Re: Within Stock rules???
 

From the NHRA Rule book
“Must be correct casting number for year and horsepower claimed, per NHRA Technical Bulletins or NHRA accepted. Porting, polishing, welding, epoxying and acid-porting prohibited.”

Based on this how is this motor legal?[/QUOTE]

If I remember correctly the heads were CNC from the factory? If that is the case how can NHRA prove that additional CNC had been done? Short of the cc's? When I first saw several years ago where CNC heads were installed on some of the super cars that clearly opened the door for additional porting. The thing I don't get from the article is the changing of the cam, to a larger grind? How can you tell this "Stocker" engine from a "SS" engine??

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

On the subject of the porting, you are correct. This was an issue on the SS AMX heads throughout their history. How do you know what is correct?


As for the camshaft specs, the .641" lift is what is in the Tech Bulletin, regardless of any advertising for the LS7. I suspect that some of the confusion is that people assume this engine is the same as the LS7 engine installed in Corvettes, but it is not. It is a spec engine for their Factory Shootout cars, not a production engine.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

For most, the real issue is what the rule book says and what is currently being done and allowed .

Isn't it time for the rule book to reflect what is currently being done? For a racer to spend $1000+ to cover up what isn't being enforced certainly doesn't help the racer.

Maybe it's time for the rules to state: If the ports meet the CC's, the valve sizes are correct and there's no welding or epoxy, they pass.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I agree with you on this one Alan!

Not that I expect anything to every change
except maybe to get worse and more expensive!

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

That is exactly how the rule for porting in Super Stock was originally written. Given time and pressure, you have the current Super Stock head rule. Is that what you want? Be careful what you ask for or how brilliant you think your solution will be or what you give in to.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Just what I was thinking.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Dwight, you ain't just whistlin dixie, bud. :cool:


I know a couple of guys who could push some fast Super Stock heads through those loopholes. It's bad enough as it is.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

All very good points, Dwight. -Al

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

If I remember correctly the heads were CNC from the factory? If that is the case how can NHRA prove that additional CNC had been done? Short of the cc's? When I first saw several years ago where CNC heads were installed on some of the super cars that clearly opened the door for additional porting. The thing I don't get from the article is the changing of the cam, to a larger grind? How can you tell this "Stocker" engine from a "SS" engine??[/QUOTE]

In this case it wouldn't be very hard they bragged about it in a magazine article.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Except what you are forgetting is that this is a school doing this. They disclose what they are doing because they use it as a teaching tool. Although I have not seen them at a NHRA race, if they are staying true to form from their NMRA days, they have their actual students working at the races. I think its cool that they are opening up and sharing with the masses , and at the same time training the next generation of engine builders.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

In this case it wouldn't be very hard they bragged about it in a magazine article.[/QUOTE]

All the NHRA would check is correct port and chamber volume and for valve size.
When they refer to larger camshaft, they may be referring to the duration, which you are allowed to run any duration you want. The lift of the cam is the only limitation for the camshaft.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Exactly...hard to educate some that are unwilling to learn, and then you have others that get there feelings hurt to easily.

I think the engine is awesome...the only questionable mod is touching up the short turn. Now if that was part of the CNC program that was approved....its all good.

carry on

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Guys I think we are overlooking the fact that the "shootout" cats have different rules from regular stockers. SAM is a great company and I can assure would not do anything outside the rules. Let's not get the two mixed up... But hey I'm not a very smart man!

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I've read many complaints here about the cars not being subject to the AHFS, so these cars can also have engine modifications not legal in stock eliminator as well?

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

But the "Shootout" cars that do not qualify for the Quick 8 go back into regular Stock eliminator and then are not subject to the AHFS! Yeah, that is fair!!

Patsy

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

So if you protest one of these cars that transferred into stock and they're found to have titanium valves, main girdles, extra porting work or whatever are they going to get tossed?

Jim Mantle 6632

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Don't know what is common between the production Corvette LS7 and the shootout engine, but the Corvette has CNC ported heads, titanium connecting rods, and Intake valves . They (GM) should have probably changed the code from LS7 to something else, to avoid confusion .

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Nothing is common with the OEM factory showroom engines.
These are dedicated race engines and race cars with their own unique specifications for a specific class.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I agree Mr. Larry! They should not be able to run the eliminator. The top dragsters that don't make the field do not get to run S/C... Once it's teched in as a shootout car it should not be considered with the Stockers.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Jim Mantle,

No they will not be tossed because this engine has been deemed legal by NHRA since it's inception in 2012 for either Stock Eliminator and or the Factory Shootout.

