Let's Build Some Pro Stock Rules

[Jeff Chandler]

I started this over on the NMCA board but not much traffic there so let's try it here. This is just some stuff that may/may not help. If we stay on topic and stay civil and constructive we might just come up with something attractive for the future. So here we go...play nice.


Here's just a few changes with the rules I thought might create some stability within our class. This was just a quick glance and some changes just to get things rolling(in a good way)so let's here your thoughts and suggestions and try to keep a open mind but most of be civil


Weight Breaks
ENGINE BASE CI BASE WEIGHT
Small Block 360 2700
Small Block 400 2850
Small Block 420 2900
Small Block 440 3025
Big Block 477 3450
Big Block 525 3550

Maximum cubic inch for all combinations – 565*.

Change to read like this:

Weight Breaks
ENGINE BASE CI BASE WEIGHT
Small Block 440 3000
Big Block 525 3550

Next section:

1950 – 1974 body styles and all Trucks – deduct 75 pounds from base weights
Entries using stock-type rear suspension may deduct 50 pounds.
All Mopar-Based Big Block Combinations – deduct 50 pounds from base weights.
Add 175 lbs for 10-14 degree small-block cylinder heads**
Add 100 lbs for 15-18 degree small-block cylinder heads**
All Pontiac Combinations – deduct 175 pounds from base weights.
All (a)Buick & All (b)Oldsmobile (c)AMC Combinations – deduct (a)200, (b)250, & (c)200 pounds from base weights.
Clutchless manual transmission – weight penalty of 200 pounds added to base weights.
2-speed OEM Powerglide transmission deduct 50 -lbs
*If actual cubic inch is more than base cubic inch listing, there will be a weight penalty of 8.5 pounds per cubic inch assessed to base weights, up to the maximum cubic inch permitted in the class.
** Small Block Ford Victor Cylinder Heads or TFS Twisted Wedge R SBF Heads will add 100 lbs irregardless of valve angle of cylinder head. (Does not include Victor II)
Note: All weights are with driver & rounded down to the five pound increment. Ex: A calculated weight of 2968 would be required to weight 2965 with driver at scales.

Change to read like this:

1950 – 1974 body styles and all Trucks – deduct 75 pounds from base weights
Entries using stock-type rear suspension may deduct 50 pounds.
All Mopar-Based Big Block Combinations – deduct 50 pounds from base weights.
All Pontiac Combinations – deduct 175 pounds from base weights.
All (a)Buick & All (b)Oldsmobile (c)AMC Combinations – deduct (a)200, (b)250, & (c)200 pounds from base weights.
Clutchless manual transmission – weight penalty of 200 pounds added to base weights.
2-speed OEM Powerglide transmission deduct 50 -lbs
*If actual cubic inch is more than base cubic inch listing, there will be a weight penalty of 8.5 pounds per cubic inch assessed to base weights, up to the maximum cubic inch permitted in the class.
Note: All weights are with driver & rounded down to the five pound increment. Ex: A calculated weight of 2968 would be required to weight 2965 with driver at scales.

Here's a part that's difficult to understand with the current "Weight Break" rules. Small block 400 has to weigh 2850, 420 - 2900 and the 440 - 3025, that's only 50lbs between the 400 to 420 with 20 cubes but from 420 to 440 it's 125lbs with 20 cubes, this doesn't make much sense. Are the 440' to heavy or the 420's to light? Now before the all-out assault from the 420 guys begins these are only my observations.

Let's here your civil thoughts and suggestions.

[Butch Kemp]

Just make my 20 degree heads lighter than the 15's and I'll be happy.
Well.............maybe happier.

[HS 3131]

Butch, Your CFE 20* head would kill any other 15* Head out there. I bet you they work better than CFE's Pro King 10* head for SB Ford. That particular head you are using Needed a weight penalty. 100# maybe too heavy but at least 50# to start. just my observation on that one.

Sorry I had to be a Tech guy for a minute. Back to normal now.

[383Malibu]

Jeff, what would you propose as a weight deduct if the actual cubic inches is less than the base cubic inch listing?

[Jeff Chandler]

Nothing. I'm a proponent of the one weight per SB and BB as the changes I listed above show. Also, no more weight breaks/adders for valve angle. It's like this, Butch got hammered this year, a 100lb swing in weight is big but if the rules were like I have them listed above(in general)then he could have spent his money on refining his combo rather than build a totally new one and end up weighing exactly the same this year(after rule revision)as he would have with last years combo.
It's all about ridding the rules of loop holes and exploitation, our class is expensive enough without having to worry about that.

