HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock Tech


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-21-2020, 03:27 PM   #11
Charles Stewart
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Rivičre-du-Loup, (QC) Canada
Posts: 272
Likes: 1,063
Liked 471 Times in 142 Posts
Default Re: 2007 Mustang V6?

Mr. Southerland, your point of view is interesting for this discussion, and, I must also add, in the CLASS WEIGHT BREAKS section, the sentence (based on pounds per NHRA-factored horsepower) under this tittle, can also be taken as a part of the answer, though it doesn’t also explain the ESI specs situation.
But further in this same section, a part of it, said: The power to weight factor is the shipping weight of the vehicle divided by the advertised or when applicable, the factored horsepower for the OEM assembly line cylinder heads.I’m still questioning the meaning and also words like: “advertised” and part of sentence like “or when applicable” to explain my understanding of the rules.
Sorry for “this too long post and THANKS once again for this very good discussion and your precious help. I’m still learning…
Keep on Sir,
Charles Stewart
Charles Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2020, 11:35 AM   #12
Dwight Southerland
VIP Member
 
Dwight Southerland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 52
Liked 704 Times in 176 Posts
Default Re: 2007 Mustang V6?

Please note my statement "There is a statement in the rule book that can be taken as an explanation, though it does not specifically explain the ESI issue." I was not trying to defend what and how NHRA's technical information is assembled or has been published. But, in practice, if there is not a power-to-weight factor listed, you cannot classify the combination in Stock or traditional SS.

There was a practice put in place after the SS/GT classes were defined that allowed manufacturers to submit shipping weight information about models they wanted to be available for competitors. This was more common in the late 1980s and 1990s than now. Manufacturers used to submit a lot more of their product line than they do now. Some manufacturers transitioned to primarily FWD cars and mostly 4-cyl and 6-cyl products but still wanted their name and make to be showcased, so the information was submitted for their cars to be eligible for those classes, but the engine data was insignificant. The manufacturers target was the SS/GT classes and other modified classes specifically and shipping weight is all that was needed. It would be good for NHRA tech department to include some statement in the rule book or accompanying the technical documents that provided a simple explanation for some of those "unwritten" processes and procedures. Not everyone has be privy to historical moves and decisions.

There are 223 engines referenced in the Tech Bulletins-Class Guides with no engine specifications. Most are listed as "ESI" (Engine Specifications Incomplete) or "NES" (No Engine Specifications). Some are shown in the Class Guide but have no corresponding information in the Technical Bulletin for that manufacturer (ex. 1960 Ford 312-205hp in the Mercury which has power-to-weight factors but no engine specs). Maybe it would be nice for the manufacturers to provide that information, though I doubt there would be many that would become race cars (like about 90+% of the combinations currently in the books!). In my opinion, I wish the "less than performance engines" of the current muscle car era were in the books because the sport cannot maintain on 40+year old combinations.
__________________
Dwight Southerland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2020, 09:23 AM   #13
Charles Stewart
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Rivičre-du-Loup, (QC) Canada
Posts: 272
Likes: 1,063
Liked 471 Times in 142 Posts
Default Re: 2007 Mustang V6?

Thanks Mr. Southerland for sharing this statement and all those new interesting details to me.
That’s clarified my knowledge (my vision) of this portion of the Stock class rules.
This will certainly help to avoid costly mistakes.
I also agree: NHRA rulebook need some refresh in that regard.
And a BIG + for your patience,
Keep on Sir,
Charles Stewart
Charles Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.