Crate Engines in NHRA?

[Rory McNeil]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Now, a current Stock Eliminator engine IS a well scienced race piece, I agree completely on that point. Actually, that's part of my point. You can't go BUY a crate motor, put it in, and be competitive. You still have to do exactly the same thing to a crate motor. At least, you do if you want to go fast. And it costs the same. The ONLY advantage to a crate motor, expense or difficulty wise, is not having to search for a few castings.



I can sympathize with Chipper, having spent his money, and now being invested in something he's going to have a hard time racing. I hate to see it happen, to anyone.

Agreed, realisticaly, I can`t imagine that a pair of heads and an iron Q Jet intake & carb for a 77 Camaro 350 can be that hard or expensive to find, anywhere in North America. It certainly isn`t like trying to find Max Wedge or Hemi cores. To most people, low HP smogger motor stuff is scrap metal value, pricewise.My own car is a 1 year only, stick only combo, yet I was able to easily find 6 pairs of cyl. heads, 4 intakes, and 5 carbs, all the correct number stuff for next to nothing at swap meets, Craigsist, car forums, and wrecking yards. I gotta think there were many many more 77 350 Chevs produced, and likely the head & intakes were also used in other years.

[Dwight Southerland]

Alan and Rory, I do not disagree with most of everything you said. However, throwing another engine spec into the mix and another class formula is certainly not going to deteriorate the state of the class. And Alan, the point is not that the replacement parts are necessaily better, it's that the parts are not "stock" like Rory's production stuff is. If you spec a small block Gen I 350 Chevrolet with flat top pistons, a .450/.460 camshaft, 062 or 182 Vortec heads and allow a 750 Holley with an unmodified aftermarket manifold, then tag a relatively correct power number to it, what is the difference for tech, for classification or for the competition event?

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Alan and Rory, I do not disagree with most of everything you said. However, throwing another engine spec into the mix and another class formula is certainly not going to deteriorate the state of the class. And Alan, the point is not that the replacement parts are necessaily better, it's that the parts are not "stock" like Rory's production stuff is. If you spec a small block Gen I 350 Chevrolet with flat top pistons, a .450/.460 camshaft, 062 or 182 Vortec heads and allow a 750 Holley with an unmodified aftermarket manifold, then tag a relatively correct power number to it, what is the difference for tech, for classification or for the competition event?

Dwight, there won't be another class formula, that's the point. If there WERE going to be another class formula, they'd have created it when they allowed the Ford crate motors in new Cobra Jet kit cars that were never sold as a running vehicle at all.

Ford has never shipped a new 428 Windsor in a running car. And yet it isn't in a crate motor class, with its own formula. It's in with real production combinations, regardless of whether or not they've had superseded parts approved, and the production combinations are probably pretty clore to being factored correctly.

The factors won't be correct either, and we all know it. NHRA is evidently unwilling to correctly factor new combinations as submitted, or even get close, so we need to add a bunch of crate motors that they won't factor correctly, and make everything better? Surely you do not believe that will be what happens. And do you REALLY believe that if NHRA were to allow crate motors, we'd see a real increase in the car count?

[Dwight Southerland]

Alan -
But NHRA did create another formula with the DP and Ford cars. It's just that it is a formula that specifically applies to those combinations. You basically said it yourself that they take paper engines (crate motors) and put them in non-production bodies to make the cars that are now in competition.

My statements and comments are not arguing that NHRA ought to start "crate motor" classes, just that such classes and the cars that are defined by them are totally within the same functional rules and concepts of the whole of Stock Eliminator as it is defined now. It's kind of like when Farmer told me years ago that "stock" is what is in the class guides and what is "legal" is what passes tech. I just don't see the necessity of the vehement remarks that come out from the NHRA guys when IHRA crate motor cars are discussed. NHRA Stock Eliminator is in one perspective just a "formula" category that is only a vague semblance to mostly production automobiles in America.

To address your questions: Will NHRA likely add crate motor classes? Probably not, unless they get financially desperate and think that by tempting IHRA racers they can help the bottom line. If they decided to add crate motor classes, would the car count increase? Probably not that either, unless that becomes an effective way for racers of old car combinations to stay away from the new cars that are being destined to overtake the existing classes.

You comments about the lack of equity in factoring answers itself. That's a moot point as far as I am concerned. We are seeing the most blatent screwing and inconsideration of the Stock Eliminator competitors imaginable. What is going on is the frog in the pot waiting for the water to boil or the Jews being moved to the ghettos in Krakow. The AHFS is designed to not correct the power factors, only to give the semblance that it will. It doesn't even keep up with old, known combinations, much less the new ones that are given such preferential status. The intent is to kill off the old cars gradually, and it is a marketing decision. These guys are looking ten years out and trying to keep their product attractive to a changing audience, and the audience is not the competitors.

