Proposal for Old Cars in Stock - Page 4

Ed Fernandez · 04-03-2010, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubski

this is great where was all the bitching as nhra slowly enhanced stock? aftermarket heads, blocks, rods, carbs, no more cam spec other than lift, valve springpressure, 700.00$ lifters etc etc. no one cared because they all thought that any of these things could give them a edge on the next guy.now that they will never have an advantage over these newer combos its cryin time. but if the shoe was on the other foot and thier combo got some bogus parts that would be great.on the other hand nhra should make a crate motor class for these new cars. you cant kick them out now but you can try to make it fair. look at ihra 15 out of 20 top qualifiers in stock are crate motor, but they have thier own class so thier not peeing in the pool of traditional combos. everyone pissed and moaned ihra isnt true stock eliminator now look at what you got makes ihra look pretty good

It's called human nature.

Chris "drooze" Wertman · 04-03-2010, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Teuton

Boy, I can't win here. Even the moderator is shooting me. I think I will just quit here and go put the SS motor in my car for Houston. But someone tell me what's wrong with looking at some older combos? They were all out there. Why not look at them? Maybe there is something out there for the purist that don't like the new cars. I like both. I got both. I race both.

Jeff Im not telling you anything you anything you dont know. BUT it was advice I was given by a "lurker" here and I find it to be true to some degree.

BUT I want to put it out there for others to see and think of mayb e they themselves have been a party to is subconciously and this will help them see it.

Me, hell I open myself up to all kinds of attacks so no suprise there, but this was early when I had yet to really be my obnoxious self.

Here goes.....

MANY Class Racers are Mad about the CJ and the DP Cars.

They complained a LOT about the CJ's before the DP Started hitting the track.

THEN Something interesting happened......More and More DP Cars began actually RUNNING and not getting mothballed like many of the CJ Cars have.

THEN also since MANY of the DP Owners were previously, or are future Class Racers that post here.

ALL DP Became a Target, AND We respond.

See how many "pro" CJ Posts there are there are a few but, well not near as many as the total of DP owners.

DP Owners simply give people who are upset about the NHRA Allowing the CJ and DP cars a visible verbal target here.

Youre right, you cant win, none of us ever will half will like it half will be angry.......nothing good would make BOTH happy I dont think.

Just another 37cent installment from someone who is full of ****

Cheers

Chris

bubski · 04-03-2010, 11:17 AM

half will like it half will be angry. more like the guys with the new cars will like it the 20 or 30 of them out there. while the 1000 plus masses will not. seems like the way of the world everyone suffers for the interest of a small minority. and in nhras case everyone suffers to keep the blob well fed. not tryin to be a d#@k but this is not fair this is not progress these cars arent even street legal. they need thier own class thats about it no stick or auto seperate. 4-5 new classes, no big deal, proper factoring would be nice, but if theyre all in the same group would it really matter?

Bob Pagano · 04-03-2010, 11:18 AM

Yes old combo's should be in if they want to. Also anybody that knows Jeff could tell you he would never do anything to advance his cars just because he is a Rep. Just like the ford guys he bought his car of choice and with all the knowledge he has gained over the years put it to good use. Who cares if he is a mopar dealer, he has worked his whole life just like everyone else and could have lost that but for the grace of god he was not one of the dealers cut lose by mopar. Jeff is the last person I would blame for this hp crap, how about putting the blame on nhra where it belongs. Well I got more than 2 cents worth

Lynn A McCarty · 04-03-2010, 11:19 AM

I agree Jeff. If not let us pick a stock class where all these cars can run against each other with acceptable replacement parts. We should do this in SS as well. I called for it 4 years ago and have been pushing for it every since. There is no reason for these cars to be exempted for no good reason.

It would also include, Stage II Buicks, RA-V Pontiacs, L88 Corverttes, Hemi cars, 421SD cars with heads like the Hemi guys get as replacements, Tunnel Port Fords, SOHC Fords, AMC dual quad 390s, High Port 427 Ford and all the factory "RACE" cars.

