HA/GR Rules...

[Ryan]

Rules

1. Stock or modified stock frame rails, rectangular tube or round tube 3′’ diameter or larger.
2. Stock width front axles and rear ends only.
3. All cars must be equipped with a minimum four point roll bar of 1 3/4″ tubing with a main hoop higher than the driver’s head and 2 support bars down to the frame towards the firewall. Tubing must meet NHRA minimum wall thickness for application.
4. Cars with keyed axles must use hub safety retainers.
5. Closed drivelines are encouraged. If open driveline is used driveshaft must have a 1 1/2″ x 1/4″ “driveshaft loop” within 6 1/2″ of front and rear universal joints and be totally covered/sealed off from driver with steel or aluminum floor pan.
6. Cars must have cowl or body and proper floor boards/belly pan to prevent driver’s legs from exiting vehicle in event of a crash. firewall mandatory.
7. No “slingshot” chassis. Driver and engine must be positioned between the front and rear axles.
8. Cars must be equipped with an engine mounted starter and be self starting.
9. Batteries must be securely mounted and fully enclosed.
10. All cars must have a master battery cutoff switch accessible from outside the car.
11. All cars must have at least one red rear running light for night racing.
12. Flathead v8 or inlines, pre-1962 inline engines with stock cylinder blocks only. No exotic aftermarket inline six overhead valve heads (Wayne). No OHV V8s or V6s. (If you are looking to run a straight 6 with exotic heads or a flathead with an o/h conversion, contact Ryan (http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/../?page_id=348) for some good news.)
13. Engines must be naturally aspirated. No superchargers, turbos, nitrous oxide or fuel injection.
14. No electronic ignition boxes that mount outside the distributor or “coil in cap” HEIs. Conversions such as “ignitor” or “stinger” that fit within a stock dist cap are allowed. Aftermarket magnetos not allowed.
15. Pump gas/racing gas only. No Methanol, nitromethane, or alcohol.
16. Era specific carbs only, stock appearing- no modern Holley, Edelbrock, or other aftermarket carbs.
17. Fuel lines can have no single rubber piece longer than 24″, must be fastened by hose clamps, not hard or cracked.
18. Cars equipped with a cooling system or water tank must use a radiator cap and overflow/catch can system.
19. Automatic transmissions are not allowed. All cars with clutches must run a stamped steel bell housing or a 1/4″ scatter shield.
20. Cars must have rims no wider than 6″ and only bias ply street treaded tires allowed. No radials, slicks, or cheater slicks allowed. Tire tread width must measure no more than 6″.
21. Drivers must wear full face helmet, single layer (or more) fire retardant jacket or suit, gloves, jeans (or fire retardant pants), and leather shoes.
22. Five point NHRA approved safety harness required.
23. All cars must be of general soundness and safety. Must have all lug nuts, sound steering, cotter pins in place, and heim ends “captured” etc. Must pass all tracks general safety rules.
24. No electronic/pneumatic drivers aids such as rev limiters, two steps, shift lights or electric shifters. Tachometers are allowed if they don’t have a rev limiter or a shift light.
25. Cars must be built in the spirit of the “Bug” and other early rail jobs. If ya aren’t familiar, ya better ask…
26. All HA/GR cars are required to run a H.A.M.B. Logo in a visible location.

[REJ]

Thanks Ryan.

[panic]

modern Holley?

Holley 4150 dates to before your engine cut-off, about 1958.

[Hemibaker]

What was the ruling on the Holley carb and whay are automatics not allowed?
I meet all of the other rules. I do have a pre 1961 Holley carb on my HAMB. I want to attend the th National in MOKAN but I do not want to get their and be told I can not race. Thanks for the help.

[Old6rodder]

Hemibaker, attend Mokan and enjoy yourself. With a quad and a slushpump you'll be run in dragster class, it's not necessary to be an HA/GR to run at Mokan.

As far as HA/GR specifics, they are what they are for reasons that not everybody seems to get, and are quite unlikely to change for those same reasons. A little searching on the site'll explain everything (ad nauseum) if you're looking to understand the why of it. If you're only searching for a chink in it don't bother.

[PurplePearl50]

anyone have a link or a "guide" thats more indepth on rules. frame/tube wall thinkness, wheel base ect

[64 DODGE 440]

anyone have a link or a "guide" thats more indepth on rules. frame/tube wall thinkness, wheel base ect

Rules #1 & #3 pretty much cover it. I believe the N(o)H(ot)R(ods)A(llowed) group specifies the cage be .093 wall if chrome-moly and .125 wall if mild steel. Wheelbase is what ever you desire but I believe that generally folks aren't building anything much shorter than 90" and probably not much longer than 120" or so. I really don't see much need to build a 190" chassis for one of these unless you feel the need to create something strange just for the effect like two Buick straight eights in a row.:cool:

The whole idea for the class is that you shouldn't need more rules than the one page we have, and there aren't any plans or blueprints for these cars. Just sketch it out on the garage floor with some chalk and start sticking stuff together. Early style, home built, run what ya brung rails.

[troy5118]

"Flathead v8 or inlines, pre-1962 inline engines with stock cylinder blocks only. No exotic aftermarket inline six overhead valve heads"

So an inline buick 8 ohv would qualify?

[moparsled]

"Flathead v8 or inlines, pre-1962 inline engines with stock cylinder blocks only. No exotic aftermarket inline six overhead valve heads"

So an inline buick 8 ohv would qualify?

yep. There's one in Australia already. BUILD IT!!!!

[troy5118]

Nice, I better go after it then! Thx

[hogfarmer]

Hi, Whats the average wheel base of a Ha GR dragster?

[Rand Man]

Most tracks won't allow a wheelbase shorter than 90 inches. Mine (and several others) are around 120 inches, because it looks good. If I built another it would be a little shorter, to save the pounds.

[6ck Pony]

Rules
2. Stock width front axles and rear ends only.

Is this a stock front axle?:eek:
I just saw this on another thread and had to bring it here.

[Calkins]

Is this a stock front axle?:eek:

For a trike!

[ceegrey]

Thanks Ryan, the info is much appreciated. Several of the locals have become interested in the concept, there is still plenty of parts about so I think the only thing to do is to get started.
ceegrey

[Dirts32]

I've had the pleasure of inspecting The Bug, up close and personal. I understand the escence of the "run what you brung" Hamb rules, but.........
I started racing at Famoso dragstrip when a Smokers flagman started 4 cars off at a time (I have photos somewhere). The only car I couldn't beat in M Stock was an Olds with a hydro. I partially paralized myself in a sreet car accident, Non 29. 1963. Sticks were to difficult to drive street/strip so I put a beefed hydro in my '32 3 window in 1964. The hydro made it posible to race again. I still have my original hydo from 45 years ago, and it doesn't meet the rules? Also, in 1964, I crewed on an early 92" WB junior fueler with a cast iron Powerglide. This was, definately, a HAMB car in spirit. We never won anything, but that's not what it was built for. It barely passed tech, but we ran. It was just for fun, and we had a fun time. And a cast iron Powerglide doesn't meet your rules? According to the rules, you can run any stick trany you want, no year limitations, just as long as its a standard. Where's the Bug spirit in that? There is a rule about pre 62 6's, which is understandible. But you can't use an automatic that was used on the 6, but you can use any late model standard trany you want? There are exceptions to the "no exotic overhead heads" rule, but there are none for the "no automatics" rule. In 1954, a year before the Bug was built, Hot Rod magazine did a large, indepth, story on the Hydro and how to beef it. Racers were using the Hydro before the Bug was built, but an automatic doesn't meet the Bugs spirit? I could understand ANY trany, 62 and earlier, nothing later. Now that's the spirit! But, I really have no problem with any year standard trany. I will stick with only 62 and earlier automatics, because that is, truely, the spirit. As I'm typing this post, but a few feet away is a 52 Lincoln with a hydro, and a 47 Cad with a hydro, ready to put into something. HAMB is my first choice, NHRA brackets is a second. But, then again, if the no automatics rule is to keep the disabled out of HAMB, I apologize for this post. My intention is not to barge in where I am not wanted, but to allow HAMB to be available to everyone. Again, if the Bug has the desired spirit (whatever that is) that the rules are based on, and those rules are written in stone, I apologize for being so presumptious as to post this thread. I could see the incongruities in the rules, and HAMB cars I have inspected, so I thought I might suggest a possible change. If that is out of the question, I didn't realize it, and I apologize.
Dirts32

