Topics Topics Edit Profile Profile Help/Instructions Help Member List Member List  
Search Last 1|3|7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

INJECTED NITRO DRAGSTERS, INC. "INDI...

HRE.COM FORUMS » Drag Racing General Discussion (Open Forum) » Archive through December 28, 2006 » INJECTED NITRO DRAGSTERS, INC. "INDI" « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 11:54 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

This association has become a reality, with the rules endorsed by NHRA. There are some solid 2007 bookings and several more pending, with the intent to have five or six races the first year.

The Bowers (Famosa) have agreed to split the nitro and blown methanol classes at the March Meet and subsequent meets at Famosa. There are possible bookings at Boise, Medford, and Tucson.

There are nine cars thus far (all dragsters), with several more a strong possibility. Center steered altereds, which would add to the show, also fit within the rules. The cars thus far are Good Guys legal nitro A/Fuelers, with the exception of allowing a larger (Enderle #1100 or Waterman #775) fuel pump and a one inch wider tire (15 in). Low six second passes at speeds at 225+ should be the norm.

Aluminum shredding should be minimal, with carnage limited to nicking a piston or two. The cars will be going thru the lights at around 7500 RPM with no boost. Engines thus far include Early Hemi, BBC, Brad and Fontana. The minimum weight limit is set at 1725 lbs with driver. Wheelbase 225 for dragsters and 140 for altereds. A max cubic inch limit has been set at 471. No gear rule. No down nozzles.

Contact Gary Adams at (208) 777-0553 or garyadams072@adelphia.net for more info and/or a rules book.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hooks
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 07:30 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

"A max cubic inch limit has been set at 471."

"The minimum weight limit is set at 1725 lbs with driver."

Amazing...... who's combo does that match, Kin's or Claude's?

:-)

Cam (the cynical Canuck)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Al_napier
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 09:19 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

No 1,000 pound 310 cube direct drive FED's?

;-)

Al in CT
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 09:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Dear Cameron.

Not Kin, for sure. He'll have to carry well over 100 pounds of lead to make weight.

The 1725 minimum was determined by the weight of the heaviest competitor interested in the class at the time Gary was forming it.

Same deal with the 471 cubic inch displacement. It was the largest engine amongst the same group of competitors.

Take off your Conspiracy Theory hat, and give me twenty push ups.

Love, Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Admin
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 10:10 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

How about a 950# 283? If I recall, my Jr. Fueler weighed that back in 67.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 10:31 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I'd guess that it would be difficult, and darn expensive, to get a modern car much under about 1350 pounds.

Then, the other deal is that they would be mediocre performers. What, 7.50's? Maybe not even that quick.

I just can't envision much of a future for a small cube high gear only junior fueler. But I remember them well, and have always thought that they were way far neat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tad626
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 10:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I think you could get a modern, 2.2b injected Chevy way under 1000 pounds. A 410 sprint car motor is around 350 pounds, dry, but ready to go. Granted a lot of dollars, but it could be done.

Art
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

23t
Posted on Saturday, December 09, 2006 - 11:49 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Why in the world would they limit the wheelbase of altereds to 140"? I don't care, I just thought that it was a bizzarro rule!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Admin
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 12:28 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Ah yes Dan, but it wasn't that many years ago that people scoffed at the idea of bringing back front motored cars as anything more than an oddity (I remember lobbying for a class back 15 years ago in Full Throttle News). Fuel Alterds were Dead and Buried not that long ago too. The fact is, that a high gear only small cube, light weight Jr. Fueler WOULD be performance limited. but it would also be AFFORDABLE, something that ALL the classes start out to be, but then become the realm of the high dollar players who screw things up mightily for everyone else.

Ask Randy how much they have to pony up to play, Bob is going to go for his lungs to run injected nitro. Ask Gary Adams about the class that we spoke about, oh maybe 12 years ago (which might be the one that you guys are talking about now). I'll bet you if you get it flying, someone will step up, find a loop hole and screw it up for everyone else. Ask anyone who remembers when the FED's started to get popular again about a guy named San Paolo who bolted a 50K motor into a state of the art front engines chassis and ran low sixes when that was almost unheard of. Guys like Dan Horan and Paul Gommi who hung it up because they wanted to be able to eat once in a while (Gommi did hang it up after his crash, but money played a big part in that decision as well).

