Aftermarket Rack & Pinion

[NBD MGT]

Originally Posted by Bobby Bennett

So, you feel completely safe running against an 8-second car with a stock 1960's style unit or something like that?

If the parts are new or in good shape I would.

Do you think a rack (especially a typical aftermarket drag racing version) is actually as strong as the old stuff (designed back in a day when there were many many many dirt roads with pot holes)?

Think about the mounting pads on the rack.......

[jaythorne]

i say leave a little stock in superstock

[NWDragracing]

Originally Posted by jaythorne

i say leave a little stock in superstock

Do you also mean that FWD should stay FWD and not converted to a RWD???

[Ernie Neal]

Originally Posted by NWDragracing

Do you also mean that FWD should stay FWD and not converted to a RWD???

I didn't see that anywhere! I have built several of these fwd to rwd cars. And if youv'e never tried it, it's quite a project. Starting with aftermarket, struts and brakes, making a firewall, driveshaft tunnel and transmission tunnel and yes mounting to rack. I will say, I could build a rwd car 4 times quicker than fwd conversion and may do one soon to take advantage of an easier index. As far a rack for steering verses steering box, I see a weight advantage and for those drag links through the oil pan (chevy II) It would be easier to build a good pan. I think the rule is fine the way it is. sorry Bobby

Ernie Neal
SS 354

[NWDragracing]

Originally Posted by Ernie Neal

I didn't see that anywhere! I have built several of these fwd to rwd cars. And if youv'e never tried it, it's quite a project. Starting with aftermarket, struts and brakes, making a firewall, driveshaft tunnel and transmission tunnel and yes mounting to rack. I will say, I could build a rwd car 4 times quicker than fwd conversion and may do one soon to take advantage of an easier index. As far a rack for steering verses steering box, I see a weight advantage and for those drag links through the oil pan (chevy II) It would be easier to build a good pan. I think the rule is fine the way it is. sorry Bobby

Ernie Neal
SS 354

Ernie, I am very familiar with the evolution of the FWD SS cars. The early Olds cars built by FJ and others, do not even come close to new new generation of FWD cars. The early cars still kept the original lower control arms, modified to accept the Strange struts and did not have fabricated K-members either. They had a modified OEM K-member.

I could continue picking on the differences between the early and newer FWD. It is not fair for a RWD car to have a heads-up against an later FWD car.

[Sean Cour]

Originally Posted by NWDragracing

Ernie, I am very familiar with the evolution of the FWD SS cars. The early Olds cars built by FJ and others, do not even come close to new new generation of FWD cars. The early cars still kept the original lower control arms, modified to accept the Strange struts and did not have fabricated K-members either. They had a modified OEM K-member.

I could continue picking on the differences between the early and newer FWD. It is not fair for a RWD car to have a heads-up against an later FWD car.

This is why the fwd conversions only run GT. If you want to run another car headsup, and have it be fair, run your rwd car in Super stock.

[BlueOval Ralph]

But some of the new Mustangs have adapted the GT Struts

[NWDragracing]

Originally Posted by Sean Cour

This is why the fwd conversions only run GT. If you want to run another car headsup, and have it be fair, run your rwd car in Super stock.

Why, worried that a RWD built under the same rules would be competitive against a FWD???