New Indexs are up

[SS3718]

Ed, what about the easy heads up runs and class runoffs that your combination still enjoys? Is it okay for a 327 carb motor to run against your LT1 EFI car? If it's just a bracket race 95% of the time, please remind me why these changes were needed! In your response, please don't single out new car HP factors and conveniently over look the on-track performance of your combo!

And as you said, combine ALL sticks and autos and ALL of us lose the same amount of index and I'll be happy! However, I do feel automatic cars are at a disadvantage to stick cars from a performance stand point! Although, I'm just a driver so what do I know!

Nick

[Kevin Panzino]

Nick, can you say honestly, with a straight face and with self dignity, that your engine combination was factored fairly and accurately?

[SS3718]

Kevin, my combination has a favorable hp factor. I don't think I've ever made a statement to the contrary.

Now, can you say honestly, with a straight face and self dignity, that other non-new car combinations are factored fairly and accurately?

Nick

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by SS3718

Kevin, my combination has a favorable hp factor. I don't think I've ever made a statement to the contrary.

Now, can you say honestly, with a straight face and self dignity, that other non-new car combinations are factored fairly and accurately?

Nick

Nick, most popular, older cars have been factored to death. Why anybody today, would build a carbed 327" or 350" Camaro is beyond me. Besides EFI (everybody's first mention) look at the compression ratio and cylinder head flow. I have told this before, Bobby Warren told me recently he had his LT1 on his dyno. He uses a single plane intake with a bolt-on elbow. (I have a sheet metal Hogan manifold, so I can't test this) He decided to try it with a good Quadrajet he had sitting there. Bingo! picked up 25 hp! It ain't the EFI making them fast. The LT1 throttle body is so small, if I drive mine hard out the back door it is pulling close to 5" manifold vacuum at 8700. As Bobby said, we already have restrictor plates.
Given as many years as the older cars, this engine will get factored hard as well. I just had a discussion with a man that works with a well known engine builder that builds engines for one of the fastest SS/GT 360" DP cars around, and builds some of the fast Lt1s out there right now. Same builder, same dyno, he says 70 hp difference! Same flow bench, over 60 cfm difference in the cylinder head intake ports. One full point compression. 10.5-1 for the LT1, 11.5-1 for the DP. Until late last year, they were rated 4 hp lower than the LT1. Now, finally, a whopping 9 hp higher. A DP owner (like Jeff ) telling an LT1 owner they need more hp (as Jeff tells me all the time) is like me telling somebody else they need to lose weight. :-)

As for the stick car deal, do you know of stick cars you can not run with? Or, just thinking about "just in case one shows up"?

[Kevin Panzino]

Originally Posted by SS3718

Kevin, my combination has a favorable hp factor. I don't think I've ever made a statement to the contrary.

Now, can you say honestly, with a straight face and self dignity, that other non-new car combinations are factored fairly and accurately?

Nick

Nope, Nick, l'll have to say some combos are off by a few and can be considered not accurate.
I will however state, those differences are very minor compared to, say the ford 352 CJ and the Drag pack 360 and very few people were screaming over the minor discrepancies left in the 'old combos'. In fact the only one that comes to mind to me is the 235 HP 305, and even that is mere chump change compared to the rating atrocities of some of the new combinations.

Lets take the two of the new combos I am familiar with:
I believe your 352 has 11.25 compression, 2.08/1.6 valves, a throttle body with (4) 1.75" holes (thats 1,000 cfm for those who dont realize it) and its rated a whopping 285 HP.

The drag pak is similar at 11.4 compression, 2.02/1.6 valves, and the same awesome 1,000 cfm throttle body, and rated an earth shattering 275 HP.

Now I'll state again, all I ever wanted was to see these combinations properly factored, and didnt see the need for all new classes. But since for whatever reason, these combos where not ever going to be factored, they chose to make new classes. Not ideal, but something had to be done, because it was way WAY out of line.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by SS3718

Ed, what about the easy heads up runs and class runoffs that your combination still enjoys? Is it okay for a 327 carb motor to run against your LT1 EFI car? If it's just a bracket race 95% of the time, please remind me why these changes were needed! In your response, please don't single out new car HP factors and conveniently over look the on-track performance of your combo!

And as you said, combine ALL sticks and autos and ALL of us lose the same amount of index and I'll be happy! However, I do feel automatic cars are at a disadvantage to stick cars from a performance stand point! Although, I'm just a driver so what do I know!

Nick

Nick, you seem like a very nice guy, I am not trying to offend anybody. I don't think anybody being honest about this, can honestly compare an LT1 to the new cars. They are better cars than older cars you mentioned. There are slow LT1s around, guys that don't work as hard.
I don't know what you have. People tend to notice more cars similar to their's, so you may have not noticed the slower LT1s.
But I have yet to see, for instance, a slow Drag Pak. No slow COPOs or CJs either. The slower DPs can still run almost a second under if they want to. About any COPO can, and the CJs I have seen can too. The faster DPs can run way under. Keith Lynch's Hemi in my class, SS/JA, was over a second under with a Stock Eliminator engine, and 9" tires. Last I noticed he was still foot braking too. Somebody as sharp as Keith, with SS ported heads, manifold, light pistons, narrow rings, light rotating assy, solid roller cam(s), high ratio shaft rockers, trans brake, big tires, a chassis by somebody like Eastexas or B&B, think how far under they could run.
They would run more like Lloyd Wolford's cars. If you have a DP, and can't run like that, you might want to talk to James Caro and Sonny Stancil. They can make those things fly.
Do you know there actually new stick cars in your new class you can't run with?

[Michael Beard]

STILL no one will answer the question: "Why do automatics get a weight break in all of the other Super Stock subcategories in which Stick and Automatics are combined?"

Again, I am perfectly fine if my combination gets a (well-deserved) .20 index hit, so long as the manual transmission combinations take the same hit. If we run off the same index and automatics don't get a weight break when combined with Stick cars in the Factory classes, then I expect that the weight breaks for automatics in all other stick/auto combined classes should be deleted.

I am looking for a fair application of the rules. Either everyone should get it, or no one should get it. Either is fine.

[Mike Carr]

Just my $.02, but I think the Indexes should have been set in the middle. The higher classes, the Indexes are close. GT/A-GT/AA are one-tenth apart (10.00 to 10.10). SS/B, C and D, the indexes are the same for both transmissions (A and E are .05 apart). The lower classes are a much larger disparity. SS/K to /KA and GT/J to/JA are .25 apart.

[Jeff Teuton]

Bingo!!! Mike gets the stuffed bear. Think of me having to run with me and me as a passenger (or Larry Hill-take your pick) slim trim as I am at about 260 before beverages and that is what I got, the classes right below me also got almost the same treatment. .25, or the same as 250 lbs. with just a pencil. Now, why am I not happy. Ed, you ain't never happy, so you get the Chuck Raburn rule, you don't get a vote.

[Kevin Panzino]

Originally Posted by Jeff Teuton

Bingo!!! Mike gets the stuffed bear. Think of me having to run with me and me as a passenger (or Larry Hill-take your pick) slim trim as I am at about 260 before beverages and that is what I got, the classes right below me also got almost the same treatment. .25, or the same as 250 lbs. with just a pencil. Now, why am I not happy. Ed, you ain't never happy, so you get the Chuck Raburn rule, you don't get a vote.

Jeff, the additional passenger reference is getting old... Your combo is rated at LEAST 40 HP light... Thats way more weight than a passenger, even Larry .. The way I see it, you guys made out two fold. One for being able to run that combo that underfactored for so long, and now for only losing .2 to .25 of index.