Another cool stocker!

Rich Biebel · 11-23-2009, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by X-TECH MAN

Joe Kenneys "Trick Tank" wagon was a 62 Dodge.

OK Terry if you say so............It's been a while...LOL!!! Dodge, Plymouth.....How 'bout a nice Desoto.....I owned two myself. Cheap street wheels....1 '58 and 1 '59......Both 361's. Real boats!

X-TECH MAN · 11-23-2009, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Biebel

OK Terry if you say so............It's been a while...LOL!!! Dodge, Plymouth.....How 'bout a nice Desoto.....I owned two myself. Cheap street wheels....1 '58 and 1 '59......Both 361's. Real boats!

I didnt mean anything by pointing it out but the Plymouth wouldnt make the 10.5 lb class even as a 3 passenger Fury. It was to lite and they were still rated at 343 HP back in the day plus running the wt. where they fell in the guide. . . The Dodge had to be a 9 passenger (3 seater like the Behemouth) to make the class. This was when you were not allowed to adjust your wt. and had to run the class where it fell in the class guide. Troxells old Plymouth wagon (before the Oldsmobiles) ran a class higher than Joe. Its confusing now to remember now that we can adjust the wt. up and down the natural class.

Rich Biebel · 11-23-2009, 12:57 PM

I remember it exactly as you say Terry. Cars were picked and built a lot because they fell right on the weight break. The car was weighed without the driver and the drivers weight was not a factor. We were so "green" in those early years we never considerd the drivers weight! I think you were allowed 5 gallons of gas. We once set the record and had to pump all the fuel out of the car into a can. That run was disallowed as we were too close to the minimum weight. The driver weighed well over 200 lbs at the time!

Mark Yacavone · 11-23-2009, 02:44 PM

These cars fell at 16.02 . That's why there were quite a few of them. Some are still around.
I t certainly wasn't for the glamor !

FrankChastain · 11-01-2010, 06:28 AM

Ok Jimmy Parker fill in the blanks...FrankChastain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

These cars fell at 16.02 . That's why there were quite a few of them. Some are still around.
I t certainly wasn't for the glamor !

GTX JOHN · 11-01-2010, 02:05 PM

Jeff: See my post #21, Thanks

Jeff Lee · 11-01-2010, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTX JOHN

Jeff: See my post #21, Thanks

But your post #21 didn't clarify what class the car is running in, just the engine. By the tone of the posts that preceded and followed your post, I sense confusion by some over what class it is in with the continued reference to the 383/343 engine.

11-23-2009, 12:57 PM	#3
Rich Biebel VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northern New Jersey suburbs Posts: 2,315 Likes: 25 Liked 544 Times in 213 Posts	Re: Another cool stocker! I remember it exactly as you say Terry. Cars were picked and built a lot because they fell right on the weight break. The car was weighed without the driver and the drivers weight was not a factor. We were so "green" in those early years we never considerd the drivers weight! I think you were allowed 5 gallons of gas. We once set the record and had to pump all the fuel out of the car into a can. That run was disallowed as we were too close to the minimum weight. The driver weighed well over 200 lbs at the time! __________________ Rich Biebel S/C 1479 Stock 147R

11-23-2009, 02:44 PM	#4
Mark Yacavone Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Miles From Nowhere Posts: 7,819 Likes: 2,910 Liked 5,127 Times in 1,955 Posts	Re: Another cool stocker! These cars fell at 16.02 . That's why there were quite a few of them. Some are still around. I t certainly wasn't for the glamor ! __________________ "We are lucky we don't get as much Government as we pay for." Will Rogers

11-01-2010, 02:05 PM	#6
GTX JOHN VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Boulder City, Nevada 89005 Posts: 2,734 Likes: 2,803 Liked 2,487 Times in 698 Posts	Re: Another cool stocker! Jeff: See my post #21, Thanks