Factory experimental

Chuck Beach · 01-26-2009, 08:12 AM

Greg,
So who was stealing when they set the LT1 (305 factory) to 275hp and the LS1 (310 non ram or 325 ram air factory) to 305? NHRA or GM?

Greg Hill · 01-26-2009, 08:31 AM

Chuck, If you remember Pontiac was the official car of NHRA when the LT1's first came out. I had to run against them in my 67 Camaro with a 350 power glide. You talk about making a car irrelevant. The failure of NHRA to properly factor these cars led to creation of the fuel injected classes. After 14 years and 66 horsepower the LT1's are no better than a lot of combos but look how long it took that to happen. At least the Firebirds and Camaros were regular production cars and not aftermarket built racecars with motors that don't come in anything else. Do you think we should go through another scenario like the LT1's or the Ls1's? I don't.

Greg

Alan Roehrich · 01-26-2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck Beach

Greg,
So who was stealing when they set the LT1 (305 factory) to 275hp and the LS1 (310 non ram or 325 ram air factory) to 305? NHRA or GM?

Chuck,
Do you think it is okay to do it again, now, because it happened in the past? Two wrongs make a right?

How about we try to stop, or at least slow, the down hill slide?

Evan Smith · 01-26-2009, 08:41 AM

I agree with Chuck.

Greg, please let me understand you better. Are you are saying it's not OK for Ford to under-rate a vehicle (which has been done since the inception of our beloved class), but it is OK for GM to claim a car that was never built (1998 LT-1 F-body)? Or clearly under-rate the LS1? Is this not cheating the system (for the purpose of manufacturers championships points)?

BTW, the Ford Edge is great vehicle and at last check Ford is offering X-plan-type incentives for any NHRA racers who want to purchase a Ford. You can contact Jesse Kershaw at Ford Racing for more details. What is GM or Mopar doing for racers?

Remember, it is still the NHRA's party and it can re-factor a combination as it sees fit. So, if this car is really that fast NHRA can act accordingly. We can type all we want but it is moot until the cars run in Pomona.

Evan

Greg Hill · 01-26-2009, 09:31 AM

Evan I' m saying exactly that. When they put this new Mustang out with bogus numbers it's like stealing from other racers who have to race against it. One thing you are right about is that NHRA can do what they want without any transparency or without regard to how it hurts their own members. How it affects their organization as time goes by remains to be seen.

Greg

Greg Hill · 01-26-2009, 09:42 AM

One other thing is that who cares if a Firebird is a 97 or 98. It's basically the same car.

Greg

Dick Butler · 01-26-2009, 09:47 AM

First the new Mustang idea is good for the sport if used wisely by NHRA.
Arent they part of the plan for a racing Camaro project(cancelled by economy) and the challenger by Chrysler to compete again in one class?
Why wouldnt NHRA put them by themselves? no chevies being built to race, no Chryslers yet? They are ready to run and need tested against something? See how it changes with Challengers arriving.
Body in White Camaro may be produced and used yet.

Chad Rhodes · 01-26-2009, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck Beach

Greg,
So who was stealing when they set the LT1 (305 factory) to 275hp and the LS1 (310 non ram or 325 ram air factory) to 305? NHRA or GM?

Check, the LT1 was NEVER 305 HP in anything. it was 300 in the vette but had a different cam and better breathing. It was 275 93-95 and 285 96-97. The LS1 cars WERE factory rated at 305 hp. get your facts straight before you start accusing stuff. I don't have one of those cars and I will agree that 305 was a very soft rating for the LS cars, however that IS what gm advertised to the public

Link to LT1 engine specs
http://www.lt1engine.com/tech/lt1-en...n-power-specs/

Greg Hill · 01-26-2009, 10:02 AM

Jim I don't think that rating the LT1's at 275 hp was right either, or the LS1's at 305. Just because that happened shouldn't be justification for this bogus hp rating on the mustang.

Greg

Bruce Noland · 01-26-2009, 10:13 AM

Guys,
Pro or Con Factory Experimental, Number 500 will be the last post for this thread; providing it is on topic and does not taunt. It was one hell of a ride. We have had a very spirited debate and everyone has had an opportunity to express their views.

Thank you to everyone who participated in this debate and especially to Kenny for providing a place for all of us to air our opinions.

