|
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
I'm not "worried" about anything, nor do I have anything to "get over". As Roberte pointed out, it was a legit question- there's no reason for you to act like a dick about it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 6 Posts
|
![]()
The issue of '98 Camaro/Firebird with the LT1 instead of the LS1 was decided 20 years ago and right or wrong it will remain that way no matter how much factory data is presented. For whatever reason NHRA elected to allow the LT1 and not the LS1 in those cars. If you want to run the LS1, just claim the car as a '99. The bodies are identical.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
I'm not interested in trying to convince anybody of anything- like you said, a '98 could simply be presented as a '99. Would a '98 LT1 Camaro stocker be what is referred to as a "paper" car? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: columbus, georgia
Posts: 385
Likes: 65
Liked 309 Times in 88 Posts
|
![]()
I think GM did this to help their 98 Manufacturers points total. If I remember correctly racers were a little slow to warm up to the LS-1 so LT-1 racers could put change the front end and accumulate points as a current year model car for GM.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|