Future of Pro Stock

[Doug Blackley]

Kinda like what's old is new again. Maybe a Top Stk, Jr Stk, Hemi shootout and Top SS with a Jr SS added. The only downside might be it could lead to dropping the traditional SS and Stk classes at Nat'ls. This is almost a be careful what you wish for scenario. Another problem is these types of classes would require a full teardown to keep things in line which takes a pile of time for all involved. But then there are those who will say tear them all apart every time.

[bill dedman]

Thanks for the responses; looks like I'm not the only one who thinks that there needs to be some kind of change to the Pro Stock program to freshen it up and generate some new excitement.

I do think that if they're going to call it Pro Stock (and, I can't imagine that they'd change the name after nearly 40 years), that it should remain a Professional category, and as such, must retain the mechanical excellence that it now enjoys, which will mean it will continue to be a class that requires money in large amounts to be competitive in. Carbon fiber this and Titanum that will continue to be "de rigueur" on the better cars, and it will be hard to build a competitive car without such materials.

Engine choices will depend on the rules, and the rules right now are restrictive to the point that it's cookie cutter all the way. Boring, to me. Those engines all put out an incredible amount of power for what they are, but since they are all alike and equally powerful within a few HP of each other, it's a driver's race.... and that's the boring part, for me. It gets down to who can cut a light, and I don't find a good guess on the tree as exciting as watching two very different engines, with very different specs, race each other, heads-up.

Instead of two basic engine designs competing for Pro Stock money, they could have ten different combinations, from multi-valve turbocharged engines to supercharged hemis, to unblown mountain motors, not unlike what the IHRA Pro Stockers are famous for. Fuel injection should be a "no penalty" option.

But, what do I know??? It just seems that Pro Stock as it exists today, is not a very exciting program, at least, to me. Not much is going to happen until the economy picks up, probably... if then.

Too bad; we need it now.

[david ring]

I just want to point out that the class the innovative guy is racing in is comp!

[63corvette]

If you want to make it exciting for the fans just limit the wheelbase and make it full body late model production cars on gasoline.
Anything Else Goes...
It would be expensive to run but it would be heads up, fast, and exciting for the fans.
Its already expensive to run as it stands today.
My 2 Cents

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by david ring

I just want to point out that the class the innovative guy is racing in is comp!

Good point Dave.You race in one of the most innovative and interesting classes.Flat out no breakout,except for CIC and still the stands empty when you guys run at a national event.Some say
that more heads up (you know who you are) will be the savior of S/SS and include us in the "big show".Well that's Comp and they're in the same boat as us.But boy do they pump money into the black hole compared to us.

Ed F.

[GarysZ24]

Bill, what I'd like to know is what happened to Buddy Ingersolls Twin Turboed Buick Regal, that was banned from NHRA Pro Stock racing because it out-ran the 500 ci guys by at least two tenths? Competition Eliminator may get cars like his nowadays, but I watched a video on You Tube where he gave a V8 Pro Stocker about 1.5 car lengths, and ran it down at the stripe!!! I miss that car, because it gave a valid argument to the phrase "no replacement for displacement"....

[bill dedman]

I have no idea where that car went, but I thought his Pinto, running high 9s at 134 mph with 120 cubic inches and no intercooler or water injection was just as impressive.

He was a wizard with turbos, no doubt!!!

There were at least two "clones" of that car, and maybe more. Butch Ball, from Division VI, had an equally-fast Pinto that held the record for awhile ( a car I got to see run in the 9's,) and "Ohio" George Montgomery built one, too. I never heard how fast it was, but given his reputation, I can only imagine!

Those cars ran Doug Nash 5-speeds and pulled the wheels on every gear-change... amazing, from just 2 liters! If they'd been allowed water injection, there's no telling how fast they might have gone.

Buddy Ingersoll's car was featured in a Car Craft tech story and he admiited to 18 pounds of boost and 11,000 rpms. With water injection, it probably could have run a lot more boost for more horsepower. As I remember, it had to weigh 2,300 pounds. According to the Wallace online calculator, which gives some pretty reasonable-sounding horsepower figures from weight and mph, it takes 430 horsepower at the flywheel to go 134 mph in a 2,300-pound car. That's 3.58 hp per cubic inch... no intercooler; no water/alky injection.

Not bad for an "economy car" LOL!

[art leong]

Originally Posted by david ring

I just want to point out that the class the innovative guy is racing in is comp!

I consider Comp the "rich man's" prostock. You get to spend all the money you can afford (and then some)
And you don't get any Television coverage for a big buck sponsor to pay the bills.

[david ring]

and back me up on this Steve-not all comp racers are wealthy!