[Dwight Southerland]

There are very few older combinations that have characteristics that make them favorable without some power rating reductions. Prior to the late '60s, car manufacturers used "optimistic" horsepower numbers for marketing impact. But the technological development for most of the engines was at such an unsophisticated level that the component parts do not lend themselves to the same potential for performance as later designs. An example: 1962 Oldsmobile 394-330/330 hp with small carb (~525 cfm), small valves (1.88x1.56), poor heads and intake, .435/.437 cam vs. 1969 Oldsmobile 400-325/315 hp with Qjet (750 cfm), 2.07x1.63 valves, better heads and intake, .440/.440 cam. This example has common characteristics when comparing older engines to later enegines and is evidence that even before the net ratings in the '70s, the manufacturers were toning down their power ratings. To include more older models, some review of power ratings would have to happen else they will mostly be rejected because they will not be able to be competitive. That's part of the reason there are no more participants with the older cars now, even though the only real choices have been the pre-1960 Chevrolets. BUT, IHRA has attempted to increase participation by reducing the power ratings on several popular older combinations without any evidence that it has generated real interest. Considering the cost of building a basic Stocker, how many older cars will be built, especially if it's dicey that you can make one competitve?