM did back in those days. These are cars that were never made. The rules had to be changed just to allow these cars in stock. They had an opportunity to put these crate motor cars in their own class and decided to let them run in regular stock classes with hp ratings so Bogus Ray Charles could see they weren't right.

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

Bogus is bogus, no matter the level. Greg, you skirted my question. Why are you not grandstanding against bogus GM cars? These are cratemotor cars.

98s are different from 97s because in 98 GM used a different enigne and diffrent body work.

Alan, I would like to see one in the real world. Please post a picture of a street F-body ('98) with a factory LT1 or scan and show us where it was available in GM literature.

Greg what rule did NHRAchange?

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

Like Funny Car?

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

I have asked the same question a few times and nobody has answered: If there was a Camaro or Corvette available in the books, would we be having these posts?

On another subject, the horsepower ratings for the crate engines shown in the Ford Racing catalog are tested under SAE conditions and they do not test every engine they assemble. Just because the engine is rated at 500 hp from the factory, it does not mean you put the engine in the car and go 1.0+ seconds under the index. The HP ratings under the SAE protocol are subjective. I have seen many engines on the dyno making 500 hp and depending on the class they run, they can run from 11.70's to 10.90's depending on the weight, trans and track conditions.

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

I honestly believe the saying "the more things change, the more they stay the same". I know back in the '80's when I just started racing, Oldsmobile was a major sponsor and there were alot of the 307 Cutlass' that were way underfactored. Olds even listed bogus specs in the guide concerning valve lift on the 307's. In the '90's, we had the underfactored LT-1's and LS-1's, and it took quite a bit of time for the AHFS to catch up with them . I personally along with alot of others took quite a few heads-up beatings. Today, we are just starting to see the effects of the Mustangs and Challengers. Personally, I'll continue to do the best I can to be competitive. That's all I have control over.

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

Dean, there is no difference other than maybe a small cosmetic difference in the 97 and 98 Firebirds. I don't know why NHRA let the 98's run the LT1 but performance wise there is no difference. I know a lot of the guys claimed 98 so they could get contingency money from GM. You could walk in any Chevrolet or Pontiac dealer and buy one of these cars and drive it home.

The rule that got changed was to allow special runs of 50 cars that need not be street legal or available to the public to be allowed in Stock eliminator. That was not in the rule book until 2007 or 2008. WTF do you mean grandstanding? All I'm doing is pointing out facts. The specs don't lie.

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

Ford Racing catalog are tested under SAE conditions --- This a dumb statement all engines are tested to SAE spec weither it is SAE J607 ( 29.92 & 60 degress carb air) or SAE J1349 (29.234 & 77 carb air) correction

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

Did someone say something about Pit Bulls earlier? What we need on this thread is a dog like Lucky, my overweight Beagle. He loves everyone in the neighborhood and for an ear scratching, he is yours. Yall all know that when GM gets around to it, there will be all kinda new stuff out there. There will be more to complain about. I think I heard this argument first when Mother Mopar made the Max Wedge 413 in 62, and it was a lot faster off the showroom than the 409 or 406. So it was underfactored some 48 years ago. Then the other stuff, the one-offs, the factory participation, the altered wheelbase(first not to obvious, then real obvious). Let's see I think Candies had one of them with Leonard Hugher, and now Candies (son of aforementioned Candies) has a new Blue Oval (that hurt my wrist to type that). It's a large wheel. It goes around. And Tech Man, I ain't that bad a driver, but then maybe so. When Woodrow Josey (stock eliminator legend) abandoned the old cars a few years ago, there was a message there. I don't even remember why I started typing this. Yall may continue the bashing now.

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

Greg, there is a huge difference in body work as the front-end parts are not at all interchangeable. Plus it's a totally different engine that was not available in the vehicle. GM submitted the paperwork to NHRA so the 98 models could be counted towards the manufacturers championship points and to have the latest car on track, even though it didn't have the engine that the public could buy the car with. And that's not a big deal to you?

So, you are saying because the performance is not an issue is it OK for NHRA to allow a car that never existed to run?

Re: Once again a bogus combination
 

cmon GREG youre avoiding my question... can we race your new ford mini explorer ???

and by the way greg is right, but hell ive been bitching about rampant rule revisions and the AHFS that cannot work for 5 years and no one listens...

and yeah there has been "seas of change" in the past but damn this is a tidal wave that will wipe out all previous stockers in just 5 years... yeah we can still race them kenny, we just wont be allowed to win...

captain jack