|
![]() |
#81 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California, Ky
Posts: 669
Likes: 61
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#82 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,123
Likes: 1,580
Liked 1,861 Times in 420 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
I'll address your points below. Just because they have cars in our class that do not belong, it doesn't mean we need to make it worse. Doesn't matter what year it is, either, that's no excuse to keep screwing up the class. I can do things with a roller rocker that cannot be done with a factory rocker. Especially with the advent of CNC machining being common. You can build the rocker to give the correct lift at peak lift and still do all sorts of things to the lift curve. I'm not going to go into that with anyone, I'll just say you should take a look at the old Crane "quick lift" rockers, or what ever they used to call them. There are other things that can be done, I won't let those secrets out either. Let's just say I had a long talk this week with three guys who know way more than I do, and all three agreed. They've got about 120 years experience going fast and setting records between them. Sure it will, we'll have stockers turning as much or more RPM that Super Stock cars turned 20 years ago. But stockers are limited to heavy pistons and rods, and factory cranks, Super Stock is not.. Sounds like a good recipe for disaster to me. Some engines that can't stand the RPM may fall behind. Stock is not allowed to have radiators that are not original size for the body, nor to have radiators that are not made of the original material. You can't put an aluminum radiator in a 69 Camaro for example. Stock is not allowed to have through the firewall roll cage bars. Stock currently requires original seats, I'm not sure it's a great idea given we're approaching 135 MPH with traditional combinations in fast classes. Stock has an open valve job rule I already mentioned, not a good idea, but not a reason to add to the escalation. Stock is not allowed to modify the rear frame other than connecting the roll cage. The solution to breaking parts is not to keep asking for more aftermarket parts. The solution is to find out how to stop breaking that part. Every combination has limits, when you reach the limits, that's it, either change combinations, or switch to Super Stock. Otherwise, Stock Eliminator will BE Super Stock before long.
__________________
Alan Roehrich 212A G/S Last edited by Alan Roehrich; 11-05-2011 at 11:18 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#83 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Anthem, Arizona
Posts: 2,766
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
Then NHRA needs to have the roller rocker defined with NHRA approved parts. Just like they have now. No custom made rockers. And the rockers need to be approved parts that have not been modified. Just like NHRA approved pistons. And rockers are easy to tech. Easier than pistons.
Look, anybody that is hell bent on finding that extra .001 to .01 is going to find it. Legally or not. That same guy that is the fastest in his class with stock rockers is most likely going to be the fastest in the class with roller rockers. I'm just encouraging something that will make it less costly & less maintenance for the rest. And if one is happy with their OEM rockers, keep them.
__________________
Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#84 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Beavercreek Or.
Posts: 272
Likes: 31
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#85 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,123
Likes: 1,580
Liked 1,861 Times in 420 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
With CNC equipment as common as it now is, it is not even expensive to make the cheated up rockers. The rest of the parts are commonly available. What do you think the chances of NHRA making or buying checking fixtures for 2 dozen different rocker arms and taking them to every event is? Or the idea that they're going to procure 7 copies of each approved part and haul them around to every race? The idea that "you can keep your stock style rocker if you want to" doesn't hold a drop of water, not if you want to remain competitive. If the roller rocker raises the operating range of your competition, you have to run that RPM just like he does if you don't want to get beat. People going fast are not just going to bolt on a set of roller rocker arms and call it a day. This is not "one part, that solves breakage for some people". Rocker arms are one part of a complete valvetrain package. Change rocker arms, and you change camshafts and other parts to go along with the rockers, unless you want to get left behind. The fast guys will completely reevaluate their cams, springs, valve job, valves, and pushrods, in order to take advantage of the change. So instead of changing a set of rockers at the cost of $300 or so, you're now looking at a new cam, $200 and up, a new valve job that may cost you $1000, new valves that could cost $500, and new springs for $300. Your new roller rockers just went from $300 to at least $2300 if you want to stay competitive. Yes, roller rocker arms are going to save you money. So long as you just change rocker arms, and you don't care about making the rest of the valvetrain work with them to remain competitive.
__________________
Alan Roehrich 212A G/S |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#86 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California, Ky
Posts: 669
Likes: 61
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#87 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California, Ky
Posts: 669
Likes: 61
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California, Ky
Posts: 669
Likes: 61
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]()
After I read my post I see that even tho this will not be the intent. This is what you are talking about as far as opening things up for more cheating. A faster ratio rocker will get to max lift faster which is like adding more duration, maybe? Which is why you would also be changing springs with the cam. But I still have not figured out why you would change valves and valve jobs
![]() ![]()
__________________
Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#89 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,123
Likes: 1,580
Liked 1,861 Times in 420 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Policing rocker arms will become an issue as soon as you allow aftermarket roller rocker arms in the class. The question will be whether or not NHRA bothers to address the issue fully and completely. For the answer to that, look at how limited tech inspection has become at the vast majority of NHRA events. I'm really not going to go in to who it was I talked to, nor the changes possible with roller rocker arms. I'll just say that it absolutely will drive the RPM range up, again, and they will create breakage that is not now happening, whether it will be valvetrain breakage or other failures due to higher RPM ranges depends on several factors, and the combination being considered. It also will certainly drive the cost to remain competitive much higher than a simple set of $300 roller rocker arms and possibly a new set of $100 rocker arm studs. Let's just make this plain and simple. A racer has reached the point where he is breaking rocker arms, and can no longer continue to increase the RPM range he runs and the valvespring pressure required to run there. So he's reached a limit. Give him roller rocker arms. Now, do you really think he's not going to go get a new set of valvesprings , turn another 1000 RPM, and start looking at what he needs to do in order to get more duration in his camshaft in order to turn even more RPM? Of course he's going to make all of those changes, if he wants to go fast and be competitive. A real racer will always push the limits. Replace the part that breaks, and he'll go find a way to break even more parts. The new replacement part will always create the need for new parts to go with it, and the opportunity to buy new parts to take advantage of the latest rule change. Every time you allow something like this, it creates the need to spend even more money for other parts to go with it, and further increases the operating range and parts breakage. Just look at what has happened to Super Stock. We're now running 9,000 RPM, with belt drives, shaft rockers, huge roller lifters, valve springs with 1000 pounds open pressure and 400 pounds seat pressure, titanium retainers, massive camshafts with as much as 0.900" lift at the valve, and all sorts of other parts that were seen only in Pro Stock and Competition Eliminator just 20 years ago. Most of that was brought on by allowing ported an polished heads, because NHRA did not want to be bothered with stopping them. Is that where we want to take Stock Eliminator?
__________________
Alan Roehrich 212A G/S |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#90 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California, Ky
Posts: 669
Likes: 61
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|