Good luck in 2009

01-26-2009, 08:12 AM	#1
Chuck Beach Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Delaware, Ohio Posts: 664 Likes: 12 Liked 58 Times in 13 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Greg, So who was stealing when they set the LT1 (305 factory) to 275hp and the LS1 (310 non ram or 325 ram air factory) to 305? NHRA or GM? __________________ Chuck Beach 3340 STK Last edited by Chuck Beach; 01-26-2009 at 08:16 AM.

01-26-2009, 08:31 AM	#2
Greg Hill VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Louisville , KY Posts: 1,995 Likes: 69 Liked 279 Times in 68 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Chuck, If you remember Pontiac was the official car of NHRA when the LT1's first came out. I had to run against them in my 67 Camaro with a 350 power glide. You talk about making a car irrelevant. The failure of NHRA to properly factor these cars led to creation of the fuel injected classes. After 14 years and 66 horsepower the LT1's are no better than a lot of combos but look how long it took that to happen. At least the Firebirds and Camaros were regular production cars and not aftermarket built racecars with motors that don't come in anything else. Do you think we should go through another scenario like the LT1's or the Ls1's? I don't. Greg __________________ Greg Hill 4171 STK

01-26-2009, 08:41 AM	#4
Evan Smith Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Tampa Posts: 400 Likes: 7 Liked 115 Times in 5 Posts	Re: Factory experimental I agree with Chuck. Greg, please let me understand you better. Are you are saying it's not OK for Ford to under-rate a vehicle (which has been done since the inception of our beloved class), but it is OK for GM to claim a car that was never built (1998 LT-1 F-body)? Or clearly under-rate the LS1? Is this not cheating the system (for the purpose of manufacturers championships points)? BTW, the Ford Edge is great vehicle and at last check Ford is offering X-plan-type incentives for any NHRA racers who want to purchase a Ford. You can contact Jesse Kershaw at Ford Racing for more details. What is GM or Mopar doing for racers? Remember, it is still the NHRA's party and it can re-factor a combination as it sees fit. So, if this car is really that fast NHRA can act accordingly. We can type all we want but it is moot until the cars run in Pomona. Evan __________________ Evan Smith 1798 STK

01-26-2009, 09:31 AM	#5
Greg Hill VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Louisville , KY Posts: 1,995 Likes: 69 Liked 279 Times in 68 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Evan I' m saying exactly that. When they put this new Mustang out with bogus numbers it's like stealing from other racers who have to race against it. One thing you are right about is that NHRA can do what they want without any transparency or without regard to how it hurts their own members. How it affects their organization as time goes by remains to be seen. Greg __________________ Greg Hill 4171 STK Last edited by Greg Hill; 01-26-2009 at 09:41 AM.

01-26-2009, 09:42 AM	#6
Greg Hill VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Louisville , KY Posts: 1,995 Likes: 69 Liked 279 Times in 68 Posts	Re: Factory experimental One other thing is that who cares if a Firebird is a 97 or 98. It's basically the same car. Greg __________________ Greg Hill 4171 STK

01-26-2009, 09:47 AM	#7
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: Factory experimental First the new Mustang idea is good for the sport if used wisely by NHRA. Arent they part of the plan for a racing Camaro project(cancelled by economy) and the challenger by Chrysler to compete again in one class? Why wouldnt NHRA put them by themselves? no chevies being built to race, no Chryslers yet? They are ready to run and need tested against something? See how it changes with Challengers arriving. Body in White Camaro may be produced and used yet.

01-26-2009, 10:02 AM	#9
Greg Hill VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Louisville , KY Posts: 1,995 Likes: 69 Liked 279 Times in 68 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Jim I don't think that rating the LT1's at 275 hp was right either, or the LS1's at 305. Just because that happened shouldn't be justification for this bogus hp rating on the mustang. Greg __________________ Greg Hill 4171 STK

01-26-2009, 10:13 AM	#10
Bruce Noland VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,855 Likes: 83 Liked 444 Times in 145 Posts	Re: Factory experimental Guys, Pro or Con Factory Experimental, Number 500 will be the last post for this thread; providing it is on topic and does not taunt. It was one hell of a ride. We have had a very spirited debate and everyone has had an opportunity to express their views. Thank you to everyone who participated in this debate and especially to Kenny for providing a place for all of us to air our opinions. Good luck in 2009 __________________ Bruce Noland 1788 STK Last edited by Bruce Noland; 01-26-2009 at 10:16 AM.