It happened to Jr. Fuel (the kind that they run nowadays) when someone's daddy paid about 25 Large for a set of one off buick heads for his kid to go kick everyone's butt with. No one could be happy with an older chassis so the chassis guys all jumped on the bandwagon and built super cars with the motors in the front. Check out the price of a roller HOLY COW!

Yeah, it'd be nice if there was a class where you could just RUN it on the weekends.

(Edited for spelling boo-boos)

(Message edited by admin on December 10, 2006)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 06:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I think this group is a good idea and could? be a class to run anywhere although I do admit it's stacked towards hemi's LOL.

What they should have done is place the minimum weight based on current hemi cars and THEN allowed weight reductions for anything other than a Hemi.

What's happened is a group has formed a class based on a VERY regional program rather than create something that might actually have some national interest.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 11:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hello Bob

I would like to very respectfully disagree with you. I neither believe that this class is ďstacked towards hemiísĒ, nor that parity can be legislated by weight breaks for weaker engines.

If it is ďstacked towards hemiísĒ, then it would be darn silly not to run one. Where are they? I know of only one hemi in junior fuel.

Structuring a class by manipulating weight (or pump size, or whatever) to achieve parity between different engines or combinations just doesnít work. Injected nitro vs. blown methanol is a case in point, both at NHRA and Good Guys races.

ďDumbing downĒ a class for weaker engines is an impossible task. Suppose the rules structure requires a hemi to race at one weight, and all others at another weight. What then happens when someone shows with a McGee, Batten, Toyota, or whatever, and smokes everyone? The cornerstone of the class being the addition of weight to achieve parity would dictate adding weight to the new winner. Then the obvious next question is what happens when someone shows up with Studebaker power, and canít compete. Well, by precedent the whole class would have to be penalized so that the Studebaker would have a fair chance. It just doesnít make sense.

The fact that someone owns or likes a certain engine (Chevy, hemi, Studebaker, McGee, or whatever) shouldnít have an impact on the rules structure.

Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 03:01 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

"Where are they? I know of only one hemi in junior fuel. "

Actually, we're not talking about Junior Fuel at all here. The subject was the new Injected Nitro class which is basically a Hemi class.
Who is competitive in this new Injected Nitro class who ISN'T running a Hemi?
Honestly, I'd like to know.

Actually nobody I know was afraid of running Hemi's in A/Fuel until you couldn't find a normal Hemi part on any of them. It's true, the chevys couldn't keep up but not because of weight or cubic inch. It was simply a matter of having to run against a modern Top Fuel motor only missing one Mag. LOL

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 06:45 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hello, Bob

Please excuse me, I thought you were talking about Junior Fuel

As to the new A/Fuel deal, there hasnít been a race yet, so itís still an unknown. To the best of my knowledge, itís all hemiís save for one Chevy.

As to the ďnormal hemi partsĒ, itís the other way around. To the best of my knowledge, all the Chevies in A/Fuel utilized aftermarket blocks and heads. The hemiís utilized 1958 Chrysler blocks and 1955 Chrysler heads until last year. Dean Adams engine, with 1955 Chrysler heads, ran 6.25 @ 225.

Itís the same deal in Junior Fuel. Fords and Chevies are allowed to utilize aftermarket heads and blocks, while hemiís have to utilize stock fifty year old blocks and heads.

Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 07:38 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I was under the impression that both Kin and LaVoie were running after market blocks and either AJ or BAE heads. I could very well be wrong on that but the photo of LaVoie on the cover of the rule book sure ain't iron heads.

However, their rules state "any block in steel or alm may be used" Item #2 in their rule book. Claude gave me a copy.

However, I will agree with you that making rules to fit a make of motor is bad. BUT, I have never seen the problem with going back to the old days and going by some kind of weight/cubic inch standard.

By their rules you're looking at a 3.66lbs per cubic inch.. Apply that to a small block chevy for example and a 358 chevy could weigh 1,310lbs. Don't favor the brand of motor, just factor in cubic inch versus weight. Think it would be more interesting.

