REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

The 2010 chevy has an aluminum center, chevy rear is lighter so it's easier to change? Get real so the 2008, 2010 CJ's have alum. centers!!, Have you ever done a gear change at the track on a dana 60 or a 12 bolt / 10 bolt GM. Well let me help you unless you remove the whole rear end you will be down there on the ground measuring and checking, the 9 inch and 8/3/4, you can set them up with the center clamped in a vise so it looks like your letter is very self serving. Like it's been told to many with the older cars, if you want the new stuff than get a new car!!

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Ruler, it is just part of this sport, the new cars have either OHC or roller lifters, they have aluminum heads and fuel injection, I would like to have half of that new stuff on my old car but that's not going to happen.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

2008 CJ's have an iron center, not aluminum. Strange housing and center section sold through Ford Racing.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

I do know of the headaches of the 12 bolts and the Danas, BUT I was at St Louis at a National and witnessed David Rampy break a ring and pinion in his stock Camaro. He and one other fellow had it changed and were qualified a couple of hours later. It was all done right there in the pits, no shop, no fancy stuff, just hard work and a procedure that had obviously been used before.

I guess I am saying there are ways around everything, look and you will find it.

By the way any header suggestions for an FE would be greatly appreciated, PM me.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

This seems to boil down to a problem with the rulebook. We all have opinions on what should and should not be allowed but at the end of the day, something as simple as the center-section issue should be written in black and white in the rulebook. What if Kenny couldn't find a center-section in time? We all know he is one of the most stout supporters of NHRA even when they make stupid decisions. Imagine driving 35 hours round trip with diesel at $4.30 per gallon assuming that your car is 100% legal and getting told to go home, and not because you didn't follow the rulebook to a tee. I agree that his car and others should not have an aluminum center section but the rulebook says nothing about it so I would race it also. I believe that in 2011 with all the technology we have Corvettes should no longer be allowed to put 12-bolts in the cars but that's a different issue.

Plain and simple, NHRA has been tweaking the Engine Blueprints on the new cars more often than not over the last few months. Just go look at the updates on the website. Is it really that hard to clarify something like centersections? It would take someone in Glendora 15 minutes to post a "Racer Update" saying that no one can run aluminum center sections except the new cars and at least the issue would be put to rest.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

A lot of guys who run Danas or 12 bolts have a spare ring and pinion already set up to the housing with the correct shims. Carry an inch pound wrench to set the bearing drag and some seals, gaskets and your ready to go. Its a simple deal then to just clean out the broken mess and swap in the new parts. Ive set up rears over the years ahead of time and have done just this same thing. Beats trying to do it in the dirt. Not everyone has a stacker trailer with a lift or a friend who has one. As in Kens case I would have had a spare (Iron) third member in the trailer already to go in case of breakage or crap like happened to him in tech. It would have saved a lot of grief and shipping charges. Probably enough to cover the cost of another carrier.
I agree that the rule book isnt clear BUT if it dosent say you can do something then you should not.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

No measuring and checking if you do your homework. Set the spare gear up at the shop. Keep the shims with it in the trailer. On a Dana you can spread the case or cool the ring gear, spool and bearings in a cooler of ice, slide it in after the pre setup pinion is installed, blow dry and your good to go. Been a long tine but I think we used to use .004 tight on the carrier bearings and with ice the shrinkage was just enough, Sure you might have to be under the car, but not much longer than with a chunk.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Shows how well you think things out before trying to stir things up!

I don't see where the request to allow aluminum 9" and 8 3/4" center sections have anything to do with the new cars or the extra labor involved with gear changes in a Dana 60 or 12 bolt. It's for racers who already have the 9" or 8 3/4" in their cars and would like a replacement option for them that is stronger, safer, can provide contingency opportunities and makes the factory happy because they can sell more parts! NHRA, in typical fashion, confuses the situation by not being specific and allows at least Mopar to post contingency for them. Of all the things that NHRA has allowed with aftermarket parts, like blocks, heads, etc., an aluminum carrier would likely have the least amount of performance benefit.

I'm curious if Mopar posted with NHRA for their aluminum 8 3/4 center sections in Stock in years before the Drag Pak Challengers were introduced. If so, then it would imply that they would be legal in older cars! Any Ford or aftermarket postings in years before the Mustangs came out in Stock?

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

last year we got gigged on the vertical brace in front of the radiator on a 67 Camaro--this is the support piece that goes from the hood latch mechanism to the core support we honestly forgot it when we put the car back to gether after painting it------Tech said it absolutely had to be in there--so we went to a bone yard got one from a 1968 olds 88 4 door sedan sprayed it black and put it in with zip ties put the bolts in a plastic baggie did not fit but it was in there --He was happy !!! bunch of BS ---Also did not like the way the roll hoop behind the seat was bent but we had a letter and pictures from NHRA Tech ok'ing it kinda ruffled his feathers a bit but F him --He passed it after about an hour going back & forth over some other small stuff wrong knobs on the radio kinda **** if ya know what I mean---stuff that had absolutely NO impact on performance simply cosmetic crap---comp

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Myron,
The answer to your question is yes. I have been paid for an aluminum rear assembly by Chrysler several times, however it was when I was driving the FWD Spirit. Jim

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

I thought the rule book said any corporate rear. I know several people who run aluminum spools.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

lol..............