[Ben Mens]

Good reply Jeff. You are absolutley correct that there are many loopholes in the rules that can be exploited. I try to steer my customers away from these picks as they are never worth it in the long run. Usually, from my observance anyway, these are brought on by a racer's need to stay competitive and the sanctioning body makes an adjustment to help his combination. Then a savy racer building his combination recognizes how attractive this loophole in the rules is and builds a combination to take full advantage and then the original racer becomes uncompetitive, the new racer is penalized and the ensuing $h1+ storm begins. So nobody benefits from these constant rules changes & adjustments. A one weight one cubic inch rule or even a single weight for small block, big block, and maybe even the different brands would work. In other words, make it so the racers want to pick the BEST COMPONENTS.

[larry santucci]

Good reply Jeff. You are absolutley correct that there are many loopholes in the rules that can be exploited. I try to steer my customers away from these picks as they are never worth it in the long run. Usually, from my observance anyway, these are brought on by a racer's need to stay competitive and the sanctioning body makes an adjustment to help his combination. Then a savy racer building his combination recognizes how attractive this loophole in the rules is and builds a combination to take full advantage and then the original racer becomes uncompetitive, the new racer is penalized and the ensuing $h1+ storm begins. So nobody benefits from these constant rules changes & adjustments. A one weight one cubic inch rule or even a single weight for small block, big block, and maybe even the different brands would work. In other words, make it so the racers want to pick the BEST COMPONENTS.

Well said.

[Damn Yankee]

Nothing. I'm a proponent of the one weight per SB and BB as the changes I listed above show. Also, no more weight breaks/adders for valve angle. It's like this, Butch got hammered this year, a 100lb swing in weight is big but if the rules were like I have them listed above(in general)then he could have spent his money on refining his combo rather than build a totally new one and end up weighing exactly the same this year(after rule revision)as he would have with last years combo.
It's all about ridding the rules of loop holes and exploitation, our class is expensive enough without having to worry about that.

So Jeff, what would you suggest in your rules as far as heads allowed for both the big blocks or small blocks ? Not tryin to be funny but theres a million BBC heads and maybe 3 different heads for the SBF guys. The Glidden Victors, Victor II's, and the CFE ProKings. I have a pretty good idea what SBC heads they would choose

[mwuertz]

why make these cars so heavy?

[Jeff Chandler]

The head list remains the same, you run the heads were allowed to run now, all I did was remove the cylinder head weight break/penalty from the rules and set a min weight for BB and SB. If you have a 23 degree headed 420 you run at 3000, if you have a CFE Pro Comp #72013 you run at 3000, probably not a good idea but you can if you want to. They allow about the best non splayed valve head in so I think you should use it. All the other weight breaks(nostalgia, trans, BOP&AMC)remain unchanged.

[HS 3131]

Ok here is were I would see a problem. What if someone starts walking away with it? Lets say Butch comes out or Jeff with there SB or BB at a certain weight and Jeff starts walking away with it by a tenth, How do you maintain parity? Just asking .

[Jeff Chandler]

Weight, give it or take it away. If a BB pulls ahead of the class add weight to the BB's or take it from the SB's. Much easier to adjust weight rather than buying a new combo for next years loop hole.

[HS 3131]

Weight, give it or take it away. If a BB pulls ahead of the class add weight to the BB's or take it from the SB's. Much easier to adjust weight rather than buying a new combo for next years loop hole.

I see your point Jeff. But lets say Edelbrock comes out with a bad ass BB head and gives it to you. That new head crushes the feild by lets say a tenth or so, everyone who runs a BB has to suffer cause that head is better and just you have it? Im just trying to see how this would work, there are so many head combinations out there, were as in Hot Street you have the Victor head on pretty much every car.

[Jeff Chandler]

That's a good point Tim but we are in a much worse spot now, instead of just a cylinder head change it's a whole new combo, 10k vs 35k, 10k that's still a ton of money but if your not investing at least that in your engine program every year your not gonna keep up(not you Tim, all of us). Let's face it, this is expensive class and the days of just going out and running cause it's fun is over.

