Why did you build your "slow" stock eliminator car?

[Paul Wong]

Originally Posted by Lee Jordan (3223) A/S

Like with anything else there are several reasons. Cost. Soft Index. Low Maintenance. Cost, oh yea I said that already. lol
Most parts and combos are easy to maintain and its not as hard to be consistant. I have never had a "slow" stocker but this is what I have heard from others who run them.

Consistent? You must have never been around any slow stockers. That is the biggest challenge is to dial a slow stocker from one day to another. Getting the clutch on your 600hp car is a little easier than my less than 300 hp 273 2 barrel

[Bill Koski]

Only car in the class!
It worked for 11 years and a slew of class wins before the rug was jerked!
By the way it is for sale.

[Michael Beard]

Originally Posted by Paul Wong

Consistent? You must have never been around any slow stockers.

Doesn't have to be consistent, just has to be *predictable*. It can be done, just need a lot of seat time to learn the car's tendencies.

Before I had some gremlins (not the AMC kind) pop up in the Turismo, the thing ran FIVE 13.01's in a row to 1000' at the Combo in the Hills, then a 13.00, then it rained. Next morning, 1000' was 13.02, short-shifting high gear a smidge. A couple of years ago, brought it out of retirement to run the Atco LODRS, and after Billy tweaked on it, won the Perfectly Strange award in the first round, dead-on 0, .004 pkg. That little car can be wicked!

[Bob Mulry]

WOW,

I guess that I am only one who thinks that fast is a relative term...........

Is an 11.00 second A/SA car fast and a 12.89 second (which is the National Record) R/SA slow???????

I thought that the object was to run as hard as possible within the rules and restrictions of the class..........

This explains why the rules are constantly changing in order to make cars "fast"

Now I get it,
Bob

[The Hawk]

At the time when I first got into Stock racing(`92)there weren`t many competitive lower classed cars,and the ones I observed didn`t do well. I had already developed some skills with leaving first by 3+ seconds so it was a natural fit for me. Once I can get a motor together without hurting it,I`ll be back running V/SA.

[brent flynn]

To answer your question about "Why did you build your ""slow"" stock eliminator car?" ... Im in the process of collecting parts for my "E/SA" car... theoretically, it SHOULD be fast, but in reality, itll probably be considered a slow car...hehe I will be doing the front suspension, starting in a couple weeks. Parts are in the mail!!

[RonTheAnnouncer]

Again, I want to say I'm not trying to be negative here. I was wondering what makes someone build a 273/2bbl Belvedere wagon when most go the 350/4bbl Camaro route. As far as 12.89 being fast, it would be for me. I've taken over 50 different vehicles down the track in 28 years of racing, none "faster" than 14.63.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by RonTheAnnouncer

Again, I want to say I'm not trying to be negative here. I was wondering what makes someone build a 273/2bbl Belvedere wagon when most go the 350/4bbl Camaro route.

Let's see, I've raced/built enough 350/4bbl Camaros, I'm cheap, I bore easily and I like making parts for cars that no one makes parts for. I guess I'm also a personal satisfaction junkie.
And just for the record, if I were getting paid for the amount of time that I have spent on making cars that shouldn't go fast fast, I could have just paid cash for a COPO. Now IMHO, that doesn't sound like any fun.

[Hemi Moose]

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by Hemi Moose

Maybe not, but the car in the far lane is O in 2 against my 12.0 NSS/E car.