Runner Volumes
I guess by now. all you guys have heard that NHRA is going to pour the heads and if your runners come up bigger than SuperStock numbers, you will be DQ'd. So all you guys that want to jump in here saying my heads have not been tricked up and will pass, better think twice. There are some heads that by just changing the valves will put them over SuperStock specs. All of you should pour your heads or at least get someone to do it for you! Its amazing how one year they come up and say they cant use SuperStock numbers and 3 years later they can now use them!
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Absolutely true.
I just poured a set of 441 and 041 sbc heads that were junk yard pull offs from years ago, never been race prepped in any fashion. The exhaust ports on both sets were within 1 CC of the superstock spec. A change to aftermarket valves will put them over the limit. A valve job as per the 2009 rules will also create an issue. |
Re: Runner Volumes
This is one of the things that broke the camel's back as far as I'm concerned with the SRAC. Woodro has probably done as many stocker heads as anyone in the country over the years and given the changes in the rules; i.e. the valve rule change and the valve job rule change, the SRAC thought there should be runner volumes but they should reflect what the rule changes could mean. We talked to a lot of people to get input including some of the most prominent engine builders and head guys in the country and also some long time tech people from NHRA. The consensus was that the two rule changes could mean as much as 5 cc's on the intake and 3 cc's on the exhaust. Also if you had heads that were available with two different valve sizes and the heads had originally been poured with the small valves and you had an engine combination with the large valves it would help you with that change.
Our committee voted on this rule unanimously. This new rule change from NHRA is a punitive change that says directly we do not value your input and we are going to do whatever we want. In teardowns over the first part of last year on stock eliminator heads, 59 heads were poured and 48 of them were found to bigger that the super stock volumes. Of that number only three racers were disqualified. If you think your heads are okay you might be surprised. One set of heads that was poured was 17 cc's larger on the intake runner and was passed. If any of you are thinking about going to National events this year I suggest you take your heads off and pour them to see where you are. Greg |
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
|
Re: Runner Volumes
greg
i went to the pri show, for the most part, to talk to bruce about this subject, myself and brian tilburg talked to bruce in detail about using the superstock specs which we both felt was a really bad idea for the majority of the racers!! i have cc'ed alot of heads and have seen a large range of numbers on the same head, {example } a 462 casting, one intake port was four cc's bigger than the port next to it if you ask gm, ford ,chry, if they have port specs the answer is NO! there is to much core shift in the older heads.it's easy to set port volumes on superstock heads with the epoxy! with opening up the valve and valve job rule, alot of heads are going to be over because of undercut stems,steeper bowl cuts etc. alot of heads are going to have to be cut or replaced, boy did they really open a big can of worms. people, you just need to call bruce and voice your opinion!! big is not always faster but the whole idea was not have to go through the trouble to pour the stockers runners. but hey what do i know i only build these engines for a living. its just going to raise the price of stocker heads which is already out of hand. .a easy fix is to just give a three to five cc over the superstock specs, how much simpler can that get, if the superstock guys whine than let them whine !! |
Re: Runner Volumes
Back when Jim Skelly was still a member of the NHRA we had lunch together in Reading Pa. This was about 1994. At that time a number of people had been DQ'd for port volumes in their stocker that exceed the maxium and swore that they had not done any thing illegal to them. Well Jim tells me that he decided to do some investigation and went junk yard cruising. As stated earlier in this thread, he found heads that were over the volume limits that were taken of junk yard cars. Soon after this,the published volumes went from Stock/Super Stock volumes to just Super Stock volumes. Doesn't anyone rember this? So to sum things up NHRA should know that there needs to be some work done to make this a workable rule. They took a lot of time to come up with the assembley wieghts and dimensions for piston and rod combo's, they just need to spend some time to resolve this issue.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
This is just another example of how NHRA is completely out of touch with the sportsman racer, especially the class racer. There are a few exceptions, but as a general rule, they have no idea, and I doubt they care.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
How will they continue to call it tech if the rules do not mean what is written? How can people be expected to be "attracted" to run classes if they SEE this going on and read it? Could this be a way to just discourage Tech as a method used in Sportsman racing? Great men in some positions, just ignored when they try to make it work also for Sportsman Class cars.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Just pocket ported the crap out of a set of 441's and with pro flow valves I am reading 154 on a 161 max! Not sure what the issue is? Guess I have bad castings LOL
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
I wish I had those before you ported them. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Jeff I also talked to Bruce more than once last year about this. I think this was a mean spirited and punitive rule change that didn't come from Bruce but farther up the food change. I really think they don't care.
Greg |
Re: Runner Volumes
Hey Daran. Jay Slane had similar results with a set of 441 heads that he is working on. All of the small block heads that I have CC'd before porting have come up about 6 CC's smaller than the SS limit. I am not sure how that compares with big block or other brands. NHRA will probably just allow some mild porting and epoxy in the intake and welded exhaust like SS. They couldnt control the head rule in super stock so they changed the rules. They will probably do the same for stock. Then a good set of heads will cost 7500.00 but you wont have to worry about passing teardown. As long as the valve size is correct and the CC's are right you will pass.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Daran, FYI, there are 2 different castings in the 441's one type is bigger on intake runners than the other!
