Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

So, I am just thinking out loud on this.

Since all the new Factory Cars all run aftermarket SFI versions of Chevrolet transmissions, is it time to allow them for all combinations?

An argument for this would be that a stick shift car can run an aftermarket transmission.

An argument against would be that it would dilute Stock/SS one more time.

I'm interest to see your responses.

Daren Poole-Adams
Stock/SS 2007

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Instead of diluting it that way why not just separate the stick and auto classes like they should have done in the beginning.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

My personal interest in this would be my Cobra Jet and Drag Pak projects. I look at what's out there for them and it's nothing compared to what I can get for my GM cars.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

There's a perfectly good example why the Cobra Jets, Drag Paks and COPOS shouldn't have been put in Stock in the first place. GM trans in Fords and Dodges galore. Should have been S/S only. I know...I know..that horse is long out of the barn and running loose.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

how about all have FORD rears.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Already allowed in SS, and aside from some optimum gear ratio choices, it would slow a lot of Stock cars down with a 9"!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

I thought the Jerico and G-Force transmissions are already legal in the classes?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Stock is not Super Stock.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

They are- that's his point...

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

I think the fact that they are combined in FS is good, I would argue that are many in SS and stock that also should be combined. I
It would increase the heads up runs slightly.
The good automatics are as quick as the stickshifts in most cases and some are quicker.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

An existing transmission rule that appears to not be being enforced, is the rule stating that you have to use the clutch to change gears, and specifically banning clutchless gearboxes. I'm not gonna point fingers, but I'm seeing a lot of in-car videos of stockers clearly showing gearchanges made without touching the clutch.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

It's unfortunate Ford and Chryslers don't have a SFI approved case. Then again I think stocker cars should have a vin number too. If safety is the issue. Better safe than sorry. The new cars have some serious power over older muscle cars with some combinations available. Maybe like all safety rules. It would come into play when certain E.T and speed is a factor.

Paul Haszlauer

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

No in high gear ..


Ron

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Wasn't the rule originally that 500 had to be built to run stock and 50 to run super stock?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

[QUOTE=james schaechter;645398]
The good automatics are as quick as the stickshifts in most cases and some are quicker.


And yet they don't share the same horsepower factors.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

you pull it hard enough don't need to use the clutch

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

I have a 2004 Dodge 2500 diesel and an 83 Mustang GT with a T-5 that I can shift without the clutch, neither at WOT, but I'm pretty sure just about any aftermarket stick shift can be shifted w/o clutch.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Hey Forrest, we are good ….no more rule changes ……

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

All those SFI requirements that they just added were a rule change too.....

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Please don’t cloud my judgement with the facts ….LOL !!!!!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

The rule defines how the transmission is to be used, regardless of what it is capable of.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

YES!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Ron, a stick car could and probably will be faster in high gear,not quicker. Remember that we race the entire track and part of that track is the beginning of tthe track.

Good automatic cars will own the front half of the track vs a similar car with a stick in many classes.

I am not saying they all would work, but there are many that do.

I can’t imagine an automatic FS Car Being afraid of a stick car unless they beat their hp to death already compared to the same car with a stick.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

I think that the way automatic and manual transmissions are ran today that they should just go ahead and put them all in one class. ....... or either go back to the way it used to be: what ever came from factory is what should be used.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Personally, I think the modern "factory" PURPOSE BUILT race cars have made enough of a mockery of Stock Eliminator rules already, without kicking the door wide open to even more liberal allowances of non OE components.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Not only have they made a mockery of it but they don't put most of the stock builds in the guide anymore.

Jim Mantle V/SA 6632

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

May I ask what transmission you run?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Well better take me off your Christmas card list as many of the cars i've raced will fall into that category - like my '57 Fuel Injected Bel Air in the sixties or my '60 Sedan Delivery 348/320 hp with Hydra-matic transmission in the seventies or better yet my Cutlass factory racer in the eighties - then it really gets good in the 90's when I started with the Firebirds and Camaros with the 350/275 LT1's and later L S series engines and finally lets look at my 04 GTO 350/340 HP ...........And then came the COPO'S --don't you get it - there will always be the next great thing -- it's progress - get used to it !!!!!!!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

They are already allowed. Since the Cobra Jet Mustang and the Dodge Drag Pak use a Powerglide or a Turbo 400, that means any Ford or Chrysler can use a Chevy transmissions.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

All of the vehicles you mentioned were available as street cars with VIN numbers, except for the COPO...

