Loophole closed - Page 2

Ernie Neal · 09-21-2011, 02:37 PM

Was there other GT cars running LT-1 Aluminum heads with automatic at Indy? Wondering if anyone had claimed the 291 anyway?
Ernie

k.pascoe · 09-21-2011, 02:53 PM

Travis, How about closing the LT-! in a '98 F-body loop hole?

Sorry guys; I had to.

Bryan Worner · 09-21-2011, 03:17 PM

Hey Travis, since you closed that loophole, why not keep going with the rest of the "bogus" combinations??? And by that I mean the ones that are different combinations because of a gasket or other misicule thing, but otherwise carry the same specs?? How about the loopholes with the "platform" part of the AHFS??? And how about the "loophole" that makes the Firebirds different classes than the same year Camaros??? Why is a 93-98 Firebird with an LT1 a natural I car when a Camaro is a natural J car? Doesn't make sense to me!!!

Dave, I have been claiming a 1996 all along, and discovered in June of last year that only the 94 and 97 horsepowers were changed to 291! I took advantage of that for over a year! Then last weekend, I noticed the 96 was corrected, but the 95 wasn't, so I claimed a 95! It's NHRA's screw up, not ours! But now some a hole had to squeal and ruin it for us! Oh well, there's one in every crowd!!!

Joey Bohannon · 09-21-2011, 03:42 PM

I think its great that they closed "a" loophole, how bout closing a few more......like making all lt-1's run at 291, or all 350/300's run at the same number, or all the 327/295's run at the same number, blah blah blah......the list goes on. why does a 69 with a cowl run lighter than a 69 with a flat hood, common sense says DUH!, or a 67 camaro w/a 327/295 run at 295 and a duece at 307, once again...DUH, all any of this needs is someone like Travis that has common sense and a good understanding of whats going on to straighten it out. Frankly its a joke, and I won't be back till it is fixed. Been gone two years and I will stay gone many more if need be, but hell they won't miss my mouth.

Joe B

Bryan Worner · 09-21-2011, 04:48 PM

[QUOTE=Joey Bohannon;283995]I think its great that they closed "a" loophole, how bout closing a few more......like making all lt-1's run at 291,

Joe, the only reason the LT1 is at 291 in GT is because a GT car kept getting the horsepower, while the Super Stockers with the LT1 did not! If you ask me the horsepower, especially for all rear wheel drive SS's, should go back to 279! And in case you forget, the only reason it is still not 275 is because of a single run, made in ungodly mindshaft conditions, with a 20 mph tail wind at Englishtown some years ago!

If a Super Stocker triggers the horsepower, it goes on the GT combo also, but not vice versa!

SS/GSI · 09-21-2011, 09:31 PM

As long as people who are uneducated when it comes to engine combinations HP potential, body style aerodynamics and obvious physics are setting the bar for all of us we are F#@KED! Other than one or two of the top guys, no one in Cali has ever even raced in STK or SS, little own ever raced at all! U wanna really see all the GT/Modified cars be on a level playing field set back the HP rating on real SS cars to factory settings + 4 or 8, not the 32hp on a 327, 20hp on a 350 or 25+hp on a 396! If the horsepower on those GT cars ever got close to that they would all stay home of embarrassment that there car can only go .70 under balls out! Oh and BTW Brian the reason it doesn't work the other way is because if a 40+yr shoebox can go fast enough to trigger HP it's obvious that a GT car, with the same combo,that is 8 to 15 hundredths faster on body alone can.

SS Engine Guy · 09-22-2011, 12:58 AM

and if a few of the trigger cars were torn down and proven legal before hp was added, in alot of cases there wouldn't be additional hp to worry about.

Chad Rhodes · 09-22-2011, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan Worner

Hey Travis, since you closed that loophole, why not keep going with the rest of the "bogus" combinations??? And by that I mean the ones that are different combinations because of a gasket or other misicule thing, but otherwise carry the same specs?? How about the loopholes with the "platform" part of the AHFS??? And how about the "loophole" that makes the Firebirds different classes than the same year Camaros??? Why is a 93-98 Firebird with an LT1 a natural I car when a Camaro is a natural J car? Doesn't make sense to me!!!

Dave, I have been claiming a 1996 all along, and discovered in June of last year that only the 94 and 97 horsepowers were changed to 291! I took advantage of that for over a year! Then last weekend, I noticed the 96 was corrected, but the 95 wasn't, so I claimed a 95! It's NHRA's screw up, not ours! But now some a hole had to squeal and ruin it for us! Oh well, there's one in every crowd!!!

