HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-18-2009, 04:46 PM   #1
X-TECH MAN
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,203
Likes: 1,047
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
Cool Re: Factory experimental

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evan Smith View Post
So a COPO 427 Camaro is a production car, available to the masses? Please. And it is OK to run a '98 LT-1-powered F-body (that never existed)? This is OK. No one seems to be able to answer why when GM "works" the system that it is alright, but Ford is evil for building a car that will bring the company exposure and hopefully sell cars on Monday.

Last time I checked, all the manufacturers played this game in the '60s and '70s. And many racers benefited from this. I can appreciate the hard work and years of research. If a new car came into my class I wouldn't be happy, but guess what, that's racing.

Evan
I remember going to Sport Chevrolet and walking the car lot in 1969, There were 15 COPO Camaros of all colors with sticks and automatics in one area and 12 COPO 427 Chevelles arcoss the lot all for about $3600 each. The ZL-1's were at different dealerships (I saw 3 at 3 different dealers) in the Maryland area but at $7200 they were out of reach for the average guy but at least they sat on showroom floors for those that had the $$$$$$ to buy them. THATS why they are called "PRODUCTION" line cars. I bought a Corvette ($4200) instead (stupid me) and raced that for a few years. If only someone would invent a time machine so we could go back . That was at just ONE Chevy dealer and you didnt have to be a "SUPER STAR" to buy one or be a millionare either to finish setting it up. I think the REAL complaint is the SUPERCHARGER. Why didnt they build these cars without forced induction?

Last edited by X-TECH MAN; 01-18-2009 at 05:19 PM.
X-TECH MAN is offline  
Old 01-18-2009, 05:33 PM   #2
Andrew Hill
Senior Member
 
Andrew Hill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 701
Likes: 446
Liked 173 Times in 39 Posts
Default Re: Factory experimental

I don't think it would be so much of a problem if these cars weren't going 138+ on pump gas. I mean come on, that is low-mid 9's! On a 10.90 index!!!
Andrew Hill is offline  
Old 01-18-2009, 11:20 PM   #3
Chad Rhodes
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Where the Green Grass Grows, AL
Posts: 2,375
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default Re: Factory experimental

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-TECH MAN View Post
I think the REAL complaint is the SUPERCHARGER. Why didnt they build these cars without forced induction?
my guess would be because they are a brick without it. Thats just about the only way to make mod motor run from what I've seen.
__________________
Chad Rhodes 2113 I/SA
Chad Rhodes is offline  
Old 01-18-2009, 11:38 PM   #4
Bruce Noland
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,855
Likes: 83
Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts
Default Re: Factory experimental

Evan,
Thanks for the response. You mentioned the deal about the Mustangs coming out of the Roush building?

I don't think the Ford executives listened when you spoke to them about running a ringer. I spoke to several of them at the SEMA Show and they were in full gloat over their plans for Stock. You know the deal at SEMA we have both done the Show for 20 years. I thought the Ford guys had a concept car and were just blowing smoke, but I know now they were not.

Good luck. I hope you guys enjoy your little rocket.
__________________
Bruce Noland 1788 STK
Bruce Noland is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 PM.


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.