Wagon Train

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hill

The whole point of the hp rating system is to put cars in classes with equal contenders. "Advancements" are not a new thing. My 350 with a Holley and aluminum manifold is more "advanced" than a 350 with a Quadrajet and cast iron manifold, so it is rated higher. Pretty simple concept.

I have no argument with that. In fact, I believe that is what I have been saying.

There are two 350's for the 2014 COPO. One has a supercharger the other has a N/A set-up. Both have different HP in the guide.

[Brett C]

Originally Posted by Jim Kaekel

Face the fact that you're benefitting from NHRA's gaffes.

Good sir, never once did I mention anywhere that things are not the way that they "should" be in our world of sportsman racing when it comes to HP ratings. Merely stating that an "opinion" does not make it "fact" like some think it is.

[Ed Wright]

Originally Posted by GUMP

There have been huge technological advancements over that time period. Each generation has had it's run and shouldn't expect to stay at the top forever. I remember when everyone hated your beloved LT1 for it's unfair advantage over the older combinations. This has always been the way. Note that we are often reminded of past irregularities when Billy or one of those other old dogs discovers a new "dime rocket".

The SS LT1 has been awarded a whopping four hp since it's release. Stock is a different deal. It's not that big a deal in SS.

Brett, what is an opinion, not fact?
The thought that a Stocker with an honest hp factor could not be the fastest in a Super Stock class? Don't care if you can walk on water and "worked really hard on it", nobody is good enough make up for ported heads, ported or fabricated intake, light rotating assy, better oil pans, better chassis, bigger tires and a trans brake. You think that is wrong? Faster than me and my home built engine is not a big deal, but the other professional chassis shop built cars with all the best parts and professionally built engines?
Your smarter than all of them? Really? You think Wanker is?

[Brett C]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

The SS LT1 has been awarded a whopping four hp since it's release. Stock is a different deal. It's not that big a deal in SS.

Brett, what is an opinion, not fact?
The thought that a Stocker with an honest hp factor could not be the fastest in a Super Stock class? Don't care if you can walk on water and "worked really hard on it", nobody is good enough make up for ported heads, ported or fabricated intake, light rotating assy, better oil pans, better chassis, bigger tires and a trans brake. You think that is wrong? Faster than me and my home built engine is not a big deal, but the other professional chassis shop built cars with all the best parts and professionally built engines?
Your smarter than all of them? Really? You think Wanker is?

Good sir,
Never did I say that anyone is smarter than anyone else...fact. And everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially here...fact. Still does not make opinion fact...and that is indeed fact...it's in the dictionary...fact.

[Bruce Noland]

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

There are at least 3 obvious facts to this scam:

1.) New car manufacturers are producing factory built race cars with intentionally under rated horsepower factors.
2.) nhra is knowingly accepting under rated factory race cars and placing them in Stock and Super Stock.
3.) Owners knowingly buying under rated factory race cars to race them in Stock and Super Stock.

All three of these facts must be in place before this scam could be foisted upon the categories of Stock and Super Stock. For the buyers of these under factored cars to say don't blame us, we are just taking advantage of what this scam has to offer is disingenious at best. Without the buyers/owners this debacle would not be possible. Have a great season guys.

Fact:
noun
1. something that actually exists; reality; truth
2. something known to exist or to have happened
3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true

[Brett C]

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

Fact:
noun
1. something that actually exists; reality; truth
2. something known to exist or to have happened
3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true

Yes it is a fact that you have expressed your opinion.

[Bruce Noland]

Originally Posted by Brett C

Yes it is a fact that the information you posted is your opinion.

Yes, and the earth is flat and only 5,000 years old. Having a little fun are ye? In order for any of these three facts to be merely opinions you must be able to disprove them. Otherwise they remain facts and your opinion about opinions is debunked.

[Greg Hill]

There is one undeniable fact. Every one of the hp ratings on these new cars was bogus starting out. The only other hp ratings that were that bogus to start with were the Lt1's and the LS1's in stock. Anybody that has half a brain can look at the specs on these motors and see how bogus they are compared to the competition. I'll give you one example. Charlie I'm not picking on you, but the 4.6 l Mustang GT was rated at 300 hp SAE net. The Cobra Jet version was rated at 235 with more of everything than the street car.

When the manufacturers went from gross hp ratings in 1971 to net hp ratings in1972 NHRA factored all those motors 1972 and up before they hit the race track. Al Provoast told me his wagon went from 185 to 285 before he ever went down the track. The motor I run in my car is a 71 350 Z28 motor that was rated at 330 from the factory and is now rated at 315. The same exact motor in 1972 was factory rated at 255. In those days NHRA did their job. The first time they didn't was the 94 Chevy LT1 which was rated at 275 net and allowed to run at that hp rating, and is now at 346.

My point in this rant is that the factory race cars were rated below their equivalent street car ratings that were SAE net to start with and they had more compression, more cam, bigger throttle bodies and better manifolds. All of you guys that complained about all of us crying about the hp ratings, well guess what? We were right on the money.

[Ed Carpenter]

Joseph I did some research on my combo 283/220hp Chevy II stick shift. Back in 89 it was rated at 230 and later that year it went to 235. At some point it went back to 230. In 2007 11hp was added due to a run Robin Brown made in Baytown. Last year it was reduced to 237. Not sure what it started at but after 40+ years of being run it is 17 over the factory rating. So that's a little info on my combo.

FWIW I feel Ed can say what he wants because he IS a current racer and he WORKS hard on his car. He is not a key board jockey. I think his car is awesome and if I remember right it's for sale. If you want to go fast turn key style go to Baytown and write him a check. See you there Ed.

[Joseph Teuton]

Originally Posted by deuces wild

Joseph I did some research on my combo 283/220hp Chevy II stick shift. Back in 89 it was rated at 230 and later that year it went to 235. At some point it went back to 230. In 2007 11hp was added due to a run Robin Brown made in Baytown. Last year it was reduced to 237. Not sure what it started at but after 40+ years of being run it is 17 over the factory rating. So that's a little info on my combo.

FWIW I feel Ed can say what he wants because he IS a current racer and he WORKS hard on his car. He is not a key board jockey. I think his car is awesome and if I remember right it's for sale. If you want to go fast turn key style go to Baytown and write him a check. See you there Ed.

Sir thanks for that knowledge. Was your combo ever a "killer" one?