GT Rulebook Amendments
 

"Reserved for foreign and domestic factory-production coupes, sedans, sports cars, convertibles, or station wagons with any production V-8 engine of the same make. Year of engine optional, engine/body platform combinations that fit base Super Stock not eligible. Only those engines and/or bodies listed in the Official NHRA Stock Car Classification Guide are eligible for competition. Also see WEIGHT. Cars will be classified using the class weight break multiplied by the horsepower or performance rating of the engine used. Minimum weight with driver: 2,670 pounds."

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Seems like a reasonable idea, but where exactly is the line drawn and how exactly will this be enforced?

I can't run a LT1 in my GT/xx 1998 Firebird because it's in the 1998 class guide as an SS/xx. OK, makes sense.

I can't run a LS1 in my GT/xx 1999 Firebird because it's in the 1999 class guide as an SS/xx. OK, makes sense.

Can I run a 1998 LT1 in my GT/xx 1999 Firebird because there's no LT1 in a 1999 Firebird?

If so, isn't this the sort of thing people were doing anyway? And if not, where do you draw the line?

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

I'm really surprised there hasn't been more discussion or questions on this.
Could you run a low compression 1972 Oldsmobile 455 in a 1970 body?
What exactly are they saying if someone claims a different year car vs engine?
Who is this rule affecting the most?

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

You're spot on, there are some very popular body combinations that can be claimed as many different years to avoid the intended rule. I'm curious what controls they are putting in place for this rule to be effective.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

How about this one 1966 Chevy 283/220. GT rated 233, Nova 233, Big cars 229, Chevelle 217 all different platforms but same engine specs. Tom

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Combinations where a simple carb/intake change changes the year of the engine?

'68 - '71 or even '73 Darts/Dusters with 340s?

Or is a different year spec engine all that is required to go to GT?

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

The way I interpret the rule is if the engine in your car is correct to run a specific super stock class then it cannot run GT. Some change would have to be done for it to be legal in GT. Carb change, Different heads etc.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

I agree with what Mike said. I have a 1964 Chevy ll with a 283, a natural K or L car in regular SS therefore can’t run that combo in GT/M or N any more. What’s unfortunate with that is the stick hp rating is 7 hp less in GT.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Larry, NHRA just took 283-237 down to 230

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

NHRA just took 283-237 down to 230 This stick cars in a Chevy II only Autos is 233. Chevelle with a stick is still 227, Auto is 217. SS/J K L M is a 1# weight break, where do the GT classes go 1/2# breaks? Tom

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

a 68-71 340 is a totally different engine from a 72-73 340, they can run GT
if a 69 engine is in a 72 car

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Tom, I believe GT/A starts at 6.00 and go 1/2 break all way to GT/Q at 14.00. 6th

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Correct. The 68-71s used different carbs on the same basic engine (mostly). My question was, will a simple carb change to something other than was used in the model year of car, i.e. a 68 Dart with a Thermoquad, make it acceptable for GT. I believe I got my answer.

Thanks.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

71 340 should be legal in a 68-70 for GT.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Looks more than a carb change. A quick glance shows different compression ratios. Of course you could run less compression if its just a head gasket and chamber, But if its a piston cc, then that might be a problem.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Need to watch Lonnie's post on NHRA with coverage of the PRI show - day 1 @ 9:00 am. Makes interesting point that they realize people will be switching back and forth to "hide" from competitors with specific engine families and made the statement that they "may" find themselves staying in GT for the year. How that comes about who will know.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Is NHRA going to start to be like other organizations and make fly by night rule changes? maybe if they would open up the quotas in stock and super stock and let more cars in they would get more heads up runs. People should just race their own car and worry about the rules that pertain to their car instead of crying to tech that others have an unfair advantage because they can run more than one class.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

68-71 have the same piston, deck height, valve size and head CCs.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

I wonder if they are singling out GT with enforcement of rules or will they enforce all class rules in Super Stock Eliminator???
For example a Modified car that is required to run 2 carbs for a specific class but is only using one. Will this still be allowed or will it be corrected???

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

I think it says a maximum 2 carbs or 3 2bbls in modified. Heck they didn’t really care too much when a well known modified racer raced in a heads up with more carb than allowed a few years ago so I doubt if they will change this.

I think if they did raise the quota just enough to be above the fields instead of defaulting to all run. Too much ladder playing because there is no fear of not qualifying. Why not make the minimum field 64 and let 80 in ? Or if they want a lower quota, make the field smaller, I realize some say that it isn’t fair etc. I would put it this way. Don’t sign up for a National event if you don’t want to try and actually qualify. There are many points meets to race in. There are some that are full fields plus and that means some don’t get in. We all seem to be able to survive when that happens.

I think also they should consider something such as more points for a heads up win and or more points for better qualifying or a record. Just little nuances that would drive racers to performance.

Maybe the SS category indexes should be lowered to reduce the number of stockers that can easily cross over with no mods and easily qualify for the SS field. If we care about SS vs GT, why not look at the easy path to SS by many stockers. Seems odd to push the GT SS deal without looking at that.

The GT rule change just reduces the places to hide. Not for all, for some.

I realize we can’t afford it to become comp. Heck comp racers can’t afford comp, so it has to be a balance. I feel like NHRA has been in support of policies that don’t require them to do the job that truly defines their existence. Anytime you have rules, you need teams to follow up. NHRA has no succession or sustainability plan for their tech dept.
The masters level tech personnel are aging out and retiring. If they don’t make some effort to help that, they will not be relevant.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

What was broke the way it was? They let Hemis go to comp as well as Factory SS cars trying to get more cars there. The slower cars going from reg super stock to GT can go to 1/2 lb weight breaks. My Chevy II to change classes, you will now have to move 233lb yet you can only have 200 removable weight. The old rules made those cars more attractive to own. With Nhras less tech who is going watch out for this stuff any way. Tom

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Does the 71 340 not have a thinner head gasket?

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

Yes, .002" equaling about .43 of a cc.

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

I thought it was 71 = .028 and 68 to 70 = .035
Did they change it?

Re: GT Rulebook Amendments
 

I just checked, 68 .030 69 and 70 .035