Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! - Page 6

Dan Fahey · 12-19-2013, 10:54 AM

Hello ALL:
Just had a nice conversation with IHRA in Norwalk this morning.
Mike Baker and Jim Woods are on Vacation and aware of ALL of our comments.
They are reading the comments on Class Racer.

They recognized the new Cam and Spring issue has cause a firestorm.
During our conversation discussed several items with them.
After the Norwalk Management gets back from the holidays they will meet early January and revisit this issue.

I am now speaking for myself.
Just hope they keep the current rules.
Think the reason was to speed up the Tech Process on Pure Stockers.

Actually this was a good useful controversy.
A lot of good stuff will come out of this.

Saying all that.
Everyone have a great holiday break.

Sincerely,
Dan Fahey

Michael Beard · 12-19-2013, 11:26 AM

Quote:

The number of IHRA National Records set is pathetic compared to NHRA.

You used to get 5 points for a National Record, up to 2x per year. It also used to be with the old points system that if you finished in the Top 10 in the World, you had to go through teardown at some point during the year. With those things combined, you had many more people setting records.

HandOverFist · 12-19-2013, 11:52 AM

Beginning to look like they just want to transition everyone over to Stock for convenience.

Ed Wright · 12-19-2013, 12:10 PM

Crate motors are now built motors, nothing "crate" or "pure" about them anymore, right?

12-19-2013, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Crate motors are now built motors, nothing "crate" or "pure" about them anymore, right?

Good point. Like everything else it started out simple and then gets out of hand (and expensive!). Top Stock is another example ... Not that it matters to many folks but this will end Pure Stock I believe.

goinbroke2 · 12-19-2013, 12:50 PM

"good controversy" is the point to take from all of this. IHRA (it appears) wanted to speed up or simplify tech and came out with a rule. The racers on here generated 6 pages of controversy in a few days. IHRA is going to reconvene in the new year and revisit the decision.
I agree, that's GOOD controversy! IHRA is actually listening and responding to the needs or wishes of the racers!
The other positive note I take from this is the sanctioning body gave a "freebee" to the racers and they declined knowing it wasn't in the best interest of the class, even if it would of been in their own personal best interest to accept it.

Dan Fahey, thanks for running point on this and being the un-elected liason between IHRA and the Pure Stock ranks.

Ed Wright · 12-19-2013, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tar Heel

Good point. Like everything else it started out simple and then gets out of hand (and expensive!). Top Stock is another example ... Not that it matters to many folks but this will end Pure Stock I believe.

NHRA ruined the original Super Modified classes the same way after killing Modified Eliminator.

ALMACK · 12-19-2013, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goinbroke2

...Dan Fahey, thanks for running point on this and being the un-elected liason between IHRA and the Pure Stock ranks.

I agree.
Thanks Dan

Mike Taylor 3601 · 12-19-2013, 03:44 PM

I don't think this will be reversed,it's more of issue of making it even for all,there are alot of cars that specs for duration/overlap,and spring are near impossible to get hold of.

My opinion is this is'nt big issue IF and I repeat IF cam,spring is only change,what I'm saying is keep it restricted on lifters,no tool steel,no ceramic, rocker stud like it is original size. Also keep it like ''Ex Techman" Terry Bell told me years ago when I was building my car and called him one night,I asked if having fittings on headers for thermcouples on dyno was OK Terry told me, Don't show with a pure stocker with acid heads and lifter bushed block.

I think if all the parts that follow the duration and spring are not allowed then it will be OK.
even though this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back for my car,as is engine is super reliable,valvetrain does require a little but is still reliable,with cam and spring change my valvetrain will be as reliable as now maybe a little better,because would be better able to control valve with added pressure,but bottom end could become weak link,with added rpm,will be pushing rods to edge.

My car has right cam springs now so I'm good like it is,if rule sticks may just change spring and leave cam alone,I know just spring would make mine faster.
Don't want pure stock to become muffled stocker.