[HS 3131]

That's a good point Tim but we are in a much worse spot now, instead of just a cylinder head change it's a whole new combo, 10k vs 35k, 10k that's still a ton of money but if your not investing at least that in your engine program every year your not gonna keep up(not you Tim, all of us). Let's face it, this is expensive class and the days of just going out and running cause it's fun is over.

I see were your heading. I see the 420 being the dominate combo right now. At least until you go out in Joliet and cream the feild by a tenth or so. LOL In Hot Street its mainly a 400 inch feild with a few 360's thrown in. Im all for a one cubic inch deal or SB BB weight deal.

But here is something else. What about fuel? Still C-25 or do we have to put space suits on to fill up?

[383Malibu]

... In other words, make it so the racers want to pick the BEST COMPONENTS.If that's the case, then why have weight adders or deducts for anything (brands, trannies, suspension, body style, etc.)?

[Jeff Chandler]

Total exclusion. The NMCA doesn't want that and you can't expect Buick, Olds and AMC to run at the same weight as the others, they just don't have the hardware available to them like the Chevy, Ford and Mopar so help is needed. Question is, is it enough? In fairness I can't say for sure as I don't know what's available, the only thing I do know is they definitely have the harder road. As for the Pontiac, John has proven that to be superior to the Buick, Olds and AMC but not up with the others so concessions are needed and are much easier with him because he is close.
There's no perfect answer but I believe we can do better.

[383Malibu]

Ok, so what's the reasoning for trannies, suspension and body style?

[Jeff Chandler]

I guess they no something we don't but those things are not a big problem like the other stuff.

These are just my ideas, they hold no water, just conversation and suggestions to make the class as attractive as possible to promote growth.

[Chris Uratchko]

Jeff I'd like to keep the weights down.

This does not reflect my feelings on Butchs dilemma, but more like Fantasy Pro Stock.

One weight, one cubic inch.

Don't make it attractive for a guy to spend 10k on a dumb cylinder head. Really, that is what the rules did in Pro Stock this year. A guy spent money according to the rules, and got burned. Everyone has the same rule book....

Anyhow...

420(cuz most of the sb guys have 420's) 2900
525(cuz all the bb guys have 525's) 3400

No Cylinder Head lists. Any head allowed both BB and Small block.

No manifold rules. Sheetmetal intakes for everyone(why not, cast intakes are STUPID, the same money, and door stops all said and done)...

Q16 spec fuel.

All other nit-picky rules thrown out. Lets race, lets spend money on 'good parts' instead of 'class rule parts'.....

[Jeff Chandler]

Chris...I thought you left the country

[Chris Uratchko]

I pretty much did, at Milan, for 3 days, 4 customers, a lot of fumes,..... came home to reality a few hours ago, about 10 shades darker, a little hoarse, worn out, but happy.

[Butch Kemp]

Butch, Your CFE 20* head would kill any other 15* Head out there. I bet you they work better than CFE's Pro King 10* head for SB Ford. That particular head you are using Needed a weight penalty. 100# maybe too heavy but at least 50# to start. just my observation on that one.

Sorry I had to be a Tech guy for a minute. Back to normal now.

I agree I needed a weight penalty.
Heres what I dont agree with.
Building my same shortblock with the best CFE 15* head and hands down making more power than what i have now, while weighing the same??????nobody has an answer for that.I got a phone call and his reason was because everyone in the class, and he made sure to say EVERYONE were bitching I needed weight.He even said a few 2 or more guys were bitching that didnt even run the class.And the main reason was "because you have your shit figured out"
So this makes me think.??????
Build a 525" so nobody can cry when theres a bunch of them in the class??
Rebuild again?????10k-15k??
race somewhere else because my 20 degree head is at a disadvantage now??
I know for a pretty good fact that Baskins' new 15* engine made considerably more power than mind did, and we have the same minimum weight now.........someone make sense of this please??

[Butch Kemp]

[QUOTE=Jeff Chandler;980544]The head list remains the same, you run the heads were allowed to run now, all I did was remove the cylinder head weight break/penalty from the rules and set a min weight for BB and SB. If you have a 23 degree headed 420 you run at 3000, if you have a CFE Pro Comp #72013 you run at 3000, probably not a good idea but you can if you want to.

That sounds like it fucks one guy.And only one

[Chris Uratchko]

Butch I think his discussion is more about what are good rules, without considering who is running what....