[Old6rodder]

I've had the pleasure of inspecting The Bug, up close and personal. I understand the escence of the "run what you brung" Hamb rules, but.........
I started racing at Famoso dragstrip when a Smokers flagman started 4 cars off at a time (I have photos somewhere). The only car I couldn't beat in M Stock was an Olds with a hydro. I partially paralized myself in a sreet car accident, Non 29. 1963. Sticks were to difficult to drive street/strip so I put a beefed hydro in my '32 3 window in 1964. The hydro made it posible to race again. I still have my original hydo from 45 years ago, and it doesn't meet the rules? Also, in 1964, I crewed on an early 92" WB junior fueler with a cast iron Powerglide. This was, definately, a HAMB car in spirit. We never won anything, but that's not what it was built for. It barely passed tech, but we ran. It was just for fun, and we had a fun time. And a cast iron Powerglide doesn't meet your rules? According to the rules, you can run any stick trany you want, no year limitations, just as long as its a standard. Where's the Bug spirit in that? There is a rule about pre 62 6's, which is understandible. But you can't use an automatic that was used on the 6, but you can use any late model standard trany you want? There are exceptions to the "no exotic overhead heads" rule, but there are none for the "no automatics" rule. In 1954, a year before the Bug was built, Hot Rod magazine did a large, indepth, story on the Hydro and how to beef it. Racers were using the Hydro before the Bug was built, but an automatic doesn't meet the Bugs spirit? I could understand ANY trany, 62 and earlier, nothing later. Now that's the spirit! But, I really have no problem with any year standard trany. I will stick with only 62 and earlier automatics, because that is, truely, the spirit. As I'm typing this post, but a few feet away is a 52 Lincoln with a hydro, and a 47 Cad with a hydro, ready to put into something. HAMB is my first choice, NHRA brackets is a second. But, then again, if the no automatics rule is to keep the disabled out of HAMB, I apologize for this post. My intention is not to barge in where I am not wanted, but to allow HAMB to be available to everyone. Again, if the Bug has the desired spirit (whatever that is) that the rules are based on, and those rules are written in stone, I apologize for being so presumptious as to post this thread. I could see the incongruities in the rules, and HAMB cars I have inspected, so I thought I might suggest a possible change. If that is out of the question, I didn't realize it, and I apologize.
Dirts32


I get to enjoy the Bug repro regularly, kind of cool.

Slushpumps are encouraged, and well represented, in HA/GR style cars in the SDRA.

There are oft stated reasons for HA/GR's stick preferrence, they're not related to period of production. One simply put; Can you miss a shift with a slush? We can with our sticks.

You don't want to hear my response to your attempted guilt trip.

[sloppyjoe]

Does the pre-62 rule apply to the trans and the rear as well? I have access to a Comet rear and 3-speed is the only reason for me asking

[Old6rodder]

No sir, it doesn't. :D

The whole concept of the class is equipment that hasn't changed much mechanically since 1950. Inline and flathead engines were only mildly improved 'til '62 with few exceptions, and a few went basically the same on into the '70s. For instance an '80 engine originally engineered in '60 on basically '50s designs and still made the same in '80 is good.

As for rears and gearboxes, there're no basic differences in'em right up to today. Still pinion, ring & spiders and still gears, forks and levers. One could supposedly argue synchros but we don't quibble that. There's also that they still look pretty much the same for many models.
The 8" Comet rear also has the advantage of a good selection of gearings available.

Carbs however, had a different time line of changes, and as they're a more visual item many builders prefer something more period common. Again though, some unique things were around in the early '50s and changed little through the years.

[sloppyjoe]

So.... I could run a early slant six...since they came out in 60, but if the date code on the block is 68 nobody is going to bitch? Sorry for being a re-nob....but I'm stoked about this, and want to get it right the first time.

[64 DODGE 440]

So.... I could run a early slant six...since they came out in 60, but if the date code on the block is 68 nobody is going to bitch? Sorry for being a re-nob....but I'm stoked about this, and want to get it right the first time.

From my point it wouldn't be any more of a problem than running a Mopar flathead 6 with a '68 date code, and yes they did build the the 230 inch flathead at least that late for use in the military Dodge M37B1 series of trucks and even though the 218 inch engine began in '34, it will swap many parts with the '68.

As long as the basic design began before '62 as long as the fundamentals of the design match I don't see a problem and doubt anyone else will. If an engine began with a four main bearing crank and the later version has a seven main crank that would be a problem and similarly if the later version had major improvements in the head porting that would be a problem too. Just my feelings on the debate and I'm sure others will chime in.

Build within the concept and have fun.:D

[pants fit]

My rail job looks alot like the bug but it has a 2.3 overhead cam ford motor,banjo rear model A front with 1/4 eliptics and it has a hand fabbed zoomie that looks correct as well. The motor makes about 125 hp and sounds great! I know chev made the iron duke 4 cyl, but its a push rod motor. will this qualify thanks Jim

[Old6rodder]

Howdy,

Sounds like a great car, how 'bout some pictures? :D

As to the engine, I'm not that up on Fords so .... did they have a cammer in the early fifties and if so, is this engine conceptually related to it?

[pants fit]

soon as I figure out how to get the film out of my digital camera I will upload or download a pic Thanks Jim

[pants fit]

go to a harley dealer, get a hand operated hydro clutch master cyl. then go to speedway motors get a hydrolic throw-out bearing stop by a hose shop have a line made to mate this combo modify your shifter to mount the hand clutch and Bam go race and have fun !!! You're welcome Pants

[RAY With]

Having recently purchased a 1950 flatty digger I was wondering where all the information was and found this site. The dragster I have represents the 50's and is all original as built back then. It seems A lot of modifications will have to be made to fit rules that are 2009 style. As I remember it they ran in the 13-14 second area I believe so why the hard core NHRA rules? Some are fine while others restrict or prevent the real older cars from running unless you want to rebuild to current standards. Just my thoughts.

[Old6rodder]

Lawyers mostly.

The safety issues are real of course and our society no longer feels you should have the right to take any chances with your own body, because it makes them squeamish.
Lawyers and con men (politicians) use that squeamishness to further their careers by pandering to the complete ignorance of freedom that the "masses" indulge.

NHRA's a business, period.
Pandering to their bottom line via the main stream public's ignorance is what they do. Their product is what that public believes drag racing should be, not one iota of what it actually was or is.
Even their "nostalgia" racing venues have nothing to do with actual historic racing. It's nothing more than a TV show of tire smoke and noise from their point of usage.

