Bogus Mini-stock Rule

Again I agree 100% with what marty said....especially the fact that it is ministocks NOT pony stocks! And PHILL if you are so set on being complety STOCK, why are you on 4m web site asking for help in building a high peformance ford 2.3? Don't get me wrong... I am not bashing you here I am just pointing out a fact.... there is lots of performance stuff out there for the fords and hardly nothing for chevys. I can't even get a header, unless I go to clifford performance and am willing to pay 285.00 for it! Nomatter what we race, most of the same drivers are going to still be the ones to beat, I know I have a lot to learn about setting up the chassis ect. but first I have to keep the thing running.... if going to a ford is what I have to do, then I will do it, I just don't know if the other guys feel the same way. The cost of starting all over again might cause some to just quit. Anyway I just hope we can agree on a change for the better... Brian
 
Might be able to help

As far as a header is concerned, a buddy of mine Scott Geary, he drives the 28 truck at Pevely and occasionnaly at MCS, but he custom built his header so it would fit the siamese head for cylinders #2 and #3 exhaust ports. He might be able to help ya out that way and even though i drive a Ford i would be in favor of supporting the Chevy guys being able to go to a more dependable rod as long as it is of stock length, the weight issue of the rods i dont have a problem with either. Chevy 2.5L cant turn enough RPMs to matter much. I drove an S-10 last year at Pevely and went to the Pinto becouse of the lack of performance parts for them. But my motor builder told me no matter how built a 2.5L is the power curve is gone after 6200 RPMs. That is why i geared the truck to the motor. Have to sacrifice one thing for another. I will support you Bow Tie guys as much as possible, what fun is it to race when you cant race against everyone. And for anyone interested, might have an S-10 for sale minus motor and tranny, full cage in it, slight body and bumper damage, but thinkin about sellin it. Send me a pm if anyone is interested in a header or the S-10. Be Safe and Have Fun!!!

Butch Hartman
Hartman Racing
 
So to compete you need a ford? That would seem kinda boring having a bunch of the same cars running around. Some things might ought to be considered when it comes to durability. If it provides durability but no performance gains, it may be for the betterment of the class to maybe allow some of these options. It seems doe run has a good core group of cars. But MCS has 9-10 and if a few guys have problems. Then you have 7-8 and so on. I by no means think it ought to be opened up to all out aftermarket stuff. But somethings definitely deserve considerstion. JMO
 
I need to rephrase some of my statement

The reason i went from a S-10 to a Ford was i was planning on running at Pevely again this year and to be competitive against the front wheel drive cars such as the Neons and Escorts, and S-10 wasnt cutting it unless you drop a whole bunch of money into it. After some things occured at Pevely i changed some minor things and came to race with the RAMS. It is probably the best move i could have made. I just didnt want to give the impression that the only way to be competitive is to build a Ford. There are several fast trucks out there that if the rod problem could be solved it would make more competitive racing which is what the fans are looking for and be cheaper on the drivers in the long run.

Butch Hartman
Hartman Racicng #343
 
Cause I am thinking on going to mod 4 for your inFO BRYAN. I am getting different opions from different people to see what I can do. And what works and what dont work. And so I can build bigger and better. :eek:
 
Phill

Hey phill and evryone one else in case I'm wrong on something. The rod change would not only be for the chevy guys. It would also benifit the ford guys giving them the oppurtunity to run stronger rods but the same rules apply it has to be stock length and at least stock weight. Its pretty obvious that the fords don't need them any where near as badly as the fords but the option would still be there. I just don't understand why you disagree with it so much. :cool:
 
The green one said:
you all just cant understand the rule STOCK. We might as well put V8's in them and get it over with.
Click to expand...

You don't know what you are talking about. Our class hasn't been STOCK for a while now. If they are stock length and stock weight or more. It gives them NO performance gain.
 
You're right.....Stock. HOWEVER......

A "stock" ford rod can withstand 8,000 rpm's. A "stock" chevy is worth about 6,000rpm's on a good day. If you take the Chevy and equip it with the same bolt-ons as the Ford(carb, header, etc.) and put a decent "aftermarket" cam in it (to get enough torque to even be racing), the holdback is the weak-*** rods that Chevy put in them. Why spend the money to build 3 or more "stock" rod engines, when for a portion of that money you can put a rod in it that is strong enough to run the RPM's. It isn't going to drive up the cost if it cuts down on building engines all year, It isn't going to give a performance advantage if it is the same length and equal or more weight, and it isn't going to cost the Ford guys anything except for a little competition.