Larry and Joseph,

I don't agree the Shootout cars that do not make the quick 8 should not be allowed to compete in Stock Eliminator. However, I do agree that once they are placed in the Stock Eliminator field they should go to the bottom of the ladder and no longer be exempt from the AHFS for the balance of the event.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I agree with this

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

[QUOTE=Mike Keener;499897]Jim Mantle,

No they will not be tossed because this engine has been deemed legal by NHRA since it's inception in 2012 for either Stock Eliminator and or the Factory Shootout.

The reason I brought this up goes back to the rule book, I don't see any exemptions for cars originally equipped with titanium parts, valves or retainers.

"engines OEM-equipped with sodium-filled valves may use sodiumfilled replacement valves. Titanium prohibited"

"Any valve spring permitted, provided no modification to head is performed. Steel valve-spring retainers mandatory."

Jim Mantle 6632

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Jim - Both of those rules are in reference to replacement parts. The first rule about the valves was inserted at a time when the allowance for parts was not as liberal as it is now. Some versions of 427 Fords came from the factory with hollow stem sodium filled exhaust valves. The factory was the only source for the valves and discontinued production. Some racers petitioned to allow titanium valves as replacements since the hollow stem valves were lighter than available solid stem valves. There was some controversy that started because the West coast tech guys thought it was all right, but every body else did not. When it was pointed out that the titanium valves deviated considerably from the shape of the original valve and provided a two-fold advantage, i.e. lighter weight than even the hollow steel valves and increased airflow, the prohibition on titanium replacement valves was the solution. The second rule was included in the change to the rule to allow replacement spring retainers. When the rule was first drafted, it merely stated that replacement retainers were allowed. Of course the ingenious racers interpreted that to mean that ANY retainer was okay, including replacement titanium retainers. The additional statement prohibiting titanium was added to solve that. In both cases, the rule pertains to replacement parts, not OEM equipped. The factories can do whatever they want as long as NHRA accepts it, which is what we are seeing in the shootout cars.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Until they change their mind after you've already built all the engines based on an approved TI sheet. :)

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

:D Ain't life grand!!

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Kinda reminds me of the old days with TOP STOCK......

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Say what you will about Top Stock but Terry Bell and I will never regret starting this class way back in 2000 and we can't thank Bill Bader and IHRA enough for giving us a stage to show what heads up competition in Stock Eliminator was really capable of.

Hindsight being 20-20 our only regret was allowing GM to institute crate motors in to this otherwise fantastic class. It always comes down to money and IHRA wanted their sponsorship but with it came the spoils. Once this fantastic eliminator was infiltrated with crate motors and eventual endless rule changes, etc., it was all over but the shouting.

I would bet dollars to donuts that had it remained a pure A-B-C- Stock Eliminator class per NHRA rules it would not only still be alive and well, but would have remained every bit as popular, if not more, than it was at Norwalk 2000.

The thing to remember about heads up racing is this. Nobody gives a damn about how fast the cars go as long the first car to the finish line wins-with no breakout!

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Mike, I absolutely loved Top Stock...it ranks right up there with night baseball and sliced bread. I agree that Crate Motors led to its demise..

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I am with you 100% on this Mike. And I think there is a missed opportunity out there for the Top Stock and Junior Stock programs.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Thanks Dwight and Mike

It's nice to hear that quality racers like yourselves knew and loved the opportunity that once presented itself. Those first couple of seasons were nothing short of phenomenal for sure!

I agree with Dwight specifically about the fact that there is definitely a missed opportunity out there currently for Top Stock and Junior Stock programs. I would love it if either or both could be resurrected!

There is no reason the current Factory Showdown cars should be the only form of heads up racing for Sportsman Racers. If all it would take is sponsor to step up and offer NHRA the proposal I don't see a reason good enough that they wouldn't listen to it.

In fact it makes me wonder if Mike Dunn would be interested?? Hmmm....

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

We held Top Stock and Top Super Stock races at Bowling Green, Top Stock a couple of times. We even had a natural D car step up and run in Top Stock. I think Top Stock with traditional cars would work, but I seriously doubt NHRA would consider adding it to National Events or LODRS races. We could possibly get it done at Opens.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

just my opinion .... what's next pro stock stock ??????? no rules just factory backing and or buyout for the cars they want..........
what about the rest of us poor lowly stock and or super stock racers??????
Guess from what I read ......cheating is O K depending on what NEW car you have........
Give the Old and Proven cars the ability to run fuel injection and computer controlled down track adjustments and then lets see what happens!!!!!
A little used term and I am not ashamed to say it .............BOGUS CRAP!!!!!!!!
Again......JUST my opinion.....
Agree or not ......
also when the ultra fast stockers start crashing into slower cars cause a 9 inch tire isn't going to hook 900 hp cars we all lose .....
don't bitch at me just saying !!!!!!!

