HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-11-2009, 11:28 AM   #31
Adger Smith
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Texarkana Ark/TX
Posts: 2,344
Likes: 425
Liked 665 Times in 258 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

How does it work going the other way?? Like a 69 Vette body W/L-88 fresh air hood and a '66 327 engine that was not equipped with fresh air... would that be allowed in GT classes? It seems to me like the precedent is already set. It has already been done/allowed with the 69 Camaro running cowl induction hoods with non fresh air engine combos in Stock, SS and SS/GT. Is a Mopar and Fomoco "forward facing scoop" really a different application than some of the cowl or rear facing fresh air systems from other MFG's? It's all about cool clean air, no matter how you get it.
The way I read the rule book using a fresh air body with a non fresh air engine should be allowed.
Because:
1. When you pick a body for the GT class It says nothing in the rules about limiting the bodies to non fresh air applications.
2. When you pick an engine. It clearly says under engine:1 V-8 only; must be same make as body.Year optional. Engine must be listed in both the NHRA Stock Car Classification Guide and NHRA Blueprint Bulletins. Again it says nothing about limiting it to non Fresh Air engines

GT classes Mix combinations of bodies and engines. If it is allowed one way, it should be allowed going the other way. .

I really don't see that there is a problem with any "Body Package" that was produced by a MFG running any "Engine Combination" that was produced by the same MFG. as long as they are listed in the applicable NHRA guides.
Maybe we should go back as far as the inception of the GT Classes to see the "intent". Which I thought was to allow the mixing of SS engine combos and body combinations that weren't available with each other. Our resident GT historian Don Kennedy might be able to shine a little more light on the reason for GT Classes.
__________________
Adger Smith (Former SS)

Last edited by Adger Smith; 10-11-2009 at 11:36 AM. Reason: sp
Adger Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 01:00 PM   #32
2021STK
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 281
Likes: 270
Liked 17 Times in 14 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

Stewart, I do understand no scoops are allowed to be added in GT, I was just trying to illustrate/exaggerate the fresh air engine concept in a non-fresh air body for the sake of this conversation.

Adger, I agree with your view 100%, that is exactly the way I read the rulebook. In fact the '69 Corvette L88 hooded car was the example I used in Dinwiddie this weekend at tech. I hadn't seen a '69 Camaro with a cowl hood yet in GT but that is an identical situation that I'm trying to clarify, I appreciate you pointing that out.

Thanks guys,
Dave
2021STK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 03:11 PM   #33
R GARY
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: edmond okla
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

How would you run a 68 cutlass w/fresh air to a cowl induction 396 in GT class. Ron
R GARY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 03:50 PM   #34
BIGDAD
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Green Valley , Texas !
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

So, if the car is a 383 combo to fit gt/ea

And no 383 cars had factory scoops, how is it that he can run that , not to mention all the other items

Like alum heads, etc, etc. ?
BIGDAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 04:09 PM   #35
Rory McNeil
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: from Vancouver BC Canada, now in Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 242
Liked 919 Times in 252 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

[QUOTE=BIGDAD;145476]

And no 383 cars had factory scoops, how is it that he can run that ,

QUOTE]

I`m pretty sure that the 383 was available with the "Air Grabber "scoop on 70-71 Road Runners, and maybe a Shaker on 70-71 Cudas, no?
__________________
NHRA 6390 STK
M/S 85 Mustang
Rory McNeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 04:09 PM   #36
X-TECH MAN
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

Quote:
Originally Posted by todd boyer View Post
so the upshot of all this is that these cars never came with fiberglass hoods from chrysler???
nope !
X-TECH MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 04:16 PM   #37
Adger Smith
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Texarkana Ark/TX
Posts: 2,344
Likes: 425
Liked 665 Times in 258 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

BigDad,
I think what is being missed with this discussion on the GT cars is there are two issues that make it a GT class.
1. body/trim/acessories package to the body style chosen
2. engine/drive line combination
They don't have to match (come from the MFG as one package) or compliment one another as in traditional Super Stock
A.He has chosen a car combination that came with a hoodscooped Hemi.
B.He then chose a 383 engine/power train combination (the 383 combo could have also had a shaker hood scoop)
A+B = GT/EA
__________________
Adger Smith (Former SS)

Last edited by Adger Smith; 10-11-2009 at 04:18 PM. Reason: SP
Adger Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 04:21 PM   #38
X-TECH MAN
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGDAD View Post
So, if the car is a 383 combo to fit gt/ea

And no 383 cars had factory scoops, how is it that he can run that , not to mention all the other items

Like alum heads, etc, etc. ?
The car its self is a Hemi car (it could also be a Max Wedge body with the dropped center on the scoop and be legal) with alum front end that came with a straight across the top hood scoop so the hood scoop is legal for GT/EA (Alum hood....not fiberglass in NHRA.....fiberglass in IHRA ONLY). If the engine installed was avaliable with fresh air it is allowed to use the existing scoop. I havent heard a straight answer about what if the engine was not a cold air version. Some say OK some say NO????????
As far as the engine goes I do not know of any 383/440 legal to use alum heads. Still waiting for all the Hemi experts out there to tell me whats the deal on the 1964 hood pins. Henged or pined or both????

Last edited by X-TECH MAN; 10-11-2009 at 04:26 PM.
X-TECH MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 04:31 PM   #39
X-TECH MAN
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,049
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
Talking Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

Want to stir up more "POOP" ? Which wheelbase is legal? The Hemi cars came with a 1 inch shorter wheelbase than the Max wedge or 383 cars.
X-TECH MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2009, 04:52 PM   #40
Adger Smith
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Texarkana Ark/TX
Posts: 2,344
Likes: 425
Liked 665 Times in 258 Posts
Default Re: 64 Plymouth GT/EA in Ennis

Terry,
Bringing up wheel base....that's not fair. Stir, stir.. LOL! There is only one legal wheel base. You know, the wheelbase has to do with the original car/combo chosen.
Just ask me all about wheelbase. I've earned the right to be an expert.
I guess you could split the one inch difference (between Hemi and Max wedge) and it would still make the 3/4" rule and be legal.
__________________
Adger Smith (Former SS)
Adger Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.