Once again a bogus combination - Page 7

SSDiv6 · 04-16-2010, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueOval Ralph

Ford Racing catalog are tested under SAE conditions --- This a dumb statement all engines are tested to SAE spec weither it is SAE J607 ( 29.92 & 60 degress carb air) or SAE J1349 (29.234 & 77 carb air) correction

Dumb? The SAE spec does not only establishes the criteria, but also the conditions.

Ken Miele · 04-16-2010, 10:44 AM

Jack,

You mean class or the eliminator? Besides, the doom and gloom guys tell us stock is done, its to expensive to race and no new blood is coming into stock.

If this is right, why worry about a few combos that are fast out of the thousands of combos that are racing right now. I would like to know if the CJ's and DP's are going to drive everyone out or are they to expensive to really make an impact. which is it?.

What new combo's have made your car non competitive?

Jack, I am saying this with all do respect, but are your telling me the CJ's and the DP's will ruin stock for all time?

Wow, I better not miss any races in the next few years.

Jim Wahl · 04-16-2010, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Miele

Jack,

You mean class or the eliminator? Besides, the doom and gloom guys tell us stock is done, its to expensive to race and no new blood is coming into stock.

If this is right, why worry about a few combos that are fast out of the thousands of combos that are racing right now. I would like to know if the CJ's and DP's are going to drive everyone out or are they to expensive to really make an impact. which is it?.

What new combo's have made your car non competitive?

Jack, I am saying this with all do respect, but are your telling me the CJ's and the DP's will ruin stock for all time?

Wow, I better not miss any races in the next few years.

Ken, I will answer your question, Jeff's Challenger has made my car non-competitive! It currently runs -.75 faster than mine ever has! By his own admission there is plenty more in it. I do not begrudge him taking advantage of the situation, I am pissed that NHRA has allowed this to happen. Jim

Rory McNeil · 04-16-2010, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Roberts

Bogus is bogus, no matter the level. Greg, you skirted my question. Why are you not grandstanding against bogus GM cars? These are cratemotor cars.

98s are different from 97s because in 98 GM used a different enigne and diffrent body work.

Alan, I would like to see one in the real world. Please post a picture of a street F-body ('98) with a factory LT1 or scan and show us where it was available in GM literature.

Greg what rule did NHRAchange?

And if you could show either a picture or a GM part number for the Camaro manual rack & pinion, that looks amazingly similar to a Ford Pinto rack

, that would be nice as well.

Paul Ceasrine · 04-16-2010, 12:00 PM

Hey Plymouth Savoy-Brown,
Get into the act. Remember when they wouldn't let you run a
dual-carbed set-up on the 62' Plymouth (383/343HP). So you couldn't run the same combination as the 62' Dodge's. What was that 40+ years ago. They protested you, as soon as you beat the Chevy's.
'The more things change, the more they stay the same'
Who would've thought that they would know the difference between a
62' Plymouth and 62' Dodge. Both not pretty.
Wing-Nut called them the "Phyllis Diller's".
Paul

Greg Hill · 04-16-2010, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack McCarthy

cmon GREG youre avoiding my question... can we race your new ford mini explorer ???

and by the way greg is right, but hell ive been bitching about rampant rule revisions and the AHFS that cannot work for 5 years and no one listens...

and yeah there has been "seas of change" in the past but damn this is a tidal wave that will wipe out all previous stockers in just 5 years... yeah we can still race them kenny, we just wont be allowed to win...

captain jack

Jack, all we've got to do is get the Flex in the guide and we're set. Andrew's mentioned this two or three times already. I'll get the Country Dog to find us a water car and with one of these crate motors it should be killer in GT. The first Ford Flex in Super Stock. Yea that's right for all you Ford apologists I own a new Ford Flex. This whole deal is not about brand it's about NHRA properly factoring these cars. If GM had a new Camaro with the fast burn crate motor rated at 275 I would be just as pissed.