Oops, vented. :o

Your car sounds like a great find. How 'bout some pictures? :cool:

[RAY With]

Lawyers mostly.

The safety issues are real of course and our society no longer feels you should have the right to take any chances with your own body, because it makes them squeamish.
Lawyers and con men (politicians) use that squeamishness to further their careers by pandering to the complete ignorance of freedom that the "masses" indulge.

NHRA's a business, period.
Pandering to their bottom line via the main stream public's ignorance is what they do. Their product is what that public believes drag racing should be, not one iota of what it actually was or is.
Even their "nostalgia" racing venues have nothing to do with actual historic racing. It's nothing more than a TV show of tire smoke and noise from their point of usage.

Oops, vented. :o

Your car sounds like a great find. How 'bout some pictures? :cool:
I have posted some of these on the regular site but not here. As stated earlier I got this from Garlits Museum and am in the process of having a new flatty built and making sure all correct pieces are time correct and this is a true 1950 vintage. I had to shorten the steering for me to fit good but that's about all I want to do other than a total disassemble and inspect every thing and then put it all together again. I also will have to do the battery and starter for rule and ease of operation but we had them like that in the 50's.

[Rand Man]

Please keep posting here RAY With. That 1950 dragster is what HA/GR is about. We are trying to re-live the early days of drag racing, and your little rail could motivate some of our re-creations to be built or finished.

[RAY With]

Please keep posting here RAY With. That 1950 dragster is what HA/GR is about. We are trying to re-live the early days of drag racing, and your little rail could motivate some of our re-creations to be built or finished.


I will and I just never knew this forum existed. I was in hopes of running the HAMB event but motor wont be finished in time and I want it right. I started racing in 52 and this digger was built 2 years before that so it is actual representative of those times. Steering was frozen up so I had to rebuild it with all new bearings then shorten it for me to drive it but it is the same appearing. I ran Nostalgia in the 90's in gas/sedan class so I know what to expect however the flatty is a new experience since its been so long since I ran one on the track. I also plan on making the Temple/Academy event when finished

[PORTERVILLE]

i've had the pleasure of inspecting the bug, up close and personal. I understand the escence of the "run what you brung" hamb rules, but.........

I started racing at famoso dragstrip when a smokers flagman started 4 cars off at a time (i have photos somewhere). The only car i couldn't beat in m stock was an olds with a hydro. I partially paralized myself in a sreet car accident, non 29. 1963. Sticks were to difficult to drive street/strip so i put a beefed hydro in my '32 3 window in 1964. The hydro made it posible to race again. I still have my original hydo from 45 years ago, and it doesn't meet the rules? Also, in 1964, i crewed on an early 92" wb junior fueler with a cast iron powerglide. This was, definately, a hamb car in spirit. We never won anything, but that's not what it was built for. It barely passed tech, but we ran. It was just for fun, and we had a fun time. And a cast iron powerglide doesn't meet your rules? According to the rules, you can run any stick trany you want, no year limitations, just as long as its a standard. Where's the bug spirit in that? There is a rule about pre 62 6's, which is understandible. But you can't use an automatic that was used on the 6, but you can use any late model standard trany you want? There are exceptions to the "no exotic overhead heads" rule, but there are none for the "no automatics" rule. In 1954, a year before the bug was built, hot rod magazine did a large, indepth, story on the hydro and how to beef it. Racers were using the hydro before the bug was built, but an automatic doesn't meet the bugs spirit? I could understand any trany, 62 and earlier, nothing later. Now that's the spirit! But, i really have no problem with any year standard trany. I will stick with only 62 and earlier automatics, because that is, truely, the spirit. As i'm typing this post, but a few feet away is a 52 lincoln with a hydro, and a 47 cad with a hydro, ready to put into something. Hamb is my first choice, nhra brackets is a second. But, then again, if the no automatics rule is to keep the disabled out of hamb, i apologize for this post. My intention is not to barge in where i am not wanted, but to allow hamb to be available to everyone. Again, if the bug has the desired spirit (whatever that is) that the rules are based on, and those rules are written in stone, i apologize for being so presumptious as to post this thread. I could see the incongruities in the rules, and hamb cars i have inspected, so i thought i might suggest a possible change. If that is out of the question, i didn't realize it, and i apologize.

Dirts32



i get to enjoy the bug repro regularly, kind of cool.



Slushpumps are encouraged, and well represented, in ha/gr style cars in the sdra.



There are oft stated reasons for ha/gr's stick preferrence, they're not related to period of production. One simply put; can you miss a shift with a slush? We can with our sticks.



You don't want to hear my response to your attempted guilt trip.





i don't think it was an attempted guilt trip .

More someone that wants to race ,and has raced before, simply asking a qusetion about the rules.

This atitude is what ruin's the chance for everyone to be a part of drag racing! Rules and $$$ thats what it equals out to.

Sound like someones been watching way too much nascar.

I rather see a hydro than a t5 any day.but thats just me .i like to see period correct racecars not someone's interpertation of one with a 1968 slant six one barrel and t56 ,radial tires ,gay ass red rims ,and a racoon tail . Oh, and you can miss a shift with a manualy shifted hydromatic . You don't wan't dirt racing any way he might build a car thats faster than yours and that would make you look bad.i will never build a "hampster" for the simple reason of that i can build a real race car ,not just a stock motor'd go cart for big kids .and the rules that govern them.

[64 DODGE 440]

i don't think it was an attempted guilt trip .

More someone that wants to race ,and has raced before, simply asking a qusetion about the rules.

This atitude is what ruin's the chance for everyone to be a part of drag racing! Rules and $$$ thats what it equals out to.

Sound like someones been watching way too much nascar.

I rather see a hydro than a t5 any day.but thats just me .i like to see period correct racecars not someone's interpertation of one with a 1968 slant six one barrel and t56 ,radial tires ,gay ass red rims ,and a racoon tail . Oh, and you can miss a shift with a manualy shifted hydromatic . You don't wan't dirt racing any way he might build a car thats faster than yours and that would make you look bad.i will never build a "hampster" for the simple reason of that i can build a real race car ,not just a stock motor'd go cart for big kids .and the rules that govern them.

If you have done any research on the HA/GR class rules and assorted build posts and reports on this forum you would understand the reasoning behind the "manual transmissions only" rule.

With that in mind you would also understand that this class isn't about "Stock motor'd go carts" anymore than "Vintage Top Fuel" is about what true front engined dragsters are about.

That said, If you need it explained to you, you'll never understand it anyway.

Build what you want and go race it, but don't rag on others for doing it their way and not how you think.

It seems like every few months we get some new folks who discover the HA/GR board and develop an interest in possibly building one of these cars.

Often they express their desires and start out by asking questions about the class, what engines they can use, what basic construction methods and on some occasions "where can they get blueprints for the cars". Generally after the initial questions it seems that there is a tendency for many to ask why they can't run some combination of parts that are "outside the box" such as an automatic transmission or a Holley four barrel carb or some other pieces that don't quite fit the spirit of the class.

First off, without wanting to sound like the grouchy old man that I am, if they would just look at the top of the forum, they would see the post "Sticky: HA/GR Rules..." that does a pretty good job of saying what is and what is not allowed in the class. There are no blueprints and the general design of these cars is left to the builder, as it was in the past.

Second, if those rules don't appeal to them, I have no problem with that, build what you want, but don't expect those of us building to the rules and spirit of the class to change the rules to fit your feelings on what you want to build.

