Factory experimental

[bill dedman]

Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building,"

This is spin #3,428....

Are they, in fact, Fords? Apparently not... in a previous post you have said, "Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the MANUFACTURER of Roush Mustangs, not Ford." and, " When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang."

So, which is it; a Ford Mustang, or a Roush Mustang??? I guess, given what you are contending, it's a ROUSH. It can't be both....

Having said that, what significance exists then, to "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building..."

So, we have a 2010 "ROUSH" coming down a "Ford" assembly line, with Roush building a car that is NOT a "FORD."
RE: "Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford..."

Can you see why this sounds like spin city???

IE: How can it be a "FORD" assembly line" Ford has nothing to do with it, at this point. It's a Roush assembly line; not a Ford... building a car that is a 2010 ROUSH.

That makes it an "aftermarket" car, to me... not that that matters. Nobody cares what I think, nor should they; I'm just trying to sort this out so that it makes some kind of sense. A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it. None of the other cars that were built "off-site," like the Thunderbolts and '68 Hemi Mopar A-bodies were ~ever~ in Stock Eliminator. That's what I mean by "un-precedented." Can you think of any such car, Evan? Not the cross-ram AMC Super Stock AMX's. NHRA wouldn't even let the '63 Tempests with the 421 powertrains into Super Stock, much less Stock... nor, the '63 Z-11 Chevys, at the time. Made 'em both run A/FX...

Besides, I wasn't really trying to prove ~anything~ about the new Cobra Jets; I'm more curious about the '63 Z-11 cars as to why this 2010 car makes it into Stock Eliminator and the 46 year-old Chevy doesn't. Guess that's not your department though; just thought I'd raise the question. Forgive the digressions of an old man...

Try to spell my name right; I'm not dead yet... (gettin' closer, evey day...) LOL!

Bill DEDMAN

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building,"

That goes back to what I said about Hurst Old which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties.

A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it.

Actually, the 2003 Mustang Cobra has been in the books for quite a while now.

[Doug Blackley]

On the up side of factory involvement in Stock, maybe that will get Stock at all National events and perhaps Class will be contested more frequently.

[bill dedman]

Gump said, "That goes back to what I said about Hurst Olds which I believe was sold as an Oldsmobile and is classified as such. This standard was established in the sixties."
But, that's not what Evan said; he said these cars are not Fords... that they are "MANUFACTURED BY ROUSH."
No one clamied that the Hurst Oldsmobiles were not manufactured by Olds. What does that mean??? I dunno....

Your point on the 2003 blown, 4-valve motor in the Mustang is well taken. I had overlooked that one car. Is it the only example of its kind? I can't think of another one, offhand.

My apologies.

Bill

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

No one clamied that the Hurst Oldsmobiles were not manufactured by Olds. What does that mean??? I dunno....

The histories that I have read show that they were built off site at a special production facility by Hurst.

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

My apologies.

I don't think that anyone needs to apogize. These forums exist for discussions just like this one.

Daren

[DK FRAZIER]

Gump your post about the hurst olds made remember the new hurst challenger is also supercharged wonder where it will fit in all of this???? seems like it was rated at 572 hp

[art leong]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

Evan Smith wrote, in regard to the cars in question: "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building,"

This is spin #3,428....

Are they, in fact, Fords? Apparently not... in a previous post you have said, "Ford and Roush are not tied at the hips at all when it comes to drag racing. Roush is listed as the MANUFACTURER of Roush Mustangs, not Ford." and, " When you purchase one of these cars, you get a Roush Mustang."

So, which is it; a Ford Mustang, or a Roush Mustang??? I guess, given what you are contending, it's a ROUSH. It can't be both....

Having said that, what significance exists then, to "They are built on a special Ford assembly line in a Roush building..."

So, we have a 2010 "ROUSH" coming down a "Ford" assembly line, with Roush building a car that is NOT a "FORD."
RE: "Roush is listed as the manufacturer of its Roush Mustangs, not Ford..."

Can you see why this sounds like spin city???

IE: How can it be a "FORD" assembly line" Ford has nothing to do with it, at this point. It's a Roush assembly line; not a Ford... building a car that is a 2010 ROUSH.

That makes it an "aftermarket" car, to me... not that that matters. Nobody cares what I think, nor should they; I'm just trying to sort this out so that it makes some kind of sense. A blown, "Stocker" with 4 valves per cylinder is unprecedented and deserves close scrutiny, regardless of WHO builds it. None of the other cars that were built "off-site," like the Thunderbolts and '68 Hemi Mopar A-bodies were ~ever~ in Stock Eliminator. That's what I mean by "un-precedented." Can you think of any such car, Evan? Not the cross-ram AMC Super Stock AMX's. NHRA wouldn't even let the '63 Tempests with the 421 powertrains into Super Stock, much less Stock... nor, the '63 Z-11 Chevys, at the time. Made 'em both run A/FX...

Besides, I wasn't really trying to prove ~anything~ about the new Cobra Jets; I'm more curious about the '63 Z-11 cars as to why this 2010 car makes it into Stock Eliminator and the 46 year-old Chevy doesn't. Guess that's not your department though; just thought I'd raise the question. Forgive the digressions of an old man...

Try to spell my name right; I'm not dead yet... (gettin' closer, evey day...) LOL!

Bill DEDMAN

Bill Bill Bill. You need to do more fact checking and a little less pounding on the keys. After all the rants about the "turbo dodges" I thought you would have known that the 1986 "Shelby" GLHS is in the stock car classification guide.
Chrylser sent these plain Omni's to Caroll Shelby's plant. Shelby installed the turbos, intercoolers, radiators, interiors, Etc.The cars were numbered cars and most of them were titled as "Shelby's not Dodges.
I'm sure there are other cases similar to this. I'm not an expert. And I'm no longer in stock eliminator.
If these cars go out and fly. Maybe nhra will hit them with a 9% horsepower increase (Art Leong AHFS rule) at one time like they did to me.
Let the cars run then lets see what happens

[ss3845]

I think what Evan was stating is they are different cars. There is a Roush Mustang and a Ford Cobra Jet. Different cars, different manufacturers. Roush is a manufacturer just like Shelby was/is.

Take a minute and read the press release on NHRA.com. You won't see the name Roush anywhere.

[Tim Kish]

Let's do some math if numbers help people understand.

Let's start with the current class record for AA/S - 9.71 held by a 68 Camaro (396 factored at 400Hp). Using a simple (by no means perfrect) Hp/ET calculator from the internet at the class minimum weight for the Camaro of 3170lb for AA/S this car must produce 669Hp to produce a 9.71 ET. That is a power to weight ratio of 0.211 HP/LB

Applying it to the Cobra Jet at an NHRA Factor of 425Hp the Cobra Jet must weigh a minimum of 3357lbs for AA/S. If intention is to be equivalent to current competition, assume that same power to weight ratio at the Camaro and the Cobra Jet must produce 708Hp to produce that same 9.71

Now it doesn't look like these cars are that soft and given some of the points Evan pointed out that make this chassis less than ideal for a stocker these cars will be at the top end of the class but won't have any significant advantage.

Problem I see is the short sighted vision of people that fail to remember that the HP numbers in NHRA's system aren't real HP if they were a AA/S Camaro should only be able to run an 11.52 @ 117 mph.

Also Eaton Supercharged powertrains have been in the NHRA classification guide since 1992 but not too many people have chosen the Pontiac Bonneville SSEI as their race car of choice!!!