Lencos in SS - Page 2

njk53 · 10-28-2009, 07:54 AM

Super Stock and Stock eliminator are really getting out of hand. This kind of equipment is more like a modified production class. Where is this going to end? The trans case should be OEM.

If I had my way I would have SS and Stock be a foot brake class; no electronics, no wheelie bars, Schubeck lifters, etc. Bring some normalcy back to the two classes.
I would have a more thorough list of OEM options from the factory and not dealer installed items to allow the 55-56-57 Chevys back into stock eliminator.

Kris · 10-28-2009, 09:26 AM

Hopefully "clutchless" is allowed. There is no et/mph advantage by having one. The major advantage is cost. The cost to run a stick is through the roof and going clutchless alleviates alot of the expense. If there is no performance edge it should be allowed. Might make things more economical to hopefully allow more people to run a stick

LB Racing 3179 · 10-28-2009, 05:15 PM

I agree with Jim. SS/ Modified and Modified Stock are giving up 250 lbs to the automatics and need a clutchless trans to compensate for the weight break. These are the only classes that alow that on the same index. All other automatic classes in Comp and SS have seperate indexes. Besides most stick cars are not using the clutch anyway.

SSGN · 10-28-2009, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njk53

Super Stock and Stock eliminator are really getting out of hand. This kind of equipment is more like a modified production class. Where is this going to end? The trans case should be OEM.

If I had my way I would have SS and Stock be a foot brake class; no electronics, no wheelie bars, Schubeck lifters, etc. Bring some normalcy back to the two classes.
I would have a more thorough list of OEM options from the factory and not dealer installed items to allow the 55-56-57 Chevys back into stock eliminator.

Not much stock left in stock.It is really too bad everytime a new rule is allowed we get further away from the class.The end will happen soon enough,then everyone will wonder what went wrong.Not looking to start a internet pissing match just an observation.

buzzinhalfdozen · 10-29-2009, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSGN

Not much stock left in stock.It is really too bad everytime a new rule is allowed we get further away from the class.The end will happen soon enough,then everyone will wonder what went wrong.Not looking to start a internet pissing match just an observation.

I didn't see where they were talking about allowing clutchless in stock. As for allowing it in SS I would think it to be a good idea, I'm unaware of anyone who still uses the clutch in a gear change. The primary benefit I see is less trans breakage, shifting a clutch assisted trans without a clutch can certainly be done however it's very hard on the trans. I've tried both combos in my AX car and the E.T. difference is almost none existant. However the durability is considerably different. This may change some racers thoughts on the prospect of running a lever car, it certainly can't hurt. Joe

SuperStockDodge · 10-29-2009, 10:07 AM

Well, i still use the clutch on every gear change.

SSHemi364 · 10-30-2009, 06:43 PM

This is pure insanity . For those who don't understand, a clutch assisted box can be shifted without a clutch, at a cost of between .015 and .020 sec per gear change. that is the time spent in neutral between gears. It also limits your clutch tune up as the flair in engine speed applies more counterweight. Do the math, a clutchless will be at least .05 to .06 quicker. Not to mention the ability to tune the clutch in a larger window.

All this does is escalate the cost of racing. Not a smart move given our present economy.What could possibly be the reason for this? Too hard to police? I don't think so, I can show you how to identify the cheaters in a New York min..
I think we need a explaination. The sportsman classes are not the place for highroller experiments. How about stapling the rule book closed for a few years and letting us catch our breath.

Dinsdale · 10-30-2009, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

Hopefully "clutchless" is allowed. There is no et/mph advantage by having one. The major advantage is cost. The cost to run a stick is through the roof and going clutchless alleviates alot of the expense. If there is no performance edge it should be allowed. Might make things more economical to hopefully allow more people to run a stick

Wrong on all accounts. A "clutchless" trans is quite a bit more expensive than a clutch type one and both require the same clutch setup. If there was no ET advantage, why do most of the guys abuse their clutch type trannies by not clutching. I don't see where you think clutchless will be cheaper. I don't think they should be allowed in Stock or S/S and Lenco's definately NOT!! The excitement went out of Pro Stock the day they allowed Lenco's.