Third, realize that this class is all about, "Run What Ya Brung, Heads Up, No Handicap Racing", in home built rails in the spirit of how it was done "back then" in the '40s, '50s and early '60s. That doesn't mean there aren't concessions to safety in construction methods and design, but the whole idea goes back to the concept of non-mass produced cars, and the design is left up to the builder, not laid down in the rules. Interpretation is left to the builder within the simple parameters that the driver sit in front of the rear axle, the axles not be narrowed, and suspension is whatever you do or do not desire.

If you wish to "Bracket Race", fine.......many people enjoy the concept. If you wish to run a class where if you "run too fast" you can break out, fine, but please accept the fact that there are some of us who wish to build our own cars, our own way, without blueprints other than sketches on notebook paper and coffee shop napkins.

As it was in the past, there will always be those who feel that the biggest and baddest engine is the only way to win and there will be those who feel that David can still slay the giant. That is the reality that this class is based on.

If you wish to play the game, welcome aboard. There is always room for more to run and we are glad to have you, just realize that the rules are there and they aren't really that complex. Times have changed, they coat the track with contact cement now and a six inch tire sticks a lot better than it did in the days of bare asphalt or concrete, but the racing is still about who gets there first

Hope to see you in the staging lanes.......and may the quickest one win.:D

[Old6rodder]

RAY With,

That thing is beautiful. Thanks for the pictures, I've tucked'em in their own folder in my collection.
Definitely keepers. :cool:

[RAY With]

RAY With,

That thing is beautiful. Thanks for the pictures, I've tucked'em in their own folder in my collection.
Definitely keepers. :cool:
Thanks Old6 and there is still a lot to do. I have to build a firewall and have it all laid out in cardboard and need material now. Installing friction shocks like it use to have and a little welding and it will be ready for motor and electrical . I am doing a few pictures as I go and will post as I get a little time.

[PORTERVILLE]

If you have done any research on the HA/GR class rules and assorted build posts and reports on this forum you would understand the reasoning behind the "manual transmissions only" rule.

With that in mind you would also understand that this class isn't about "Stock motor'd go carts" anymore than "Vintage Top Fuel" is about what true front engined dragsters are about.

That said, If you need it explained to you, you'll never understand it anyway.

Build what you want and go race it, but don't rag on others for doing it their way and not how you think.

It seems like every few months we get some new folks who discover the HA/GR board and develop an interest in possibly building one of these cars.

Often they express their desires and start out by asking questions about the class, what engines they can use, what basic construction methods and on some occasions "where can they get blueprints for the cars". Generally after the initial questions it seems that there is a tendency for many to ask why they can't run some combination of parts that are "outside the box" such as an automatic transmission or a Holley four barrel carb or some other pieces that don't quite fit the spirit of the class.

First off, without wanting to sound like the grouchy old man that I am, if they would just look at the top of the forum, they would see the post "Sticky: HA/GR Rules..." that does a pretty good job of saying what is and what is not allowed in the class. There are no blueprints and the general design of these cars is left to the builder, as it was in the past.

Second, if those rules don't appeal to them, I have no problem with that, build what you want, but don't expect those of us building to the rules and spirit of the class to change the rules to fit your feelings on what you want to build.

Third, realize that this class is all about, "Run What Ya Brung, Heads Up, No Handicap Racing", in home built rails in the spirit of how it was done "back then" in the '40s, '50s and early '60s. That doesn't mean there aren't concessions to safety in construction methods and design, but the whole idea goes back to the concept of non-mass produced cars, and the design is left up to the builder, not laid down in the rules. Interpretation is left to the builder within the simple parameters that the driver sit in front of the rear axle, the axles not be narrowed, and suspension is whatever you do or do not desire.

If you wish to "Bracket Race", fine.......many people enjoy the concept. If you wish to run a class where if you "run too fast" you can break out, fine, but please accept the fact that there are some of us who wish to build our own cars, our own way, without blueprints other than sketches on notebook paper and coffee shop napkins.

As it was in the past, there will always be those who feel that the biggest and baddest engine is the only way to win and there will be those who feel that David can still slay the giant. That is the reality that this class is based on.

If you wish to play the game, welcome aboard. There is always room for more to run and we are glad to have you, just realize that the rules are there and they aren't really that complex. Times have changed, they coat the track with contact cement now and a six inch tire sticks a lot better than it did in the days of bare asphalt or concrete, but the racing is still about who gets there first

Hope to see you in the staging lanes.......and may the quickest one win.:D


very well put . and point taken. it was not my intent to offend anyone .
i do understand the concept of a class
and anyone who has ever been injured understands the need for safety
my beef is simply not letting hydros or early auto's run in that class
you can do alot with a hydro but is it cheaper to run the stock hydro with your flathead lincoln ? or buy a expensive adapter kit and manual gear box? im sure the rules are there for a reason ,and its problably been debated before. i just belive your selling your selves short by not allowing
autos . It would help your class to grow you already have one guy who wants in . ps all of my personal cars at this time are standard. i perfer them. may be you could start a new class AHA/GR A for auto .ps
what about a chrysler fluid drive it is a standard 3spd only the flywheel has a fluid coupler infront of it ? what about a manual shift clutched hydro?

just stickin up for dirt
you know he missed a shift with his hydro at fomosa in his 32 then got back in it only to have the front universal goint to let go at the lights causing the car to poll vault end over end he was thrown out of the original open top by centrifugal force being scalped in the process and remained consiousnes throughout the ordeal. i asked him where was the drive shaft loop he said didnt have one ,no loop ,no helmet ,no seat belt,
just a t-shirt that said "powerd by junk". he said the worst part was they left the windows down in the ambulance and the wind was blowing on his bare skull ,all he asked was how's my car? so you could say he is aware of safety. you never know who your talking to thats why you should treat every one with respect .

quote "drive fast and have a shitty day tomarrow"

[64 DODGE 440]

PORTERVILLE, I understand respect and I'm not trying to offend anyone, but the manual/automatic thing has been beaten to death many times over.

For those who wish to run an automatic, the SDRA guys have no problems with the concept as well as other options that don't fit into the spirit of the HA/GR rules.

It just seems that many folks come on here with the attitude that they would like to build an HA/GR, but "why can't I use an Automatic", or "can't we use radial tires", or "why can't we run an Olds overhead V8, they were built before '62", or whatever else comes to mind.

The rules are really pretty simple and don't need to be changed. As you yourself said, you don't have to build one, you "can build a real race car". Why does everybody feel the need to change the class to fit their own ideas? Build what ya want, just don't expect it to be accepted as an HA/GR if it doesn't fit the rules.

[Old6rodder]

I'll add that the SDRA cars and the HA/GR cars race side by side in Tulsa (where they started) and the slushpumpers are presently faster. :cool:

Hell, do what we did. Build the first one on the west coast, bring it out and race it. Get the SDRA rolling out here. I guarantee there'll be followers if you do. And at least you'll get to race the first year instead of having to settle for "show & tells" 'til the second like we did. Why should the Tulsa boys be the only ones to enjoy a good rivalry?

It may well be that I've talked to Dirts32 at the strip. I recall someone mentioning a problem with shifting and I believe I responded regarding the SDRA then. Perhaps it was another person with the same concerns, I'm sure there're others.

As to respect, calling someone on a silly statement (we all make'em from time to time if we're human) isn't disrespectful in my book if it isn't done antagonistically. I've been called on things, as we all have. I take it as it's intended, "Gimme a break Dick, that's a bit much." Embarrassing yes, offensive no.
What's hard to convey in print is the tone of it. There's no icon handy to show the wry head shake a friend gives you in calling you on something silly.

