2 tenths?

[SS Engine Guy]

VERY good posts! All have valid points and I think are well thought out! Mr. Butler offered a good idea of why the indexes should be lowered. If I read the post correctly this could be an attempt to make it harder to run an older model vehicle as opposed to a new one. He also brought up a good point about factoring. The 400 chev. which was given a bowtie block so an under rated combo could be used. The stock block was so thin that it cracked the thrust surface after very few passes. A bowtie block made this a killer combo for 3? years. Finally it was given I think, 25hp. and still was a very good piece. A good example of the proper factor putting the combo in line. Not killing it. Just leveling the field.

Jack, I think you left out a bunch of things that have been "allowed" not given in both s/ss. I won't get into the stock list because that is not what I have concentrated on for quite a few yrs. In SS however, I will add to your list of things that have been allowed:
(A) Aftermarket of replacement heads - because a few wanted this because they claimed the parts just weren't out there to be found.
(B) Aftermarket block - because an underfactored motor combo couldn't live without them. However I don't think that the other manufacturers were given this across the board. Now you need a bowtie to use the 55mm cam due to the stock cam bores not having the meat to install.
(C) One off handbuilt intakes - no comment since I have been repeatedly told by tech that they were absolutely illegal? However they are being passed.
(D) Combustion chamber modifications - my favorite! Racer/racers were torn down and found to have not just relieving around the valves but completely reshaped chambers. Instead of a suspension, after legal action was threatened, a few weeks later they were approved.
(E) Smaller diameter journals - again racer/racers were torn down and found to have drastically smaller journals. Instead of a suspension this rule also was changed allowing these modifications.
(F) Any QJ carb as long as the venturi measurement is the same as allowed - same old story: people can't seem to find the correct carb but ebay is full of them as is Hemmings.

I can list more if necessary when I have the time. These few things along with those you mentioned have greatly added to the performance in some classes in SS. These are closer to Comp rules than SS. However, my customers and myself have bore the financial and maintenance burdon of these "Allowed" changes and kept right on going. My customers are somewhat used to the added expence/time/R&D that these "allowed" instead of "illegal" rules changes have brought.
HOWEVER, racers should not have to put up with underated combos (1.15 or more) under and crossing the scales 300 to 900 lbs. heavy. I don't care if you lower the index .2, .5 or any other number you still will be allowing these combos a hiding place. They are getting hit now. But taking 18-22 lbs. out of a car that is already way heavy is accomplishing nothing. They laugh at the guy at the scales, at tech, and at racers because they have leagally beat the system. They aren't the ones using cutting edge technology, working harder with attention to detail as Jack said. They don't have to because they are protected by a system that uses NO COMMON SENCE whatsoever. I'm not saying make these cars uncompetitive. They still should be allowed the same chance every other racer has to qualify well. But when a car qualifies near or at the top and the car is HUNDREDS of pounds heavy shouldn't that tell the hp committee etc. that the hp rating is way off?

Tim, you brought up a very good point about the qualifying at Indy. However, you know that quite a few of those cars had new bullets, fresh bullets, or "Indy" bullets. I freshened 17 SS motors in the months before Indy. I had 3 completely new bullets with the latest combustion chamber tech and pro stock cam designs that were put into top qualifiers the week before. Indy is the same to me as Christmas is to the retail business. Many of my customers have "Class" engines that aren't used but 2-4 times a year because in order to be fast they run on the ragged edge. Still I think that your comparison of Indy sheets is a good analogy. I also like you idea of -1.00 being a trigger and ALL passes should be counted.

Ending I still am unable to grasp the logic behind lowering indexes. As everyone knows: if I am a second under and another is 6 under by removing .2 from the index still has me having you covered by four tenths. Two tenths means nothing. yet. The questions still remains: How much abuse and BS will racers endure? Most of my contacts during an average day are SS racers/ parts and equipment manufacturers. I don't know but 2 that have ever posted on either forum and those were very brief. For anyone that would like to know. The talk is getting alot more serious in the past few months and it isn't anything like alot of the opionions mentioned in most of these topics. There apparantly aren't nearly as many racers that are just tickled to death about alot of recent changes. And racers, like any other consumer talk with their money.

[Mike Keener]

SS Engine Guy,

You probably have identified yourself before on this forum but for those of us who may have missed it (like me for example) would you mind telling us once again who you are?

Anybody who refreshed 17 SS motors before Indy is someone I surely want to know.

Thanks,

Mike Keener
Team Checkmate Race Cars

[Stewart Way]

SS engine guy
Not sure who told you one off intakes were not legal but as far back as 1971 the rule book stated "any intake" of same basic config that will fit under the hood was legal. In 71 they limited the intake to 1" diff in lenght, width and height. In 1972 the 1" limit was removed. I think it was 1994 they added additional wording to keep the crossram crossed and inline inline.
Also don't remember anything about journal diameters being limited to stock unless that is thought to be lightening the crank but then so would -.010 or -.030. Usually when they find someone doing something they don't like they publish a rule change like they did for valve sizes. +.005, -.015. Never saw that for the main journals. Could have missed something on this one though.

On another note, when you have a Stock class car enter and win Super Stock at a national event, would seem like an index adjustment is in order.

[Mickey Whaley]

not tring to start anything but i know when the FI cars were with the carb cars it was no contest the fi cars were much faster, how fast can the FI cars go? The final at memphis the 2 bfia cars went into the 50's off the throttle? i was going 70's with my stuff will we be at a big disadvantage??? With our old carb cars??

[Woodro Josey]

Now Mickey, how fast did you go against Brenda Grubbs in Bradenton? Besides, i have said this before we have been hit with 61 Horsepower since the first outing of the LT1!

[Mickey Whaley]

Originally Posted by Woodro Josey

Now Mickey, how fast did you go against Brenda Grubbs in Bradenton? Besides, i have said this before we have been hit with 61 Horsepower since the first outing of the LT1!

2 tenths faster than i will ever go again, conditions were better than i have ever seen, my dragster has not run within 17 hundreths of what it did in bradenton this year yet? And it's not supposed to be affected by the air that much 582 profiler motor. At memphis i couldnt get in the fifty's no matter what! Maybe a 62

[Real Racer]

Originally Posted by Woodro Josey

Now Mickey, how fast did you go against Brenda Grubbs in Bradenton? Besides, i have said this before we have been hit with 61 Horsepower since the first outing of the LT1!

And how long did it stay at 275 HP before the first hit? How many years Mr. Josey?
LT-1 was the most protected GM engine next to the early 327-250 which has never been adjusted.
Both are still way light in SS and there is no denying it.

[SS Engine Guy]

[QUOTE=Stewart Way
On another note, when you have a Stock class car enter and win Super Stock at a national event, would seem like an index adjustment is in order.[/QUOTE]

Good point but is it the index that needs fixing or the HP factor on the engine?

Anything other than the normal balance job was considered lightening same as cross breeding of parts ie: small journal crank in a large journal engine. Bearings that would be size that could be purchased at your favorite parts house or listed in price list. New ruling clarifies this.

As I said, no comment on the intake as there is still lack of communication between what will pass and who will pass. I have no opinion on this either way.
The problem lies in who is determining what is "same configuration" as original. example: a sbc with something close to a symetrical intake port spacing. Does "same configuration" mean that it retains stock intake port spacing and is able to adapt a QJet intake on it or does "same configuration" mean that it can be bolted onto a sbc in some form or another? Like has been said many times, just because the rulebook doesn't say you can't do it. That doesn't mean that you can. When divisional tech is constantly overruled by Cali. who do you go to when you need a clarification?

In the mean time, What benifit is there in taking -.2 off the indexes? And while we are at it, anybody know why good tech guys are being lost?

[Mickey Whaley]

engine talk engine work im a dummy, but i know what my motor will run and what others will, i just think were a little behind, not complaining but just don't won't to bring a knife to a gun fight! would like it to be close if they put us in the same classes.

[Jim Cimarolli]

I think there will be a few of the older cars that will be competitive with the new stuff, but overall the advantage will shift to the newer technology IMO.