"2012 and beyond rule proposals"

Tom keedle · 10-30-2010, 02:33 PM

there ya go, Mr Lee...

i'd be all for the worse redlight deal ..
seems fair but at the moment, i ain't racin'...

Angelo DiTocco · 10-30-2010, 04:20 PM

OK - I'll go 1st................

I'd like to see the rules opened up so that a traditional RWD SS'er (like mine) would be permitted to apply the same allowances as the FWD conversion cars.
Specifically
eliminate factory the K-member - replace with tube
eliminate factory control arms - replace with fabricated tube
eliminate the upper control arm and use a strut that mounts in the factory upper shock location
rod ends instead of factory ball joints etc...
firewall ? - pobably does not apply. room to fit engine not a problem.
I doub't it would make the car any faster but I think it would be safer
I think it would make the car able to hook consistently without the big wheelstands (also safer)

BTW - I don't care about the cost - It would be an option

anyone who wants to continue to race with factory parts would still be allowed

quickford1 · 10-30-2010, 04:48 PM

X2
Rich

Mark Markow · 10-30-2010, 05:30 PM

x3 on that one angelo. what's legal for one car, should be legal for everyone.

Ed Wright · 10-30-2010, 05:57 PM

I agree with Angelo. Also how about the the rest of the rest of the things they are doing to the new Comp, sorry I meant SS/GT cars? Long steering columns, relocated pedals & driver's seats to move weight back. The rule book says they can't but they go right though tech with no problems. That helps hook with less body rotation/wheel stands.

Glad I don't have to race those things heads up.

Btw, word is no titanium valves for SS in 2011.

Jeff Lee · 10-30-2010, 06:47 PM

Good ! Now just think, only 12 months to go...

Angelo DiTocco · 10-30-2010, 08:13 PM

Thanks for the support! I must say I wasn't expecting that.

I don't view the FWD cars as necessarily having any tremendous performance advantage if at all..... no gripe there.... and that is not the basis of my request. Without those allowances - I believe the FWD cars would be at a tremendous disadvantage.. if able to be competative at all.
I do see it as an advantage in other ways... mainly safety and in some ways easier to work on. Being able to have room for fenderwell headers and more room around them to maximize pipe lengths, get them on and off, and access to the plugs is something I have to say I envy about them. The fact that they leave more room in the trailer is not an issue.

Reality dictates that progress is inevitable. In order for newer cars to get into the game allowances to construction have to be made.

Alowances for traditional cars would make them much safer - and in some ways easier to work on.

I sent this in to NHRA last year - they weren't ready for this much change - I will try again this winter

Freddie · 10-30-2010, 08:38 PM

Angelo: could not agree more, the front suspension rule is the only thing keeping me from racing. My car is set up for NMRA and tubular K-Members and lower control arms are allowed. Every year I ask, and get told maybe, keep looking... My only hope is to step up and try racing Comp.

71mavlouisville · 10-31-2010, 10:58 AM

I think you are right on. These changes should be allowed.
Another thing I would like to see is the minimum weight for modified cars reduced to 2800 pounds. The FWD conversion cars have to add a lot of weight to get to 3000 pounds with a standard trans.
Ashton 4373

Stick Racing · 10-31-2010, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

I agree with Angelo. Also how about the the rest of the rest of the things they are doing to the new Comp, sorry I meant SS/GT cars? Long steering columns, relocated pedals & driver's seats to move weight back. The rule book says they can't but they go right though tech with no problems. That helps hook with less body rotation/wheel stands.

Glad I don't have to race those things heads up.

Btw, word is no titanium valves for SS in 2011.

Interesting statement...

If the rules are the same in SS as the GT class, why shouldn't they race heads up? Maybe NHRA will will make the rules the same and combine classes. Sponsors would be happy. Less classes to pay.

Be careful what you wish for.

______________________________

Andy Stone 1102 A/S 1112 SS/C

10-30-2010, 02:33 PM	#1
Tom keedle Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Berthoud, Coloraduh Posts: 695 Likes: 13 Liked 8 Times in 7 Posts	"2012 and beyond rule proposals" there ya go, Mr Lee... i'd be all for the worse redlight deal .. seems fair but at the moment, i ain't racin'...