"But, then again, if the no automatics rule is to keep the disabled out of hamb, i apologize for this post."
Man up, that was a silly statement and an attempted guilt trip.

"You don't want to hear my response to your attempted guilt trip."
I'll freely admit that my comment can be read harsher than I intended it.
Perhaps a :rolleyes: would've been a helpful addition.

Lastly, "you never know who your talking to thats why you should treat every one with respect ."
I'm a charter member of the "Lifetime paying for my own stupid mistakes" club. Earliest one was climbing a tree in the rain at a friend's birthday party at the age of nine and grabbing a 24K power line 2 1/2 stories up to see what electricity felt like. What's left of my nervous system is more problems than some folks would care to live with. Some of'em are deadly if not managed, and not one of'em do I expect variance for. There are more as well but they're all my problems, I'll tend to'em.

This world doesn't give a rusty fuck where I've been or what hells've tempered me into what I am, nor should it. They only notice what I am today, if they notice at all. Smiling seems to help some (except with lawyers), so ... :D

[duke182]

not sure if this is in the right place but here goes.
first, i understand what ya'll are trying to do with this class. very cool.

second, you,re very vague about the engines that are legal for this class. just to try and understand let me offer this.
i assume a 53-57chevy 235 L6 would be legal while a late model toyota L6 that shares a common head, albeit modernized, and a much stouter bottom end would not even though gm designed it and sold it to toyota who updated it with great success.

the other thing that bothered me while reading about this class is that it has been touted by some as a "run what u brung class" or something similar to that.
once again i think these cars are awsome, but that just aint so.
anybody thats ever been around racing knows that it stops being run what u brung the moment you write the first rule.
just my two cents worth.
love these cars, but please don't call it something it's not.

looking forward to a clarification about the engines to see if i understood correctly.
thanks
duke182

[Old6rodder]

Nice try, down right smooth. :cool:

"Modernized" & "updated with great success" pretty much explains the point if you understand what we're doing here.

Run what you brung refers to the widely varied styles of build for 1950 era "rail jobs". Again pretty clear if you understand what we're doing here.

Perhaps if you define your understanding of the class we can be of more help.

[64 DODGE 440]

not sure if this is in the right place but here goes.
first, i understand what ya'll are trying to do with this class. very cool.

second, you,re very vague about the engines that are legal for this class. just to try and understand let me offer this.
i assume a 53-57chevy 235 L6 would be legal while a late model toyota L6 that shares a common head, albeit modernized, and a much stouter bottom end would not even though gm designed it and sold it to toyota who updated it with great success.

the other thing that bothered me while reading about this class is that it has been touted by some as a "run what u brung class" or something similar to that.
once again i think these cars are awsome, but that just aint so.
anybody thats ever been around racing knows that it stops being run what u brung the moment you write the first rule.
just my two cents worth.
love these cars, but please don't call it something it's not.

looking forward to a clarification about the engines to see if i understood correctly.
thanks
duke182

Sorry, but you seem to be missing the point...yes there are "rules", but if you read the rules, specifically rules #12 through #16 the game is explained pretty well and in that concept the class is very much "run what ya brung" and it isn't really "very vague about the engines that are legal for this class". If you read through the build posts here you will see everything from box stock engines to the full race builds like Ron Golden's GMC and moparsled's flathead six that pretty well cover the range. This class is about reliving the early days of drag racing and you have the choice of what and how to build your vision of that era, be it a lightweight V8-60 powered rail, a monster Cadillac flathead V8, a Crosley inline 4 or a straight 8 Buick. Single one barrel carb up to however many two barrels you can stack on it. Hell I doubt there are any here that would object to a full race Lincoln V12 if someone wanted to go there. If that don't seem like "run what ya brung" what does? The rules are pretty wide open on chassis design, engine location and everything else, our main restrictions come not from the class, but the modern safety requirements of the tracks and as long as they are met it's wide open to your imagination.

Take some time, research the builds and join in. Once you make a pass in one of these cars it's really hard to live in the modern world.

[duke182]

ok i'll try to keep this short.
i think my grasp of the class is consistent with your efforts.
i understand it to be an effort to recreate the thrill and excitement of the earliest rail jobs without too many restrictions or too much carnage,thus the safety concerns.
maybe when i become a little more technically savy i'll scan and post the picture of me at three in a car just as you wish this class to be, except that safety wasn't as big a concern when my dad and his friend j.d. put it together in 1969 and70.

i also understand the use of a standard tranny and a "modern" one at that. even if it does seem wrong at the surface given the ban on "modern engines"
it doesn't take that much grunt to rip up an old three speed, and rowing the gears is always more fun than just hanging on.

your still not going to sell me on run what you brung though.
i only know of two legit examples of this(safety concerns put aside):
top fuel, before the nitro ban was pretty wide open, but somebody BROUGHT a better fuel and somebody else made them stop.
the other example is known for being void of rules and safety concerns, that's right i'm talking about street racing. where you drive and lineup against whatever you have the balls to and whatever shows up if you think you're the fastest and willing to prove it.
this last example is extreme and possibly has consequences that keep many away(probably for the best) but it is really the only run what you brung racing that exists.

i think this is a great class and i hope that it is well supported, so i hope nobody gets their feelings damaged just cause i ask a few questions and offer a few opinions.

i'm just trying to understand the madness behind the methods!

[REJ]

Maybe I can explain the "run what ya brung" a little.
I go to the HAMb drags every year and for the last three years I have carried my HA/GR. It is a slant six, two carter carbs, small cam, 426 rear (open).
When they call for the HA/GR's to run, we pull in the staging lanes. Whoever I am paired with is who I am going to run. Anything from a stock flathead to highly modified flatheads or another six.
I'm running in the low 14's and there are those who are running in the low 12's.
I know this on hooking up to my trailer and pulling 1300 miles one way.
If this is not "run what ya brung", I know of no other way to explain this to you.
As previously stated in one of the above post, this is a way to get back to the way drag racing used to be. Sure there are some out there that will spend $5000.00 on a motor for this class just because they can. Most of them do not last very long as there is no money to be made, only trophies and that is once a year. Most of the guys that do hang around, do it because they are very passionate about these cars. You have to love this concept or you will not enjoy it.
And before you ask, No I have never won at the HAMB drags, but there is always next year. If I pull up side of one of these high dollar motors and he misses a shift, breaks something, then the little guy wins.:D
Robert

[Drewfus]

RoCk On....

Passion, enthusiasm, persistance, in spite of the high reality you're butt will be kicked to the curb....

Cheers,

Drewfus

[bobw]

Robert wins everytime he makes a pass.

[64 DODGE 440]

RoCk On....

Passion, enthusiasm, persistance, in spite of the high reality you're butt will be kicked to the curb....

Cheers,

Drewfus

That's OK Drewfus.......some of us have a lot of butt to kick.;)

[duke182]

"If this is not "run what ya brung", I know of no other way to explain this to you."