Mike Taylor 3601

John Musial · 12-19-2013, 04:38 PM

Does IHRA actually check spring pressures in tech with a pure stocker?? If so I haven't seen it.

12-19-2013, 10:54 AM	#51
Dan Fahey VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 2,128 Likes: 1,084 Liked 184 Times in 113 Posts	Re: Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! Hello ALL: Just had a nice conversation with IHRA in Norwalk this morning. Mike Baker and Jim Woods are on Vacation and aware of ALL of our comments. They are reading the comments on Class Racer. They recognized the new Cam and Spring issue has cause a firestorm. During our conversation discussed several items with them. After the Norwalk Management gets back from the holidays they will meet early January and revisit this issue. I am now speaking for myself. Just hope they keep the current rules. Think the reason was to speed up the Tech Process on Pure Stockers. Actually this was a good useful controversy. A lot of good stuff will come out of this. Saying all that. Everyone have a great holiday break. Sincerely, Dan Fahey

12-19-2013, 11:52 AM	#53
HandOverFist VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Gulf Breeze, FL Posts: 1,651 Likes: 8 Liked 33 Times in 16 Posts	Re: Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! Beginning to look like they just want to transition everyone over to Stock for convenience. __________________ Rich Taylor I/SA - 321

12-19-2013, 12:10 PM	#54
Ed Wright Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sand Springs, OK Posts: 8,132 Likes: 896 Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts	Re: Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! Crate motors are now built motors, nothing "crate" or "pure" about them anymore, right? __________________ Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA

12-19-2013, 12:50 PM	#56
goinbroke2 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: NS CANADA Posts: 899 Likes: 1,676 Liked 403 Times in 158 Posts	Re: Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! "good controversy" is the point to take from all of this. IHRA (it appears) wanted to speed up or simplify tech and came out with a rule. The racers on here generated 6 pages of controversy in a few days. IHRA is going to reconvene in the new year and revisit the decision. I agree, that's GOOD controversy! IHRA is actually listening and responding to the needs or wishes of the racers! The other positive note I take from this is the sanctioning body gave a "freebee" to the racers and they declined knowing it wasn't in the best interest of the class, even if it would of been in their own personal best interest to accept it. Dan Fahey, thanks for running point on this and being the un-elected liason between IHRA and the Pure Stock ranks.

12-19-2013, 03:44 PM	#59
Mike Taylor 3601 VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Somerset,Ky Posts: 1,374 Likes: 358 Liked 308 Times in 103 Posts	Re: Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! I don't think this will be reversed,it's more of issue of making it even for all,there are alot of cars that specs for duration/overlap,and spring are near impossible to get hold of. My opinion is this is'nt big issue IF and I repeat IF cam,spring is only change,what I'm saying is keep it restricted on lifters,no tool steel,no ceramic, rocker stud like it is original size. Also keep it like ''Ex Techman" Terry Bell told me years ago when I was building my car and called him one night,I asked if having fittings on headers for thermcouples on dyno was OK Terry told me, Don't show with a pure stocker with acid heads and lifter bushed block. I think if all the parts that follow the duration and spring are not allowed then it will be OK. even though this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back for my car,as is engine is super reliable,valvetrain does require a little but is still reliable,with cam and spring change my valvetrain will be as reliable as now maybe a little better,because would be better able to control valve with added pressure,but bottom end could become weak link,with added rpm,will be pushing rods to edge. My car has right cam springs now so I'm good like it is,if rule sticks may just change spring and leave cam alone,I know just spring would make mine faster. Don't want pure stock to become muffled stocker. Mike Taylor 3601

12-19-2013, 04:38 PM	#60
John Musial Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Comfort Texas Posts: 93 Likes: 83 Liked 51 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Pure Stockers New Camshaft Rule !!! Does IHRA actually check spring pressures in tech with a pure stocker?? If so I haven't seen it.