10-30-2010, 04:20 PM	#2
Angelo DiTocco Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NY, NY Posts: 750 Likes: 175 Liked 189 Times in 48 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" OK - I'll go 1st................ I'd like to see the rules opened up so that a traditional RWD SS'er (like mine) would be permitted to apply the same allowances as the FWD conversion cars. Specifically eliminate factory the K-member - replace with tube eliminate factory control arms - replace with fabricated tube eliminate the upper control arm and use a strut that mounts in the factory upper shock location rod ends instead of factory ball joints etc... firewall ? - pobably does not apply. room to fit engine not a problem. I doub't it would make the car any faster but I think it would be safer I think it would make the car able to hook consistently without the big wheelstands (also safer) BTW - I don't care about the cost - It would be an option anyone who wants to continue to race with factory parts would still be allowed __________________ Angelo DiTocco '98 Firebird SS/HA '98 Firebird B/SA Last edited by Angelo DiTocco; 10-30-2010 at 04:22 PM.

10-30-2010, 04:48 PM	#3
quickford1 Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Davidson, NC Posts: 269 Likes: 522 Liked 20 Times in 12 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" X2 Rich

10-30-2010, 05:30 PM	#4
Mark Markow Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: east hartford ct. Posts: 539 Likes: 0 Liked 9 Times in 3 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" x3 on that one angelo. what's legal for one car, should be legal for everyone. __________________ Mark Markow 171 ss/tb

10-30-2010, 05:57 PM	#5
Ed Wright Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sand Springs, OK Posts: 8,132 Likes: 896 Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" I agree with Angelo. Also how about the the rest of the rest of the things they are doing to the new Comp, sorry I meant SS/GT cars? Long steering columns, relocated pedals & driver's seats to move weight back. The rule book says they can't but they go right though tech with no problems. That helps hook with less body rotation/wheel stands. Glad I don't have to race those things heads up. Btw, word is no titanium valves for SS in 2011. __________________ Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA Last edited by Ed Wright; 10-30-2010 at 06:01 PM.

10-30-2010, 06:47 PM	#6
Jeff Lee VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Anthem, Arizona Posts: 2,766 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" Good ! Now just think, only 12 months to go... __________________ Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX

10-30-2010, 08:13 PM	#7
Angelo DiTocco Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NY, NY Posts: 750 Likes: 175 Liked 189 Times in 48 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" Thanks for the support! I must say I wasn't expecting that. I don't view the FWD cars as necessarily having any tremendous performance advantage if at all..... no gripe there.... and that is not the basis of my request. Without those allowances - I believe the FWD cars would be at a tremendous disadvantage.. if able to be competative at all. I do see it as an advantage in other ways... mainly safety and in some ways easier to work on. Being able to have room for fenderwell headers and more room around them to maximize pipe lengths, get them on and off, and access to the plugs is something I have to say I envy about them. The fact that they leave more room in the trailer is not an issue. Reality dictates that progress is inevitable. In order for newer cars to get into the game allowances to construction have to be made. Alowances for traditional cars would make them much safer - and in some ways easier to work on. I sent this in to NHRA last year - they weren't ready for this much change - I will try again this winter __________________ Angelo DiTocco '98 Firebird SS/HA '98 Firebird B/SA Last edited by Angelo DiTocco; 10-30-2010 at 08:18 PM.

10-30-2010, 08:38 PM	#8
Freddie Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tampa Fla / Anderson SC Posts: 334 Likes: 12 Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" Angelo: could not agree more, the front suspension rule is the only thing keeping me from racing. My car is set up for NMRA and tubular K-Members and lower control arms are allowed. Every year I ask, and get told maybe, keep looking... My only hope is to step up and try racing Comp.

10-31-2010, 10:58 AM	#9
71mavlouisville Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 68 Likes: 0 Liked 28 Times in 1 Post	Re: "2012 and beyond rule proposals" I think you are right on. These changes should be allowed. Another thing I would like to see is the minimum weight for modified cars reduced to 2800 pounds. The FWD conversion cars have to add a lot of weight to get to 3000 pounds with a standard trans. Ashton 4373