Heck I got 2 sets of them Pro Comp 10 degree heads on the shelf... one the same program you had, and one set.... how should I say... 'tuned up by CFE'.... :p... .much better than the head on your engine right now... we'll go 40's at your new weight.

All we need are some pistons and some manifold work.

[Jeff Chandler]

Butch, this is not what this is about, it's actually all about what happen to you never happening again and as far as EVERYONE bitchin about the rules that's not true and I hope you know that. Furthermore, I have nothing to complain about, I'm not chasing you, my job is to do what I can to run with the fastest BB in the class(Bruce)and not worry about the fastest car(you)until I can run with Bruce and when that happens I'll worry about you or whoever else is the fastest but I won't bang a door, make a call nor send an email saying they should slow you or anyone else down. Also remember that this is just a discussion to get ideas or maybe just to see what the others think how the rules need to be. As I mentioned above, this thread holds no water, it's just a discussion.

[HS 3131]

I agree I needed a weight penalty.
Heres what I dont agree with.
Building my same shortblock with the best CFE 15* head and hands down making more power than what i have now, while weighing the same??????nobody has an answer for that.I got a phone call and his reason was because everyone in the class, and he made sure to say EVERYONE were bitching I needed weight.He even said a few 2 or more guys were bitching that didnt even run the class.And the main reason was "because you have your shit figured out"
So this makes me think.??????
Build a 525" so nobody can cry when theres a bunch of them in the class??
Rebuild again?????10k-15k??
race somewhere else because my 20 degree head is at a disadvantage now??
I know for a pretty good fact that Baskins' new 15* engine made considerably more power than mind did, and we have the same minimum weight now.........someone make sense of this please??

Butch, I think you should come on out to Joliet and show those guys whats up... You know what your car runs at what weight. Do you think you can still be competitive? You can PM me your answer.

[dwmotorsports]

Jeff I am glad you are taking these steps to be proactive for the class however I am not sure this class is going to be anymore then a small block ford/chevy big block chevy class the reason being the demand to produce parts for the other makes is just not there and with the huge incease in inflation happening it is not going to get any better weight breaks fix the lack of power but also cause all the arguements and the last thing I want to do after spending day and night and maxing out my home equity trying to make a turd run is have to justify to powerhead why there is a nostalgia weight break or a weight break for bopa and mopars I say make the class a Ford/Chevy class you run a small block ford/chevy you weigh X you run a big block ford/chevy you weigh X at this point I don't think you would lose any racers other then Langer and myself and hell I have only been to one and Langer looks like he wants to go a different direction anyhow and maybe I can get a job as a tech for the NMCA ??

[Bubstr]

I have no dog in this fight, but it seems the more rules you add the more unfair it becomes. These rules basically eliminate any small small blocks as they came out in the 300 ci range. Why not go to a weight to cubic inches deal and put everyone on the same playing field. Sure there will be some makes that will not be competitive no matter what you do. It just isn't cost effective to build Packard after market parts. As far as the word Stock in Pro Stock, either dump stock or put more stock in it. Tube chassis and exotic heads was not an option on the show room floor. The attraction of the racers and spectators in the hey days of class racing was to see their kind of car kick ass.

The one biggest problem is the heads. There are big differences as to what is available for what kind of engine. There is no real good answer to level the playing field and to a point there should be an advantage for the smart guy to be able to go faster. Possibly to limit valve angle to one available to all makes would be a starting spot, and may cut costs a bit.

All the weight breaks remind me of the days before the Christmas tree. They used to give footage handicaps in the class racing. This was never fair for the lower cubic inch to weight classes. The higher class always got the part of the track with good rubber down to launch. They never could get the footage just right to be fair to all. You have the same thing with weight breaks. They eliminated this problem with the Christmas tree and national records for an index. Maybe record and index the different variables.

There have been rule loop holes from the days they stopped running everyone together, from Top fuel to 49 Plymouth stocker. The last one standing won. Top eliminator.

[BWise]

I for 1 feel the Pro Stock rules are pretty fair, a little tweaking maybe but by no means to jump ship!

My .02

[blown54]

Jeff I'd like to keep the weights down.

This does not reflect my feelings on Butchs dilemma, but more like Fantasy Pro Stock.

One weight, one cubic inch.

Don't make it attractive for a guy to spend 10k on a dumb cylinder head. Really, that is what the rules did in Pro Stock this year. A guy spent money according to the rules, and got burned. Everyone has the same rule book....

