1969 camaro hood

Carguy49 · 02-12-2014, 12:51 PM

I know I am late to the party and don't have a dog in this hunt. With all the things that are allowed in STOCK now, why is there an issue with this car/hood combo????? Personally, I think the cars look better with the cowl hood on it. Is there any weight difference between the 2 hoods (stock vs. cowl)?? Also, as long as it's not functional, would there be any performance advantage to the cowl hood?? Just my 2 cents which, in today's economy, ain't worth much. - - Just sayin'

X-TECH MAN · 02-12-2014, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carguy49

I know I am late to the party and don't have a dog in this hunt. With all the things that are allowed in STOCK now, why is there an issue with this car/hood combo????? Personally, I think the cars look better with the cowl hood on it. Is there any weight difference between the 2 hoods (stock vs. cowl)?? Also, as long as it's not functional, would there be any performance advantage to the cowl hood?? Just my 2 cents which, in today's economy, ain't worth much. - - Just sayin'

The cowl induction hood is slightly heavier due to the extra steel in it. Dwight is correct in his prior post.....I figured it out MANY MANY years ago that NHRA had their heads up their butts on a lot of things. Some things they do right but that was before Wally Parks passed away. NHRA had Marty Barrett and Greg X. to keep tech straight. I used to keep my membership up to date to get the National RAGster but I let slide probably 8 or 10 years ago so I haven't kept up with many of the rules changes such as this hood deal. Kind of funny when they allow the 1964 A/FX fiberglass hood on 1964 Comets today in S/S. The paper kept getting worse each year.

Dick Butler · 02-12-2014, 03:06 PM

Really sad how the tech department spends how many hours pouring over the books to rule on a car from 1969. Could it be an honest attempt to get rid of them? Could that be the same reason they took the 71 vette hood? Next they will find 255 hp wasnt available in 68, or in a camaro. Wrong they will just move to another group of racers to harrass. It is amazing to me how a "Business" like NHRA spends so much time on agitation of paying racers when they could attract many more with clarity, consistency, and openness....
Good Luck Class Nationals. Maybe this can become THE racing association of the next generation...

Maybe a list of bogus rules would be fun. You know each racer add the change they have seen which was factually wrong. Add your examples

Carguy49 · 02-13-2014, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by X-TECH MAN

The cowl induction hood is slightly heavier due to the extra steel in it. Dwight is correct in his prior post.....I figured it out MANY MANY years ago that NHRA had their heads up their butts on a lot of things. Some things they do right but that was before Wally Parks passed away. NHRA had Marty Barrett and Greg X. to keep tech straight. I used to keep my membership up to date to get the National RAGster but I let slide probably 8 or 10 years ago so I haven't kept up with many of the rules changes such as this hood deal. Kind of funny when they allow the 1964 A/FX fiberglass hood on 1964 Comets today in S/S. The paper kept getting worse each year.

Thanks for the info. I figured there might be a slight difference due to design. It is surprising how much stuff is allowed on a STOCKER these days. I underdstand some of the changes, but many of the cars are so far from stock it is just wrong. I had a stocker briefly back in the 70's. I am still a big fan of the class and super stockers also, but shake my head at some of the cars that are running now. Pacific Raceways has 4 stock super stock combo races this year and I will be there for them all. I hope that the class will still be around for many more years. I have many friends that race in both stock and super stock and I applaud there efforts, in spite of what NHRA keeps throwing at them.

69Cobra · 02-13-2014, 09:12 PM

If the cowl hood didn't come on it it shouldn't be on it. What about the rear wings that aren't on the cars that came with wings on them?

gbur · 02-14-2014, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 69Cobra

If the cowl hood didn't come on it it shouldn't be on it. What about the rear wings that aren't on the cars that came with wings on them?

Sounds like you are in a snake trap

69Cobra · 02-14-2014, 12:35 PM

What I'm saying is if that engine/hp combo didn't have the option for a cowl hood then how can you run it? With that being said I think its funny how pretty much every 67-69 F-body stocker does not run a rear wing yet 95% of the ones that were ever on the street had them. I'm not a F-body guru and I'm sure the reason they get away with that is GM had the rear wings as an option but was that rear wing an option on cars that had Cowl hoods or was it part of the package?

Dick Butler · 02-14-2014, 12:43 PM

Billy, I am truly impressed with your data. Thanks. Wonder why NHRA took 40? years to look into this? I can only guess a competitor with a slower combination. Probably will still be slower but I must admit if it didn't come on it or not available as an option on it then it shouldn't be allowed. Now apply the same reasoning to all the other small parts, fins, wings etc. people have mentioned within a month or so and all will be fair.

Billy Nees · 02-14-2014, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 69Cobra

What I'm saying is if that engine/hp combo didn't have the option for a cowl hood then how can you run it? With that being said I think its funny how pretty much every 67-69 F-body stocker does not run a rear wing yet 95% of the ones that were ever on the street had them. I'm not a F-body guru and I'm sure the reason they get away with that is GM had the rear wings as an option but was that rear wing an option on cars that had Cowl hoods or was it part of the package?

The spoilers were options.