REJ, you could call it what it is.
a Heads Up class.

i understand what this class is about, so this is my last post about semantics. you can call it what you want but it is not a run what you brung class.

top fuel used to be,but somebody BROUGHT a better fuel and it was banned for a while, and even today certain types of blowers are banned.
much like the ban on certain parts in the HA/GR class. rendering them both restricted classes, not run what you brung.

the only real run what you brung races that i know to exist are grudge races at some tracks, where you run who you want for fun or wagers, in a safe environment.
street races where the same thing happens without the safety of the closed track and the fairly new races held by the kkoa in denison texas were anyone can make a pass and you run against your buddy or the guiy next to you. all for fun, no prizes at all.

one thing is for sure, this class will continue for a while but it will change over time as people look for ways to go faster to remain top dog.
just look at rule 12. it's starting already. this will bring in new people but it will inevetiably run others away.
just a word of warning, you change one rule and people will expect others to change also.

i have seen some of these cars on trailers at shows but haven't seen them in action, only on video, hopefully i'll be able to see or maybe even participate in this class before it becomes to competitive and over run with high dollar machines that will out class any modest effort i could put forth.
one last thought: RUN EM TILL YOU WEAR EM OUT!!!!!

[scottybaccus]

Would 1 5/8" tubing be allowed for the cage, provided it's NHRA spec? NHRA allows both 1 3/4 or 1 5/8.

[64 DODGE 440]

Would 1 5/8" tubing be allowed for the cage, provided it's NHRA spec? NHRA allows both 1 3/4 or 1 5/8.

Seems like if it's good enough for the N(o)H(ot)R(ods)A(llowed) it should be OK for the construction of an HA/GR. Most of us will have to deal with their tech requirements anyway.

[scottybaccus]

Seems like if it's good enough for the N(o)H(ot)R(ods)A(llowed) it should be OK for the construction of an HA/GR. Most of us will have to deal with their tech requirements anyway.

Seems reasonable, but the HA/GR rules specify 1 3/4" tubing. I am just all set for 1 5/8" because it's all we use on customer cars. The bonus is the lighter weight of chrome-moly. NHRA allows lighter wall tubing when using chrome-moly. That means about a 40% weight break in a chassis, so it would be a few pounds on a 4 to 6 point cage.

[64 DODGE 440]

Pounds per horsepower is the name of the game...go for it.:p

[mudflap261]

I dont have a problem with inch/five eights on the 5/6 point roll bar ,i do h ave a problem with the chromemoly. These cars are susposed to be something the average guy can build .the average guy cant weld moly,also the cost factor and they did not have moly in the day.once you let moly chassie in its over.i think these cars should be mild steel only.my 2 cents

[moparsled]

I LIKE the idea of using the CM, yes it was used in the day. 'round here there's alot of midget, sprint, and hillclimb history (Pike's Peak) and I have seen some INCREDIBLE chromemoly stuff on cars built before the focus of our class.

Would a fledgling drag racer building his first rail in his barn have gas welded chromemoly in 1953? Perhaps. Not likely, but, it could happen. It happened around here, as above^^^

as far as cost, and the average guy skills and such, I think those should be up to the individual, not legislated within the class. Let each individual bring what he wishes to the class, whether it be $$ or skill, or vision, or whatever, it's one more means to letting the concept flourish.

[64 DODGE 440]

What 'sled said...gas welded chromemoly was used in aircraft long before drag racing...the technology existed in the '50s and I imagine there were early rails built that way. Lots of early hotrodders came out of the aircraft industry and Army Air Corp of WWII

[nexxussian]

FWIW the Piper Super Cub was gas welded orriginally, the sturcture surrounding the people was 4130. I forget exactly when that model was introduced, but it's certainly not new.

However I see mudflap's point too.

Not to mention no, matter what process you use, 4130 is a PITA to weld right.

[64 DODGE 440]

FWIW the Piper Super Cub was gas welded orriginally, the sturcture surrounding the people was 4130. I forget exactly when that model was introduced, but it's certainly not new.

However I see mudflap's point too.

Not to mention no, matter what process you use, 4130 is a PITA to weld right.

Don't know about that last statement...I've torch welded quite a bit of it in aircraft bits and pieces and never had any problems. I've even had a landing gear leg "crash tested" by a friend and the tubing folded, but the welds held.:p

[bobw]

NHRA won't accept gas welded CM. Must be TIG. For those that are in areas dominated by NHRA and have to pass their tech.
How much lighter would a Cro-Mo chassis be compared to a mild steel chassis?
A Cro-Mo chassis can use .065" and .058" wall tubing as compared to .118 wall for MS. Many builders use .133 wall MS in order to be sure to pass sonic testing. However, I doubt many (if any) HA/GR cars will ever be sonic tested.

Edit: I found a calculator: all 1 5/8 o.d. tube in pounds per foot. .058 wall=.97 .065=1.08
.120=1.93 .133=2.12

[64 DODGE 440]

NHRA won't accept gas welded CM. Must be TIG. For those that are in areas dominated by NHRA and have to pass their tech.


True, but that doesn't mean that gas welded structures are unsafe when done properly.

[nexxussian]

Don't know about that last statement...I've torch welded quite a bit of it in aircraft bits and pieces and never had any problems. I've even had a landing gear leg "crash tested" by a friend and the tubing folded, but the welds held.:p


I never said it was impossible (or that I hadn't done it).:p

Just that it's significantly more dificult (in ways that can be devious for those un-aware).

[64 DODGE 440]

I never said it was impossible (or that I hadn't done it).:p

Just that it's significantly more dificult (in ways that can be devious for those un-aware).

True...Just saying I've seen, stick welds, mig welds and tig welds that looked beautiful and had no penetration on one or both sides and failed under small stresses and that the N(o)H(ot)R(ods)A(llowed) mandates for construction make as much sense as saying that it is OK to run a convertible as long as the top is up,(Like the layer of fabric will protect you from injury.)

Method does not insure structural integrity.

[scottybaccus]

I dont have a problem with inch/five eights on the 5/6 point roll bar ,i do h ave a problem with the chromemoly. These cars are susposed to be something the average guy can build .the average guy cant weld moly,also the cost factor and they did not have moly in the day.once you let moly chassie in its over.i think these cars should be mild steel only.my 2 cents

You can weld chrome-moly. Choose the right mig wire and anneal the weld with a heat crayon and a propane torch. NHRA certification doesn't kick in until 9.99 or quicker.

I plan on mild steel rails with moly cage, not for any advantage but safety and that I already have the equipment. Purchasing dies for 1 3/4 mild steel would be as much as the chassis costs. I think the intent is to honor the bare bones construction, but modern safety measures still apply, hence the compliance with current NHRA requirements. They didn't turn back the clock on the safety equipment to be sure appearances were met.

Yes, I know there's a big debate on acceptable welding processes for CM. I have some experience in that area, so let's not go down that road. I just want to know if the HA/GR will be permited with .083 1.625 CM tubing in the cage.

http://c2.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/91/l_98d6b5c3b5ef33111e7110b340336425.jpg

[bobw]

Scotty, The TIG rule is in the General Regulations and is in effect for all CM roll bars and cages, even those slow enough to not require certification. I have zero experience with CM and have no opinion about what effective welding practices are. I'm just giving my interpretation of the rulebook.

Personally, if I could build a CM chassis/rollcage HA/GR, I would. But, I'm stuck with my heavy MS HA/GRa. It will probably go on a diet next year.:D

[mudflap261]

scott what about sending a pm to ryan he has the final say.

[Old6rodder]

I finally took notice that the header for this thread reads "HA/GR Rules".

Frankly my dear, I agree ......... :cool:

:D

[hotrodbob]

Simple question, the Ford 200 inch 6 is basically the same as the 144-170 motors even the heads interchange, but has a 7 main crank and the ability to run a modern trans. The 144-170 will not as the bell housing/flywheel/clutch parts are to small and there is only one trans that they can run. There is also no stamped steel bell housing available for them. Is the 200 allowed since the later slat 6 MOPAR and Chevy 6's can be used?