Anyhow...

420(cuz most of the sb guys have 420's) 2900
525(cuz all the bb guys have 525's) 3400

No Cylinder Head lists. Any head allowed both BB and Small block.

No manifold rules. Sheetmetal intakes for everyone(why not, cast intakes are STUPID, the same money, and door stops all said and done)...

Q16 spec fuel.

All other nit-picky rules thrown out. Lets race, lets spend money on 'good parts' instead of 'class rule parts'.....




i like these rules, and ditch the clutchless rule. make it 100lbs for clutchless, or no penalty at all.

[Powerhead]

Oh yeah classic car weight break that has to go.....Powerhead

[Jim Craig]

Jeff I'd like to keep the weights down.

This does not reflect my feelings on Butchs dilemma, but more like Fantasy Pro Stock.

One weight, one cubic inch.

Don't make it attractive for a guy to spend 10k on a dumb cylinder head. Really, that is what the rules did in Pro Stock this year. A guy spent money according to the rules, and got burned. Everyone has the same rule book....

Anyhow...

420(cuz most of the sb guys have 420's) 2900
525(cuz all the bb guys have 525's) 3400

No Cylinder Head lists. Any head allowed both BB and Small block.

No manifold rules. Sheetmetal intakes for everyone(why not, cast intakes are STUPID, the same money, and door stops all said and done)...

Q16 spec fuel.

All other nit-picky rules thrown out. Lets race, lets spend money on 'good parts' instead of 'class rule parts'.....


Keep C-25, throw in dry sumps and I'm in...........

[John Langer]

Oh yeah classic car weight break that has to go.....Powerhead

If the classic car weight break goes... would the Pontiac break increase??? My combo should be 200lbs lighter then the bbc without any nostalgia weight break, it currently is 175. All bullshit aside, how much power does the sbf make? If 30hp is .1 and .1 is 100lbs, I make 1117 and have to weigh 3450 without any nostalgia weight breaks. The sbf has to weigh 3000lbs. Does it make 980hp?

[John Langer]

The following is a portion of what I was asked to send to the NMCA after the preliminary rules for the 2008 season were posted before the season started.