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

So I could run a metric 200 in a 2.3 Ecoboost J/SA Mustang?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

From a different thread:

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

I now have a G Force 4 speed, previously ran Jerico 4 speed. And these NHRA approved transmissions were behind a 5.0 Mustang engine, equipped with the exact same heads, intake manifold , carb, cam lift, etc, as tens of thousands of 85 5.0 Mustangs that had a VIN and were available ,(with warranty) for the street for anybody who walked into a Ford dealership,and drive one home. Can you say that about your COPO? Or do you honestly believe that there is anything "STOCK" about a hand built race car that never was available for street use, that uses engine combinations unavailable to the public in a street version, with a transmission that GM has not offered in 50 years, and a FORD differential that was NEVER available in a GM car ? Just curious.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

So in your mind "Progress" means allowing engines, transmissions, and rear ends that were never available in a application fits the spirit of a "STOCK" class , against other cars that compete using the same factory installed components as millions of cars that anybody could drive off the showroom floor. AND allow engines with much more performance potential, and at a lower HP ratings, than the engines that similar cars that are actually sold to the public with ? THAT is your idea of "progress" in Stock Eliminator?

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

No, that is not the case. Those cars were sold with those transmissions.

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Boy, I'm sure glad that I don't have these problems!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Yes, it is progress as during the entire run of Stock eliminator has it received as much ink and TV since 2008 when they started building these factory cars .That plus at least 95% of the time they get to race each other heads up not traditional Stock cars .When a new car races a traditional car its a bracket race - get a light and run the number .You may not be aware that when one of the newer cars run as say A/SA even B/SA they use normal production engines not the same ones that are fitted into Factory Stock classes .

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

ALL of the stock elin. rules SUCK BIG TIME. Stock should be "STOCK" like in 1970-1971 !

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

Is there anything that's the same as 1970/71? Its called evolution wether it's good or not!

Re: Time For A Transmission Rule Change?
 

I'm thinking that we can both agree that allowing this was a good decision made by the NHRA?


My COPO runs the same head, block, and fuel system as the production Camaro that was also built in the tens of thousands. The throttle body is 90mm just like the production throttle body. The exception would be the intake and cam lift. But, as I have stated many times before, if this were 1969 and the factories had access to these parts, do you really think that they wouldn't use them?


The boat sailed on the VIN deal a very long time ago. There are plenty of examples of Body-In-White cars dating back to at least the seventies. There was also a time when you could drive your Stocker to the local track, change a few things, and be competitive in class. The rules have changed quite a lot since then. I think that we can agree that a competitive Stocker is now a designated, trailer riding, race car? A better question would be, "Is your Stocker street legal?".


I have been "hand building" stockers since the 1990's. When Woodro called my first Firebird a "street car" I realized how far from stock Stock Eliminator really was. After that reality check, I rebuilt the car with a bunch more aftermarket stuff!

The factories built plenty of "special performance" engine combinations in the sixties that had very limited access. The biggest hurdles that they have to face today are emission and crash test standards that did not exist back then.

The transmissions that we are discussing are aftermarket replacements that meet current SFI standards. Not rebuilt older units. When Chevrolet built the first COPO's they decided that the transmissions had to use all new parts. That's why they all got two-speeds!

In 2011 when I started building a 2010 Camaro Stocker, the NHRA made me put a 12-bolt in it. Some time later, they changed the rules to allow a 9" in any 2008 and up car when replacing the IRS. Since the newer Camaros have an available 9.8" ring gear, I don't see this as a problem. Especially since the rear ends being fabricated do not contain one OEM part.