1969 camaro hood

Dwight Southerland · 03-01-2014, 10:16 AM

Half of this problem with what is accepted is the inconsistency in the verification by NHRA tech. So they accept a letter from Carroll Shelby that can be questioned by critics for some obvious reasons. So they accept bogus engine-trans-body combinations because of a snafu when some tech person put in writing to a racer that the combination was legal to race in spite of no factory documentation. So they allow bogus camshaft specs twenty years after an engine was in production. So they allow scoops and body kits to be retrofitted to cars after they were produced. So they allow intake-carb parts because of one installation on a factory show car. The infuriating part is that the justification for one case is rejected when presented for another case. It's like your Mom refusing to let you eat a cookie because it will spoil your supper then turning around and feeding cake and ice cream to your brother.

Then, for them to come back thirty years later and start punishing racers for something that has been standard behavior is like blowing on smoldering coals.

But, remember that the definition of "legal" to NHRA tech is what they say passes and it does not have to agree with facts.

03-01-2014, 10:16 AM	#20
Dwight Southerland VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything. Posts: 2,001 Likes: 64 Liked 780 Times in 194 Posts	Re: 1969 camaro hood Half of this problem with what is accepted is the inconsistency in the verification by NHRA tech. So they accept a letter from Carroll Shelby that can be questioned by critics for some obvious reasons. So they accept bogus engine-trans-body combinations because of a snafu when some tech person put in writing to a racer that the combination was legal to race in spite of no factory documentation. So they allow bogus camshaft specs twenty years after an engine was in production. So they allow scoops and body kits to be retrofitted to cars after they were produced. So they allow intake-carb parts because of one installation on a factory show car. The infuriating part is that the justification for one case is rejected when presented for another case. It's like your Mom refusing to let you eat a cookie because it will spoil your supper then turning around and feeding cake and ice cream to your brother. Then, for them to come back thirty years later and start punishing racers for something that has been standard behavior is like blowing on smoldering coals. But, remember that the definition of "legal" to NHRA tech is what they say passes and it does not have to agree with facts.