[Old6rodder]

So far that's up in the air. Some think it should be OK and some don't. Likely it'll wind up a go.

The slant block's still an under square four main pushrod engine right on up 'til they stopped making'em, with no real difference from the original '59 design. Its primary advances were a long runner intake and a bit higher compression, both things already in use at the strips of the time. It's a "throwback" to a large extent, so the "grandfathering" is understandable.

The Chev's that're seven main I'm told are technically legit as they come in just under the wire. They're still a major design advancement over the engines HA/GR represents, as are the seven main Fords, and actually are the beginning of the next engineering generation. I'm not certain but aren't they both over square as well?

One argument holds that they're small enough (194 & 200) that the design improvements aren't a major advantage. The counter argument is that their tach capabilities decidedly are.
Both arguments ignore the original intent of the class.

Bear in mind that HA/GR was devised to showcase technology and engineering commonly seen at strips of the early '50s, thus reliving that era's ways and methods of racing.
The '62 cut-off is there because folks asked for a simplified rule, and '62 is generally applicable for the end of that engineering era.

It's really what you want out of it that'll make your decision.
Here're the two trains of thought regarding the class ......

If you're looking to enjoy the early '50s "spirit" of the thing, the deciding factor is the engineering itself.

If you're merely looking to game a set of rules, that's good too. There're builders doing that already, you'll be in good company.

[hotrodbob]

My concern is I want to run a Ford. The top loader trans will not fit a 144-170. Only the early Falcon 2.77 trans and it is A. very weak (POS) B. Not very available. C. only a 8 1/2 clutch will work. This combo gives away way to much to the Chevy or MOPAR. I could see a Pre-Smog limit and cube inch limit, like the later 60's. I'm looking at like engine sizes and reliable operation. The object is race and have fun, not dissasemble parts as you drive down the track, make one pass and go home. Cost of operation.

I understand the intent of the class and am not looking for an unfair advantage, just equality as the other engines can run stronger current drive lines and have the mechanical advantage of displacement and in the Chevy stronger bottom ends.

[Old6rodder]

I apologise, on re-reading my previuos post I see it comes across with an unintended snottiness. That isn't the way I think (good thing I'm not in politics for a living).

I have no problem with the alternate thought process and its goals. Indeed, the points and reasoning are real and well considered.
In addition I see plenty of room in what this class is for both styles of build. As I stated, both are in practice already and HA/GR's still alive and slowly growing, benefitting in part from the very fact that it can accomodate both schools of thought (in my opinion).

That our team accepts the weaknesses of our set-up as part of the spirit of that era is no more than our own preference of what the class is for us.
We blew two pressure plates in two starts last weekend, the second at revs. That one cost us the engine, as it freakishly tweaked off a piece of the bell flange and a bit of the oil galley in the process (the Mopar "slant" driveline's hardly strong). We also constantly sweat our spiders, a given on Chrysler's 7 1/4". :rolleyes:
This was drag racing in the '50s, warts and all. I'm relating what we do it for, we don't expect the world to turn our way.

Rocky & Lee are running a top loader (and top shifter :cool:) on their Ford, perhaps they're already running a 200 and've set the precedent. If not, then they found a way to mount it up. Give'em a yell, they're good eggs.
And if not, then certainly Dick Mosely's 194 can be said to set it.
Hell, Joe's car is a fountain of later engineering applied to the concept and could easily be considered a poster car for the precedent.
Run the 200, build it and have fun. You sincerely will be in good company, HA/GRs. :cool:

[64 DODGE 440]

My concern is I want to run a Ford. The top loader trans will not fit a 144-170. Only the early Falcon 2.77 trans and it is A. very weak (POS) B. Not very available. C. only a 8 1/2 clutch will work. This combo gives away way to much to the Chevy or MOPAR. I could see a Pre-Smog limit and cube inch limit, like the later 60's. I'm looking at like engine sizes and reliable operation. The object is race and have fun, not dissasemble parts as you drive down the track, make one pass and go home. Cost of operation.

I understand the intent of the class and am not looking for an unfair advantage, just equality as the other engines can run stronger current drive lines and have the mechanical advantage of displacement and in the Chevy stronger bottom ends.


Yeah Bob...what Old6rodder said. I have no problem with the 200 with early style cast in part head. the seven main bottom should help reliability and that doesn't really seem much different than running a 9" Ford rear which seems quite accepted.

Don't really like the idea of automatics though that has been previously flogged to death so we'll let that die a peaceful death.

Our choice was entirely the other way...old parts, (1934 dodge engine and trans) and old technology. Part of the fun from our perspective will be seeing how well we can do with a pile of old stuff against the "New Iron".

Build it and have fun...we look forward to staging next to you.

[hotrodbob]

Old6rodder, I heard about your clutch issue from Joe. and the car I'm trying to buy is sitting in Dick Mosely's shop. Thanks for the info. I would rather run the 200 with the log intake head and a stick is just part of the fun. With the 200 I can run a good bell housing and stick.

I should pick up the chassis this weekend. Don't think I'll have it together for this year, but I will for next. Thanks for the input and help.

I've spent to many years watching and talking about you guys racing. I want a piece of the action too..LOL

[hotrodbob]

Build it and have fun...we look forward to staging next to you.

If I had not sold the Flathead from my coupe I would be right there with you with the old iron. 216, Isky cam and lifters, Edmunds head and Offy intake. 6's sound so sweet. Ran 19's at LACR with it at the Antique Nats years ago, so I know it would run well in a dragster. I prefer 6's and sticks.

See ya in the staging lanes.

[64 DODGE 440]

if i had not sold the flathead from my coupe i would be right there with you with the old iron. 216, isky cam and lifters, edmunds head and offy intake. 6's sound so sweet. Ran 19's at lacr with it at the antique nats years ago, so i know it would run well in a dragster. I prefer 6's and sticks.

See ya in the staging lanes.

Cool! :d

[Old6rodder]

The car I'm trying to buy is sitting in Dick Mosely's shop.
I should pick up the chassis this weekend. Don't think I'll have it together for this year, but I will for next.

Cool, I know that chassis. You can be sure the welding's excellent and won't be coming apart on you. It'll be good to have another Ford in the mix but of course you'll now be required to harass Dick about his radials. :D

Maybe you'll surprise yourself and make the second Eagle Field meet this year.

Six bangers, side suckers & sewer tubes :cool:, heaven'll keep.

[hotrodbob]

We talked about the radials too.. lol. This will be fun.

[Old6rodder]

I finally took notice that the header for this thread reads "HA/GR Rules".

Frankly my dear, I agree ......... :cool:

:D


Still agree ............. :cool:

[timbo_93631]

Would a Jaguar XK6 engine be allowed? Inline OHC/OHV 6 introduced in '49 and production ran until 1992. If allowed would it have to be from pre '62? Just wondering cause there are so many 4.2L XJ6's in junkyards/for sale cheap.

[Old6rodder]

Yes, you can use the XK from '62 and earlier. Also from '62 up until the next changes were engineered into it would be "grandfathered" in, same as the American engines. I don't know when the next changes came but I'm sure there're those who do, just ask around.

I've heard of at least two who've considered this engine but as yet none who've done it. It'd be wicked looking. :cool:

[timbo_93631]

Awesome! I know that the 4.2L block was introduced in '64 and incorporated some design changes, they moved the inner 2 bores closer together and the outer 2 further out, but the heads stayed the same as the earler 3.8L engine. I suppose the hard thing would be finding the earlier block to meet the rules, and finding an affordable manual gearbox might be hard too. Loved seeing the Barn Job run this past weekend! Good to see you got the timing chain/components back in there in time to race!