Attention: NMCA Technical Committee

I am forwarding to you this information as per the direction of Charlie Harmon pertaining to the proposed rules for the Pro Stock class for the 2008 race season. If I were to view this class as a pure spectator, I would say don’t change anything from the 2007 rules. The class had its highest participation ever. The racing was the closest of any class competed in the series and there was parity with the winners as well. The championship was determined at the final round at the final race. Out of a possible total 12 final round pairings, the BBC filled 5 spots, the SBF 3 spots, the Pontiac 3 spots and the SBC 1 spot. Ironically the BBC had the highest percentage of participation followed by the SBF, then the Pontiac with the SBC having the least. The BBC glide combo won 2 races, the BBC 3-speed combo won 1 race, the SBF won 1 race and the nostalgia Pontiac won 2 races. The BBC 3-speed combo held the class ET and mph record for the entire year as well as qualifying #1 three times. The BBC 2-speed combo qualified #1 two times and the Pontiac qualified #1 once. The top 6-8 cars at each race were regularly only separated by .07 seconds. Now that is close racing.
Now as a competitor in the class, I feel that the 2007 nostalgia weight break of 75lbs is correct and should not be changed. At the first race of 2007 at Bradenton, FL. The nostalgia cars ran right with the late models. During the second round of eliminations, Maichle (’02 Trans Am) went 157.72, I (’69 Trans Am) went 157.39 and Stanton (’72 Chevelle) went 157.04. That is an example of 3 separate body styles that went the same mph. Albeit mph doesn’t win races, it is indicative of the aerodynamic effects of horsepower vs. coefficient of friction and wind resistance. Comparing Maichle’s mph potential with Stanton’s clearly shows that the 75lbs allocated for the nostalgia body style is adequate to overcome the deficiencies of the less aerodynamic vehicles. Similar results were experienced at the Bowling Green and Columbus races. As a side note, I will have both a nostalgia and late model vehicle at my disposal. I have no hidden agenda with this proposed rule change other then having the best interest of the class.
Power glide transmissions are taxi cab transmissions, not for high performance. Is the 3-speed faster, yes. Is the 3-speed more expensive, yes. Is the 3-speed a higher maintenance component, yes. Should the power glide receive any form of a weight break for competing in the class, no. My personal feeling is this. This is heads up racing, not index or bracket racing. To compete at this level, you need to procure and maintain the best possible equipment. The reason for the competitors in Pro Stock to not purchase a 3-speed is purely cost. Until someone in the class shows up with a 1.65 first gear, low line pressure, 3-high gear clutch glide, any additional weight breaks can not be justified. There are a variety of 3-speed configurations and manufacturers, Pro-Trans pro-flite, Coan 3-speed, Kilgore 3-speed and Rossler 3-speed to name a few. I have tested every possible transmission configuration, gear ratio and manufacturer in my car with the exception of a C4. I look at it this way, an automatic is an automatic and a stick is a stick. If someone chooses to use two forward gears instead of three, that is their decision. Is there a weight break for using 4 forward gears instead of 5 in the stick applications? To give a power glide any weight break would be like giving vehicles equipped with a steel drive shaft a weight break over an aluminum drive shaft or a vehicle equipped with a cast center section posi 9” a weight break over a vehicle with a 9” that has all the “bells and whistles”. The current weight break is in line with larger displacement engine combinations that produce more torque then a small block. The larger engines recover better on the gear change and have the ability to accelerate back thru the power band of the combination. The small block doesn’t have the torque to recover from large gear ratio changes. The 3-speed is more of a benefit in the high winding small blocks. If any additional weight break was to be given for purchasing inferior parts, I would recommend the additional 25lbs for small block combinations only.
Now, you guys have a little bit of a fuel issue. I can not confirm the use of “tampered” fuel in your series but if I had to, I would bet money on it. I have spoke with the manufacturer of this fuel and he has confirmed its use in Pro Stock and Hot Street. There are a few ways to look at or deal with this problem. If the rules for fuel remain the same as that of 2007 I would be forced to proceed with the following actions. I would feel compelled to use the “tampered” fuel knowing that others were using it and that there is an approximate .03 ET advantage with no current way to check its legality at the track. This would force all competitors to purchase $100/gallon fuel. This is NOT the way I want this to turn out and would suggest the following alternatives.
(1) Have a spec fuel for the class. The benefit for this would be to assure all competitors are using the same fuel, drawn from the same source prior to making a pass in the staging lanes. Unfortunately the cons outweigh the pros. Requiring all competitors to use a spec fuel will just open a bigger can of worms. Although most use VP’s C-25, this could possibly distract local guys that have 9.50 cars from entering the class since they just use Sunoco Blue and don’t want to have to pay $19/gallon for VP. Additionally, if the spec fuel was not a class title sponsor, which could potentially damage the NMCA’s relationship with other fuel manufacturers. That would not be in the best interest of the series. I don’t suggest going this route.
(2) The NMCA could open up the fuel rules allowing oxygenated products. A fuel similar to DRT or Q16 cost less then C-25 and will make close to the same power as the “tampered” fuel. Small displacement engines benefit from oxygenated fuels more greatly then large displacement engines. This would be the easiest route for both the competitors and the series.
(3) Continue on as per 2007 rules with the exception of having a protest cost associated with fuel similar to that of a cylinder head, intake or short block. Investigation into independent lab testing for the oxygen content of a fuel would need to be looked at. Unfortunately results would not be available at the given race but penalties could be so severe such as a 5-year ban from competition could prevent the use of illegal fuels to begin with. This option has the least amount of effort or responsibility on the series. If someone wants to complain about a competitor using illegal fuel, tech could simply say to file an official protest and pay the fee. It could be that simple. The NMCA would just need an easier way to file an official protest at the race for this infraction by having pre-made protest forms that someone could just fill out with a pen at the track and then turn it in with the required fee.

[dwmotorsports]

ok powerhead ditch the nostalgia weight break but let a Hemi headed motor legal and run at the big block chevy weight

[Bboy]

I don't race in the class(can't afford it) but I'm a big fan of it.

