Once again a bogus combination

[Bruce Noland]

Jeff,
After many months of work, we just completed our first stage of the paper work that may help put an end to this nonsense. Undoubtedly there will be more for us to do in the future. But, for now this problem rests in the hands of folks who are pretty good at cutting through murky issues.

Will post more on this issue in the coming months.

I trust your finger has fully recovered. Good luck with your crate motor car.

[Mark Callanan]

Originally Posted by Jeff Teuton

And while we are doing this, lets get the facts right. I hired Joe Friday, famous Dragnet detective to get 'just the facts': I ran a best at No Problem at the Cajuns of 11.01 in H/SA. I ran a best of 10.47 in SS/KA in Houston, qualified in the bottom of the field. I beat Vern Bucannon (probably mispelled, sorry Vern) from Arkansas by .004 in class at No Problem. The rest is testing, time trails, and other assorted BS that seems to overrun this forum at times from speculation, enuendo, and who knows what else. Just the facts. Anybody got any other facts, or speculations? And if you don't remember Joe Friday and Dragnet, you probably are too young to throw rocks at me anyway. Personally I'm glad for the factory involvement. GM won't be long before they are in the mess. Or maybe we should get NHRA to do like NASCAR and we all have one car, and one motor, and change stickers from race to race. Do you like Heads Up racing? Every Round? Every Race? Stock and Super Stock would shrink 75% overnight. Bruce, that what you want? No, then what do you want? And if 50 words or less. Greg, you get 50 words also. And anybody else gets 50 words. But not the same 50 words. I ran over 50, sorry. Greg, by the way, loaded the boat with Redfish this weekend, and had a couple beverages along the way.

Jeff
Spoken like a true car salesman
You went 10.50 I don't care if it was testing or not
It shows what that car can go
And as many have said that makes them want to quit
I have 15 k in my engine alone and over 50k in the car and I cant run within 7 of that
The car doesn't belong where you ran it and I will say what only one other person has said It is up to you since NHRA wont, you need to decide how and what you did to pervert and change the rules to slide that car in
Jeff you are a very long time racer doesn't it bother you what other racers feel about you?
Was it worth what you did to cause doubt in your fellow racers?

Spoken by someone who put way to much money in what I do to accept what is an unfair advantage by someone on the advisory committee
Jeff I am sure this will fire you up but please think on it before you post
What is your worth as a long standing class racer?

[Mark Callanan]

Originally Posted by Jim Wahl

Evan, thanks for your honest answer. 10.13? Yup, I believe that car is capable of that. OK, with that said, I have to admit I embellished a little. My best at H/SA weight has been 11.12 @ 118 in a mineshaft. Jeff ran 10.50 @ 127 in testing at the Cajuns. Thats only -.62 and 9mph better than my best. Jeff says he "only" ran 11.01 in H/SA class, but he forgot to say was he only ran 101 mph. I am willing to bet the farm when he was testing the day before the class race he was at legal weight, and he never denied that. At Houston,the car ran -.078 under (10.47) in SS/KA. In December that would have been -1.07 in SS/KA with a "Stocker" motor! 275 HP my ***! The point being NHRA needs to be realistic, or is there an ulterior motive here?

As I said before, I do not begrudge anyone for taking advantage of these highly underrated combos. If I had the money I might be tempted myself. What does tick me off is NHRA not even making an attempt to rate these cars fairly. Jim

Jim
With all due respect I do hold it against the racer
Since NHRA wont police the class we as racers have to, and be honest as to how we race
And in this case he (jeff )wasn't
And thats why he is playing games he knows what he did
And it isn't working as racers a lot smarter then me are calling him out on it

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Dean Roberts

Alan (aka spinmaster), you obviously don't read or comprehend very well. My point about the LT-1 has NOTHING to do with certification or performance! I know it is a legit engine, if used in a 1993-97 F-body (or Caprice w/steel heads). I don't care if the LT-1 IS a certified engine, it wasn't used in 1998 F-bodies, period. That is a fact that cannot be spun or argued.

Why was this engine allowed? I will tell you: It has everything to do with the fact that when GM needed to, they submitted bogus facts to NHRA to get a combination in the guide. That is my point, it is PURE fact. If Ford or Dodge does the same thing to get a combination in the guide, how is that any different?