Stewart Way · 04-16-2010, 01:27 PM

Greg
The rule for the "Special run must include a minimum run of 50 units of an already accepted body style, need not be showroom available." has been in the rulebook since 1998, not 2007 or 2008. This was not done for the DP and CJ as I think you stated. Could have been for the LS1 LT1 deal. Maybe Firehawks or some Hamburger special, but not the DP or CJ.

Clay Arnett · 04-16-2010, 04:25 PM

People keep wanting to compare back to the LT1 and LS1 cars. I also see someone thew the pinto rack into the mix and the mysterious 98 LT1. I agree the 98 LT1 never existed and the rack isn't right either but we're going straight and steering means nothing. To me the biggest difference is that you could go to any GM dealer and buy the same car off the lot and drive it home that was being raced. You can't do the same with these cars. Also the LT1 and LS1 cars were 50hp underrated I will agree. These cars are way more than 50hp underrated. The comparison of LT1/LS1 to DP/CJ is apples and oranges at this point. I don't hate the cars I actually like them but how anyone can see that this is right is beyond me.

Dean Roberts · 04-16-2010, 04:50 PM

Clay, we are not wanting to compare, we are comparing because it is just as blatant as the current cars everyone is crying about. But those crying about teh Cj and DP cars won't admit it. Any manufacturer will get away with whatever it can and it is the sanctioning bodies job to keep it all fair. It doesn't matter what the form of racing is, and it's found in all auto racing.

How could go to the dealer and buy a car that didn't exist? Which is the case with the '98 F-body with an LT1. Also, crossbreeding parts is illegal, yet the Pinto rack is legal in a GM car. How do you explain NHRA allowing that? It is a performance advantage because a Pinto rack is lighter than the stock GM setup and removing nose weight is worth a ton in a Stocker. We all want to know why the3 GM racers aren't screaming on the Internet for over a year about that?

04-16-2010, 04:54 PM

Greg, I completely understand where you are coming from...I think/know you are a really good driver and have been for awhile. I read the BS on here from other who get a lot from there daddy's and think it's totally wrong for them to even suggest otherwise. That being said, I will get to the subject of this post. A long time ago I started dreaming of the day when I could call myself a nhra class racer because itKs a fantastic community and I really enjoy the experience every time I get to participate with my father "Mike Fuller". Let me digress once again to the subject...

In my opinion NHRA HAS FAILED...They repeat their failure at luring people because they switch rules so often. Not only do they switch rules but, they do not enforce rules...Hence $5000 DOLLAR MANIFOLDS AND HEADS....

Lets be rational because stock eliminator is not! Without getting into the nitty gritty details I propose a community intervention. What would that be your job is to ask?

That intervention is abide by those rules....

The example and remedy is to quit or to pay the money to have these cj' and dp's torn down everywhere they go in my opinion.

I don't think its practical but' they need to be discriminated with NHRA'S ASSESTS AND TIME! There is glory and consequences..... I know the differnce...

I might not make sense on this forum to most but, i will impose the question....are you ready to fight the fight?

ANYWHO...I will make this sugestion one time only...discriminate! Because NHRA HAS DONE SO WITH YOU!

ANY COMMENTS OR HATE MAIL IS APPRECIATED....In honor of Dave Young...

04-16-2010, 10:44 AM	#62
Ken Miele Live Reporter Join Date: Dec 2000 Posts: 4,862 Likes: 461 Liked 16,562 Times in 1,523 Posts	Re: Once again a bogus combination Jack, You mean class or the eliminator? Besides, the doom and gloom guys tell us stock is done, its to expensive to race and no new blood is coming into stock. If this is right, why worry about a few combos that are fast out of the thousands of combos that are racing right now. I would like to know if the CJ's and DP's are going to drive everyone out or are they to expensive to really make an impact. which is it?. What new combo's have made your car non competitive? Jack, I am saying this with all do respect, but are your telling me the CJ's and the DP's will ruin stock for all time? Wow, I better not miss any races in the next few years.

