|
![]() |
#71 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,855
Likes: 83
Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts
|
![]()
Evan,
I think we deserve more than what is being offered here. We have seen a lot of spin from the CJ camp as well. But no one on your side wants to talk about the real numbers the CJ motor is making. You can't say that we are not prepared to put our cars up to the same scrutiny that we seek for the CJ. In short the spinning about this car needs to stop. This car is a dramatic departure from any thing that has ever been allowed in Stock and we need to know more about it. Even if the Ford folks want to tag team us with spin and nhra doesn't want to do their job. I'm going to email several magazines today and explain the situation and ask them to consider latching on to one of these cars. Then tune it up and dyno it. What do I want nhra to do with the Horsepower numbers that may come out of any dyno session? Well, I want them to do their darn jobs. That's what. I'm not sure about this but I believe Chrysler tried to get the so-called NASCAR Hemi approved at 410 and NHRA bumped it up 20 Horsepower. Apparently they didn't take the manufacturers advice on that one. Why are they doing it with Ford? And why are you guys so unwilling to post the numbers on this car. Most of the racers know what to expect from a maxed out 396, 426, 427 and 428. But we know nothing about your little CJ motor. And nhra should know what this motor is making and they don't. The shame will be on them for not knowing.
__________________
Bruce Noland 1788 STK Last edited by Bruce Noland; 02-11-2009 at 10:44 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#72 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
Your still not answering the question as to what you want NHRA to do once they have the number. Do you want them to adjust the HP rating to the results of the test? That would only be fair if your willing to have YOUR combo adjusted also. The combos you talk about are making at least twice the HP than is in the guide. Do you want them adjusted also? What your asking is never going to happen anyway. And the comment about not having a dog in the fight doesn't hold water unless your debuting a new car.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#73 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
Please, whatever you do, don't force the CJ into Super Stock. It belongs in Stock just like the GT500 that IS a production car. I want to see what it is capable of before its rearend gets chopped up for bigger wheels and before wild cams and intake manifolds get stuffed into it.
I am not saying that the 425 hp is not too low and it definitely should be factored appropriately. From the pictures that I have seen under the hood of these cars, there is a lot of power left there. I see that the power steering pump is on and so is the crank driven water pump. I also see some emission stuff like the crankcase ventilation going to the intake. 500 hp just like the GT500 is not unreasonable. Someone also mentioned reorganizing the classes so that the A class starts at 5.0 or 6.0instead of 8.0....Great idea! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#74 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,855
Likes: 83
Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts
|
![]()
I have nearly five years and money I can't metion tied up in a 71 Corvette (AA,A,B) car that will race in just a few weeks. Hopefully Acto or Maple Grove. Even though you own a SS Mustang you still have no dog in this little match; but you are entitled to your opinion. This site is available to everyone and they may offer a fair comment at any time. But it is important for those of us who read these threads to know who really is involved and who isn't. Just my .02.
It goes with out saying that all these motors are rated on a curve. Lets' say my motor is rated at 420 and it makes 590 HP. Let's look at a really well prepped 427 that is rated at 425 and it is making 620 Horsepower. From these two examples, a reasonable person might expext to see a 700+ horsepower motor rated at 475 - 490 Horsepower. It's not difficult or complicated to fairly rate a combination, if you are at least in the right ball park on the power.That is why it is important to determine a fair Horsepower value for the CJ motor. Right now nhra is not in the right ball park with the CJ because they didn't care enough about Stock to do their homework.
__________________
Bruce Noland 1788 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#75 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tampa
Posts: 400
Likes: 7
Liked 115 Times in 5 Posts
|
![]()
Bruce,
I am not a representative of Ford, I am only posting my opinion, just like you. I happen to work on a Ford magazine and I race a Ford, but I really am just a car guy. I think it is very cool that the guys at Ford have an interest in Stock Eliminator and they have done quite a bit to help Ford Sportsman racers, such as upping the contingency money and helping with parts. I stated that I agree that the cars are under-rated, but as we all know, this has been going on for a long time. Ford is playing the game that we, and the manufacturers all play. There are other combinations in NHRA Stock that are grossly underrated—some have never even been run hard, such as the Ford Lightning. I disagree, however, that NHRA should dyno the engines unless they do ALL engines. The fact that you are willing to give up your own engine for testing is meaningless unless EVERY Stock racer does the same. And even then, how can you draw a conclusion based on one engine from only testing each engine type? It doesn't matter if the CJ engine could make 1,000 hp unless NHRA is going to dyno all engines and then factor all engines based on the results. Frankly, it is a moot point as I seriously doubt NHRA is going to set a new precedent for factoring Stockers. I certainly realize that you want to know the full capabilities of the CJ, but I would like to know the same thing about my competition. So would every racer. Since I don't on a CJ I can't post hp numbers. I have been to one dyno session and since I don't own the car I can not post the hp numbers. That would not be fair. Evan
__________________
Evan Smith 1798 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#76 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,855
Likes: 83
Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts
|
![]()
Evan,
We don't need to dyno all the cars in Stock to determine a fair Horsepower value for the CJ. Thanks for your response.
__________________
Bruce Noland 1788 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#77 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: michigan
Posts: 162
Likes: 251
Liked 19 Times in 7 Posts
|
![]()
The two automatic cars at the Winternationals had electric water pump drives and manual racks on them. The four Cobra jets at the Winternationals did not qualify 1,2,3,and 4 and, with the exception of John Calvert, were not the fastest cars in their respective classes , so why can't you guys get over it?
__________________
ss/gt 93 t-bird Last edited by dwydendorf; 02-11-2009 at 11:58 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#78 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Carrolltown,PA
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times in 6 Posts
|
![]()
Just like NHRA was worried about the dyno on '97 '98 firebirds when they came out a runnin' over a second under and 1.35 60 foots.I was there running D against NHRA s' "offical"car,........suck it up or go back to JR.stock.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#79 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,855
Likes: 83
Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts
|
![]()
Bart,
Thanks for your advice, but this isn't a suck it up issue.
__________________
Bruce Noland 1788 STK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#80 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
They are not running the CJ anywhere near their limits. Clavert ran 10.18 at 112 MPH and Stinnett ran 10.11 at 117 MPH in the 2nd round. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|