HP off / HP on ??

[Larry Hill]

-1.20 under still applies

[Jack McCarthy]

That's three weeks in a row a ffflying ffford got hit on Tuesday ... well I assume Wednesday its a holiday week

Captain

[Bob Shaw]

Jack,
Congratulations for qualifying #2. That's a tough class you are in.

[Jim Cimarolli]

Jack, that run, 13.70, was really impressive!

[Billy Nees]

Cheez Jack, the poor baxtids that are running that 75/302 combo are at 140 HP now! That's the same rating as my 230 inch straight six with a monojet!

[Tom Moock]

Billy, 1975 Maverick fact. 122hp now 164hp. 1975 Mustang fact. 129hp. now 140hp. same motor. Maverick must be a slicker body? Kind like 2000 corvette Ls1 345hp and 382hp, 2000 Camaro & Firebird.Tom

[Mike Graham]

Originally Posted by Tom Moock

Billy, 1975 Maverick fact. 122hp now 164hp. 1975 Mustang fact. 129hp. now 140hp. same motor. Maverick must be a slicker body? Kind like 2000 corvette Ls1 345hp and 382hp, 2000 Camaro & Firebird.Tom

Tom, It is a little more complicated than that. The longer wheelbase and more rear overhang of the Maverick allow it to pitch rotate better than the Mustang. This allows the Maverick to plant the tires better all the way down the track. Keeping in mind that we are only allowed 9 inch tires this is an important advantage. The addition of wheelie bars on the Maverick controls some of this rotation.
As a side note.. The Mustang(like the Chevy wagon) has MUCH better brakes.
I hope this clears up some of the confusion.

[Dwight Southerland]

Originally Posted by Tom Moock

Billy, 1975 Maverick fact. 122hp now 164hp. 1975 Mustang fact. 129hp. now 140hp. same motor. Maverick must be a slicker body? Kind like 2000 corvette Ls1 345hp and 382hp, 2000 Camaro & Firebird.Tom

You just don't understand the whole situation. When you put engines in a Mustang, it becomes a whole different engine and must be considered separately. The '75 302/129hp engine in a Monarch or a Granada is 164, but 140 in a Mustang. The '76 302/133hp engine in a Monarch, Granada, Maverick or Comet is 138, but in a Mustang it's 133. See?!?

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Tom Moock

Billy, 1975 Maverick fact. 122hp now 164hp. 1975 Mustang fact. 129hp. now 140hp. same motor. Maverick must be a slicker body? Kind like 2000 corvette Ls1 345hp and 382hp, 2000 Camaro & Firebird.Tom

Tom, Jack knew what combo I meant. What Jack meant in the original post was that a request was sent in for a certain 302/2V combo, I believe that the original request was for a Fairmont. Instead of just granting the request for the Fairmont 302/2V, NHRA gave the entire 302/2V family not just a 1-2-3% reduction, they gave the entire family back it's original NET rating.
The funny thing about this is that probably a dozen or so cars are being built or have been built and I think that it's great!
Now NHRA just has to do the same EXACT thing to a bunch of other obsolete combos!