1969 camaro hood

[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?

[Dick Butler]

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]

Originally Posted by Dick Butler

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.

The thing that has always bugged me about the way NHRA does things is that they, quite simply, won't use the wealth of available knowledge that they and their Racers have. Just look at the old pics that Tom Kasch and others have posted on here. Don't you think that if a 66/67 Street Hemi Belvidere had a hood scoop available that Jere Stahl would have had one? Look at all of the old 6-Pack factory Challengers and Cudas. Why did Landy's car have a Shaker hood? Why wasn't the 390 Ford a competitive car when they were new? And do you realize that EVERY 1971 and later carbureted 350 Chevy combustion chamber number is wrong EXCEPT for one? The 350 truck is correct. How, at this point can NHRA fix that? It's been wrong since 71 but that is what was submitted. None of the other Manufacturers have clean hands in this either.

[Rick Schilling]

Are there any back to back performance comparisons available between the cowl hood and the flat?

A number of them would have been changed back by now.

[HandOverFist]

Originally Posted by Rick Schilling

Are there any back to back performance comparisons available between the cowl hood and the flat?

A number of them would have been changed back by now.

I have not queried my buddy who used to run one on his '69 and had to swap to a flat due to protests. My guess is there would be little difference...maybe a slight advantage to the cowl under certain weather conditions.

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Rick Schilling

Are there any back to back performance comparisons available between the cowl hood and the flat?

A number of them would have been changed back by now.

Maybe the guys running S/S with a 350/255 could tell us. They probably had to remove some carb spacers to get the flat hood to fit.

[Dick Butler]

Advantage of the tall hood is spacer ht and carb clearance. Some negative to air flow if used with or without ac as I understand.

[HandOverFist]

With a maximum of two stock base gaskets allowed I don't think that has any bearing on either hood.

[Alex Denysenko]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

The thing that has always bugged me about the way NHRA does things is that they, quite simply, won't use the wealth of available knowledge that they and their Racers have. Just look at the old pics that Tom Kasch and others have posted on here. Don't you think that if a 66/67 Street Hemi Belvidere had a hood scoop available that Jere Stahl would have had one? Look at all of the old 6-Pack factory Challengers and Cudas. Why did Landy's car have a Shaker hood? Why wasn't the 390 Ford a competitive car when they were new? And do you realize that EVERY 1971 and later carbureted 350 Chevy combustion chamber number is wrong EXCEPT for one? The 350 truck is correct. How, at this point can NHRA fix that? It's been wrong since 71 but that is what was submitted. None of the other Manufacturers have clean hands in this either.

-I agree Billy, and they also allow 70-71 440 six packs to run aluminum intakes when they only came on th 69 A-12 cars but back then Chrysler was funneling lots of money to NHRA, I asked for and was not so politely denied a Shelby scooped hood for my SS 65 Mustang. I'd love to hear Jerry Mcneish's take on this hood issue

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

The thing that has always bugged me about the way NHRA does things is that they, quite simply, won't use the wealth of available knowledge that they and their Racers have. Just look at the old pics that Tom Kasch and others have posted on here. Don't you think that if a 66/67 Street Hemi Belvidere had a hood scoop available that Jere Stahl would have had one? Look at all of the old 6-Pack factory Challengers and Cudas. Why did Landy's car have a Shaker hood? Why wasn't the 390 Ford a competitive car when they were new? And do you realize that EVERY 1971 and later carbureted 350 Chevy combustion chamber number is wrong EXCEPT for one? The 350 truck is correct. How, at this point can NHRA fix that? It's been wrong since 71 but that is what was submitted. None of the other Manufacturers have clean hands in this either.

Billy, just a question:

Since you appear to now a lot about these combinations, as regards to the Ford 390 cars, is the reason why they are fast now is the allowance of the Police Interceptor intake on the 1967 Mustangs?

If so, have you spoken to NHRA about this and have you also brought up with NHRA the issue about the Chevy 327 intake use on the 283 engines and the use of the aluminum intake and Holley carb on the 1970 - 1971 Cleveland engines?