How about keep it simple:
420ci for smallblocks and bigblocks
All cars stk susp
Only glides or 3 speeds. No sticks
Weight for BB 3200 SB 2900
Q-16 fuel
No bars
Inline head only
One carb

Just my .02

[Jeff Chandler]

I think the inline BB head would be some trouble;)

[Chris Uratchko]

Same for a bb only 300 pounds heavier than a small block..... LOL

[Bboy]

I don't like no dam BB's anyway !!! LMAO

[matukas]

Jeff Im dissapointed in YOU. Im not sure about (the whatevers) that are going to hold you back from competing. But didnt YOU WIN this race last year and runnered up (Should have WON) BG. Put that engine together the best it can and come KICK some ASS
MATUKAS

[Jeff Chandler]

Hey, what can I say, Kim and I are pretty disappointed also but we both made this decision and we are not willing to jepordize the engine if it isn't right besides, we aren't competitive right now and that must change so we are going to work;)...Cya down the road

[matukas]

Hey, what can I say, Kim and I are pretty disappointed also but we both made this decision and we are not willing to jepordize the engine if it isn't right besides, we aren't competitive right now and that must change so we are going to work;)...Cya down the road
You are more competitive now then ever. Going into BG you should have got your ass kicked . I know Kim is on my side

[Jeff Chandler]

Nope, she's like me, take all the precautions neccessary to try and protect the investment. You can't bring a knife to a gun fight, especially one with a dull blade;)

[matukas]

damit JEFF and KIM I was hoping to see you guys in chi town. Let me know if I can help with anything.......

[HS 3131]

Jeff, Still have time left to get something done. Whats the clitch? I had that feeling again about you in the winners circle.....

[Kim Chandler]

damit JEFF and KIM I was hoping to see you guys in chi town. Let me know if I can help with anything.......

Do you know what I can take for my racing withdrawals?
What can I say,it's in my blood:p

[HS 3131]

Do you know what I can take for my racing withdrawals?
What can I say,it's in my blood:p

Yeah its called buy a boat. LOL

[Ken Schertz]

allow 4 links

[Jeff Chandler]

Ken, why don't you ladder bar the Camaro?

[Ken Schertz]

Can't do that. Both myself and Paul Sulof had an interest in running Pro Stock but the 4 links kept us out. I do not see an advantge myself. My best 60 on the true 10.5's is 1.22 with most being in the 25 - 28 range. Thats with the wheelie bars. Granted it would take some time to remove the bars and get a handle on things but I don't think I could do better than the mid 1.20's. Even with the 4 link allowed I would need a new hood and oiling system.

[Jeff Chandler]

I kinda think different Ken, I believe the 4-link has a definite advantage over the ladders. The potential is there and with some work with shocks, tire psi and converter/clutch work I thinks it could lay the smack down on a ladder bar on a marginal to bad track. When the track is tight I could see them pretty darn close. I know Mike DeMayo has been 1.18 60ft with his Hot Street car with 28x10, ladder bars and no wheelie bars, Butch Kemp has been 1.20-1.21 as have a few other of the small block cars but they were on very good tracks, but honestly, the 4-link issue is not what's keeping the car counts down in PSTK it's the cost. The reality is it's expensive and the engines are morphodites. Who wants a 35K dollar conventional headed BBC other than someone wanting to run in this class or the Ram Series? I mean we can't really go anywhere other than the NMCA or Ram to race, the smartest thing to do is sell out and buy a ex NHRA Pro Stocker build a 632 put a couple of foggers on it and race ADRL Extreme 10.5, I bet it's cheaper than NMCA Pro Stock.

[Chris Uratchko]

I know Tony was saying he was spending less money and less headache racing Pro Street than when he was running NSCA/NMCA Hot Street back in the day.... hard to believe but I do believe it.

[BWise]

I personally like the challenge of ProStock, although the cost is a factor, thats why I try to do everything myself.
I mean WTF else are we going to do, bracket race........... NOT!
Did the Street race thing, tired of getting shot at. So here we are!

This is the closest thing to NHRA Pro Stock and still be affordable.

my .02 :cool:

[hsutton]

I personally like the challenge of ProStock, although the cost is a factor, thats why I try to do everything myself.
I mean WTF else are we going to do, bracket race........... NOT!
Did the Street race thing, tired of getting shot at. So here we are!

This is the closest thing to NHRA Pro Stock and still be affordable.

my .02 :cool: If you had a more aerodynamic car, like Travato's, you'd be pretty competitive with the slick late models.

[John Langer]

If he wasn't 250lbs over weight he would do well. :)

[428saleen]

I know that if 4 -links were allowed in Prostock/HotStreet, I would come over and race. And Im sure that a few more NHRA superstocks would as well, especially with the way things are going at NHRA events. This would be a way for the NMRA and NMCA to increase the car counts as well as get differnt combos into the class.