Another factor that I hate is that the new cars are so expensive. When the economic statistics of the country support the fact that no more than 2.6% of the population can even afford to build and race a $100,000 race car, Stock Eliminator is beginning to look like polo - eclectic and only for the rich. The fly in the ointment is the Billy Nees and Bob Shaw racers, but how many new racers are being educated into that perspective and mentality? If you can't get old racers to really honor them, so what chance to pass on the wisdom? Even if there were a "move" to more practical and not-ego-driven race car building, NHRA would strategize a way to make them uncompetitive. They have a product to sell, not races to run, and they know that mindless excitement, lust, greed and ego sells races, not true competition.

Sorry for the rant, guys.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

The fly in the ointment is the Billy Nees and Bob Shaw racers, but how many new racers are being educated into that perspective and mentality?

Sorry for the rant, guys.

Well Dwight, it's not for lack of trying on my end! It seem to me that you and Alan (and others) are always trying to help Racers also.
The biggest problem I have trying to get young people to try Stock and SS is the purse structure. I personally believe the ridiculous purses we are running for is the BIGGEST issue that we face (moreso than the AHFS, new cars, etc.).
How can I convince someone who can go to their local track with a Bracket car that they should try building a "specialty" car, spending 3,4,5 days at some far away track where they'll pay a ridiculous entry fee to be treated like crap and in those 3,4,5 days run one race with a purse that's lower then they are used to running for locally? Exposure? Fame?
We'll get no new blood (other than SLRCs) until NHRA makes it worthwhile for them to try it. We're dead, we just haven't fallen down yet.

[Hagen Gary]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Well Dwight, it's not for lack of trying on my end! It seem to me that you and Alan (and others) are always trying to help Racers also.
The biggest problem I have trying to get young people to try Stock and SS is the purse structure. I personally believe the ridiculous purses we are running for is the BIGGEST issue that we face (moreso than the AHFS, new cars, etc.).
How can I convince someone who can go to their local track with a Bracket car that they should try building a "specialty" car, spending 3,4,5 days at some far away track where they'll pay a ridiculous entry fee to be treated like crap and in those 3,4,5 days run one race with a purse that's lower then they are used to running for locally? Exposure? Fame?
We'll get no new blood (other than SLRCs) until NHRA makes it worthwhile for them to try it. We're dead, we just haven't fallen down yet.

Well said. Everybody is worried about how the new cars and thier factors are slaping traditional stockers in the face, and they don't see that NHRA has been straight kicking us in the balls for years with the purse structure. If I wasn't born into this, No way in hell would I be doing it.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by Hagen Gary

Well said. Everybody is worried about how the new cars and thier factors are slaping traditional stockers in the face, and they don't see that NHRA has been straight kicking us in the balls for years with the purse structure. If I wasn't born into this, No way in hell would I be doing it.

I wasn't born into it, but then I'm not just real bright.

[Dwight Southerland]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

My statements and comments are not arguing that NHRA ought to start "crate motor" classes, just that such classes and the cars that are defined by them are totally within the same functional rules and concepts of the whole of Stock Eliminator as it is defined now. It's kind of like when Farmer told me years ago that "stock" is what is in the class guides and what is "legal" is what passes tech. I just don't see the necessity of the vehement remarks that come out from the NHRA guys when IHRA crate motor cars are discussed.

CrateCamaro, I agree with what you say about the attitude that frequently is displayed here. Nobody really thinks or promotes the idea that somebody can go to the dealer, buy a motor out of stock, put it in a car and go competitive racing. The advantage of being able to build a motor with commonly available parts that can be serviced easily is attractive to many people who are not personally capable. Having the option of a list of additional motors for more optional classes sounds exciting to me. That makes some cars more attractive that are currently restricted to a single production engine.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

The advantage of being able to build a motor with commonly available parts that can be serviced easily is attractive to many people who are not personally capable. Having the option of a list of additional motors for more optional classes sounds exciting to me. That makes some cars more attractive that are currently restricted to a single production engine.

Umm Dwight, that sounds like a perfectly good definition of Bracket Racing to me. Div. 2 just came out with some "optional classes" at points races, they're called 10.0,11.0 and 12.0.

[dartman]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Umm Dwight, that sounds like a perfectly good definition of Bracket Racing to me. Div. 2 just came out with some "optional classes" at points races, they're called 10.0,11.0 and 12.0.

Soon it will only be 10.0,11.0 and 12.0 in Nhra, with no stock, as it way easier to police and the money is the same to them(NHRA).the car will only have to be safe to race,so it make tech fast and cheap to run with less people to run it.the fans will see some heads up race which is easier to understand.so it coming and we all will have to find something to do with our stockers.


now this is only my 2 cents.