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Why dont they just add 2 or 3 percent to all the SS volumes,and use that for both the STK and SS numbers? They should only have one list.Will be alot less confusing when you race a stocker in SS.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
I have to agree with Lyn...their are alot of guys that run both S & SS with the same car. I also have a question on the head volumes...what about the cars that have NO #'s like our 6cyl nova? I don't see any #'s for a 230!
|
Re: Runner Volumes
DARAN:
161 CC is the spec for the intake side. My intakes were safely under the spec as well. It's the exhaust side that is way too close for comfort. Same result now on 3 sets. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Who's to say the numbers used for Super Stock are really "right" anyway.
I'm sure no scientific methods were ever used to arrive at the magic numbers we have to use. As Woodro says , there are different castings made at different foundries that definately have different volumes when made. I for one like Lyn's idea to add 2 or 3 percent and get on with it. FJ |
Re: Runner Volumes
Just a little insight to the production of heads. My buddies at Brodix tell me that a fresh core box will produce heads that are on spec. I assume that means port location & cc's because they say at the end of a production run the core boxes are showing wear & the port volumn will be smaller than designed. I would think the same applies to any automaker produced heads. The Design/R&D guys at Brodix have used the term "Filed" core when talking about producing a bigger runner head. Hey, the pattern maker has a bad day on Monday & the molds are off spec. He sobers up by Wed and is feeling good so he makes some molds over spec. At that time of original design & production little did they know that the quality of their work & a few CC's would mean so much to racers.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Consider this,
Maybe NHRA is trying to make the cylinder head issue so oblique that it will facilitate the introduction of "spec" heads from the aftermarket. If an aftermarket supplier can supply 80-90% of the class and provide accurate port dimensions, cc min and max, cross section, templates all of a sudden it makes sense.Will there ever be a 230 6 cyl head? Probably not, but the amount of those types of combinations are no where near the amount of sbc/bbc/ford/dodge V8s in stock(nitro joe would know). Is this "pure" as the old "stock" eliminator, probably not. If someone can buy some performer rpm (or whatever is approved) heads and build a stocker, it would appeal to a broader group (mostly those that do not see the merit of all of the hard work). I am not trying to p anyone off, ( I deeply respect what stocker engine builders can do) but when someone asks me if they can build a stocker and you explain what some of the stuff really costs they get intimidated. I am not trying to discount the efforts of those of you who are really good at what you do, but if NHRA will not consider the knowledge of Woodro, FJ, and any of the stocker "head guys" (even their own "pouring" records) what could possibly be next? They (NHRA) obviously have a different agenda then what meets the eye. |
Re: Runner Volumes
New 207 carbs, New Aluminum heads for big blocks, New cranks, new rods new pistons to spec sheet. New Blocks for strength. We are there now we just need to find a company who wants the work. World might be the one to do it. Why buy old rusty castings and spend the work to be off on CCs and worse create all this foolishness of tech currently sees. Make some good ones with todays technology and move forward. Cut the crap and cost at the same time.
I hate to say it but I think making one casting for small block low pro and one for high compression for ALL stock and SS would be the smart way to create the large number needed to justify making them. Simplify tech and stop the frustration in tear down. One casting of any family of motors the same thing. Just think it would also help stop the tech book finding an obscure combo wrongly factored and ignored by tech for 5 years too.. Thanks for listening... Dick |
Re: Runner Volumes
No thanks, I'll pass. I have no desire to see or participate in "aftermarket GT crate motor crossbred stock eliminator".
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
|
Re: Runner Volumes
X tech man
I know you are a purist about this tech stuff but nhra is never going crate motor racing. |
Re: Runner Volumes
What's the deal????? We already have specs that we have been working with for years - carbs, combustion chamber volumes, bore, stroke, etc. If you find a carb in the junk yard that is over size on spec, you don't use it 'cause you know it won't pass tech. Same with the runner volumes. Don't use a head that won't pass or make it pass. Just because we haven't had a spec for runner volumes before is no reason to get your shorts in a wad. Deal with it like everything else. If you think NHRA's spec is wrong, appeal the best you can. If you have spent maximum $$ for a heads that are now illegal, such is the environment of NHRA class racing. This area has been an issue for years and now that Glendale has spoken, you have your supper on your plate. Are you going to eat it or starve? Since the way they have dealt with the SRAC is very telling about their procedures, your belly-aching probably is a waste of energy.
The "measure and add 1 or 2 percent" idea was used during the establishment of the current SS specs. Maybe not consistently across the board, but that was the intention so that there would be some cushion. Of course, you had some enterprising factions who made their ante over the top during the time the tech people were gathering data, but many of the current specs have a bit of extra built in. I'm sure there are exceptions. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
On the other hand the massaging of the head stuff started back in the 70's and has been a snowball rolling downhill ever since. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
BYE bye S/SS. Ed F. |
Re: Runner Volumes
This is probably a discussion for the racers only forum on this site, because we have too many non racers and no names out here mixing it up with current racers on this issue.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
""In addition, cylinder head runner volumes will be monitored during 2009. Runner values may not exceed the current Super Stock Cylinder Head Volumes as listed on www.nhra.com.
