|
|
|
|
08-13-2007, 05:05 PM
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 104
Likes: 2
Liked 18 Times in 4 Posts
|
7.5 lb class for GT
We would like to see NHRA make a 7.5 lb/hp class for Big Block combinations only.. Super Stock has the top 4 or 5 weight breaks for Big Block combos (A through E for the most part) but there are none in GT.
This would allow the top GT class to run close to the Classic Super Stock cars but not upstage them.
__________________
Bryan Broaddus 7568 STK ,SS |
|
|
|
08-14-2007, 12:21 PM
|
#2 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 7.5 lb class for GT
Hey Bryan, you know I am all for a big block GT class, however the last thing SS needs is more classes. What they ought to do is combine GT and SS thus allowing GT cars to go all the way to 6.0 weight break. The big bonus in consolidation is more heads up runs as well. I know I am in the minority in encouraging heads up runs, but I actually like class racing more than bracket racing. Crazy, I know.
The 64 extra lbs all those 350's have to carry this year certainly does help the big block's cause though.... |
|
|
|
|
08-14-2007, 02:32 PM
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Plainfield (INDY) Indiana
Posts: 468
Likes: 1
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
Re: 7.5 lb class for GT
I agree with both only more towards 6.0 so we can incorporate all the old Hypo motors that are locked out of competition like the Boss 429's, Tunnel Port 427's, Tunnel Port 428's, Buick Stage II's (Tom Rix's car is already ready), 421 SD's, AMC dual quad's. The 7.0 could be like the more street type big blocks only.
All with suitable after market parts to keep the cost down. Lynn Last edited by Lynn A McCarty; 08-14-2007 at 02:34 PM. |
|
|
|
|
08-14-2007, 04:10 PM
|
#4 |
|
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Richmond Indiana
Posts: 1,196
Likes: 5
Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts
|
Re: 7.5 lb class for GT
I go for the Combining GT and SS. Agree with reasoning. Remember Gt is already old motor/new body OR new motor /old chassis.
Dick |
|
|
|
|
08-14-2007, 05:06 PM
|
#5 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 7.5 lb class for GT
Quote:
They would not be comptitive at all. Plus in SS you have to use the correct engine/tranny for the car/year. Lots of these combos are not optimal. Which leads to more $$$$ for the old cars to spend to be competitive, well at least sort of competitive. Dick it has been what 2 years since they have opened up pre 81 cars to run GT. Has anybody been successful (ie ran fast) doing this? Another thing to rember is that under GT rules a car uses its heaviest shipping weight +/- 250 lbs to figure class eligibilty. So lots of the old cars have to use Big Block shipping weights for GT. Which makes them run much lower heavier classes than the are currently using. Which rules would you use GT or SS? If you use SS would the cavaliers and Cobalts be legal because of moving the firewall back? If so would everyone now be allowed to move their firewall back? |
|
|
|
|
|
08-14-2007, 06:32 PM
|
#6 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 104
Likes: 2
Liked 18 Times in 4 Posts
|
Re: 7.5 lb class for GT
Yea, I agree that combining SS and GT is a lose lose situation for the SS cars. My Monte Carlo would have to run against the current GT/AA cars. Can you see a heads up between my 3650 lb Monte Carlo and Grossi's Sunfire or any number of Cobalts?
I know we have similar power in my car and my brothers (Firebird) and he runs 5 MPH faster, can you say aerodynamic drag! How are you going to factor that into the equation?
__________________
Bryan Broaddus 7568 STK ,SS |
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
