Titanium Valves Allowed in S/S?

[mopar68]

Originally Posted by Shawn Blair

David, I agree this would not be a good rule change. What's next?

Shawn 6383

Nitrous oxide!

M68

[SSGN]

Originally Posted by mopar68

Nitrous oxide!

M68

Why have rules,let it all hang out and lets see who is really fast.Not much stock left in Stock or super stock

[Jess Suter]

I cant stand it anymore
The simple solution is to implement the valve spring rule-period! Stock spring pressure. There would be no 9800 rpm hemis or 9800 rpm anything else. IMO this was the downfall of stock. Lower rpm no acid heads or manifolds needed. No $1000 lifters no $7500 heads. Wouldnt matter cause they cant flow at lower rpm. Just my 2 cents

[James L Miller]

I thought the allowance of going to Honda/IRL rod journals in SS was stupid. This sounds like the rich racers putting the class out of reach for most people. NHRA must want to get the SS fields down to a pair of megabuck cars. Why bother to tech them at all? Just P&G one cylinder and wave it through. I would like to see fiberglass replacements for the aluminum front end cars as a cost savings. Cost saving measures would be nice rather than cost escalation.

[Pat6868]

Originally Posted by Jess Suter

I cant stand it anymore
The simple solution is to implement the valve spring rule-period! Stock spring pressure. There would be no 9800 rpm hemis or 9800 rpm anything else. IMO this was the downfall of stock. Lower rpm no acid heads or manifolds needed. No $1000 lifters no $7500 heads. Wouldnt matter cause they cant flow at lower rpm. Just my 2 cents

Check out Pure Stock rules . Terrey wrote em. End of bull ****, period. PatSTK6868

[jmantle]

We are all entitled to our opinions but in my opinion, all materials should be as per OEM in both stock and SS. That should include cylinder heads and any other items affecting performance. The only exceptions I would consider would be rods and cranks, replacing iron items with steel (of equal weight) does help reduce oil downs.

Jim Mantle V/SA 6632

[SS Engine Guy]

Brought to you by the same "group" that got worked over combustion chambers thru tech and then got them made "legal". Apparantly can't run legally with the fast stuff. By the way, this won't be the first time a engine has passed tech with titanium valves which were switched right in front of techs eyes. To prevent it, just check the guy with the shop towel wiping down the valves.

Oh, and for the record I am against allowing titanium. They are light, they are tough, but they are unforgiving as Jeff said. Also need replacement frequently if they are the high dollar ones.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by SS Engine Guy

Brought to you by the same "group" that got worked over combustion chambers thru tech and then got them made "legal". Apparantly can't run legally with the fast stuff. By the way, this won't be the first time a engine has passed tech with titanium valves which were switched right in front of techs eyes. To prevent it, just check the guy with the shop towel wiping down the valves.

Oh, and for the record I am against allowing titanium. They are light, they are tough, but they are unforgiving as Jeff said. Also need replacement frequently if they are the high dollar ones.

I agree fully. It would be stupid in SS. I ran them in the past in Modified Eliminator and later my sprint car. They do also need the seats changed for longevity. I think the Honda rod deal was stupid also. Some engine builders just wanting to sell more expensive parts is all I can figure. No other logical reason I can ome up with. Had some out dated Comp parts on the shelf they needed to move?

[David Barton]

People, please write NHRA more letters so they don't continue to ruin the little bit of Super Stock that is left. Its not about how much it cost, its about the sport, the challenge, the strict rules. Once you take that away what's left?

If they allow this they should just jump right into eliminating cylinder head volumes too. Tunnel rams, inline carburetor placement, smaller rod journals, clutchless transmissions, all completely uncalled for changes that were made. What was wrong with the previous rules?

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Jess Suter

I cant stand it anymore
The simple solution is to implement the valve spring rule-period! Stock spring pressure. There would be no 9800 rpm hemis or 9800 rpm anything else. IMO this was the downfall of stock. Lower rpm no acid heads or manifolds needed. No $1000 lifters no $7500 heads. Wouldnt matter cause they cant flow at lower rpm. Just my 2 cents

Jess...glad to see your still alive! FYI - the talk is Ti valves in Super Stock, not Stock (for now).

I recently held a 427 / 425 HP Ford intake valve from an old Hollman-Moody engine built in 1967 or so (the fishing boat engine I brought up on this forum). When disassembling the heads the head on an intake vale broke off. The dang thing was rifle drilled in the stem! Couldn't believe how light it was and it was a pretty large diameter valve. Now I know the exhaust are sodium filled on this engine but I didn't know they were doing this to intake valves back in the '60's.

I'd have to say I'm with SS Engine guy and others on this. Based on my limited experience, I can't see the need. Sure it may be faster but I see no other benefit. Cost goes up, maintenance and replacement goes up and engine damage can be a real issue if one breaks.
I lost two Stocker engines thanks to Mr. Schubeck, don't think I would want to go down this road.