Cylinder Head Runner Volumes - Page 4

bsa633 · 12-15-2008, 11:23 AM

When a "CC-rule" becomes the rule in stock...they admit they lost or dont care against "creative" cylinder head work...i just wonder how rest of the "cylinderhead rule" is gonna look in print!

Stocker 2 · 12-15-2008, 12:01 PM

If the S/S runner volumes are adopted in Stock, the answer is simple. You know if your runners are too big. If they are, the following applies.

Do not run National events.

Do not set a record anywhere.

Do not win an event.

Do not lead the points.

Do not be number 1 qualifier anywhere.

Do not run 1.40 under the index.

Do not teardown if protested.

Woodro Josey · 12-15-2008, 12:20 PM

Just Shows, you cannot trust an NHRA Official anymore!

Woodro Josey · 12-15-2008, 12:22 PM

Its like closing the barn door after all of the cows have left the farm.

Tech Man you are so right!

Myron Piatek · 12-15-2008, 12:56 PM

Legitimizing "acid" porting or not, at least there will be a set number. It's been brought up here many times that the "higher ups" don't want to go through any more time, trouble and cost in tech than they have to. So bit by bit, the rules have been "generalized". (i.e.: stock cam lift but any duration, any spring pressure, etc.) Porting concerns/violations have been based on the tech person's interpretation anyway which can be difficult to prove or disprove by either party. With a set cc number, hopefully somewhat less than SS, at least there will be a clear limit. (I don't know how close the SS cc's are to average as-cast OEM numbers.) If they don't emphasize the as-cast port texture, perhaps that would reduce costs because any massaging wouldn't have to be covered up, which is where a lot of expense is. Of course, it would still be possible to weld, recontour, etc. and cover that up. There will always be people with the money and resources to get around any rules. But overall it should reduce the difference between the top and bottom qualifiers.

The down side is that Stock will be a little more like SS. But I would hope there will be enough differences to keep them seperate.

zracer305 · 12-15-2008, 01:31 PM

You know I'm done with NHRA and done building an NHRA stocker. You will soon see all of stuff on sale in the classifieds. I'll build my car to NHRA standards safety wise and just build a 10.60 car to run PSCA.

442OLDS · 12-15-2008, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zracer305

You know I'm done with NHRA and done building an NHRA stocker.

Why?

zracer305 · 12-15-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 442OLDS

Why?

NHRA has no idea what they want to do. Rules on cylinder heads change every year. I was just quoated by an engine builder 1800.00 for a set of sbc stocker heads. If the rules say stock heads what modifications are they doing that cost 1800.00? I can buy a set of AFR 227 aluminum heads complete on ebay for 1500.00. I'm just sick of it.

442OLDS · 12-15-2008, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zracer305

NHRA has no idea what they want to do. Rules on cylinder heads change every year. I was just quoated by an engine builder 1800.00 for a set of sbc stocker heads. If the rules say stock heads what modifications are they doing that cost 1800.00? I can buy a set of AFR 227 aluminum heads complete on ebay for 1500.00. I'm just sick of it.

Is the $1800 for everything or just the bare heads?$1800 for a set of heads complete seems pretty cheap.

Dick Butler · 12-15-2008, 03:17 PM

"enough differences to keep them different" The problem now is they are so alike in major ways that where they are different is wasted money in a sense. No four links, no cam or manifold but both can be non stock and massaged.I am sure the research to set up manifold, suspension and cam specs would be very close to SS parts to start with. For the entry level idea a truely new Stock class with SET rules or spec parts could be started with limited classes for competition like the new cars and EVERYONE could restart at a much cheaper level if they wanted. S and SS could be one class for a small investment by current stockers compared to the overall cost of keeping up with the rules of StK.
Running Stock "parts" and rules should be a significantly less cost than stepping up to SS. If making it "stock" with massaged parts is about the same money then it is not a meaningful difference in classes.
Keep it more simple in the future..
my .02

12-15-2008, 11:23 AM	#31
bsa633 Banned Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 310 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes When a "CC-rule" becomes the rule in stock...they admit they lost or dont care against "creative" cylinder head work...i just wonder how rest of the "cylinderhead rule" is gonna look in print!

12-15-2008, 12:01 PM	#32
Stocker 2 Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 137 Likes: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes If the S/S runner volumes are adopted in Stock, the answer is simple. You know if your runners are too big. If they are, the following applies. Do not run National events. Do not set a record anywhere. Do not win an event. Do not lead the points. Do not be number 1 qualifier anywhere. Do not run 1.40 under the index. Do not teardown if protested.

12-15-2008, 12:20 PM	#33
Woodro Josey Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 805 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 1 Post	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes Just Shows, you cannot trust an NHRA Official anymore! __________________ Woodro Josey 2002 STK

12-15-2008, 12:22 PM	#34
Woodro Josey Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 805 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 1 Post	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes Its like closing the barn door after all of the cows have left the farm. Tech Man you are so right! __________________ Woodro Josey 2002 STK

12-15-2008, 12:56 PM	#35
Myron Piatek VIP Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Florida Posts: 1,542 Likes: 34 Liked 138 Times in 51 Posts	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes Legitimizing "acid" porting or not, at least there will be a set number. It's been brought up here many times that the "higher ups" don't want to go through any more time, trouble and cost in tech than they have to. So bit by bit, the rules have been "generalized". (i.e.: stock cam lift but any duration, any spring pressure, etc.) Porting concerns/violations have been based on the tech person's interpretation anyway which can be difficult to prove or disprove by either party. With a set cc number, hopefully somewhat less than SS, at least there will be a clear limit. (I don't know how close the SS cc's are to average as-cast OEM numbers.) If they don't emphasize the as-cast port texture, perhaps that would reduce costs because any massaging wouldn't have to be covered up, which is where a lot of expense is. Of course, it would still be possible to weld, recontour, etc. and cover that up. There will always be people with the money and resources to get around any rules. But overall it should reduce the difference between the top and bottom qualifiers. The down side is that Stock will be a little more like SS. But I would hope there will be enough differences to keep them seperate. __________________ LOCOMOTION Racing

12-15-2008, 01:31 PM	#36
zracer305 Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 108 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes You know I'm done with NHRA and done building an NHRA stocker. You will soon see all of stuff on sale in the classifieds. I'll build my car to NHRA standards safety wise and just build a 10.60 car to run PSCA.

12-15-2008, 03:17 PM	#40
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: Cylinder Head Runner Volumes "enough differences to keep them different" The problem now is they are so alike in major ways that where they are different is wasted money in a sense. No four links, no cam or manifold but both can be non stock and massaged.I am sure the research to set up manifold, suspension and cam specs would be very close to SS parts to start with. For the entry level idea a truely new Stock class with SET rules or spec parts could be started with limited classes for competition like the new cars and EVERYONE could restart at a much cheaper level if they wanted. S and SS could be one class for a small investment by current stockers compared to the overall cost of keeping up with the rules of StK. Running Stock "parts" and rules should be a significantly less cost than stepping up to SS. If making it "stock" with massaged parts is about the same money then it is not a meaningful difference in classes. Keep it more simple in the future.. my .02