Roller Cams in Stock Eliminator?

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

Maybe so CB, but maybe for not such a good reason.

I have a friend who no longer posts here, who proposed $200 solid lifters for Stock, years ago. Not much interest there, at that time.
But, now we have $800 ceramic bottom lifters, $400 tool steel ones, all with only .015 thou travel, which are completely legal.
Plus now I'm told you need the ceramic ones to break in the tool steel ones..
Makes you wonder who thinks these rules up sometimes.

Look again. Tool Steels are $2000 plus. About time we reconsider since less than 30 percent of the stockers are now flat tappet motors.

Originally Posted by Terry Cain

Look again. Tool Steels are $2000 plus. About time we reconsider since less than 30 percent of the stockers are now flat tappet motors.

Where did you come up with the 30% of cars use flat tappet cams in stock now? That number seems low.
I have an idea, why don’t we just lobby NHRA to do away with stock and put everybody into super stock? Raise the indexes or some of the slower cars can still dial in for races. That way everybody who wants roller cam’s wins.

[john ancona]

Originally Posted by Todd Hoven

Where did you come up with the 30% of cars use flat tappet cams in stock now? That number seems low.
I have an idea, why don’t we just lobby NHRA to do away with stock and put everybody into super stock? Raise the indexes or some of the slower cars can still dial in for races. That way everybody who wants roller cam’s wins.

As you have repeatedly done in the past you speak as if you are the un-appointed
spokesman for the 1500 plus Stock Eliminator racers ,with your poor scenarios as to anything to be done about the challenges some face in Stock Eliminator ,always quick to jump on anything that is said on here to put down anything said when it comes to a much needed change from a flat tappet cam to a roller cam ,no one wins with a Attitude like yours

I just post my opinion. I don’t agree with the roller cam movement that you and Terry support. Next, I think the 30% number is low for competitors with flat tappet cams.
I just offered a suggestion to help you guys out, that’s all. I never claimed I represented 1500. Id agree with you two, but then all three of us would be wrong. Have a nice day

Originally Posted by john ancona

As you have repeatedly done in the past you speak as if you are the un-appointed
spokesman for the 1500 plus Stock Eliminator racers ,with your poor scenarios as to anything to be done about the challenges some face in Stock Eliminator ,always quick to jump on anything that is said on here to put down anything said when it comes to a much needed change from a flat tappet cam to a roller cam ,no one wins with a Attitude like yours

[john ancona]

Originally Posted by Todd Hoven

I just post my opinion. I don’t agree with the roller cam movement that you and Terry support. Next, I think the 30% number is low for competitors with flat tappet cams.
I just offered a suggestion to help you guys out, that’s all. I never claimed I represented 1500. Id agree with you two, but then all three of us would be wrong. Have a nice day

Suggestions are what is needed for sure ,I am not going to speak for Terry or any others,
I have said in the past on here the reasons as to why a change is needed , for my self I have been racing NHRA for 50 plus years now like many of my friends have, I still seem to be hearing the same story about flattened cams ,and ruined lifters form many
along with engines that have been ruined , so it's not just two of us supporting that something be done

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by john ancona

I still seem to be hearing the same story about flattened cams ,and ruined lifters form many
along with engines that have been ruined , so it's not just two of us supporting that something be done

Umm, roller lifters break too!

[1347]

This roller cam thing is like beating a dead horse.
There are plenty of racers that are having success with their solid cams. Using roller cams will not help the class at all. Call the cam company of your choice and tell them you want a roller lobe for your 450 lift application. I know someone with a foxbody that cam stock with a hydraulic roller and wanted to upgrade to a solid roller. He was told no lobes are available and it would be alot of money to design a lobe to use. By the time he was done, it was gonna be 3k to put one in the engine. I'm surprised some of you are gonna spend more time trying to lobby for a roller cam instead of just putting a solid cam in.

There will be 150 cars at Indy in stock, and there are more than 45 with solid cams. The 30% number is fake news!

[Bill Grubbs]

Originally Posted by john ancona

Suggestions are what is needed for sure ,I am not going to speak for Terry or any others,
I have said in the past on here the reasons as to why a change is needed , for my self I have been racing NHRA for 50 plus years now like many of my friends have, I still seem to be hearing the same story about flattened cams ,and ruined lifters form many
along with engines that have been ruined , so it's not just two of us supporting that something be done

Not calling you out, but John you don't speak for me either.
JMHO...Keep Stock...Stock!
While we cannot undo past changes... we do have the ability to stop future changes!
As far as lifters are concerned, we toasted a SS engine first rnd of qualifying at Denver. We had a lifter go bad and take out a camshaft. The full extent of the damage has yet to be determined. At best it is a lifter, a reground cam, and a pushrod. At worst...we shall see.

This was a $$$$ lifter. **** Happens. We have not had a stocker lifter go bad since 2007 (knock, knock, knock...knock on wood) and that was a Schubeck lifter which exploded on startup. We have now had two roller lifters go bad in the last 5 years. If your having lifter issues, then fix the issue...don't change the rules! We found our issue for the first SS failure...it was an issue put in place by a now closed engine builder in the Houston, Texas area. The current issue appears to me to be a bearing failure. we will determine whether it is a material failure, or if the failure was caused by some other issue within the engine. Either way, I have complete confidence any future failure will not be for the same reason.

I do not believe in the concept of "One person ****s their pants...everybody wears diapers!"

[1347]

We need Bubskis input on this rule change proposal!!!

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Bill Grubbs

I do not believe in the concept of "One person ****s their pants...everybody wears diapers!"

Bill! Why do you have to keep bringing that up! I TOLD you it was an accident!