Stocker build
Looking to get back into Stock eliminator racing.. years ago ran a 74 Mustang II with a 2.3L auto in W/SA was a ton of fun!! I kow there has been alot of back and forth about build one Vs Buy one already done..Budget could be in issue buying a completed one, but just depends.. Here is what I have here: 1993 Mustang Convertible 2.3L Auto, 1969 Pontiac Catalina Wagon 400ci 2 bbl.. so initial cost would be zero.. however Id possibly like to build a 3rd gen camaro with a V6 or low HP V8.. Again many comments on building a slower car Vs a quicker one.. some people like to chase, some prefer to be chased.. Any thoughts guys??
|
Re: Stocker build
81 Camaro with a 267 in U.
|
Re: Stocker build
The Catalina wagon should be a good Q/SA car.
|
Re: Stocker build
I'd be interested in Catalina if you decide to sell.
|
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
|
Re: Stocker build
Or two + tons of fun if you go with the Catalina. If Bob Shaw has been wrong on one of these deals, I've never seen it.
Pete |
Re: Stocker build
I'm just a "has been", who never was much. But, I love Pontiacs. So, this caught my eye. There's a LOT I don't understand about Stock racing today. So, I'd like to ask some dummy questions. Since it's the off season. maybe some of you guys will have time to offer opinions & maybe supply info I can't find.
If the info I found on the Class Racer Info site is correct, that '69 Cat wagon 400 2-barrel engine is rated at 290hp. Looks to me as tho you'd have to get NHRA to reduce that a LOT, to even be able to run the index. I'm guessing that nobody has ever tried to run this engine in a serious Stocker. http://www.classracerinfo.com/Engine...6&MAKE=Pontiac So, lets say he builds the car. What are the chances he could get the hp factor reduced to a reasonable number, and aprox how long would that process take ? If he had to run the 2-barrel @ 290hp, looks like a 4-barrel 400 would be much more competitive. The 330hp '68 400's have done quite well, in Birds. And the low compression 400's from the mid '70's have also done quite well. And some of those can run the 800 Q-jets. It would obviously be a lot easier to pick a body which can run an engine, with a good hp factor. So, I'd just like to hear some examples of guys that built a car which could only use an engine with a bad hp factor, then had good luck getting NHRA to quickly reduce the factor, enuff to allow the guy to get it down to it's index, without too much trouble. All good examples will be appreciated. Thanks ! |
Re: Stocker build
I was thinkin the 265 hp engine.
|
Re: Stocker build
I remember having a 1980 or 82 Pontiac Wagon with a 400 Pontiac Engine with a Qjet.
That car was a good road car. Shares the same suspension back to 1964. D |
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
Not the same suspension..Metric, different angles. 71 -76 wagons had leaf springs. |
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
http://www.classracerinfo.com/Engine...5&MAKE=Pontiac The 265hp engine is allowed 90cc heads. The 290hp engine is allowed 68cc heads. That's a lot of compression difference. Also, the 290hp engine is allowed a cam with more intake lift. Not sure how much power difference those 2 items would make. Would the difference be 25hp ? Anybody have an educated guess ? :confused: |
Re: Stocker build
"...So, lets say he builds the car. What are the chances he could get the hp factor reduced to a reasonable number, and aprox how long would that process take ?..."
Would he have to run several div races ? Would he have to know somebody with pull, in the racing world or NHRA ? What exactly is involved in getting the hp factor reduced ? So, any real world experiences that answer any or all these questions ? :confused: |
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
The natural classes would be O/SA and Q/SA. That's .60 difference in the index. I don't think the 290 engine would be that much faster. You could always change heads and see how much difference that makes. The cam wouldn't make much difference. |
Re: Stocker build
Yeah, that makes good sense to me. May as well also strap on a Q-jet & see if it looks more competitive, than either 2-barrel engine. The Q-jet engines just seem to be more competitive, in most combos, unless you can get the hp factor lowered enuff.
I just can't think of a single competitive 2-barrel Pontiac Stocker, right now. Lots of competitive Q-jet combos. http://www.classracerinfo.com/Engine...1&MAKE=Pontiac |
Re: Stocker build
Well if I decide to do the wagon based of the Class racer site, it fits Q/SA with the 2 barrel at 17.05 which is at the top of the class.. so thats a good thing right?
So where should I start? I guess a rule book to see what I can and cant do would be a good place to start.. any reccomendations on transmissions, gears, rear ends...etc?? Tire size? ? |
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
If you are really so inclined to race a tank, find a 77 Grand Safari for P/SA ,with a 4bbl 400. Oh , you'll need some skateboard wheels for the front, or maybe just leave on the second yellow. |
Re: Stocker build
Ok.. so what car/class do you suggest for someone who is going to build a car from stock.. one that can be accomplished on a small budget with me doing most of the work as possible.. Im all ears.. :)
|
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
That leaves the old standby ..302 Fffffford 2 v, R,T, U /SA. |
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
|
Re: Stocker build
I guessing that the term "small budget:" is what Mark is referring to. The price of a racing 4 speed, clutch, and bell housing ruins the budget on its own. Could be over $7000 with the shifter included if my research is correct.
Pete |
Re: Stocker build
There is a Turismo out there that may still be for sale. Winning car that was priced at 4 or 5 thousand if I recall. The price of entry doesn't come more affordable than that.
|
Re: Stocker build
Quote:
They don't come any cheaper or easier than that! |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.