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Oops. Duplicate...

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Some of us are of the age that we are happy too bi'-tch about things. Please remember, it is still bracket racing in stock and super stock eliminator.......so why complain about 8 second stockers going 150 mph...... dial soft and pound the brakes.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I doubt that depending on NHRA to step in and build such races will yield any results. They are too busy with their own program problems to take on anything new. It will take a promoter to put together the races and purses. Track owners need to be sold on the idea (it has to make $$ for them), sponsors will need to be procured and tech support will have to be provided. Innovative track owners and divisional directors will be the most receptive and the races will probably have a better chance of success on a divisional or regional level. The program that Div 1 did will provide a lot of good information to work from. It would be good to talk to as many people as possible who were involved in those races to learn. Such programs offer good opportunities if marketed well to bring spectators to the races, and that's what race tracks want. Think of a Factory Stock heads-up race using current Detroit race only cars, Top Stock featuring historic Detroit super cars, and Junior Stock featuring historic and current street muscle cars.


My nickel in the pot.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

Several racer-promoters have gone out on a limb over the years to give S/SS racers big money races and specialty events, and every one of them in the last ten years has failed.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

This is a hard group to unify for any purpose, too many are unwilling to move beyond their own best interests.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

I worked my *** off for the SS/K shootout raising over 7k total and I still had people bitching. I'm done dealing with other racers some are real a..holes

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

[QUOTE=Dwight Southerland; The program that Div 1 did will provide a lot of good information to work from. It would be good to talk to as many people as possible who were involved in those races to learn. Such programs offer good opportunities if marketed well to bring spectators to the races, and that's what race tracks want.

I totally agree about Dave Ley's Div 1 Top Stock program as being the best idea going forward from Norwalk 2000. Dave took the Top Stock program one gigantic step forward by developing an 11 lb. class that was widely popular. Every event held in his division was a great success and the racers truly appreciated his efforts!

I'm not sure that promoting this type of a program on a local level can get off the ground very well without a ton of individual promotion which costs the track operators quite a bit of money. Perhaps the "Sunday..Sunday" pitch on local radio in addition to internet advertising, local newspaper ad's, etc., could be helpful, but who knows??? My thinking is it will take the effort of an NMCA or IHRA to pull this off correctly. Top Stock at Norwalk in 2000 began as a one race deal that just blossomed from there in to a huge success. But, this primarily happened for two very important reasons.

First was the 25,000 strong "Night of Fire" fan base coupled with the huge popularity that for years had been hidden from view in the form of "heads up" no breakout racing with old "Detroit Iron" muscle cars. Having Horsepower TV provide coverage of the event sure didn't hurt either. Another huge aspect of the success of this class was the tremendous amounts of ink and promotion that was performed by none other than "Michael Beard" whom IHRA was fortunate enough to have on their publicity staff during the early years of Top Stock! That being said I totally understand how frustrating it is trying to promote a racing venue for the racers on their own. Guys like Mike, Alex (RIP), Dave Ley, Jim Schaechter, Ed Carpenter, Dick Butler, among others that all did many things to promote races (for free) through the years truly deserve way more credit for what they have done for our sport than they ever received. My hat is off to all of them!

The second reason Top Stock became a success going forward was that IHRA was able to obtain title sponsors for the class. No sanctioning body will likely ever run any new class without somebody outside of themselves paying the freight. A perfect example of this theory is the new "Factory Shootout Quick 8 events". This revamped program which now includes perks such as increased purses, a World Champion being crowned, Wally's, etc., etc., wouldn't be possible without a title sponsor stepping up to the plate. Having a title sponsor also permits the class the maximum chance for continued success because of reason number 1...racing in front of more spectators.

I'm not at all trying to discount the great potential appeal of "heads up racing during class eliminations" at Indy as another example of something that could be very successful as well- if it had a bigger stage on which to perform. However, it takes a bigger audience than our personal friends and family members in the seats to create maximum excitement. It's obvious to me that Stock and Super Stock racing in general would get a huge boost if it ever got the opportunity to run in front of the big crowds.

Re: Within Stock rules???
 

We really enjoyed running in the Top Stock class, yes we had one of the crate engine combinations. Running in front of the big crowd was the best, quite a rush. I do wish it would come back.