Hmmmm, Tammy Fargo/95% Nitro/1350lbs total..400lb weight break. Might be fun.

Of course the old saving still holds true today. "Cubic Money beats Cubic Inches every time"

Bob



(Message edited by soaring16 on December 10, 2006)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Speeddemon
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 09:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Tammy in your car....She would love it.

You better have a good RMP limiter in it for her burnouts......

SD
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 09:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Jim, funny how some things don't change much. Given the formula 3.66 lbs, your old dragster was about right. Should weigh 1,035lbs with a 283

Ed, tell Tammy to be careful what she wishes for. LOL

Bob

(Message edited by soaring16 on December 10, 2006)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Admin
Posted on Monday, December 11, 2006 - 02:09 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

And we didn't know ANYTHING back then! Heck, we even ran press in studs (I drilled the sides of them and put in a roll pin so that they wouldn't pull out and you know what? They NEVER pulled out!) The nitro would get in the oil and clean the numbers off the oil filter (the old can types). We didn't have any money for anything so we hauled the car out to the track in the back of a friends sedan delivery. Just got a couple of guys to push it into the back of the truck on some boards. Tied it down with rope and off we went. Probably the best time I ever had racing. (My own stuff, now I enjoy watching my boy do his thing. Some one of these days I KNOW he's going to get the bug to quarter mile things. THEN I'll break out the stuff that's gathering dust in the shop LOL!)

(Message edited by admin on December 11, 2006)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gordon
Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - 12:02 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hi Dan , the only chance I asked for was to be allowed to run my stude. I was told it wasn't popular enough to qualify as a orphan engine class car. Back to working on the Rodeck. by the way Merry Christmas you sidewinder. And that goes for the rest of you HRE hooligans!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Geoff
Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - 02:18 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Dan,You might not have been around in the late 60,s but the rule,s then were SBC-blown-1000lbs Hemi-blown -1200lbs.The reason given for the diff, in weight was you could build a giant Hemi-say 480cu.in. vers.380-for the chevy.I felt that it was reasonable,and so did everyone else in that era.By the way,My A/Fueler,IF I put it back on a diet would scale 1190lbs easy,With a 470 chev,Rodek,and a 40gal. pump,plus 100%,I could put up some numbers on the board that would get me thrown out ANYWHERE,ask Gene Adams
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - 07:10 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Some of the ideas being kicked around here would be nice to be seen in a set of rules for Open Fuel.
While I certainly think you'll see some good racing in this new association, it will be Hemi versus Hemi in every single final round and maybe the entire field. BORING!

If something was created with some weight/cubic inch rules, the field would be wide open and could become a Nationally run class. Since Open Fuel started, we're starting to see it at other tracks and people like it. A couple of times, you didn't even have to qualify to get in at Bowling Green in VRA Top Fuel but every race you've HAD to qualify in Open Fuel due to number of racers.

Fact is, lot's of folks want to run nitro but not many want to spring for the bucks to run VRA style Top Fuel.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - 07:17 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hello Gordon.

Thought the Studebaker reference might get your attention. Please write or call.

Hello Geoff.

One thing that most folks don't realize is that an early hemi weighs about the same as a Chevy small block. Sure, a factory small block is lighter, but who is running a factory block or heads? The bottom line is that an aftermarket iron (block and heads) Chevy small block engine of around 400 cubic inches is very comparable to a similar displacement early hemi.

In junior fuel trim (410 cubic inches, unblown, methanol), both types are very well developed, and a small block makes at least 50 more horsepower. The small blocks breathe a little better, have a better rod to stroke ratio (the hemi has a very long rod), and have lighter valve trains and pistons. The small blocks also have a far smaller chamber, as the early hemi's are over 100 cc's. Don't hold me to this, but as I recall, the early hemi block isn't as wide as a small block (maybe about .500" less).

I kinda feel like I'm preaching here, but that's not the intent. I'm just offering an opinion and information that some forum members might find interesting.

Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - 08:11 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

This thread is getting a little off topic.