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

There is no rule I'm aware of on internal components, aluminum spools are legal, from what I understand.

The only real advantage to an aluminum center section is a reduction in unsprung weight. Unless of course you use an aluminum 9" center section that accepts GM 12 bolt components.

Once again, we have bigger issues than this in the class, this is merely another minor distraction.

Do I think aluminum center sections should be legal? Not really, and certainly not if aluminum radiators and drive shafts are not legal for cars not originally equipped with them. Do I think aluminum center sections are a huge issue? Not really, so long as they are not the ones that accept 12 bolt parts.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Then NHRA needs to be more specific about what they do instead of causing more questions & confusion. If they allowed Mopar to post for their aluminum center sections and pay out for their use for years, how can anybody think that they are not legal? Why would Mopar spend the money and post for something that isn't legal?

Yes, 10lbs can be a small performance advantage because it can be relocated to a better location. But it's considerably less than the aftermarket brakes that are allowed! As far as unsprung weight, the benefit is negligible in a drag car. It would be a bigger advantage in Nascar, offroad, etc. where there is considerable and constant suspension travel.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

This would be a good time to make the rules for Stock the same as Super Stock except for the engine and tires. Let roller rockers in stock, there is no reason to blow a motor up because you break a stamped steel rocker.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

No thanks to roller rockers in Stock Eliminator. We've got enough "performance enhancements" already. Give them roller rockers and they'll just break something else. If you're breaking enough rockers to have a recurring problem, then something is wrong. We haven't broken a rocker in 6 years, and we average around 125 runs a year.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

UH OH......Ed. F. would not think so. Its moving toward S/S to much.......LOL. Just yanking your chain Ed to see if your awake today.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Maybe you need MORE spring pressure and MORE RPM's to test the parts......

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

to add if they are replacing the same ratio that broke,its not a big deal as long as the pinion depth numbers marked on the pinion are the same or a 1 or 2 thousands off they can use the same shims ,dial indicate the back lash and your good ,if your picky hone your pinion bearing just so it slides on the pinion ,i use a solid pinion spacer this will allow the bearings to be tight it is some work but ,if planned its not bad gmonde

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

The roller rockers is actually under consideration by NHRA

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Thats good....as much as the hard core guys would hate this it makes since. It would cost less than buying a few dozen rockers from a dealer or TRW/Seal Power/etc. and then having to send them out to be treated/coated/frozen and then you still have a bunch of rockers that might break and the ratio is off somewhat. Ive seen dyno pulls that showed no increase in HP by using them over OEM type rockers. It just might save someone an engine down the road with the loads they endure today. OK....Flame away.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Oh, I don't know about that, we run about as much spring pressure as anyone does. We turn plenty of RPM when we need to as well.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

I don't think it makes that much sense. All it will do is change where the weak link is located. The next thing will be another few hundred RPM, and something else that breaks. Then something else to be "enhanced" for more money. The escalation just keeps on, without end. Super Stock has already been "enhanced" well over 1/2 way to where Modified was, and Stock is already 1/2 way to where Super Stock was. Where should it stop? When Super Stock reaches where Comp is, and Stock reaches where Super Stock is?

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Just yanking your chain Alan......LOL. NHRA will do what they want no matter what we think. Just look at the new 4.6 Ford just allowed in stock with CNC ported heads and a ton more comp.,larger 65mm throttle body, and a hotter cam than the street version comes with yet the street version is rated much more than this "Stocker" version. Its all a joke and stock is not only DUMBED down its just gets dummer with each passing ehancement.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

As far as unsprung weigh making a difference, it does in my car. when I put the wheelie bars, totally inoperative & they are there for the 18 lbs they add to the car and never touch the ground, It costs me about .05.. That .05 is with their weigh adjusted else where in the car. I think their weigh screws with the shock and spring settings. I can't tell, but it might even make it more of a dead hook. My low hp combo doesn't like that. If I had to run an iron chunk i'm sure it would make a difference in my car. If I had to run one and be heavy on the unsprung you can bet I would figure out what to do and how to overcome the ET it cost.

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

Im beginning to think that NHRA is planning to combine stock with S/S some time in the future and replace stock with the "Unleashed" index classes as the so called entry level classes..

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.
 

The point I was trying to make was the fact that the reasons he listed for why it should be legal were not good reasons, it's not going to save racers money because a new car gets it I should or it's easier for them to change there gear set than mine, bla-bla-bla, it was a self serving request. make it make sense and they may listen, but remember this is NHRA. and they don't care for old combo's anymore for sure!!!

Re: REALLY, Letter to tech.