HandOverFist · 02-14-2014, 01:00 PM

Spoilers (D80): The spoiler option was not available in 1967 on any Camaro. It became available as an option on all cars (except those with a rear antenna) in 68-69. It was not mandatory on any car, except for the 69 pace car replicas and later 69 Z's. The narrower 68 spoiler was used on the 69 Camaro up to January - March of 69, when the wider 69 spoiler was phased in. One of the torsion bars on an original spoiler equipped car will be of larger diameter to compensate for the weight of the spoiler. The front center of the 69 subframe will have a drilled hole to mount the center brace of the front spoiler.

Cowl hood (ZL2): The cowl hood was an option on SS and Z28 models in 1969 and was included on all COPO's and Pace Cars. It was introduced midyear 69. #1 ZL1, built 12E at Norwood is one of the first Camaros to have a factory ZL2 hood. A late December LOS-built Z28 with ZL2 has also been documented.
The ZL2 option included a solenoid and flapper in the hood. The wiring for the solenoid was routed through a special hole in firewall above the fuseblock. Only 10,026 cars received cowl hoods in 69 and about half of those went to COPO's and Pace Cars, meaning there were only 5,000 Z28's and SS's (out of about 20,000 Z28's and 30,000 non-Pacer SS's) that received the cowl hood.

02-12-2014, 03:06 PM	#3
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood Really sad how the tech department spends how many hours pouring over the books to rule on a car from 1969. Could it be an honest attempt to get rid of them? Could that be the same reason they took the 71 vette hood? Next they will find 255 hp wasnt available in 68, or in a camaro. Wrong they will just move to another group of racers to harrass. It is amazing to me how a "Business" like NHRA spends so much time on agitation of paying racers when they could attract many more with clarity, consistency, and openness.... Good Luck Class Nationals. Maybe this can become THE racing association of the next generation... Maybe a list of bogus rules would be fun. You know each racer add the change they have seen which was factually wrong. Add your examples Last edited by Dick Butler; 02-12-2014 at 03:09 PM.

02-13-2014, 09:12 PM	#5
69Cobra Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: California, Ky Posts: 669 Likes: 61 Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood If the cowl hood didn't come on it it shouldn't be on it. What about the rear wings that aren't on the cars that came with wings on them? __________________ Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032

02-14-2014, 12:35 PM	#7
69Cobra Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: California, Ky Posts: 669 Likes: 61 Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood What I'm saying is if that engine/hp combo didn't have the option for a cowl hood then how can you run it? With that being said I think its funny how pretty much every 67-69 F-body stocker does not run a rear wing yet 95% of the ones that were ever on the street had them. I'm not a F-body guru and I'm sure the reason they get away with that is GM had the rear wings as an option but was that rear wing an option on cars that had Cowl hoods or was it part of the package? __________________ Kris Rachford 69 Cobra 428CJ 4 Speed C/S 3032

02-14-2014, 12:43 PM	#8
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood Billy, I am truly impressed with your data. Thanks. Wonder why NHRA took 40? years to look into this? I can only guess a competitor with a slower combination. Probably will still be slower but I must admit if it didn't come on it or not available as an option on it then it shouldn't be allowed. Now apply the same reasoning to all the other small parts, fins, wings etc. people have mentioned within a month or so and all will be fair.

02-14-2014, 01:00 PM	#10
HandOverFist VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Gulf Breeze, FL Posts: 1,651 Likes: 8 Liked 33 Times in 16 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood Spoilers (D80): The spoiler option was not available in 1967 on any Camaro. It became available as an option on all cars (except those with a rear antenna) in 68-69. It was not mandatory on any car, except for the 69 pace car replicas and later 69 Z's. The narrower 68 spoiler was used on the 69 Camaro up to January - March of 69, when the wider 69 spoiler was phased in. One of the torsion bars on an original spoiler equipped car will be of larger diameter to compensate for the weight of the spoiler. The front center of the 69 subframe will have a drilled hole to mount the center brace of the front spoiler. Cowl hood (ZL2): The cowl hood was an option on SS and Z28 models in 1969 and was included on all COPO's and Pace Cars. It was introduced midyear 69. #1 ZL1, built 12E at Norwood is one of the first Camaros to have a factory ZL2 hood. A late December LOS-built Z28 with ZL2 has also been documented. The ZL2 option included a solenoid and flapper in the hood. The wiring for the solenoid was routed through a special hole in firewall above the fuseblock. Only 10,026 cars received cowl hoods in 69 and about half of those went to COPO's and Pace Cars, meaning there were only 5,000 Z28's and SS's (out of about 20,000 Z28's and 30,000 non-Pacer SS's) that received the cowl hood. __________________ Rich Taylor I/SA - 321 Last edited by HandOverFist; 02-14-2014 at 01:03 PM.

02-12-2014, 12:51 PM	#1
Carguy49 VIP Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Fife, Washington Posts: 1,977 Likes: 2,467 Liked 2,941 Times in 707 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood I know I am late to the party and don't have a dog in this hunt. With all the things that are allowed in STOCK now, why is there an issue with this car/hood combo????? Personally, I think the cars look better with the cowl hood on it. Is there any weight difference between the 2 hoods (stock vs. cowl)?? Also, as long as it's not functional, would there be any performance advantage to the cowl hood?? Just my 2 cents which, in today's economy, ain't worth much. - - Just sayin' __________________ Ron McDowell - Did Race Every day is a Gift - Enjoy with family and friends.