What class is my 98 LT1 FBird?

[Jack Matyas]

Evan--I have to agree with you 100% on this one . As you know , I too was involved with a Firebird during the 97-98 season and was also sent the parts to transform my 97 Formula ILE Ram Air into a 98 Trans Am WS6 Ram Air car except when the car was completed at the bodyshop I was told by the factory that there was a shortage of LS1 engines and I would have to use the LT1 until they became available . I think under the circumstances the manufacturer did their best to keep new cars (98 Firebirds) on the track in front of the buying public until the "correct" engines became available .

Robert--You may want to hold on to your stocker as despite of all the claims made here I've never seen one piece of documentation that shows an LT1 car was ever built as a 1998 . You could possibly have a collectors item on your hands if any of these claims can be verified .

As for Mr. Hawks car--good for him !!!!!!! This car has been in the NHRA classification guide forever and he had big enough kahonas to go ahead --spend big money and go where no one else tried .

[Robert Pare Racing]

Sure thing Jack .

[Woodro Josey]

Jack for those that did not read my post a while back. There was some 98 Firebirds up at the proving ground with LT1 engines, i know, i was there and saw them with my own eyes, There was 6 of them testing because i tried to get one, and i had to build my own!

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Woodro Josey

Jack for those that did not read my post a while back. There was some 98 Firebirds up at the proving ground with LT1 engines, i know, i was there and saw them with my own eyes, There was 6 of them testing because i tried to get one, and i had to build my own!

Woodro is correct...there were always many strange prototype cars at the proving grounds. Many of these cars were available for sale to the public or given to racers after they got flogged to death. If you lived in Arizona and went to Firebird on Wednesday evenings, many times you could see prototype GM or Chrysler cars at the track getting flogged by engineers.

[Evan Smith]

Ed,

I've never seen an aluminum spool or gun-drilled axles with scalloped flanges from the factory either, but I bet most fast Stockers have them. So, it's OK to seriously lighten all the parts that spin, thus reducing rotating weight and improving performance, and it's OK to build your own housing with any axle tubes you want, or to whatever length you want (just look at some cars and you see what I'm talking about), get real?

Robert,

My post was not meant to discredit your car, only to point out the facts. I don't really care either way, I'm just tired of Hawk taking heat for his combbination when there are dozens of cars with stuff that wasn't even close to being available from the factory.

Woody,

I've been to the Ford proving grounds many times and seen wild combinations of cars and trucks, one being a Ford GT engine (550 HP V8) in an F-250, but that doesn't make it legal to run one in Stock. We also tested a '92 Camaro with all the '93 equipment. It was a Chevrolet prototype and we had it at our office for evaluation.

Evan

[Robert Pare Racing]

It's all cool man, I was speaking generally, as in, I'm not even a mechanically inclined kinda of racer. It really could have a Ford engine in it, and I might not know the difference. I'm just a bracket racer trying to figure out what class this thing is in, so I don't show up one day looking like an idiot.

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Evan Smith

Ed,

I've never seen an aluminum spool or gun-drilled axles with scalloped flanges from the factory either, but I bet most fast Stockers have them. So, it's OK to seriously lighten all the parts that spin, thus reducing rotating weight and improving performance, and it's OK to build your own housing with any axle tubes you want, or to whatever length you want (just look at some cars and you see what I'm talking about), get real?

Robert,

My post was not meant to discredit your car, only to point out the facts. I don't really care either way, I'm just tired of Hawk taking heat for his combbination when there are dozens of cars with stuff that wasn't even close to being available from the factory.

Woody,

I've been to the Ford proving grounds many times and seen wild combinations of cars and trucks, one being a Ford GT engine (550 HP V8) in an F-250, but that doesn't make it legal to run one in Stock. We also tested a '92 Camaro with all the '93 equipment. It was a Chevrolet prototype and we had it at our office for evaluation.

Evan

Evan, you are right in regards the rear end and people taking shots at Hawk. My opinion is that if the combination is in the books, NHRA has accepted the combination and deemed it legal. Contrary to the old days that you had to buy all the spec sheets, nowadays, everything is online.

In lieu of spending lots of time typing slander and slamming others on this forum, they should spend the time looking at the different combinations available like others do and taking advantage of what is available ... or ... writing to NHRA.

The problem is that there are many that want to race in the class, not spend the money or effort and go fast. Going fast requires being smart on the combination you pick, putting the hard work and effort, and spending $$$.

The reality is that there are so many combinations that have been flogged to death and if you want to race iwth these combinations, you need to spend the money. Example: 1968-1970 BBC Camaro and Novas, LT1 and LS1 Camaros and Firebirds, 1969-1971 Mopar 440-6, and many others.

That is why you have to give kudos to guys like Bob, Neil Smedley, Mark Yacavone and others that are great on picking overlooked car combinations, building them, going fast and getting other people's feathers ruffled up!!! ...and they still get bitched at too...

[Woodro Josey]

Evan, you know as well as i do, it's all about paper work! Bill Hawk proved that several years ago, and congrats to him!