However, allowing some run and other not because of race gerrymandering is unacceptable.

Bruce Noland · 04-03-2010, 11:20 AM

[QUOTE=Jack Matyas;179638]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

Jeff,
And, as a SRAC representative you should tell the racers what part you have played (if any) in bringing the crate motor cars into Stock. The SRAC position you have works both ways when it comes to information flow. How do you reasonably reconcile being a Mopar dealership co-owner, a crate motor racer in Stock and your position on the SRAC? Again, I enjoy your good old Big-Boy humor but you should tell the racers the truth about any influence you may or may not have had during the classification process of these new cars.

Jeff -- Before answering any of this have you been Mirandized ? Holy Cow -- talk about being on the spot ..........................

Jack,
Jeff is never on the "spot." Many, many racers want to know how these cars made it into Stock and Super Stock. Who better to ask than a SRAC representative with knowledge in all areas of this issue? The racers should be told how, and who helped, these cars make it into Stock and Super Stock.

Lynn A McCarty · 04-03-2010, 11:37 AM

If you want to talk about influence, let us talk about how a Square Port BBC is ok to take off the production line and refit it with a 427, but doing the same thing at the dealer is not OK?

How about letting a SCAB shops do cars with different parts and motor specifications is OK, but a Factory authorized part numbered swap is not OK if an authorized dealer did it. I dont criticize these cars cause they are way cool, but to exempt ours is preposterous

How about replacement parts accepted that never came on a car, but factory part numbers entities deemed "not legal"?

How about "any duration" in stock class for lo-po combos killing all the combos with huge factory duration with no HP adjustments?

If you ask me Jeff hits the nail on the head with some common sense, and the other stuff is just promoting the existing, self-fulfilling, gerrymandered advantage with no real actual rhyme or reason. How can we tell this is true? The guilty ones are out in numbers with the canary tail feathers hanging out of their mouths.

Jack Matyas · 04-03-2010, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

Jack,
Jeff is never on the "spot." Many, many racers want to know how these cars made it into Stock and Super Stock. Who better to ask than a SRAC representative with knowledge in all areas of this issue? The racers should be told how, and who helped, these cars make it into Stock and Super Stock.

Bruce - You really are putting him on the spot by saying to him -- " you should tell racers the truth " ...........that alone implies that he isn't or won't .............I'd be insulted for sure .

J.Dillinger · 04-03-2010, 12:01 PM

I propose a 1949 Hudson Hornet+

Ken Miele · 04-03-2010, 12:35 PM

Jeff,

Don't let it get to you. Anyone can build your combo, so to me there is no advantage.

As far as the moderator goes, yes Bruce is one of my moderators but don't let that bother you. Bruce has opinions and I have no problems with him expressing them. Bruce and I are on total opposite sides of this subject, but that's okay. I'm not going anywhere and I hope you don't.

I race a so called paper car in A and AA and was never the fastest, although it was competitive. I know have no chance to out run the new CJ's and DP's, but do you see me calling for the heads of NHRA and or the owners of these cars, no way. I have lots invested, money and time, but I see no difference with some who runs a soft combo and kicks my butt or runs these new cars, being out run is being out run. If I want to run with them, I will have to build one.

So Jeff, keeping on posting, no one on this site will stop you from expressing your opinion on this subject.

One other note, at the track, opinions on the new cars are way more positive then negative.

04-03-2010, 11:17 AM	#33
bubski Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 228 Likes: 14 Liked 165 Times in 60 Posts	Re: Proposal for Old Cars in Stock half will like it half will be angry. more like the guys with the new cars will like it the 20 or 30 of them out there. while the 1000 plus masses will not. seems like the way of the world everyone suffers for the interest of a small minority. and in nhras case everyone suffers to keep the blob well fed. not tryin to be a d#@k but this is not fair this is not progress these cars arent even street legal. they need thier own class thats about it no stick or auto seperate. 4-5 new classes, no big deal, proper factoring would be nice, but if theyre all in the same group would it really matter?

