|
![]() |
#13 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 1,999
Likes: 64
Liked 772 Times in 192 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
That being said, the backbone of the usefulness of my website is the exact NHRA data they publish. I have no inside track to NHRA. They do not communicate with me about anything, so the updates I provide to you all is by my constantly monitoring their websites looking for changes. That is a commitment of my time that you all do not have any concept. Also, there are unspoken "rules" about how to interpret and use the data that I have only garnered from years of conversations, inquiries, and pursuit of information and understanding. Old timers are familiar with the "secret" or "unstated" rulebook that tech officials carried in their heads. All that is reflected in the data on my website. Referencing Oldskool's example of the 1962 SD 421 Pontiac pistons, here is an example of how the data is interpreted. The Accepted Piston list for Pontiac engines lists a Ross piston, pn 145415, as a replacement for "421 62-66 All Flat Top". That means that piston can be used in all 1962-1966 Pontiac 421 engines where the "Piston Type" specification in the NHRA Tech Specs is "Flat Top". However, the "Piston Type" specification for the 1962 Pontiac 421-405 is blank, indicating that there is no official specification. Therefore, according to NHRA information, that replacement piston cannot be used in that engine. Maybe Norman has a letter from NHRA in his possession that validates the use of that piston in the 1962 421SD, but it has not been published on any NHRA website and is not contained in any published NHRA printed material that I know. Consequently, for the sake of accuracy, I do not attach that piston spec to the '62 421 SD. (Part of the "unstated" rulebook?) Billy's recommendation is exactly correct. If you know that the data for your combination is not correct, and you have documentation that has the correct specifications, please contact NHRA tech to get the public spec corrected.
__________________
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|