Ok?

denbreeden · 08-07-2013, 04:07 PM

So my 72 Comet GT would be a natural U/SA car? 302 @ 143hp? The 2 BBL probably makes it a bad combo, or is there any hope of making it under the 14.85 index?

Dennis Breeden

Stock726 · 08-07-2013, 04:17 PM

Has anybody verified with Pat C. that this isn't a typo?

Every other HP adjustment has a separate column for OEM HP
and one for NHRA HP. Even if they are the same, they are both listed. Looks to me like they need to hire a proofreader.....

Paul Wong · 08-07-2013, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denbreeden

So my 72 Comet GT would be a natural U/SA car? 302 @ 143hp? The 2 BBL probably makes it a bad combo, or is there any hope of making it under the 14.85 index?

Dennis Breeden

If you want to see and help out I will go 2.00 under plus for you!

denbreeden · 08-07-2013, 04:48 PM

I don't want to step on Chuck Blossom's toes, lol. I can't imagine that 302 2 bbl going 13.85 let alone 12.85!

Dennis Breeden

Paul Wong · 08-07-2013, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denbreeden

I don't want to step on Chuck Blossom's toes, lol. I can't imagine that 302 2 bbl going 13.85 let alone 12.85!

Dennis Breeden

If a 273 2 barrel mopar can run in the 12's. I am sure it will be no problem with 30 extra cubic inches. Your just used to thinking with a 1000 cfm throttle body. These are not cookie cutter cars. You have to think a bit outside the box. Thats where the fun is.

rawhide · 08-07-2013, 05:06 PM

What I find confusing is that every year from 1972 through 1979 has a different hp rating. 1980 and 1981 have two different ratings of 130 and 132 each year. 1982 has two of 132 and 157 for the GT engine. 1975 has the lowest which is 129. Hope I have not confused any of this.
regards, Roland

Ed Wright · 08-07-2013, 06:21 PM

How do you read those? Mostly reductions? I don't see seperate columns for OEM and new.

Jack McCarthy · 08-07-2013, 06:38 PM

just *****ng great....

every year just before indy a new -2 second p.o.s. shows up in U/SA... cmon nhra don't you guys really have a clue here... use the calculator on your phone....

captain jack

Nick Heath · 08-07-2013, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

How do you read those? Mostly reductions? I don't see seperate columns for OEM and new.

Ed, you have to check each individual year (e.g. 1978 Ford) to see what they were reduced to.
I can't figure out what the reduction is on the 2000 LS1 though??

I wonder if NHRA realized that it did not make sense to rate a '72 Maverick, a '78 Mustang, and an '82 Mustang all at the same HP. So they rolled the HP ratings back to what they were from the factory, without realizing that the factory ratings weren't worth anything to begin with!
Or is this some elaborate plan to win back Ford's support and $$$?

Ed Wright · 08-07-2013, 08:54 PM

The 2000 LS1 reduction surprised me. I figured I was reading it wrong. The bone stock, untouched automatics made more than the factory rating, at the tires, on my chassis dyno, totally untouched. Stick cars made more, of course, than the automatics. Figure a 20% loss through the drive train. Best automatic cars make in the 330s at the tires.

08-07-2013, 04:07 PM	#1
denbreeden Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Plainville, IN Posts: 502 Likes: 148 Liked 67 Times in 27 Posts	Re: Ok? So my 72 Comet GT would be a natural U/SA car? 302 @ 143hp? The 2 BBL probably makes it a bad combo, or is there any hope of making it under the 14.85 index? Dennis Breeden

08-07-2013, 04:17 PM	#2
Stock726 Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 72 Likes: 24 Liked 39 Times in 10 Posts	Re: Ok? Has anybody verified with Pat C. that this isn't a typo? Every other HP adjustment has a separate column for OEM HP and one for NHRA HP. Even if they are the same, they are both listed. Looks to me like they need to hire a proofreader.....

08-07-2013, 04:48 PM	#4
denbreeden Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Plainville, IN Posts: 502 Likes: 148 Liked 67 Times in 27 Posts	Re: Ok? I don't want to step on Chuck Blossom's toes, lol. I can't imagine that 302 2 bbl going 13.85 let alone 12.85! Dennis Breeden

08-07-2013, 05:06 PM	#6
rawhide Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 270 Likes: 1 Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts	Re: Ok? What I find confusing is that every year from 1972 through 1979 has a different hp rating. 1980 and 1981 have two different ratings of 130 and 132 each year. 1982 has two of 132 and 157 for the GT engine. 1975 has the lowest which is 129. Hope I have not confused any of this. regards, Roland

08-07-2013, 06:21 PM	#7
Ed Wright Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sand Springs, OK Posts: 8,132 Likes: 896 Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts	Re: Ok? How do you read those? Mostly reductions? I don't see seperate columns for OEM and new. __________________ Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA

08-07-2013, 06:38 PM	#8
Jack McCarthy VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: lyndon ky. ... louisville area Posts: 1,327 Likes: 30 Liked 511 Times in 122 Posts	Re: Ok? just *****ng great.... every year just before indy a new -2 second p.o.s. shows up in U/SA... cmon nhra don't you guys really have a clue here... use the calculator on your phone.... captain jack __________________ Jack McCarthy 3609 STK "the Captain"

08-07-2013, 08:54 PM	#10
Ed Wright Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sand Springs, OK Posts: 8,132 Likes: 896 Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts	Re: Ok? The 2000 LS1 reduction surprised me. I figured I was reading it wrong. The bone stock, untouched automatics made more than the factory rating, at the tires, on my chassis dyno, totally untouched. Stick cars made more, of course, than the automatics. Figure a 20% loss through the drive train. Best automatic cars make in the 330s at the tires. __________________ Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA