Billet cams and lifter supply

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by 4284spd

In this whole thread, maybe 10 actually race Stock. Nobody currently racing is going to want to go slower so that's a huge fail for all the valve spring pressure guy's.
2nd It's 2022 not 1967! Get over it!
3rd Rollers don't effect the looks or purpose of the class. It adds reliability. Again it's 2022!
No parts = no racers!!! JMO

Let's make something perfectly clear Bob, first of all I DO race Stock. I really don't mind "going slower". I've probably done it for as long or longer than most on this board. And probably with more combos in more cars than you and your buddys put together. If "going slower" means having the rules actively enforced and having the bogus parts and combos done away with then count me in for "going slow".

Rollers DON'T add reliability, they just allow bigger, more aggressive lobes that allow higher engine speeds that will make bigger and more "manipulated" cylinder heads more of a necessity which will just drive costs higher and make engine failures more frequent. Now that right there sounds like a good way to get rid of Racers.

REAL RACERS, (not the people who order parts from a second party and have them assembled by a third party so that they can have their rig driven to a track by a forth party so they can fly in and rent a Mercedes and drive to the track) will ALWAYS find the stuff that they need to go racing. That's what REAL Sportsmen Racers do!

Yes, it is 2022 and if NHRA and the Racers themselves don't start actively trying to come up with ways to lower costs and do away with the interpretations (and manipulations) of the written rules, we probably won't see 2032. The way everything else is going, I doubt that we will anyway.

[Stan Weiss]

No, I don't run NHRA stock.

You are right! Lets move into the 21st century and let you update your parts.

Maybe NHRA should move into the 21st century as well. No need for tech. They need to contract with someone to write some software which will take your car's weight, aerodynamics, track weather conditions, etc. and analyze your runs split time and my guess is give most of you some HP.

Stan

[Frank Castros]

The core issue and has been for many, many years is the NHRA's inability, or desire to enforce the Stock Eliminator Rule Book.
Racers will do anything to run with the big dogs, it's the sanctioning body's responsibility to monitor and enforce the rules. BIG FAIL on its role to do so.

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Rollers DON'T add reliability, they just allow bigger, more aggressive lobes that allow higher engine speeds that will make bigger and more "manipulated" cylinder heads more of a necessity which will just drive costs higher and make engine failures more frequent. Now that right there sounds like a good way to get rid of Racers.

Billy,

The issue is that there is only one solid/hydraulic lifter manufacturer left in the USA. The only other manufacturer left in the USA, makes only hydraulic roller lifters. New engines are either hydraulic rollers or OHC. The business model for earlier engines that run a hydraulic or solid tappet style is no longer a market the bean counters want to support with USA made products.

Moreover, there is both an issue with cam core quality and lifter quality, especially when they are made overseas. Then add the EPA imposed restrictions on lubricating engine oils, it creates more issues.

As regards to camshaft design, running a roller lifter/camshaft does not always allow a performance increase since the roller wheel diameter places a limit on how aggressive the lobe can be. One example would be the Olds 307 engine, which was available with both a hydraulic tappet and roller lifter. In Stock Eliminator trim, the hydraulic tappet engine, even with solid tappet lifters, is faster than the roller engine.

Since you been around as long as I have, you may remember in the early days, there were "Mushroom" style solid lifters available to run aggressive lobe profiles because it provides a larger contact area.

If there were to be a rule change to allow the use of hydraulic or solid roller lifters, then they should limit the roller wheel size to OEM which is 0.700". This is the roller wheel size for all OEM applications.

Allowing a larger roller wheel diameter has the same effect as using a larger size tappet style lifter. With roller lifters, the diameter does not make any difference, however, the roller wheel diameter does.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

One example would be the Olds 307 engine, which was available with both a hydraulic tappet and roller lifter. In Stock Eliminator trim, the hydraulic tappet engine, even with solid tappet lifters, is faster than the roller engine.

Poor example as the 307 roller motor uses a totally different cylinder head design. I can however see the issue of using a "stock" roller lifter. Very heavy.

I'll stand by what I've said, REAL RACERS will FIND the parts that they need.
And if they can't find the parts then maybe it's time for them to start building newer combos.

[nhramnl]

I always get a laugh when I see this argument. It always makes me think of what has taken place in the past. Remember Super Mod and the Econo classes? They were going to be a cheap and simple way for guys to have fun without spending a fortune. And now, they're ridiculously expensive and there's nobody in them. Super Stock? I remember when a decently competitive SS car involved a $30,000 total investment. Nowadays, that won't buy you an engine. I think the real problem is that many racers see three options, when there are only two. Option 1 is quit: Option 2 is spend enough to keep up with the guys who don't CARE how much it costs, and Option 3 is to keep bitching, but refuse to spend with the big dogs.

[tavirace]

I know I'll be classed as a lunatic but I see is the cause of all this fuss and expense is the obsession in stock and super/stock with UNDER. The index for for super gas is 9.90 the index for G/SA is 12.00 that's how it should stay. It's of no value to go 9.20 in super gas it could be of no value to go 11.20 in G/SA. In a heads up run you could still let it fly and you could still have class eliminations but do away with the qualifying ego trip, it could reduce expenses and create a new element in the game. Otherwise the never ending rule change and technology roller coaster is endless and for many they just can't keep up with it.

[Gary Parker]

For those who can't remember back when we used to have to meet overlap and duration with the cam and spring pressures were checked we were still wiping out camshafts. That's why the schubeck lifters were such a hit when they first came out. And now with the cost of today's engines it would be nice to bulletproof them so they do not come apart.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Gary Parker

And now with the cost of today's engines it would be nice to bulletproof them so they do not come apart.

Even if Stock were put back to "Stock", this^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ will never happen.

[Doug Hoven]

I apologize if this comes off a bit standoffish, especially coming from a 19 year old "kid", but there are more ways to control a radical camshaft than throwing heaping amounts of valve spring pressure at it. At least with flat tappet stuff, I don't see why you couldn't build a good stocker engine with, for example, a 150lb on the seat valve spring rule. I know it probably means nothing to the average A,B,C stock racer, but the 6 cylinder engine I built last winter was quite happy with about 100lb on the seat, and that cam is by no means "soft" in any way.