Regardless of the poured volume measurement, any modifications to intake and exhaust runners are prohibited. Any evidence of modifications from the original castings will be grounds for disqualification. Final decision at the discretion of the Technical Services Department. A revised list of Stock and Super Stock accepted runner volumes will be adopted for the 2010 season "" Is that last sentence still in effect? If so.. why would they DQ. Stockers acc. the current SS list this year of 2009 if they then possible could be legal 2010? |
Re: Runner Volumes
First Crate motor is a term to degrade racing ONLY a term. We can gradually "evolve" to Spec motors or move constructively to limit ambiguous rules and rulings.
Yes I am not racing now but with doing it with three cars in the late part of my 35 years doing it I have watched it , experienced it and dealt with it. You may not like the term Crate motors but you each have your own Spec motor now just you built it to fit the spec of your year car. Everyone wants stable specs while some use the unstable production of old parts as an excuse to not follow the specs published. Why dont people keep searching for a casting that can make the specs? cost of multiple old castings to find one pair that works. With the consistent push for fewer and fewer gray zones on valve angles, valves , acid use people are pushing for a CNC piece to be used with molded production. Alan, I respect your point of view that it would not be the same (in one way) to have given Casting of aftermarket to be used. It is the same just get the piece clean and cheaper and hopefully less to finish and the supply can be larger. 55 chevy still has a spec, Ford still has a spec. People still can race class now with Aluminum heads right? what would change except ONE STEP to uniform parts and specs for all motors and brands. As far as a Chevy eliminator I hear ford has a DOVE head, right, Cranks are built by many people. This could really help the manufacturers have a market and continue to exist.Chrysler has all new Hemi parts produced now right? |
Re: Runner Volumes
Never mind.
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
What about Buick,Olds,6 cyl. engines,Pontiac,AMC etc.?Me and Jeff,Aris,Jim Mantle and others can't just run to the local AMC dealership or for that matter most after market companies and get the trick of the week.I know,build something more common.There's enough Chevies and Mustangs now.We dont need Chevy_Mustang Elim. being called to the lanes. Ed F. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Alan, I understand the feelings about the Crate motors because it loses the "flavor" of class racing.
The alternative is dont us the term and wait for all cars to get there over another X years with bogus specs of every kind and opinions for decisions instead of Numbers or specs.If it were a move to SIMPLIFY the spec choices and searchs and specs to enforce that was my view. Ed, Diversity is a neat deal in Class racing. Can it be racings worst enemy? maybe. Too many specs in the books and too few enforcers and tech abilities to keep it working. Soon laxity and lack of enforcement and overruling decisions become the norm. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
The real reasons are 1) Lazy IDGAS leadership in Glendora 2) A small % of racers that will do anything at any cost to go faster and or win races 3) Our wonderful Nat'l tech director 4) GG (glendora greed).Ever seen the salaries these bums pull down?If it was a public owned corp. they would have been out on their asses a long time ago. I have more,but maybe others can add to the list,it's far from complete. Ed F. Dick you were doing well for a while but you seem to be going over the edge again.Get back on those meds. |
Re: Runner Volumes
Ed , No meds, I get light headed standing on the Soap Box, too little O2. I'll rest a while and recover.. Thanks. Back to politics.....
|
Re: Runner Volumes
Quote:
Ed |
Re: Runner Volumes
dick,
get off the soapbox and back into a race car...maybe it will refocus your thinking we think top stock is cool, FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO PLAY... not everyone does. and furthermore i dont need you are anyone else to tell me what i should race and what the rules should be... if i chose to race and "obscure combo" in your words i should be run out of stock eliminator. bob shaw has forgot more about what stock eliminator means than you may have ever known. jack mccarthy p.s. i thought this thread was about those cheating bogus cave sized stocker heads that are gonna be $5000 weight box material ?????????????? |
Re: Runner Volumes
Jack, Thanks you are correct. The thread Is about the$ 5000. door stops. No planning for the future and no end to the door stops. Just more and more expensive replacements and frustrations.
No intent to tell ANYONE how to race or WHAT to race or what to call racing their cars. Too much fun just frustrating as seen today. |
Re: Runner Volumes
This is probably an ignorant question, but, why do all the stocker heads that fail to pass tech become $5000.00 door stops and ballast. Are door stops really in that short of supply and the demand is so great that they bring $5000.00 on the open market. Or is Bernie Madoff the only wholesale outlet for them?
Now I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but if I had a set of 'large capacity' cylinder heads, I'd probably list them on Class Racer and hope that a Super Stock racer bought them. After all, isn't the supply of OEM heads finite? And don't forget, those dad-gum collectors are gobblin' them all up! |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.