Once again a bogus combination

[BlueOval Ralph]

Brillant Crate Motors in stock!! Why not take it one steep further Crate Motor Supe Stock???

Originally Posted by Evan Smith

Bruce, here is a thought, and nothing more—how about instead of separating the new cars, we create Stock GT, where you can run any approved engine from the same manufacturer, in any car. Don't create new classes (like Super Stock), but allow the cars to fall where they will based on HP and weight. Then GM could simply supply similar engines and all of the three current makes could benefit. Racers would only need to build a new engine to take advantage of better hp factors (until they get hit, that is) without the expense of building a new car.

I know, this is not in the spirit of Stock, it's just an idea, so everyone cilll out, but it's an idea nonetheless. Racers are always saying old parts are hard to get, so here is a chance to get around that by running a new engine in an existing car. This keeps the muscle cars in Stock.

[Sean Cour]

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

Apparently it was plenty to answer your juvenile post. Try to contribute to the discussion rather than acting like an illmannered child. Grow up!

Your answer is like a scorned child. I would love to be an adult with you and meet you on the playground.....you name the place! I think Indy would work for me. The only thing of contribution you provide to this board is waterworks. How much a month for the faucet?

You grow up and start acting like a sportsman, instead of a poor sport!

Sean

[Bruce Noland]

Originally Posted by Sean Cour

Your answer is like a scorned child. I would love to be an adult with you and meet you on the playground.....you name the place! I think Indy would work for me. The only thing of contribution you provide to this board is waterworks. How much a month for the faucet?

You grow up and start acting like a sportsman, instead of a poor sport!

Sean

Sean,
You wish to level personal attacks rather than discuss the issue at hand. Please PM me and we can exchange numbers and get to know each other a little better. I think you'll be surprised to find that I am a Sportsman and certainly no child. Post about the topic of this thread and no more personal attacks.

[Evan Smith]

Bruce,

Every manufacturer over the history of Stock and Super Stock (or any form of motorsports for that matter) looks for an advantage, and it is the sanctions job to keep the field fair. Most agree that the Ford and DP cars are underrated, ok we get it and can't argue that fact.

Your question is one for NHRA's tech department or the S/SS group at NHRA who makes the decisions, not for me or anyone who frequents this board. All we've gotten is battling opinions and lots of pissed off people.

What about the guy who works his tail off to qualify number one, only to be thwarted by some odd-ball combo that is grossly underrated? Why is there not an urgent fight to clean that up?


Evan

[Wayne Kerr]

The rhetoric is the same as the other 57 threads the "regulars" have participated in.
There has NEVER been parity in motorsports when different combinations are permitted. There is ALWAYS an advantage or perceived advantage.
I'm done wasting my time, over and out.

See you at the races,
Wayne Kerr

[Bruce Noland]

Evan,
My question about Injected classes is for you; not the tech staff. Who is injured by placing the crate motor cars in Injected classes? Boring does not rise to the level of injury.

You said odd ball combinations...right? Well sure there are a few of them out there but they are not the result of colusion by nhra and the OEMs.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Dean Roberts

NHRA set precedent by allowing GM to run this car, period! The level of performance is irrelevant.

Actually, Dean, you are the master of spin. The LT-1 was not only already in the guide in the 97 cars, but it was also a production engine, fully certified for street use. There is no performance advantage held by a 98 F body with an LT-1 over a 97 F body with an LT-1, you're just grasping for straws to support an argument that has no basis in fact or reality. Unlike the LT-1 you constantly cry about, no engine in the Drag Pack cars is certified for street use, nor were they already in the guide. The same applies to the crate engines in the new Mustangs.

The bogus factors is only irrelevant in your mind. Reality is far different than the dreamworld you are trying to create by saying crate engines never certified for street use, installed in cars that won't even run or move when you buy them, are the same as a year old production engine in a new production car.

[Greg Hill]

It's Monday morning and I got back last night from our first Bowling Green combo race at about 9;00 p.m., Andrew and I both lost first round. These new cars and the crate motor deals that have been approved were a major topic of discussion. I didn't talk to one person who felt like these new cars with the hp ratings they have were good for stock eliminator. A lot of people don't post on here and quite frankly don't even look at the site. A good friend of mine and a guy that builds a few stock eliminator motors had no clue about the crate motors that are legal for the new Challenger and Mustang. When I filled him in on these motors and the specs along with the hp ratings his comment was " Are you f@#$ing kidding me?" He went on to say " Why would someone build one of these cars?" What gratification would there be when all along you know you are running in the wrong class?" This is a guy that runs a 69 Camaro with a 302 rated at 309hp.

I truly think people are just beginning to realize how these cars are going to affect them and the sport they love. A lot of people feel there is nothing they can do about it. They feel powerless and are not vocal because they think NHRA will punish them if they speak out. If we do nothing then we become powerless. if we continue to go to National events we condone what NHRA does. It makes us complicit in the whole process. There are good racers that are truly thinking about quitting because they feel they can't compete any
more.

Another good friend of mine who doesn't post on here and has one of the fastest G/SA cars in the country told me after watching Jeff run 10.57 in H/SA at Belle Rose he was depressed for the rest of the weekend. I don't know if anything we do can change what's happening to stock and eventually super stock,but I do know one thing if we don't try to change it we get what we deserve.

[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.

[Dgal]

Dean,

I agree with your comments about the LT1 for 1998 to a great degree, but that is the only V-8 listed in the NHRA guide book for 1998. You cannot run a LS1 and claim a 1998 if you wanted to. You could, of course, call it a 1999-2002 instead.

Don