Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

All I can say is this. The heads I run came on the truck when I bought the truck brand new in March of 1996. Mr. Ronny at Southland did a 3 angle and cleaned up the surface on these heads and thats it. I know how virgin these heads are; however, when Wesley pored them they were .2 of 1cc higher than the SS spec of a 350. Now they were try to compare the SS specs of a 350 to my 4.3 V6 because they admitted they had no data to compare to. Tell me how is that fair. All I can say is that if NHRA decides that these heads are to big I guess I will be doing more bracket racing, because I don't believe I could find a stock head smaller.

P.S. It is their ballpark; however, without players its just a field.[/QUOTE]

Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

S10 Stocker:

The main thing NHRA is doing this year is gathering data for next year. That is my understanding
from "sources" but it appears they are also going to disqualify some heads they do not 'like'.

I can remember Farmer (for you younger guys he was the original national tech guy) disqualifying
heads because he didn't like the looks of them.
So, this has been going on forever and looks like they are going back to it. So, I would suggest
everyone have their heads checked and make sure they are legal. There has been too much
cheating with heads for years,

I'm sure Wesley was just gathering 'data' when he poured you heads and it will be used to update
their records for next year when things really get serious.

Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

I'm glad they are collecting data now. After what happen with the Q-Jets a few years back with poor manufacturing/quality control by not following "Mill SPECs".

Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

Well we talked about it and I asked if I could bring a set of junkyard heads for thr Red River Race to be CCed and he aggreed. I know he was doing his job and just collecting data, but the way he warned me made me feel like I did something wrong.

Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

Yep...how do you dare to question his authority!!! :)

Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

I’m quite sure they are just trying to get as much data as possible I’ve have my heads poured twice in 3 weeks now and the Division 6 guys asked which ports the Division 7 guys poured to make sure they did not pour the same ports. That tells me they are just trying to get as many different runners as possible to get statistical data.

Re: Great Bend Stock DQ
 

Re: cylinder head pouring

You know the old saying, “It’s like closing the barn door after the horse has got out”. As far as I’m concerned the horse has been gone so long, it has likely died of old age.

I think it’s far too late in the game to try to bring things back to the way they were. What spec do we use?? NHRA doesn’t seem to be up-front with what their long term intentions are.

I had my heads poured on numerous occasions back in the early 1980’s. They (NHRA) knew then there was a problem in Super Stock and they were looking for baseline numbers AND it was only a matter of a short period of time it would spill into Stock. And it did.

I don’t know what the answer is. Open up the head rule or attempt to police it based on comparative sample cylinder heads. Somehow I find it hard to believe NHRA will pony up with the resources to make any dramatic changes. Like I said they have known for a long time there were cylinder head issues in Stock and chose not to do much if anything about it. All of a sudden they develop a conscience ??

I also was on the receiving end of “Farmer’s” wrath. He could be a handful to say the least. As a small example of this, I was in the teardown barn at Pomona a hundred years ago. I had a 79 Malibu wagon. At the time I had 78 tail lights in it. The difference between the two was the position of the backup lights. I suspect somebody had tipped him off on this minor fact and he came after me and was bound and determined to bounce me for it. There was a long debate between us. I asked him what possible performance advantage was gained by those tail lights??? His response was quick and on point. He said “There is no performance advantage, it’s consistency”.
Perhaps we were held to a higher standard back then, but as time passed the standards changed – as did the CONSISTENCY. Farmer had the right idea. I think it is too little, too late now. The horse is dead.

Chuck Porter