I'm going to be out of town for several days, but when I return, I'll start another thread and provide the weights of the major components of the 409 hemi (owned by Gary Adams) in John Rasmussen's "B" Junior Fueler.

The pans, mags, belt drives, zoomies, etc. for other engines should all be similar, so I'll concern myself with block, heads (including rockers), injectors, and crank. By comparing these weights with those of, for instance, a small block, we can determine the weight differences of the engines.


I suspect that there will be some surprised hooligans.

Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - 05:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Actually Dan, the question has never been related to weight of motors. Very little to argue about really. I can build a hemi that weighs less than a chevy as easily as I can build a chevy that weighs less than a hemi.

BUT, it's tough to build a small block chevy as BIG as a hemi and there in lies the problem..Of course all you old school guys have known this for years. LOL

The bottom line is this new association is built for hemi users. Pure and simple. Don't believe me? Wait until 07 and tell me how many chevys are in the field. I'll put my money on NONE!

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Afueldigger
Posted on Wednesday, December 13, 2006 - 04:34 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I dont feel this class is built around the hemi.It just so happens most of the a/fuel cars that are going to be a part of this have hemis. I dont believe it is anyones intent to shun the chevy guys at all The fact of the matter is if you would prefer to run a chevy go for it.We would love to have the car in the class.
The idea was to keep the rules simple and straight forward if you get into weight to cid issues and weight breaks it gets mutch more difficult to keep a handle on it. After all we are not talking big money payouts in this deal this is for fun....... Right?
Gary
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Wednesday, December 13, 2006 - 06:45 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Perhaps you're right Gary but I still feel weight/cubic inch was always a viable option in the past and maybe still could be given some serious thought.

My new combo will eventually follow these rules so who knows, maybe you'll see us in Calif late 07.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Piranha
Posted on Wednesday, December 13, 2006 - 12:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I really wondered how my old SBC w/14 degree heads would run with a little pop.
10K thru the lights? those heads flowed good! 400+ cfm.
Marc McCormick
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Afueldigger
Posted on Thursday, December 14, 2006 - 04:07 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

That would be bitchin to have you come out west and play with us Bob. What are you putting together for a combo?????
Gary
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Thursday, December 14, 2006 - 07:25 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hi Gary,
Basically taking the tall deck Dart alm Small block I've got and going with a fab intake, dual port nozzles and ShotGun hat, 1100 pump. 90+% nitro. 225" Stirling car. 3:50 rear gear. 14.5 slicks, 3 disk clutch and 2spd, 378 cu inch.

Beauty of it all is, I've got most of the parts already. Good to have a good crew in Florida as they can take care of many of the odds and ends while I work in Maine to pay for it all. LOL

The car will be on the light side so going to have to work on putting some weight in it. (Besides me) It was already at min with a blown iron block. Don't think it will stay with you guys out West but in the East should do very well. But, hey, you just never know until you tow west. LOL Throw my hang glider in the trailer so I can make a long vacation out of it.

Need to get together with Gene at some point to talk this new program over. Probably have him set the injection up with something close.. I also need to send the Mag out to Spud to get a little more juice out of it. Mag actually worked very well on Lincs Top Fueler as is but won't hurt to hop it up a bit more.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Friday, December 15, 2006 - 06:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Gary Adams would like to weigh in on this thread. Although heís not a forum member, I feel it appropriate to paraphrase his thoughts, which are as follows. Hopefully, Admin will agree.

If a person wants to run a SBC in the new Injected Nitro Dragster class, he can do so and not give up cubic inches or cylinder head flow to the two fastest Hemiís in the class. The two quickest VRA A/Fuel cars to date, LaVoie (6.17)and Bates (6.21) run Alan Johnson cylinder heads that flow about 360 CFM. Their intake valve size is only 2.125".

There are many makes of aftermarket SBC heads that flow CFM equal to the Alan Johnson heads, and some that flow more. Also available are Olds Small Blocks which can be stroked to 4.250", which with a 4.180" bore give a displacement of 467 cubic inches. Both LaVoie and Bates engines are 468 cubic inches. The cubic inch limit is 471 in the new Injected Nitro class, so a 467 cubic inch SBC would not be giving up cubic inches or head flow with the SBC equipment that is available.