tj310 · 10-30-2009, 08:30 PM

Dale thank you for sharing the video I take it you are in B.C.? We are looking at a new trans now Jerico lists $250 more for a clutchless I hear they hold up better which should cut down on maint. cost. Did you see how hard Schachter had to pull the shifter that shoulder strain will lead to expensive surgery! because we live in Canada with free health care it's of no concern to us. By the way at Indy open tech checked our car for clutchless . Thanx Trevor

SuperStockDodge · 10-30-2009, 09:06 PM

I'm with you Dale

I'm sorry, but i can't just let my left leg lay there while i'm banging gears. I don't know, maybe it's all about that number and not having fun and going rounds? If you have a clutch pedal stop, correct free play and are coordinated with a manual transmission, i don't see how it can be that much faster (for me) than shifting without the clutch and i can't justify the extra stress/damage on the (clutch assisted) 4-speed. I pull it out of the car enough as it is! LOL

10-28-2009, 07:54 AM	#11
njk53 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: East China, MI Posts: 504 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Lencos in SS Super Stock and Stock eliminator are really getting out of hand. This kind of equipment is more like a modified production class. Where is this going to end? The trans case should be OEM. If I had my way I would have SS and Stock be a foot brake class; no electronics, no wheelie bars, Schubeck lifters, etc. Bring some normalcy back to the two classes. I would have a more thorough list of OEM options from the factory and not dealer installed items to allow the 55-56-57 Chevys back into stock eliminator. __________________ Nelson Kowal Stock 345

10-28-2009, 09:26 AM	#12
Kris Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Maine Posts: 49 Likes: 51 Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts	Re: Lencos in SS Hopefully "clutchless" is allowed. There is no et/mph advantage by having one. The major advantage is cost. The cost to run a stick is through the roof and going clutchless alleviates alot of the expense. If there is no performance edge it should be allowed. Might make things more economical to hopefully allow more people to run a stick

10-28-2009, 05:15 PM	#13
LB Racing 3179 Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 48 Likes: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Lencos in SS I agree with Jim. SS/ Modified and Modified Stock are giving up 250 lbs to the automatics and need a clutchless trans to compensate for the weight break. These are the only classes that alow that on the same index. All other automatic classes in Comp and SS have seperate indexes. Besides most stick cars are not using the clutch anyway.

10-29-2009, 10:07 AM	#16
SuperStockDodge Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stickville USA Posts: 261 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Lencos in SS Well, i still use the clutch on every gear change. Attached Thumbnails

10-30-2009, 06:43 PM	#17
SSHemi364 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 74 Likes: 39 Liked 22 Times in 13 Posts	Re: Lencos in SS This is pure insanity . For those who don't understand, a clutch assisted box can be shifted without a clutch, at a cost of between .015 and .020 sec per gear change. that is the time spent in neutral between gears. It also limits your clutch tune up as the flair in engine speed applies more counterweight. Do the math, a clutchless will be at least .05 to .06 quicker. Not to mention the ability to tune the clutch in a larger window. All this does is escalate the cost of racing. Not a smart move given our present economy.What could possibly be the reason for this? Too hard to police? I don't think so, I can show you how to identify the cheaters in a New York min.. I think we need a explaination. The sportsman classes are not the place for highroller experiments. How about stapling the rule book closed for a few years and letting us catch our breath.

10-30-2009, 08:30 PM	#19
tj310 Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Dresden On. Canada Posts: 460 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Lencos in SS Dale thank you for sharing the video I take it you are in B.C.? We are looking at a new trans now Jerico lists $250 more for a clutchless I hear they hold up better which should cut down on maint. cost. Did you see how hard Schachter had to pull the shifter that shoulder strain will lead to expensive surgery! because we live in Canada with free health care it's of no concern to us. By the way at Indy open tech checked our car for clutchless . Thanx Trevor

10-30-2009, 09:06 PM	#20
SuperStockDodge Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stickville USA Posts: 261 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Lencos in SS I'm with you Dale I'm sorry, but i can't just let my left leg lay there while i'm banging gears. I don't know, maybe it's all about that number and not having fun and going rounds? If you have a clutch pedal stop, correct free play and are coordinated with a manual transmission, i don't see how it can be that much faster (for me) than shifting without the clutch and i can't justify the extra stress/damage on the (clutch assisted) 4-speed. I pull it out of the car enough as it is! LOL