I understand that in the end the performance doesn't change on an LT-1 car if you change the bodywork, but still, GM was the first to get a crate-motor car approved.

It's the same friggin' thing either way, you want to say it is not because of the level of performance, but that's not how it works.

Already reduced to childish and petty name calling. Not surprising at all given you have no basis for argument.

You can type "precedent" all you want. But you should understand how precedent actually works before you try to use that for a basis to argue from. Precedent requires very similar facts and circumstances. What you claim as precedent, is not.

Your first example you claim as precedent (the 98 LT-1 F body) involves a car and an engine that are both already in the guide AND already certified for street use, but never sold together. NHRA would call that a "GT" combination, the precedent being the "GT" classes in Super Stock, where a certified car, and a certified engine may be joined in the rules even if they were not sold as a unit, and it will fit into a "GT" class as opposed to a traditional class. An example would be a 454 LS-6 in a 1980 Malibu.

That, however is NOT precedent for a car AND an engine that were not ever certified for street use, nor were they previously in the guide. The closest precedent for that would have nothing to do with NHRA.

Previously, the ONLY sanctioning body to certify any engine never sold or certified as a production engine was IHRA, those are called "crate motors". But even then, they were required to be installed in a car that was sold and certified for street use. The Drag Pack cars are not production vehicles, and are not sold or certified for street use. So they don't even meet the standard for crate motor classes. At least the Ford crate motors installed in Mustangs that are in the guide as production cars meet the crate motor class standard.

The problem with that for your repeated claims of "precedent" is that NHRA doesn't HAVE crate motor classes. And they never have had them. NHRA accepted what amounted to a "GT" combination with the 98 LT-1 F body. But until now, they've never accepted a crate motor, ever. So, despite your baseless claims to the contrary, no precedent exists, and the only person "spinning" anything here is you.

Good luck with the name calling, and the failure to produce any facts to back up your argument. The two tactics fit well together.

[Dean Roberts]

Alan, sorry for the name calling, however, you are not making sense. Relax, take a breath and learn the facts.

Fact Number 1: GM did not build a 1998 F-body with an LT-1.
Fact Number 2: GM obviously submitted paperwork saying it did build such car.

So, if what you are saying is correct, this is OK, because the engine was already in the guide and the car in question is similar to the prior years car? That is a joke and would set precedent for allowing any engine in the guide to be used in a similar body car with the same name? you are right on one account, we have a place for this and it is called Super Stock GT.



Why not just allow an LS-1 in any year Camaro? The engine is in the guide and it came in a Camaro. Is that cool?

[Floyd Gomez]

No matter how much you beat a dead horse, in the morning he is still dead. The 98 Firebird should not have been allowed with the LT-1. Correct ( and I am a GM fan) The Cj's and DP's are grossly underated and build up is questionable at best. Correct. Will this change the fact that all of the above mentioned cars are acceptable by NHRA in stock? Nope! Racers and engine builders have found many secrets for many years to make their combo faster, have combo's in cars that they never came with and have guarded those secrets like it was an issue of national security. Does it suck that somebody is faster? Sure but somebody will always be faster. As far as a CJ or DP owner taking responsibility to own up to problems with the car he just paid 100K to build, that would sound just as crazy if you took 100K out of your pocket and threw it out of the window going 70mph on the interstate. There is no way that a person would go to NHRA and say " Hey I love my new car but it really isn't legal for competition so I think you should throw it out". The fact is the people that could afford the new cars did. Those of us that couldn't didn't. Just like when people could afford the new FI cars. Just my .02 worth

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Dean Roberts

Alan, sorry for the name calling, however, you are not making sense. Relax, take a breath and learn the facts.

Fact Number 1: GM did not build a 1998 F-body with an LT-1.
Fact Number 2: GM obviously submitted paperwork saying it did build such car.

So, if what you are saying is correct, this is OK, because the engine was already in the guide and the car in question is similar to the prior years car? That is a joke and would set precedent for allowing any engine in the guide to be used in a similar body car with the same name? you are right on one account, we have a place for this and it is called Super Stock GT.