04-16-2010, 12:00 PM	#65
Paul Ceasrine VIP Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 2,546 Likes: 0 Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts	Re: Once again a bogus combination Hey Plymouth Savoy-Brown, Get into the act. Remember when they wouldn't let you run a dual-carbed set-up on the 62' Plymouth (383/343HP). So you couldn't run the same combination as the 62' Dodge's. What was that 40+ years ago. They protested you, as soon as you beat the Chevy's. 'The more things change, the more they stay the same' Who would've thought that they would know the difference between a 62' Plymouth and 62' Dodge. Both not pretty. Wing-Nut called them the "Phyllis Diller's". Paul

04-16-2010, 01:27 PM	#67
Stewart Way Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Atlanta Posts: 476 Likes: 20 Liked 70 Times in 22 Posts	Re: Once again a bogus combination Greg The rule for the "Special run must include a minimum run of 50 units of an already accepted body style, need not be showroom available." has been in the rulebook since 1998, not 2007 or 2008. This was not done for the DP and CJ as I think you stated. Could have been for the LS1 LT1 deal. Maybe Firehawks or some Hamburger special, but not the DP or CJ.

04-16-2010, 04:25 PM	#68
Clay Arnett Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Hartsville, IN Posts: 128 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Once again a bogus combination People keep wanting to compare back to the LT1 and LS1 cars. I also see someone thew the pinto rack into the mix and the mysterious 98 LT1. I agree the 98 LT1 never existed and the rack isn't right either but we're going straight and steering means nothing. To me the biggest difference is that you could go to any GM dealer and buy the same car off the lot and drive it home that was being raced. You can't do the same with these cars. Also the LT1 and LS1 cars were 50hp underrated I will agree. These cars are way more than 50hp underrated. The comparison of LT1/LS1 to DP/CJ is apples and oranges at this point. I don't hate the cars I actually like them but how anyone can see that this is right is beyond me.

04-16-2010, 04:50 PM	#69
Dean Roberts Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 87 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Once again a bogus combination Clay, we are not wanting to compare, we are comparing because it is just as blatant as the current cars everyone is crying about. But those crying about teh Cj and DP cars won't admit it. Any manufacturer will get away with whatever it can and it is the sanctioning bodies job to keep it all fair. It doesn't matter what the form of racing is, and it's found in all auto racing. How could go to the dealer and buy a car that didn't exist? Which is the case with the '98 F-body with an LT1. Also, crossbreeding parts is illegal, yet the Pinto rack is legal in a GM car. How do you explain NHRA allowing that? It is a performance advantage because a Pinto rack is lighter than the stock GM setup and removing nose weight is worth a ton in a Stocker. We all want to know why the3 GM racers aren't screaming on the Internet for over a year about that? Last edited by Dean Roberts; 04-16-2010 at 04:54 PM.

04-16-2010, 04:54 PM	#70
Jason Fuller Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Once again a bogus combination Greg, I completely understand where you are coming from...I think/know you are a really good driver and have been for awhile. I read the BS on here from other who get a lot from there daddy's and think it's totally wrong for them to even suggest otherwise. That being said, I will get to the subject of this post. A long time ago I started dreaming of the day when I could call myself a nhra class racer because itKs a fantastic community and I really enjoy the experience every time I get to participate with my father "Mike Fuller". Let me digress once again to the subject... In my opinion NHRA HAS FAILED...They repeat their failure at luring people because they switch rules so often. Not only do they switch rules but, they do not enforce rules...Hence $5000 DOLLAR MANIFOLDS AND HEADS.... Lets be rational because stock eliminator is not! Without getting into the nitty gritty details I propose a community intervention. What would that be your job is to ask? That intervention is abide by those rules.... The example and remedy is to quit or to pay the money to have these cj' and dp's torn down everywhere they go in my opinion. I don't think its practical but' they need to be discriminated with NHRA'S ASSESTS AND TIME! There is glory and consequences..... I know the differnce... I might not make sense on this forum to most but, i will impose the question....are you ready to fight the fight? ANYWHO...I will make this sugestion one time only...discriminate! Because NHRA HAS DONE SO WITH YOU! ANY COMMENTS OR HATE MAIL IS APPRECIATED....In honor of Dave Young...