It is not like it was the 1960's, when small blocks were 364 cubic inches and hemiís were 461 cubic inches with both bored and stroked to about as big as you could get them, and the hemiís flowing a lot more air.

Therefore, a SBC in the new Injected Nitro Dragster class can have the same cubic inches and the same head flow and be the same weight as a hemi. There would be no reason for the SBC to be lighter.

As for a small cubic inch SBC unblown on nitro running a lot of RPM, the size of the fuel pump dictates how much RPM you can run. It would not be feasible to try to run a high RPM unblown on nitro with a 17 gallon fuel pump, as you would have to take away a lot of fuel to keep the cylinders lit. The new INDI class is simply not designed for a small cubic, high RPM unblown nitro engine. To do that, you would have to have a fuel pump of very limited volume like a Hilborn PG-150 or an Enderle 80-A. The performance level with fuel pumps this small is not what is intended in the new Injected Nitro Dragster class. The INDI class is looking for a performance level of 225 to 230 in the real low sixes.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Friday, December 15, 2006 - 08:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hmmm, guess I'll stay on the East Coast and just have fun with it.. LOL

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Terry_coker
Posted on Friday, December 15, 2006 - 11:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

What needs to happen is to come up with a class such as b/fd. Like years ago. Only iron blocks and iron 23 degree heads. No 14 or what ever degree heads. Would be a fun and fast class. And not break the bank.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Admin
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 12:08 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I agree. I have pushed for such a class for nearly 15 years (maybe a little more than 15 years). Everytime they make a class along those lines, someone comes along and screws it up by injecting cubic dollars into the mix. I say BAH! Small block, Iron heads No tricks and 80% should make a super fun class. Even 75% would be fun.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 08:10 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Basic Dragster

Hereís an idea for a class. It could obviously stand some refinement, but itís a start.

FED, 3.65 (or thereabouts) pounds per cubic inch, with a displacement range of 400 -500 cubic inches. This would give a weight range of 1460 - 1825 pounds.

No carbon fiber, no titanium (engine or chassis) save for valves and retainers, no fabricated rear end

Iron heads and blocks, factory architecture (deck height, cam location and diameter, valve angles, bore and lifter spacing, etc.), no billet crankshafts, .700" lift, measured at the retainer with zero lash

methanol (stacks or a hat), zoomies, points type magneto, zero electronics, no battery, no trans brake, one switch allowed (kill switch)


Iíve specified methanol. Nitro would make the class a lot more expensive (both fuel and carnage). The .700" lift is to keep costs down.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 06:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Nitro may or may not make it more expensive parts wise but the thing is people WANT to run nitro.
I don't think there should be a minimum weight as long as all safety requirements are met.
Otherwise, I like the rules.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave_koehler
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 07:05 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

1:Without nitro you have nothing. Policing percentage would be a tech fiasco so let em run what they want.

2: Cast iron heads won't fly. Why? Because no one has them. Better way to put it would be..Do you own a set currently?

3: The cast iron head, limited cubic inch, alky thing has been tried recently by the folks at Dragnews.com. It had a decent circuit set up and some money. It was not limited to FE cars and it failed. No one was interested in building a new car/engine combo for this or changing their aluminum headed car backwards.

4: Fab rear end? Sorry but where do you draw the line? Buy a center section, hack it, whack it and weld it and you have a fab rear end. Not worth the tech hassle.

The west coast indi thing might work. If you want to run a rambler or a SB, so be it. Don't ask for special consideration. Man up, spend the money, find a way. You may be the next Santos.

Seems we have been down this road too many times and it does get a little frustrating thinking all this stuff through.

For the Mid Coast folks look at Coker's NPCA. http://nostalgiaprocomp.com/ It's here now and a viable place to run.
It will do the trick until some money people come along to promote some particular circuit with the intent of making a profit. Without money or the idea of making money it's just a club.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 09:13 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hello, Bob and Dave

I absolutely agree about the nitro, which is the reason that I'm going nitro racing next season.

The A/Fuel VRA and Gary's INDI classes are about as basic and inexpensive as any heads up nitro class. If one wants nitro on a budget, what's wrong with those classes?