04-03-2010, 11:18 AM	#34
Bob Pagano VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: New Holland, PA Mooresville,NC Posts: 1,163 Likes: 243 Liked 16 Times in 11 Posts	Re: Proposal for Old Cars in Stock Yes old combo's should be in if they want to. Also anybody that knows Jeff could tell you he would never do anything to advance his cars just because he is a Rep. Just like the ford guys he bought his car of choice and with all the knowledge he has gained over the years put it to good use. Who cares if he is a mopar dealer, he has worked his whole life just like everyone else and could have lost that but for the grace of god he was not one of the dealers cut lose by mopar. Jeff is the last person I would blame for this hp crap, how about putting the blame on nhra where it belongs. Well I got more than 2 cents worth __________________ Bob Pagano A/SA

04-03-2010, 11:19 AM	#35
Lynn A McCarty Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Plainfield (INDY) Indiana Posts: 468 Likes: 1 Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Proposal for Old Cars in Stock I agree Jeff. If not let us pick a stock class where all these cars can run against each other with acceptable replacement parts. We should do this in SS as well. I called for it 4 years ago and have been pushing for it every since. There is no reason for these cars to be exempted for no good reason. It would also include, Stage II Buicks, RA-V Pontiacs, L88 Corverttes, Hemi cars, 421SD cars with heads like the Hemi guys get as replacements, Tunnel Port Fords, SOHC Fords, AMC dual quad 390s, High Port 427 Ford and all the factory "RACE" cars. However, allowing some run and other not because of race gerrymandering is unacceptable. __________________ Lynn A McCarty 3470 SS

04-03-2010, 11:37 AM	#37
Lynn A McCarty Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Plainfield (INDY) Indiana Posts: 468 Likes: 1 Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Proposal for Old Cars in Stock If you want to talk about influence, let us talk about how a Square Port BBC is ok to take off the production line and refit it with a 427, but doing the same thing at the dealer is not OK? How about letting a SCAB shops do cars with different parts and motor specifications is OK, but a Factory authorized part numbered swap is not OK if an authorized dealer did it. I dont criticize these cars cause they are way cool, but to exempt ours is preposterous How about replacement parts accepted that never came on a car, but factory part numbers entities deemed "not legal"? How about "any duration" in stock class for lo-po combos killing all the combos with huge factory duration with no HP adjustments? If you ask me Jeff hits the nail on the head with some common sense, and the other stuff is just promoting the existing, self-fulfilling, gerrymandered advantage with no real actual rhyme or reason. How can we tell this is true? The guilty ones are out in numbers with the canary tail feathers hanging out of their mouths. __________________ Lynn A McCarty 3470 SS

04-03-2010, 12:01 PM	#39
J.Dillinger Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 12 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Proposal for Old Cars in Stock I propose a 1949 Hudson Hornet+

04-03-2010, 12:35 PM	#40
Ken Miele Live Reporter Join Date: Dec 2000 Posts: 4,864 Likes: 462 Liked 16,570 Times in 1,525 Posts	Re: Proposal for Old Cars in Stock Jeff, Don't let it get to you. Anyone can build your combo, so to me there is no advantage. As far as the moderator goes, yes Bruce is one of my moderators but don't let that bother you. Bruce has opinions and I have no problems with him expressing them. Bruce and I are on total opposite sides of this subject, but that's okay. I'm not going anywhere and I hope you don't. I race a so called paper car in A and AA and was never the fastest, although it was competitive. I know have no chance to out run the new CJ's and DP's, but do you see me calling for the heads of NHRA and or the owners of these cars, no way. I have lots invested, money and time, but I see no difference with some who runs a soft combo and kicks my butt or runs these new cars, being out run is being out run. If I want to run with them, I will have to build one. So Jeff, keeping on posting, no one on this site will stop you from expressing your opinion on this subject. One other note, at the track, opinions on the new cars are way more positive then negative.