XO Engine Class

[Dan Stokes]

I'm confused and need clarification.  Going by the 2007 rule book, I just bought a 322 Buick nailhead to run in XO.  The 2007 book says "XO class consists of overhead valve (OHV) and flathead inline, V8 (except Ford and Mercury) and V12 engines, 1959 or earlier design, up to 325 cubic inch displacement."  Now the new rule book comes along and reverts to an earlier wording (perhaps the same as SCTA?) with "XO class consists of overhead valve (OHV) and flathead inline and flathead V8 (except Ford and Mercury) and V12 engines, 1959 and earlier design,up to 325 cid."  In both books, SBC's are specifically prohibited.  I talked with Keith a couple of years ago and he said the intent was to allow vintage non-SBC V8 and inlines a place to run (OHV or otherwise), and that the 2006 rule book wording was in error.  I think the 2007 wording was the correction to allow such things as early Olds, Buick, Packard, Studebaker, and other such engines to have a competitive place to run.  So my question - which is correct?  If I can't run my 1956 Buick in XO, there's no sense in building it.  It clearly isn't going to be competitive against a SBC with the superior heads and other technologies available for them.

Thanks
Dan

[Cajun Kid]

Dan for what it is worth. I agree with you.. The nailhead V8 may be better suited for XO class.

If the 322 Buick Nail Haid is not allowed in XO, I assume you would have to run as a "C" motor ?
and if that si so, man I see your point in C , I see no way that nailhead could be as strong as a SBC platform.

Hope you get a favorable ruling.  Those nailheads sound so cool... Have you heard David Pike's  black 35 ford coupe,,, it has a 215 Buick in it,, it sounds bad to the bone... I kinda hate I beat his record last meet.. But on Sunday he came back strong and made his fastest run ever at a 126.3??  and got his D License... I am proud of his effort and think competition is good...

Go NailHeads !!!!

Charles

[Cajun Kid]

Here is a "fun " formula.

(hmm not so fun from the budget standpoint, as I have done it and find it to be accurate as well)

More HP should = More MPH, and if this is so, More HP from less Cu.In. = the need for more Cubic $$$'s

[Dan Stokes]

Charles -
Thanks for your input.  Sorry I don't get a chance to meet you at the track - I was the short guy in the funny-looking big hat, mostly in pre-stage.  Great Vicky, BTW.  Dave and I chat all the time at the track - he's a great guy!  I had 5 215's at one time, including the one in my Vega (long lost to the rust monster back in Michigan).  Love them little motors!  Not sure if it's truly a "nailhead" though, in spite of the vertical valve covers.  They have a fairly conventional combustion chamber.  My 56 is a no-BS nailhead, with a pup-tent shaped combustion chamber and the valves coming straight down on one side of the "tent" - strange indeed.

Thanks for the good wishes - don't know how the ECTA (or SCTA, for that matter) will come down on this.

Later
Dan

[RichFox]

Pretty sure ECTA is the same as SCTA on this. overhead valve and flathead inline engines. Flathead V8s that are not Ford/Merc engines. V12 Cads. 325 cid or less. Pre 1959 design. In other words No OHV V8s. Anyone dumb enough to chose a Packard V8, for instance, would be running against simular size (350) Chevys or what ever. But if that's what he want's to run and it makes him happy, what's the harm?  Buick inline eights--Yes     Buick V8s---No

[panic]

How could there be a favorable ruling?

Even limited to 325", that would allow 276 & 291" DeSoto hemi; 241, 259, 270, 315 & 325" Dodge hemi;: 1955 Chrysler 301" poly; 277, 301, 313 & 318" poly A; 303 & 324" Olds, etc. etc.

[dwarner]

Dan,

Rich has detailed the rule.

Misplaced commas in the 2007 book make the rule confusing. It has always been XO = OHV Inlines and Flathead V8(other than Ford or Merc).

DW

[Dan Stokes]

I'm cool with all those.  None of 'em have had much development in years - aftermarket heads and the like.  They all have potential, are heavy as lead, and scarce as hen's teeth. Sure, the Hemi's have more potential than the Buick, but I think it's a relatively level playing field.  The question, in my mind, is "does a Nailhead have an advantage over an inline Buick 8?"  My feeling (no data on this) is "no".  If my nailhead can't compete in XO, I may be finding out!

Dan

How could there be a favorable ruling?

Even limited to 325", that would allow 276 & 291" DeSoto hemi; 241, 259, 270, 315 & 325" Dodge hemi;: 1955 Chrysler 301" poly; 277, 301, 313 & 318" poly A; 303 & 324" Olds, etc. etc.

[Sumner]

..............  The question, in my mind, is "does a Nailhead have an advantage over an inline Buick 8?" 

Buick must of thought so  .  At least it was shorter, but since the cars were getting longer anyway that probably wasn't the main reason for going to it.

...........If my nailhead can't compete in XO, I may be finding out!..............Dan

Well since it is not an XO motor take the "Rich Fox" road less traveled and go for it.  Even if it doesn't set a record it is one of the cooler motors to look at in my estimation  .

c ya,

Sum

[maguromic]

"None of 'em have had much development in years - aftermarket heads and the like'

Even though these engines didn't have much stuff done in years , the old stuff thats their is pretty stout.  The Olds 303 had a lot of development by Tom Beaty.  As I recall he had some pretty stout records and he built a lot of parts for that motor.  That stuff shows up at the swap meets sometimes. Micky Thompson built a  hemi head for the Buick nail head similar to  the hemi he built for the Ford FE motor. As for the Buick 215 Micky also built a overhead cam head for it and I think it was Clem Tebow that also built a overhead cam 4 valve head for th 215. If you look around you can find the parts, not cheap, but they are out their.

Or you can do what some others have done is figure the bore spacing out and find a modern aluminum head  with the same spacing and cut and weld.

[RichFox]

You might like to check out the Harry Hoffman/ Markley Bros. team before you write off DeSotos and Dodges. just because it isn't in the Summit Catalog dosn't mean it isn't fast.

[panic]

Of course, what was I thinking.

[Cajun Kid]

Man ya'll know your stuff?? Port design, cross flow intakes, hmm let me see,,

I don't know much, but at least I know I don't know,, so I guess that is a "known unknown"  or is it ?

Hmm... I do know the Gas is the pedal on the right and the brake is the one on the left.... OK,, I am ready now..

Just having fun, guess I just smelled to much Sunoco 110 today....

Charles

[RichFox]

We may also remember the Ferguson Family XO/FS at 284.876 mph with those awful siamese ports. 300.943 without them. Both highly respectable speeds. And Ron Mains flathead Ford at 302.674. Not a crossflow. Good thing they didn't know what loser motors they had.

[Cajun Kid]

Scott,  now that says it all.... Kudo's