Stocker engine tech - Page 2

Stk4405 · 03-31-2009, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJ

The way stock is anymore (not stock at all), why not just simplify things a bit for ourselves and NHRA/IHRA tech? As long as the engine appears stock externally what's the difference anyway?

Don't give NHRA any ideas.
The only thing we need is for NHRA to enforce the rules that's already in place . Stock have changed enough already so why give up. The rules will never please everyone. Besides no matter what happens, someone gonna bitch about it.

Ed Fernandez · 03-31-2009, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJ

The way stock is anymore (not stock at all), why not just simplify things a bit for ourselves and NHRA/IHRA tech? As long as the engine appears stock externally what's the difference anyway?

1. Check for correct head/manifold/carb casting numbers.
2. Pump the engine for correct cubic inches.
3. Whistle test for correct compression, does it really matter how (dome,flat,dish) you get it anyway?
4. Inspection plate on oil pan to verify correct crank/steel rods.
5. Pull valve covers to verify correct rockers.

Let's face it, in stock, there are already the following -

Casting number mods
Relocated lifter bores
Billet cams
Self casted intake manifolds
No hydraulic lifters anymore
Rings backcut to nothing
Bogus runner c.c. info
Bogus valve reliefs

How different would it REALLY be?

The solution is simple.We are subject to TEARDOWNS.Unfortunatly upper level Tech doesn't feel the need to impliment the rules as written.Maybe next year things will change.

Ed F.

X-TECH MAN · 03-31-2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ed fernandez

the solution is simple.we are subject to teardowns.unfortunatly upper level tech doesn't feel the need to impliment the rules as written.maybe next year things will change.

Ed f.

lol

RJ · 04-01-2009, 05:15 AM

Yes, I forgot to add cam lift, but someone point it out to me, what would the big difference be? are you saying the stuff I mentioned IS NOT being done already?, the port volume c.c. on most heads/manifolds are bigger than they should be already!. The pride and challenge comes from porting and gettin it done with factory castings, as you are doing RIGHT NOW. Not a big deal, I'll race either way, but we are 90% there ALREADY, if you don't believe that then you are A. Near the bottom of the ladder, B. Writing checks to someone else to build your motor and don't know what's in there anyway, C. Doing it now, and sure don't want to tip anybody off.

X-TECH MAN · 04-01-2009, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rj

yes, i forgot to add cam lift, but someone point it out to me, what would the big difference be? Are you saying the stuff i mentioned is not being done already?, the port volume c.c. On most heads/manifolds are bigger than they should be already!. The pride and challenge comes from porting and gettin it done with factory castings, as you are doing right now. Not a big deal, i'll race either way, but we are 90% there already, if you don't believe that then you are a. Near the bottom of the ladder, b. Writing checks to someone else to build your motor and don't know what's in there anyway, c. Doing it now, and sure don't want to tip anybody off.

amen !

04-01-2009, 05:15 AM	#14
RJ Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 248 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Stocker engine tech Yes, I forgot to add cam lift, but someone point it out to me, what would the big difference be? are you saying the stuff I mentioned IS NOT being done already?, the port volume c.c. on most heads/manifolds are bigger than they should be already!. The pride and challenge comes from porting and gettin it done with factory castings, as you are doing RIGHT NOW. Not a big deal, I'll race either way, but we are 90% there ALREADY, if you don't believe that then you are A. Near the bottom of the ladder, B. Writing checks to someone else to build your motor and don't know what's in there anyway, C. Doing it now, and sure don't want to tip anybody off.