I own seven sets of iron heads (five hemi, one poly, one Chevy). And one one set of aluminum heads (hemi).

In retrospect, I agree regarding the fabricated rear end.

Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Geoff
Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 10:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Dan,When I gave you 1000lb.sbc and the 1200lb.Hemi that was early 60,s,there were no BBC,s then.My car won the Canadian Nationals in 1971 at 1130lbs.Blown 417 Hemi.all Iron direct drive.6.30@230mph.A injected BBC on 100% same size would be just as fast,and as much fun.A BBC all Iron 470in.or Olds eng would be some heavier,but nearly as fast.A sbc 380in.-1000lbs.-100% should run with anything.Ilike 3.5lbs. per.in. run any eng you want,chevy,hemi,ford,olds. Geoff.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 12:10 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hello Geoff

If you took your car exactly as it was in 1971, and updated it to current rules, I wonder what it would weigh.

I don't have any idea, but off the top of my head, I'd guess at least an additional 100 pounds. Maybe even 150.

Danny
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave_koehler
Posted on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 12:22 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Well, now I know why there is little interest in cast iron heads. Dan has all of them. chuckle.

As for the indi rules. I see bits and pieces further up this thread. Have they been written down somewhere or is just the vra thing with the pump and tire change the only difference? Dan, got a copy you can post?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Terry_coker
Posted on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 01:38 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Yes I do have a set of cast iron heads. Their on the motor right now. Iron 350 SBC. And run pretty good too.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Soaring16
Posted on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 04:11 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Dave,

Think of the VRA A/Fuel rules without all those annoying non hemi's hanging around. LOL

Seriously, I've got the book in front of me and the only difference is bigger pump and 1" wider tire. BTW the 6.17 run by Claude was with the smaller pump.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan_miller
Posted on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 11:15 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Minimum weight is also up a little.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Geoff
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 02:04 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Dan,min-weights and other restrictions are a big part of what is wrong with the system today.Your comment about my car weight after updates is very close.After updating to NHRA 2.2b rules and VRA rules my car weighted 1195,with a all-alum. Rodeck and Crower-stack Inj.and a piece of junk called a Power-Glide.1195+80lbs.nitro+175lbs.driver+20lb..fire suit,helmet,boots,etc.=1470lbs.I,am still 180 lbs.light for the MIN-wgt.You are allowed a MAX.wgt.ballast of 150 lbs. I,am still 30 lbs. light.WHY build a light race car to go fast?????then add wgt.As wgt. goes up parts must be stronger to stand the strain.What happens to the cost???.Let UPS or FEDEX haul the WEIGHT.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Admin
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 04:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Maybe you could fill your slicks with water like earth moving equipment does. that oughta satisfy the Tech guys LOL!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tad626
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 06:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Geoff,

I am in full agreement with you. I guess I was someplace else, I know I was, when this minimum weight stuff started. Use the 2.2b as a minimum standard and let the cards fall where they may. 1966, full iron hemi, blown,.090 chrome molley chassis and added weight to get to NHRA minimum, 1200, maybe 1250 pounds, memory not like it used to be.

Art
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pat_primmer
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 10:42 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

A high minimum weight can help with safety and cost as it reduces the temptation to build a fragile chassis and reduces the advantage of exotic lightweight parts.

Notice I did not say eliminate, I said reduces.

Using exotic lightweight parts in rotating parts improves response, even if that weight has to be added as ballast.

Building a light chassis allows you to put the ballast weight where you like.

Maybe if they specify minimum weights on each wheel. Yes I know still only further reduces but does not eliminate problems.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pat_primmer
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 10:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

No matter what rules you have, the guy who best works out how to get the most within those rules wins. A big experimental development budget always helps in this regard.

For instance, if you must run a stock as it came from "X" part, buying 100 parts and hand picking the best gives a small advantage at a very high cost.

In my often not humble enough opinion, the best low budget class can only hope to reduce the level of the advantage gained by big budget.

I will post some ideas tomorrow night as I am now running late for family Christmas functions.

Administration Administration Log Out Log Out   Previous Page Previous Page Next Page Next Page