What's wrong with Stock?

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by FS Fan

I'm a long time lurker on here and I've seen this pop up many times.

I see a number of questions that I don't think anyone is asking.

1. Without the package cars how could a late model car ever be competitive? An older engine combination can make big gains within the Stock rules, but a new engine is WAY more optimized for performance as delivered. A new street legal showroom engine combo can never hope to get 1.70 times the rated hp from the showroom to be near the top of a qualifying sheet.

2. If NHRA decided the new cars had to be factory street legal combos what if they put all the old cars out to pasture? Stock used to be only back to 1960 and I believe that came about in 1972. If they decided that Stock Eliminator was only back to 2002 would that be ok with your sense as to the spirit of the class? One could argue that when that rule was in place it was the heyday of Stock racing. I see many posts about how great those days where, and the cars they were racing were actually fairly new. I can't think of any other motorsport where you could win a "world" championship with 40 year old technology. I can go to a dealer and order a new GM DR head from the performance parts catalog, I cannot order a 369 big block anything. If the factory doesn't support it any longer should it be relevant?

Do you care if the factories are involved? Factories get involved when its marketable. I see a bunch of dealers sponsoring new cars, I don't see them sponsoring older cars so much. If the dealers don't care I wouldn't expect the factories to care. I don't see how racers can have it both ways asking for factory help and contingency money but not running what they actually sell. A window manufacturer wouldn't continue to help someone who bought windows 40 years ago.

4. Regarding the disparity in MPH between cars what if NHRA decided to put slow cars out rather than move fast cars to Super Stock? The new Dodge Hellcat went 10.80's on sticky tires with an IRS. As a solid axle stocker that could easily be a 9-second car (of course there is no weight break for it currently but we're talking theoretically). I bet a new Camaro V6 can run 13's in total street trim, maybe 11's as a Stocker. It is the National HOTROD Association, and if the slowest modern version of a hot rod can run 11's modified to race is that the new bar?

5. Is it important to bring new and/or young people into the sport? Is everyone ok with the same people racing the same cars for the foreseeable future? A 16 year old kid who might get bit by the racing bug has only seen LS based Chevies, Modular Fords, and Gen 3 Hemi's. These are the powerplants that are easily available in junkyards and have parts readily available. If the spirit of the class is to be able to build a fast, inexpensive car, with parts that you can get at a dealership then I think a new Mustang is about as cheap as you can get.

Interesting facts:.
2008 Indy qualifying (before the package cars) top ten average model year:1976, on average they were 32 years old! Almost all had carburetors despite the fact there hadn't been a carburated car sold new in the US since 1985 (23 years prior).

2008 qualfying for 1960 Kingswood
#49, U/SA John McCarthy Jr., Lyndon KY, '60 Kingswood 14.073, -1.077

2014 qualifying for 1960 Kingswood
#31 U/SA Roy Dean, Bloomville OH, '60 Kingswood 13.756, -1.094

I like the new cars but I see why there is angst about them. Nothing is perfect. To me it looks like years of not doing anything to keep the classes growing & relevant has resulted in big changes quickly which upsets the norm.

1. The same way any other production stocker becomes competitive. Someone builds it, flogs it, and makes it work. Oh, and they can get the HP factor reduced if it is not fast enough, too. It's been done that way for decades. You'd be amazed how much potential there is in those engines. And the cars. It has already been proposed to give them a break on the curb weight to allow for the modern "street equipment" that would be removed. The curb weight could be adjusted 300# down (more or less), to account for safety and emissions equipment that would be removed. It is not just the engine that makes a stocker.

2. It would be short sighted on the part of NHRA to make that move. And actually, yes, you can go to the dealer and order all sorts of parts for a 396 big block Chevy, including the heads, the intake, and other parts. Call it a 454 or 427, and you can buy a new block. GM will pay you contingency on the block or the heads for your big block Chevy, or double if you buy both.

3. Factory involvement is nice. It does not have to force everyone to obsolete a car that represents a long term investment in time and money. I have yet to hear anyone say they bought a new Challenger, Mustang, or Camaro because they saw a new factory race car. We did not ask for factory involvement, they decided they wanted to. And that is fine, we welcome them. Some of us have a problem with how they did it, not that they did it, there is a difference. Again, the factory cars would look a lot better to spectators, and to potential new street car buyers, if they were racing each other, most often heads up.

4. So, NHRA is going to be so short sighted as to kick all of the A/S and slower cars out of Stock Eliminator? Not seeing it. Why are we looking at a 13 second V6 Camaro? Why are you attempting to set the bar there? What about the V8 Mustang, Camaro, and Challengers? Did those production street cars suddenly cease to exist? Another problem here, that hasn't really cropped up yet, but will before long, is a 9" tire on a 3500 pound car with 900 horsepower.

5. What young person who is interested in Stock Eliminator has over $100K of disposable income to spend on a new factory car? His own money, not someone else's. Even if he does, the factories are proving that in 2-3 years, they'll make the old combination obsolete, by merely printing off a new engine on a sheet of paper. So, after he spends $100K plus to get started, will he have another $20K for the next combination, and even if he does, will he spend it? Your "16 year old kid" sure won't have the funds to pony up for a new factory car, and odds are, he won't when he is 24, either. The 24 year old might come up with enough to start with a 4-5 year old street car, and go from there. Further, suppose the "new kid" wants to build a newer car, but can't afford a new factory race car? What happens if he decides to build a newer V8 Mustang, Challenger, or Camaro? He runs into the new factory race cars, that's what. Boy, won't that encourage him!

Yes, Jack McCarthy found 0.32 seconds. In SIX YEARS, and you might ask him what he changed, and what he spent. More than one rule has changed since then as well.

The only problem with the new factory race cars is how they have been put in the class, and the special consideration they got. Easily solved by reverting Stock Eliminator back to what it was, a class for real production street cars, and putting factory race cars where they belong, in their own class. No one loses if you do that. Unless you count the fact that egregiously under factored new cars do not get to run roughshod over older cars with legitimate factors. If you feel the $100K plus price of a new factory race car entitles you to a half second plus advantage over older cars, I guess getting your new factory car put in a class where it races cars just like it, is a loss.

Oh, and if anyone wants to talk about Larry Hill's truck, or Gary Summers' Mustang II, (or any other obscure dime rocket) those are old production street vehicles that have been in the guide for decades, someone found the combination in the guide and built one. No one went and had a vehicle that never saw mass production or street use inserted in the guide for them.