hey len !!!!
 

Hey Len ,,did,nt hear back fron you on my post about throwing the fuel---injection cars back in with us carburated car,s, think this need,s soom explanatoin ???? like i stated earlier how about the aro-dynanic,s, the E -shift ect.. ? WE WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE ,, WHAT MAKES NHRA THINK THIS WILL BE FAIR NOW WHEN IT WAS,NT AND THEY SPIT IT UP BEFORE ????? MAKE,S ME SCRATCH MY A?? AND WONDER .... DENNIS DUNLAP J/SA SSGT/MA

Re: hey len !!!!
 

I have ran 3 carb cars,,,and 3 fuel injected cars,,,,it depends on the combo,,,,,,,,2 of the 3 FI cars were greated affected by bad air and elevation,,,, 2 of the carb cars were not,,,,,,1 was drasticly,,,,,,1 carb car slowed down over .50 running it at 100 degrees water temp and 65 degrees outside at an actual elevation of 300ft,,,,,,,,to 140 water temp,,,,80 degrees outside temp,,,,,,,,


on the other hand ,,had an oldsmobile that woundnt slow down but .02 from an outside temp of 65 up to 85 outside temp

the statement of Fi cars not moving around in et is not exactly correct,,,,the camaro, which had the f.a.s.t. system wouldnt move around hardly any if the A/F ratio was set to a lean condition,,,,,BUT,,,,the cavalier would change if it THOUGHT the outside temp would drop,,,,,so that like comparing apples and oranges

now,, the mustang ( FI) would run 8.3`s at the rock and 8.8`s at bristol,,,,,while the olds (CARB) would run 8.0`s at the rock and 8.1`s at bristol,,,,,

just depends on combo,,,,I wouldnt depend on that reason to justify not combining classes

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Well here is a thought on FI vs Carb........

The GT/MA record just got set.....10.66 with a '95 Chev FI 265 cu in

Now, how fast in GT/MA with a '55 Chev Carb 265 cu in ??

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Well, ya "hadtobethere" to see the lil' 265 FI sucker run. Fast piece!

Jerry

Re: hey len !!!!
 

1 1352 B/SA Bill Hawk, Manassas VA, '67 Shelby 10.092 11.55 -1.458
2 1441 A/S Richard Adkins, Willingboro NJ, '67 Shelby 9.867 11.30 -1.433

From MIR this spring. These guys can keep up with the FI if they want to, but most are scared of the slap on the wrist.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

If the carb cars are going to run with the injected cars wouldn't it be reasonable to put a realistic weight on the late model cars? Compare a 1968 Camaro stocker which weighs very close to the real shipping weight to a 1988 Camaro that is at least 400 pounds lighter than the REAL weight of shipping. How the weights got out of control is not a big deal until the 68 with it's obvious disadvantages has to run heads up.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

great example...but those arent stockers...they are modified production!!

Re: hey len !!!!
 

b/sa 633, that,s the best description i,ve heard so-far....nicely put !!!!!!!!!!!! dennis dunlap j/sa ssgt/ma

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Dennis,
Several reasons why the switch back:

1- The original split was to allow the EFI cars to compete against each other and level out the HP factors.
2- When NHRA created the EFI specific classes, the thinking was that eventually we would blend them
back into regular stock after they leveled out against each other.
3- Design inequities will always be an element of Stock category racing. This is why Stock Eliminator is
categorized by weight vs horsepower with the element of weight being adjustable based on actual
performance.
4- There are a number of racers that I am sure would gladly debate the consistency factor with you.
5- NHRA has too many classes in Stock (75) and Super Stock (85) eliminator categories. Eliminating the
EFI classes reduces the overal class count by 26 classes.
6- To include or not include EFI cars back into regular Stock has been an ongoing debate among
racers since the inception of the classes. When you look at ALL the elements, such as those
listed above and what is best for the long term growth of this category putting EFI cars back into
regular Stock made the most sense to NHRA and arguably many racers.

Re: hey len !!!!
 

Thanks, Len Here is a good example 1969 Camaro 325hp 396 VS 1997 Camaro 350 LTI

Both fit in E/SA

1969 3420lbs
1997 3530lbs

Both have a 3 speed

1969 396 cubic inches
1997 350 cubic inches

1969 700+ cfm Q Jet
1997 600 cfm throttle body

You tell me what looks better!