NHRA 2020 Rule Amendment SS Intakes???

[cbohannon]

This, in my opinion, is just another "stretch" of a rule. The question of right or wrong and our opinions of it probably matter very little at this point. The problem here is somewhat the same as it has always been...NHRA. If these heads went through tech and were approved 2 years ago then they are problably always going to be legal from here on out, just like pretty much every other rule that has been "stretched" over the years. Honda rod journals, modified combustion chambers, aftermarket cranks, gas ported pistons, blah, blah, blah...

A couple thoughts...

1. I commend Eric Jones for asking for permission before he started doing this modification. Wether it be for a mopar, ford, chevy...whatever. Its not the way things have been done in the past for the most part and I for 1 look at it as the respectable thing to do.

2. I have spoke with John Gulius on a few occations...dude is the Don Garlits of super stock motors for sure. He is an innovator no arguments on that. But I feel this is just the straw that broke the camels back or the excuse he needed to say I'm done. There is no way this is the only reason he quit...To my knowlege he's in his 70's, I'm sure he has his reasons.

For the record...

We have 2-L98 motors...one has some modifications done that become illegal based on this new ruling if it stands, the other is legal either way.

THE MOTOR THAT IS LEGAL IS FASTER!!!!!


That is all...I'll head back to the couch and wait for next season to get here!

[Jeff Niceswanger]

Originally Posted by cbohannon

This, in my opinion, is just another "stretch" of a rule. The question of right or wrong and our opinions of it probably matter very little at this point. The problem here is somewhat the same as it has always been...NHRA. If these heads went through tech and were approved 2 years ago then they are problably always going to be legal from here on out, just like pretty much every other rule that has been "stretched" over the years. Honda rod journals, modified combustion chambers, aftermarket cranks, gas ported pistons, blah, blah, blah...

A couple thoughts...

1. I commend Eric Jones for asking for permission before he started doing this modification. Wether it be for a mopar, ford, chevy...whatever. Its not the way things have been done in the past for the most part and I for 1 look at it as the respectable thing to do.

2. I have spoke with John Gulius on a few occations...dude is the Don Garlits of super stock motors for sure. He is an innovator no arguments on that. But I feel this is just the straw that broke the camels back or the excuse he needed to say I'm done. There is no way this is the only reason he quit...To my knowlege he's in his 70's, I'm sure he has his reasons.

For the record...

We have 2-L98 motors...one has some modifications done that become illegal based on this new ruling if it stands, the other is legal either way.

THE MOTOR THAT IS LEGAL IS FASTER!!!!!


That is all...I'll head back to the couch and wait for next season to get here!

John closed the shop because of the lingering implementation of the rules. His shop was empty from Indy till he closed.His customers was told not to build his stuff, because it "might" be illegal. Our engine had 200 runs on it but I kept dragging my feet awaiting the new rule package. Good thing I did. Bottom line, John built a engine that fit the current rules,had four or five different customers go through teardown and pass,only to have NHRA change the rules deeming those members illegal..
Don't bring his health into it, or his age. He's in better health than you and me put together. His hobby is hunting in mountains in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Iran, at peaks of 15 thousand feet that will make a common man wilt. A friend of ours was sharing a room with John while at the races. He had the crap scared out of him about four in the morning, only to turn on the light to see Gulius doing push ups in between the beds ! One thing for sure,his age or health didn't bankrupt him.....

[cbohannon]

Jeff, I appoligize if you took my post wrong...

I didnt even imply Johns health was bad, I only feel this can't be the only reason he decided to quit, especially considering the rule is probably never going to be implemented.

[Super Sport]

[QUOTE=cbohannon;603992]This, in my opinion, is just another "stretch" of a rule. The question of right or wrong and our opinions of it probably matter very little at this point. The problem here is somewhat the same as it has always been...NHRA. If these heads went through tech and were approved 2 years ago then they are problably always going to be legal from here on out, just like pretty much every other rule that has been "stretched" over the years. Honda rod journals, modified combustion chambers, aftermarket cranks, gas ported pistons, blah, blah, blah...[QUOTE]

Does anyone really think that the tech department just lets stuff slide right thru teardown or approves modifications that are clearly against what Stock and S/S stands for?

Like all businesses the tech department is probably governed by powers higher than themselves. Those higher powers more than likely have the final say on rule changes and what is deemed illegal or legal, even though the higher powers may know very little about the mechanical workings of racing engines, especially Stock and S/S.

[cbohannon]

I'm not knocking the tech guys at all, especially the guys that are there every weekend trying to make things fair and safe for all of us. But there is documentation from the nhra tech dept that approves these type modifications.

[Mike Pearson]

I don't remember anything in the rule book that says you cant run a spacer on the intake between the head and intake in Super stock but I don't see where they allow it either. Kind of a gray area. The new ruling clarifies that.

Sorry to hear that John Gulius has retired. He for sure was an innovator in the evolution of super stock engine building. His stuff was always fast.

[Bob Smith]

Originally Posted by Mike Pearson

I don't remember anything in the rule book that says you cant run a spacer on the intake between the head and intake in Super stock but I don't see where they allow it either. Kind of a gray area. The new ruling clarifies that.

I think that you are correct Mike in that engine builders and racers entered this gray area and grifted the true rule. People may hide it under the name of "innovation" but it really leans toward defrauding a rule, the NHRA and fellow competitors. Thank goodness they are working on expanding the written rules to help all racers.

Glad that NHRA and the expense has left some of us behind so that we can watch at the events and the internet without the effect on our pocket books.

Merry Christmas

[Bob Sherwood]

Why do we need to wait another year to have a decision on this issue?? The rule book states that you can cut the intake face of the head up to the valve cover bolt holes but does not state any limit to the angle of that cut. Now we have a problem. Although it does not say you can't do it, long standing Nhra policy is you have to get permission to do it first!!! So at some point did someone get permission to do it??? If so, there shouldn't be problem. If not ???

[Jeff Niceswanger]

Originally Posted by Bob Sherwood

Why do we need to wait another year to have a decision on this issue?? The rule book states that you can cut the intake face of the head up to the valve cover bolt holes but does not state any limit to the angle of that cut. Now we have a problem. Although it does not say you can't do it, long standing Nhra policy is you have to get permission to do it first!!! So at some point did someone get permission to do it??? If so, there shouldn't be problem. If not ???

Bob,

I'm only speaking of the engines I know of. So take that into consideration when I tell you this.. But five different customers of the now closed up Gulius camp have went right through teardown with the heads in question. These teardowns started in 2018 and finished up in Rockingham N.C this year. Pictures were taken, and multiple officials tried their best to find a reason in the rulebook to disqualify them. Problem is, they fit the current rules. In fact, they fit the rules that have been in place for decades. Last year they implemented new tightening of the rule(s), in that the original bolt holes bolting the intake manifold to the cylinder head had to be maintained. That stopped the aggressiveness of the milling, as any more cutting, and the bolt hole would have been non-existent. But it did not stop the complaining. I hope this helps clear things up.