Classic Lakester Class

[Glen]

What an evil thought, are you nuts Dan Warner would get another ulcer
and others might come after you with an ugly stick and whopp yer butt.After seeing what the committee went thru the last time over the classic classes I don't even want to be in the same state with them, come to think of it I am in another state. They would require a armed marshal to over see the transactions and total confusion in trying to slide this in the next rule book. Some of these guys are getting old and hard to retrain. Lets keep  it the way it is.

[dwarner]

Crap!! I gotta type this again.

I think Bob is mis-informed.

The 2005 rule book, page 57, 2nd. paragraph states that the minimum requirement for a car that would be classified as a Classic Category vehicle to run with Jack's Big Boys is the addition of a non-OEM EFI system.

The use of a data recorder just makes the car illegal for both categories.

DW

[JackD]

Well that's the end of my on board tape recorder for the sound playback and the Tach that played back the run revs.
Now I am gonna need a driver.
Probably still don't need anything in the weight box. I wonder if those other guys are still running the same 250lbs I suggested.
Oh well, the TBI will work just fine with the same manifold.

[Bob Drury]

Dan, what about Page 61, paragraph 2, which states : Coupes and Sedans produced from 1949 to the current model year, not meeting the criterea of the Classic Catagory, must compete in the Modified Classes Category.  I read the rule you speak of, but to me, the rule on page 61 should supercede basic engine requirements.  I understand the division decisions, but if the EFI rule takes precedence, it means that a racer is penalized for running a carburator or mechanical fuel injection.  Something doesn't seem kosher.  I had a 1984 Olds Cutlass with a factory carburator.  It seems incredible to me that a vehicle can be found to be non-complient for running mechanical parts which are less efficient than what the record holders run.  Maybe your techs at Speedweek are confused on this too, as we talked over my class change and the reason for it while teching in.  I realize, however, that there job is to tech you in, not interpet the rules, but the way I am reading you now is that I either have to remove the data recorder and run as a Classic, or run as the car is now, for Time Only.  Either way, it doesn't make sense to have to add electronics to step up in class.  Thanx for your time.  Bob

[Bob Drury]

Dan, just to add to the above post, I guess what really has me confused is that, apparently, a 1982 or later car running a carb or mechanical fuel injection would be legal in FALT, where as a 1981 or older car MUST run a aftermarket EFI.  Man, this is like climbing a sand dune, the further I climb, the lower I get.lol................

[JackD]

"Records come and records go but bad rules tend to stick forever."

[Bob Drury]

Just one more log to toss in the fire, when I built my car nine years ago, it was built for the FALT class, but was legislated out the next year.  If anything, I feel these cars (1981 and older) should be allowed to be grandfathered in if it be the owners intent.  And yes, this has been done before by SCTA.  Thanx,  Bob

[Dynoroom]

Just one more log to toss in the fire, when I built my car nine years ago, it was built for the FALT class, but was legislated out the next year.  If anything, I feel these cars (1981 and older) should be allowed to be grandfathered in if it be the owners intent.  And yes, this has been done before by SCTA.  Thanx,  Bob

Don't get me started on "grandfather" rules or we'll start talking about the all wheel drive roadsters....

[JackD]

Protection of the "Older Iron" was the objective however the thought was incomplete and You are the victim.
If the new rule had the word "MAY" run in the "Classic" class and not made it a requirement it would have the effect of the protection of the heritage they were seeking and suitable shame on the newer stuff.
 If they were stuck in a class with what should be a slower machine that is in fact faster, too bad.

The bikes are going through a lot of that stuff now and the confusion on the part of the rules makers generates a lot of laughs.

Was that to harsh ?

[Bob Drury]

Jack, I concur with your thoughts.  I think the Classic Class was created with good intentions, however the ECU rule is killing the intent of what I call True Hot Rodding.  I have seen a lot of posts on this site defending existing rules, but this is the first rule that I am aware of that keeps "the boys down on the farm", that is telling you that you have to install exotic parts on a older car in order to run against "the big boys".  Hell, I guess we might as well add traction controll to the list too.  I am sure that this rule was written with good intent, and I am not mad at anyone, I just think it doesn't make sense, nor does it follow the true concept of LSR racing.  I could go on and on, however, let me sum it up thuslly, The rule sucks.....................................................Bob

[JackD]

Consistency is the objective , ragged is the result.
Put a turbo from a WW2 aircract on a B Model Ford and tell me what you think you are.
 Drive the same blower with a belt and look again.
Put a rev limiter in your tach and see if it controls your traction.
Run a 79 Bulck in E/A until you go fast and get yelled at because you had
 an 850 Holly instead of the more honorable EFI.  
"Life is tough, It's tougher if you are fast ?" (John Whine)

[NArias3]

I don't even want to know how Dan is going to do the fuel check... I'll leave that up to him and his pastor to sort out ...

...or how Dan's going to check for displacement. Probably how the guy on "Dirty Jobs" did with the cows.

Nick 3rd.

[JohnR]

I don't even want to know how Dan is going to do the fuel check... I'll leave that up to him and his pastor to sort out ...

...or how Dan's going to check for displacement. Probably how the guy on "Dirty Jobs" did with the cows.

Nick 3rd.

I just hope for the horse's sake that he remembers to switch his beer over to his other hand first!

[Bob Jr.]

I just hope for the horse's sake that he remembers to switch his beer over to his other hand first![/quote]

      ouch!!!!!!!!!

[Tom Bryant]

I agree with the "too many classes " comments. Old cars are not necessarily at a disadvantage. I will use ours as an example. When I purchased the Pierson coupe in 1980, it had been inactive since 1959. The main reason that it was retired, I believe, was because of the 1953 Stude that appeared on the scene. The Stude had covered wheels and was considered to be very streamlined. Actually, it took a few years before the car would handle above 180 MPH. The Pierson Coupe went 190 MPH in the mid fifties when John Cobb was running it.

I am not sure what the best speed for a Stude is, but I think it is a bit upwards of 250 MPH. Those speeds were with big supercharged motors. We ran 225 with the Pierson Coupe with a 302 Chevy unblown. The present car is approaching 250  MPH, still with a 302 Chevy unblown and on straight alky.

I am not telling this story to brag about our performance, just pointing out that much of the time being out classed by the newer stuff in mostly in the mind. New classes bring in open, or unreasonably low records. I agree with Mike that the harder records are more rewarding.