The Keir Stocker is absolutely 1st rate craftsmanship - but is it legal?

[Jack Matyas]

Dan -- It was to make engine changes easy .........same as on todays newer cars -- i'd love to do it .

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by herbjr

Who is this guy that started this thread. Someone has to know

Why? So you can have a lynch mobb go after the guy? I haven't seen the car, probably never will due to distance. I made a post some pictures would be good to see at this point.
I have a hard time believing some guy went out of his way to blacken a racers image just because he wanted to one day. If what he wrote is total BS, then he would sure look like an idiot. If however the statements are accurate, then there is a problem. And the problem is we have a rulebook and it should be enforced and 3/4 of the listed items don't appear to be in any "grey" area.
And those that taught the word "stock" and it's lack of relevancy are somewhat mindless in my opinion. "Stock" is a title. The rulebook defines Stock.

[GTO/GN]

I Don't remember where I found this but I have found it to be pretty acturate..
1/8 mile ET X 1.55 = 1/4 mile ET
Using this the 6.47 = 10.02

[Jesse Knapp]

Originally Posted by herbjr

Who is this guy that started this thread. Someone has to know

One of those that love to cause a stir. On the positive side it promotes intelligent conversation for the most part, something the thread starter might not have figured on. Rule book says the brace has to go through the floor. I take that to mean part of the brace is above the floorpan and part below the pan. My camaro had 2/3rds of the 2x3 brace inside the floor and 1/3rd below, or outside. Wesley told me that was fine. My car did many 6.30's and it's quarter mile was 10.0's. The 6.40s were 10.teens and twentys. Nevertheless, it's still a fast Nova.

[Dave Ribeiro]

Fred & Bill,

Adam, went 10.26 or 10.27 at Maple Grove the week before... But, I do think he only had 8-10 passes on the new Car ... The Car is really a nice piece and the kid can drive ... You will have to discuss the other stuff with his dad , who has built many racecars... Remember the name, cause you will being hearing more of it...


Jack,

I thought you could cut the rad. support, but could be bolted back together for easy engine removal ???

[Jack Matyas]

Dave -- you're allowed crossmember cutting for pan removal but not the rad support .....

[bill dedman]

Dave,

Maybe it's an example of one of thoise cars that is so well set-up that it has inordinately fast 60-foot times (high 1.20s?) and because of that, covers the first eighth really quickly (for its type of car), but doesn't run on the big end like a SS/A car would, so the performanxce falls off, COMPARATIVELY SPEAKING, the last half. Maybe it's only running 128 mph, or so...

That would explain its slightly incongruous eighth-mile vs. quarter-mile times.

Bill

[JRyan]

Awhile back, I bought a car from Division 1. It had passed tech MANY times over MANY years. Unfortunately, the car came with several things that weren't legal according to the rule book. In order to run in Division V, I had to CORRECT them. So apparently, the rule book used in Division V is written more clearly than the one used in Division 1.

On our Superstock Olds, The guy we sold the car to was required to completely re-do the rear suspension because part of the bracing protruded into the rear seat floorpan. That was in Division 3, and the car had originally come from Division 3. He changed it because that's what the rule said. So apparently the Division 3 rule book is more specific regarding protrusion than the rulebooks in Division 1 or 4.

The problem isn't THE RULES. It's the Divisional tech people who have neglected to grow a pair to tell their buddies NO! Do you think Division 1 has a lock on HIGH-TECH? Take a look at some of the Division 6 & 7 Stockers??, if you can call them that. There is way too much liberal interpretation going on here. EVOLUTION - MY *****.

Jerry

[Larry Fulton]

Originally Posted by JRyan

The problem isn't THE RULES. It's the Divisional tech people who have neglected to grow a pair to tell their buddies NO! Do you think Division 1 has a lock on HIGH-TECH? Take a look at some of the Division 6 & 7 Stockers??, if you can call them that. There is way too much liberal interpretation going on here. EVOLUTION MY *****.

Jerry

Hi there Jerry!
Yep both Stock & Super Stock has gotten way out of control as far as what is legal (and what little isn't). This Keir car is an awesome piece of mechanical artwork there's no doubt about it, and there is no questioning Ken's talent. But the question was "is it legal" as an NHRA Stocker?

If this car is accepted as legal, then it is definitely going to set the standards for everyone else to follow.

Larry Fulton

[mcink]

Originally Posted by jryan

awhile back, i bought a car from division 1. It had passed tech many times over many years. Unfortunately, the car came with several things that weren't legal according to the rule book. In order to run in division v, i had to correct them. So apparently, the rule book used in division v is written more clearly than the one used in division 1.

On our superstock olds, the guy we sold the car to was required to completely re-do the rear suspension because part of the bracing protruded into the rear seat floorpan. That was in division 3, and the car had originally come from division 3. He changed it because that's what the rule said. So apparently the division 3 rule book is more specific regarding protrusion than the rulebooks in division 1 or 4.

The problem isn't the rules. It's the divisional tech people who have neglected to grow a pair to tell their buddies no! Do you think division 1 has a lock on high-tech? Take a look at some of the division 6 & 7 stockers??, if you can call them that. There is way too much liberal interpretation going on here. Evolution - my *****.

Jerry

Yeah, what he said!