I can answer this part of the question. A trans am is a few lbs heavier than a z28 ( which was no heavier than a v6 car aside from the drive train). the ram air option also changes the factor as well. The formula is lighter than the T/A not sure how it falls in relation to the Z28, the SS is a little heavier but not much and gets the ram air penalty

09-21-2011, 02:37 PM	#11
Ernie Neal Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Columbus, Indiana Posts: 529 Likes: 164 Liked 325 Times in 78 Posts	Re: Loophole closed Was there other GT cars running LT-1 Aluminum heads with automatic at Indy? Wondering if anyone had claimed the 291 anyway? Ernie

09-21-2011, 02:53 PM	#12
k.pascoe Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Fenton, Missouri Posts: 107 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Loophole closed Travis, How about closing the LT-! in a '98 F-body loop hole? Sorry guys; I had to.

09-21-2011, 03:17 PM	#13
Bryan Worner Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Duncannon, PA Posts: 819 Likes: 131 Liked 478 Times in 80 Posts	Re: Loophole closed Hey Travis, since you closed that loophole, why not keep going with the rest of the "bogus" combinations??? And by that I mean the ones that are different combinations because of a gasket or other misicule thing, but otherwise carry the same specs?? How about the loopholes with the "platform" part of the AHFS??? And how about the "loophole" that makes the Firebirds different classes than the same year Camaros??? Why is a 93-98 Firebird with an LT1 a natural I car when a Camaro is a natural J car? Doesn't make sense to me!!! Dave, I have been claiming a 1996 all along, and discovered in June of last year that only the 94 and 97 horsepowers were changed to 291! I took advantage of that for over a year! Then last weekend, I noticed the 96 was corrected, but the 95 wasn't, so I claimed a 95! It's NHRA's screw up, not ours! But now some a hole had to squeal and ruin it for us! Oh well, there's one in every crowd!!! Last edited by Bryan Worner; 09-21-2011 at 03:20 PM.

09-21-2011, 03:42 PM	#14
Joey Bohannon Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 102 Likes: 1 Liked 61 Times in 22 Posts	Re: Loophole closed I think its great that they closed "a" loophole, how bout closing a few more......like making all lt-1's run at 291, or all 350/300's run at the same number, or all the 327/295's run at the same number, blah blah blah......the list goes on. why does a 69 with a cowl run lighter than a 69 with a flat hood, common sense says DUH!, or a 67 camaro w/a 327/295 run at 295 and a duece at 307, once again...DUH, all any of this needs is someone like Travis that has common sense and a good understanding of whats going on to straighten it out. Frankly its a joke, and I won't be back till it is fixed. Been gone two years and I will stay gone many more if need be, but hell they won't miss my mouth. Joe B

09-21-2011, 04:48 PM	#15
Bryan Worner Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Duncannon, PA Posts: 819 Likes: 131 Liked 478 Times in 80 Posts	Re: Loophole closed [QUOTE=Joey Bohannon;283995]I think its great that they closed "a" loophole, how bout closing a few more......like making all lt-1's run at 291, Joe, the only reason the LT1 is at 291 in GT is because a GT car kept getting the horsepower, while the Super Stockers with the LT1 did not! If you ask me the horsepower, especially for all rear wheel drive SS's, should go back to 279! And in case you forget, the only reason it is still not 275 is because of a single run, made in ungodly mindshaft conditions, with a 20 mph tail wind at Englishtown some years ago! If a Super Stocker triggers the horsepower, it goes on the GT combo also, but not vice versa!

09-21-2011, 09:31 PM	#16
SS/GSI Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 291 Likes: 79 Liked 750 Times in 108 Posts	Re: Loophole closed As long as people who are uneducated when it comes to engine combinations HP potential, body style aerodynamics and obvious physics are setting the bar for all of us we are F#@KED! Other than one or two of the top guys, no one in Cali has ever even raced in STK or SS, little own ever raced at all! U wanna really see all the GT/Modified cars be on a level playing field set back the HP rating on real SS cars to factory settings + 4 or 8, not the 32hp on a 327, 20hp on a 350 or 25+hp on a 396! If the horsepower on those GT cars ever got close to that they would all stay home of embarrassment that there car can only go .70 under balls out! Oh and BTW Brian the reason it doesn't work the other way is because if a 40+yr shoebox can go fast enough to trigger HP it's obvious that a GT car, with the same combo,that is 8 to 15 hundredths faster on body alone can.

09-22-2011, 12:58 AM	#17
SS Engine Guy Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: usa Posts: 256 Likes: 1 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: Loophole closed and if a few of the trigger cars were torn down and proven legal before hp was added, in alot of cases there wouldn't be additional hp to worry about.