HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock
Register Photo Gallery FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-20-2016, 05:26 PM   #61
RULER
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 222
Likes: 15
Liked 58 Times in 18 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

There you go 396 has different spec than a 1970 402 this is reason for a DQ. If this was anybody else it would have been an auto DQ. Once again different rules for different folks
RULER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 05:44 PM   #62
Alan Roehrich
Veteran Member
 
Alan Roehrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,118
Likes: 1,576
Liked 1,837 Times in 417 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Casey View Post
If my memory serves me correctly,1970 has different engine specs, assuming it is a 375/396/402 combo. The exhaust valve is bigger is one differance, and the earlier cars are true 396 ci and the 70 is a 402(bigger bore) .

The 1970 is allowed a 1.88" exhaust valve, the 1968 is allowed a 1.84" exhaust valve. The dome volume and chamber volume is the same, the dome height is lower for 1970. The other difference would be the intake, if he was running the 163 intake. In 1968, the plenum divider cannot be cut, in 1970, it can. Yes, there is a 0.030" difference in bore size.

Given the car has been campaigned as a 1968 for the most part, it probably meets those rules. I don't think Clark Holroyd has been cheating up his 396 all this time, using 1970 402 specs and running it as a 1968.

My point was, you can't run a 1970 in AA/S. So if you want to run the car in AA/S, run it as a 1968, there is no disadvantage. Most are running the 401 head and the 359 intake. So the only possible advantage to the 1970 is the 0.030" bore size gain, and the 1.88" exhaust valve. Well, the cubic inch gain from a 0.030" bigger bore will be minimal, as will the unshrouding of the valves, which would be entirely negated by the 1.88" exhaust valve. Again, not seeing a real disadvantage to the 1968 combination if you want to run light and go AA/S racing. Besides, it's the only one that fits the class.
__________________
Alan Roehrich
212A G/S
Alan Roehrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 07:05 PM   #63
mtkawboy
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Billings Mt
Posts: 282
Likes: 186
Liked 54 Times in 18 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

When you see a friend get DQd for class at Indy because he accidently had "ONE" TRW pushrod in his Cobrajet stocker you tend to lose respect for NHRA tech
mtkawboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 08:39 PM   #64
Todd Bailey
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 312
Likes: 30
Liked 33 Times in 17 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

And for the record, the 68-69 Nova taillights are a little shorter than the 70-72 taillights so the interchangeability is not there without modification to the taillight panel.
Todd Bailey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2016, 07:33 AM   #65
Billy Nees
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 3,601
Liked 7,782 Times in 1,743 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Miele View Post
Jimmy Alund withdrew from the race. Jimmy is a straight up guy, he loves stock. He felt it was the right thing to do. There was some confusion on the class he could run. By no means did Jimmy want to circumvent the rules. Rules are rules and Jimmy was man enough to do the right think. I hope all of you will support Jimmy in the future and not hold this against him. He came along way to support the class, and for me, that says it all.
So there you have it! Thank you, Jimmy. You did the right thing and preserved the integrity the class.
The End.
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS

I'm not spending 100K to win 2K
Billy Nees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2016, 07:59 AM   #66
rod butcher
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 252
Likes: 304
Liked 132 Times in 27 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by billy nees View Post
so there you have it! Thank you, jimmy. You did the right thing and preserved the integrity the class.
The end.
x2
rod butcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2016, 08:14 AM   #67
Bobby DiDomenico
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 924
Likes: 103
Liked 101 Times in 52 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Miele View Post
Jimmy Alund withdrew from the race. Jimmy is a straight up guy, he loves stock. He felt it was the right thing to do. There was some confusion on the class he could run. By no means did Jimmy want to circumvent the rules. Rules are rules and Jimmy was man enough to do the right think. I hope all of you will support Jimmy in the future and not hold this against him. He came along way to support the class, and for me, that says it all.
How difficult would it be for NHRA to have a "Go/No Go" computer at tech in where the year/engine/class claimed is entered and it either passes or is flagged prior to credentials?
Bobby DiDomenico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2016, 09:17 AM   #68
Bob Don
VIP Member
 
Bob Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Greater Boston
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 1,134
Liked 903 Times in 192 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby DiDomenico View Post
How difficult would it be for NHRA to have a "Go/No Go" computer at tech in where the year/engine/class claimed is entered and it either passes or is flagged prior to credentials?
At the New England National Open last year, everyone's class/combination was verified during the tech in process. It added about 2 minutes or so to tech. No big deal.
__________________
Bob Don 128 SS
Bob Don is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2016, 09:56 AM   #69
Adger Smith
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Texarkana Ark/TX
Posts: 2,446
Likes: 575
Liked 880 Times in 311 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby DiDomenico View Post
How difficult would it be for NHRA to have a "Go/No Go" computer at tech in where the year/engine/class claimed is entered and it either passes or is flagged prior to credentials?
OH, they would have to pay someone to come up with the program and maintain it as well as administer it at the races. Administering it at the races would require another step in Tech. They can't afford to do that when it is to the racers benefit to learn how to class his own car and fill out the paperwork correctly. They can't afford to be responsible for anything like putting a car in a class. Having that step in Tech would imply responsibility and possibly leave them open to law suits. OH, yea now I remember that could be the reason the process is the way it is now. Someone sued them for putting them in the wrong class & it put a financial burden on them. The last thing that should happen is a financial burden be put on the racer.
__________________
Adger Smith (Former SS)
Adger Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2016, 10:30 AM   #70
Dave Casey
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hampden, MA
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 233
Liked 797 Times in 165 Posts
Default Re: So, what should happen to

Quote:
Originally Posted by billy nees View Post
so there you have it! Thank you, jimmy. You did the right thing and preserved the integrity the class.
The end.
x3
__________________
Dave Casey 1330 STK
Dave Casey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.