Why not just allow an LS-1 in any year Camaro? The engine is in the guide and it came in a Camaro. Is that cool?

Other than laughing hysterically at your twisted logic, I'm perfectly relaxed. I never said the 98 LT-1 should or should not be in the guide. That was 12 years ago and not even remotely relevant to the current situation.

I'll keep this incredibly simple.

98 GM F-body = certified for production and street use by GM and the Feds.

97 GM LT-1 = certified for production and street use by GM and the Feds.

Drag Pack Challenger = NOT certified for production or street use by Mopar or the Feds, and sold incomplete.

Drag Pack Challenger "crate" engines = NOT certified for production or street use by Mopar or the Feds.

Ford Mustang = certified for production and street use by Ford and the Feds.

Ford Mustang "crate" engines = NOT certified for production and street use by Ford or the Feds.

As such, the 97 LT-1 in the 98 F body could be seen as precedent for a "Stock Eliminator GT" class, as it combines to certified pieces for racing that were not combined for sale for street use. However, it does not even remotely set any sort of precedent for any sort of "crate motor" cars to be accepted.

[Mark Callanan]

Originally Posted by Floyd Gomez

No matter how much you beat a dead horse, in the morning he is still dead. The 98 Firebird should not have been allowed with the LT-1. Correct ( and I am a GM fan) The Cj's and DP's are grossly underated and build up is questionable at best. Correct. Will this change the fact that all of the above mentioned cars are acceptable by NHRA in stock? Nope! Racers and engine builders have found many secrets for many years to make their combo faster, have combo's in cars that they never came with and have guarded those secrets like it was an issue of national security. Does it suck that somebody is faster? Sure but somebody will always be faster. As far as a CJ or DP owner taking responsibility to own up to problems with the car he just paid 100K to build, that would sound just as crazy if you took 100K out of your pocket and threw it out of the window going 70mph on the interstate. There is no way that a person would go to NHRA and say " Hey I love my new car but it really isn't legal for competition so I think you should throw it out". The fact is the people that could afford the new cars did. Those of us that couldn't didn't. Just like when people could afford the new FI cars. Just my .02 worth

Maybe the point is the car never should of been built knowing the rules had to be bent to get it in
And your right I am sure it costs 75-100k to build a paper car like that
Must be nice to have money and influence to get deals like this done...

[Jeff Teuton]

Mark, you really aren't going to like it when Jerry Hatch from you home state comes out with his DP. Some of your comments are a little close, but I am a true car salesman, and have been for 42 years and the 325 people I employ like me being a true car salesman. You really don't know me very well, but that's ok. I'm a big boy and can take the heat. I have been squabbling with people over combo's for years, and plan on doing some more. And you might check around. Over the many years I have probably tried to help the Sportsman and especially Stock and Super Stock as much as anyone. If you feel your can cannot compete, the do as I did, get another combo. Maybe you can check with Bob Lang, your division directory as to my involvement with the SRAC. If you don't like it, get me unelected. That's the American way. It's sorta thankless anyway. As to the 'perversion' of the rules, I didn't do anything at all. Mopar asked and got approval from NHRA to make 100 special Drag Pak cars, with 3 engine combos that are outlined in the guide and approved before the first one was built. I own and race #16. As it turns out, Mopar will build an additional 50 DP cars. We also got 3 Hemi Cudas, which I guess they got 'perverted' in l968, which is the year I became a true car salesman.

[Floyd Gomez]

Originally Posted by mark callanan

Maybe the point is the car never should of been built knowing the rules had to be bent to get it in
And your right I am sure it costs 75-100k to build a paper car like that
Must be nice to have money and influence to get deals like this done...

Mark the plain fact is that the car WAS allowed by NHRA and that decision was between them and Mopar. Just like the CJ was between them and Ford and the FI Gm were between them and NHRA. I am a racer on a budget. I know I will never be as fast as the new cars but I will have fun no matter what car I line up next to. As far as bashing someone because they have money that is just wrong. I am sure all of these guys have worked just as hard or maybe harder than most to get where they are today. You cannot fault a person for doing well in their lives. They chose a career that suited them as I am sure you chose a career that suited you. I think Jeff has done a great job at making his business what it is today and he should be proud to be a CAR SALESMAN.