A bogus rule is "putting a ford motor in other makes"! There are only gonna be so many more available engines out there. And alot more owners will be looking for one then. Cylinder heads are already hard to find.

This leads to the next concern I have. Are the ford guys gonna be howling for an aftermarket cylinder head in the near future? Will you consider that stock? It is a far cry from wanting a stronger rod, it has ports as big as a ported factory head, it is aluminum and it costs about 2 grand. But guess what, it has an OEM number on it........Think about that for "stock", it is being used throughout the country. Save your arguements for the day that those are on the chopping block. That will set a class on it's butt, and the stronger rod for the Chevy isn't even a notion of an arguement in comparison.
 
gain?

MinistockMike said:
If they are stock length and stock weight or more. It gives them NO performance gain.
Click to expand...
If it allows the engine to rev higher then it would with stock rods then its a gain. If the aftermarket rod will reliably rev higher then you can go to a more aggresive cam profile than you need with a low rpm engine. It makes no difference to me what is decided, just saying that the aftermarket rod will open the window of options in the rest of the motor. Then what will be the weak link?
 
By the way, SMURF. You CAN run weight jacks on a leaf car @ DRR, HOWEVER, they have to be the shackle type. You just can't run them the way we(8 or 99) did. We ran coils mounted to the inside edge of the leafs and had weight jacks on them. You probably have that set-up, right?
 
COBRAII said:
If it allows the engine to rev higher then it would with stock rods then its a gain. If the aftermarket rod will reliably rev higher then you can go to a more aggresive cam profile than you need with a low rpm engine. It makes no difference to me what is decided, just saying that the aftermarket rod will open the window of options in the rest of the motor. Then what will be the weak link?
Click to expand...

Not as aggressive as the Ford, at least without an adjustable cam gear.......
They are already more agressive than the Chevy and have alot more options because of the stronger driveline and their history in the pony-stock world. There IS a clear cut advantage for the Ford now and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out those advantages, Steve Smith contributed to that. There are no books out there to teach guys what to do to prepare an S-10 for circle-track racing OR to build the 2.5 to compete in the class. Throw the guys a bone to at least make it a little more fair for them to make a good run. As someone above stated, it is going to end up a pony car class again because, if you can't beat 'em-join 'em. Or worse, stay home because you can't afford to keep building motors.
 
Esslinger & SVO

DirtSurfer said:
This leads to the next concern I have. Are the ford guys gonna be howling for an aftermarket cylinder head in the near future? Will you consider that stock? It is a far cry from wanting a stronger rod, it has ports as big as a ported factory head, it is aluminum and it costs about 2 grand. But guess what, it has an OEM number on it........Think about that for "stock", it is being used throughout the country.
Click to expand...
Randy, if its the Esslinger produced heads M-6049-A230 or M-6049-E23A that you are refering to. Neither have an OEM number on them. That is the Ford racing catalog part#. Neither of these heads are oem Ford. Example of a OEM number on a Ford head would be D0oE , that is the oem # for a 1970 351 Windsor head. Just an example. Jon Reando
 
And if you think there aren't any killer heads for the 2.5 out there you are crazy! Pontiac, who is the maker of the 2.5 as we know it today, made and still makes a variety of performance heads out there. Cast iron or aluminum and they all have gm numbers on them. So if you can get your 2.5 to stay together you can definately build some horsepower! If it should ever get opened up in that class or you go to a class that lets you do a little more than stock, there ARE all kinds of parts available for the 2.5. I don't think anybody wants this class to get that wide open but it is a viable consideration for the Mod class.
 
Oh and by the way COBRAII, my personal favorite for the 351w is C9OE of which I have two sets and I also have two sets of the D0OE if anyone is interested in some!
 
DirtSurfer said:
By the way, SMURF. You CAN run weight jacks on a leaf car @ DRR, HOWEVER, they have to be the shackle type. You just can't run them the way we(8 or 99) did. We ran coils mounted to the inside edge of the leafs and had weight jacks on them. You probably have that set-up, right?
Click to expand...
YEP MY old car had only one leaf with the weight jacks next year car (if I don't sell it wont have them on there) but thinking of going to a fox body mustang instead of a mustang II... PWR I got a question for ya I'll pm you...
 
Pw

Sorry to get off the subject, but what is the difference between the 69 and 70 Windsor heads? I want to say its the chamber size?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Back
Top