[hotrodbob]

I've got the chassis home and started collecting parts. Have a 3 carb set up, now need the engine /trans to put under it.

[Old6rodder]

Cool.

Start a build thread with the words "build" and "HA/GR" in the title for search purposes. Then we can harass you along with the rest of us. :D

[hotrodbob]

LOL okee dokee. Will do soon. There will be a little delay. Totaled my daily driver two weeks ago.. Gotta replace it first... been religated to driving my wifes PT cruiser...YUK

[64 DODGE 440]

LOL okee dokee. Will do soon. There will be a little delay. Totaled my daily driver two weeks ago.. Gotta replace it first... been religated to driving my wifes PT cruiser...YUK

As long as you weren't hurt...cars can be repaired/replaced. Take care Bob, looking forward to seeing your progress.

[hotrodbob]

Hi Tom, I'm ok, my panel was totaled. Can't find a replacement like it so I'm surching for something different..I will post progress as I can

[Joe Roseberry]

I don't want to appear to be whacking on a deceased equine but...we need to have more discussion on the use of the late (62 and later) Chevy 6 in HA/GR. The rules do not support the exception and these engines are not a refinement of the early GM 6. They share the Bowtie and the number of pistons only. The early 6 is available and can be competitive.
Just say no !

[hotrodbob]

Isn't the 194, 230 and 250 the same basic block and engine that came in the 1962 Nova?

[Old6rodder]

No, the 194 had smaller bores cast in. The subsequent blocks of that series (230 & up)were modified at the patterns for larger bores.

The 194 R & D was done, and the first (siamese exhaust) models hit the floor, in '61 for the '62 sales year. This is the technical point arguing for their inclusion.

The early 194 does not grandfather the 230 & up sizes nor the seperated exhaust heads in. It should only be used with the early head, like the slant.

My own opinion is in favor of the early 194, thrice.
One, the limited displacement offsets the better tach capability more than enough from a C.I. perspective.
Two, it'll respond well to the old techniques of engine building that we're promoting.
Three, it'll allow more HA/GRs to be built (the early head design is a good equalizer).

[Joe Roseberry]

No, the 194 had smaller bores cast in. The subsequent blocks of that series (230 & up)were modified at the patterns for larger bores.

The 194 R & D was done, and the first (siamese exhaust) models hit the floor, in '61 for the '62 sales year. This is the technical point arguing for their inclusion.

The early 194 does not grandfather the 230 & up sizes nor the seperated exhaust heads in. It should only be used with the early head, like the slant.

My own opinion is in favor of the early 194, thrice.
One, the limited displacement offsets the better tach capability more than enough from a C.I. perspective.
Two, it'll respond well to the old techniques of engine building that we're promoting.
Three, it'll allow more HA/GRs to be built (the early head design is a good equalizer).
Dick, at the risk of offending a friend I have to say I disagree with your reasoning on the issue of 1962 and later Chevy engines in HA/Gr. We have a reasonable engine rule for the class, "pre 1962" not to be confused with engineering or R&D dates that will be completely arbritrary. Simple and easy to understand, pre 1962.
As for your 3 opinions supporting the inclusion of these late (modern) engines I would offer the following:
#1 Displacement is not the issue (try policing that) vintage is.
#2 Old style techniques that we should promote will fall by the wayside in favor of . parts inter-changeability with modern high performance Chevy engines.
#3 There is no shortage of pre 1962 GM I-6 engines. if we keep it simple they will come.
Joe

[Toymaker]

Considering the 3rd generation Chevy engine as "HAMB Dragster" legal is a mistake and will open a can of worms, we are not all educated on how too tell the difference and I don't see anyone checking bore and stroke, now or in the future. The rules as written keeps it simple and unconfusing, sure I can get my Falcon 6 to 200 inchs but thats it, anything larger in the ford family is easy to identify. Rocky

[Old6rodder]

Dick, at the risk of offending a friend I have to say I disagree with your reasoning on the issue of 1962 and later Chevy engines in HA/Gr.
Joe

Honest disagreement doesn't offend me, Joe, it pleases me. I have little respect for much else.
Hell, my longest standing friend, Tom, and Rocky & Lee are all on the other side of this issue as well. And I'm not taking any of you off my quick-dialer, so suck it up. :p

This has been an opinion discussion, and all of yours are well thought out and well stated. In fact most of the posts on this have been well considered and perfectly civil.

In truth I may be bending too far in my wish for broader inclusion and more participants. Might only be inviting wrong attitudes.
While I discern the "purity" more in the application than in the hardware, I do realize how easily that can be gamed and how willing others would be to game it (I'm not a complete Pollyanna, just a wistful one).

I've always liked Ryan's "just one, bangin' gears and grinnin" (paraphrased) line. It's what I get out of it, and it'd be what I get out of it if I had a 200 Ford as well. Let's face it gentlemen, how many actual "frame rail" HA/GRs are running anyway vs how much tube, or even chromoly?(No, I'm not carping, it's merely an illustration of my bent :rolleyes:).

I've always been far too wordy, and I guess I can consolidate my basic point easily enough.
So with no rancor, here 'tis ........

Our stated goal is to apply old school building and racing styles to newer, more available and cheaper hardware, for the love of it.
Whatever furthers that, I'm for.
And I'm still in, no matter what.
:cool:




OK kiddies, I'm going to let it stand there for me. I certainly don't need to harrangue anyone about it, we know what I think. :o

ps. I'll still stage with anyone. :D

:mad: 'Cept I wanna stage my rear wheels against Lee, he's just too damn good on the tree.

[hotrodbob]

So if we limit engines to Pre-62, why not diffs and transmissions?

[Old6rodder]

So if we limit engines to Pre-62, why not diffs and transmissions?

They're underneath the car, so nobody cares? :D

Forgive me, Bob, just couldn't resist that one. :o

[hotrodbob]

I'm not laughin.....Ok, Ok a little, but the question still is an issue

[Old6rodder]

Cost, availability, safety, no real engineering differences beyond synchros.
Gears is pretty much gears.

[vectorsolid]

I'm not sure why you guys are debating the rules. Anybody asked Ryan if he's happy with them as is? ;)

[Toymaker]

I'm not sure why you guys are debating the rules. Anybody asked Ryan if he's happy with them as is? ;)
Yep, no answer. The rules seem clear enough to me, but we need clarification on the 194 chevy 6 and if he considers them a '62 and later engine.

[hotrodbob]

Cost, availability, safety, no real engineering differences beyond synchros.
Gears is pretty much gears.

So, then everyone is limited to a 3 or 4 spd manual trans., right?

[Old6rodder]

So, then everyone is limited to a 3 or 4 spd manual trans., right?

Basically. I guess someone could put in a five but then you'd just spend more time tossin'em. Some of the faster guys only use two as it is.

[64 DODGE 440]

So, then everyone is limited to a 3 or 4 spd manual trans., right?

Actually you can run as many gears as you want as far as I'm concerned...every shift is just one more chance to miss one and it may give an advantage to the slower cars. Rocky and Lee seem to break theirs pretty regularly, but Lee can shift it really well when it ain't broken.

Other than the engines which most folks seem to feel should be older than '62 year model production the rest of the running gear is whatever ya want to run. If you don't mind the extra weight hang a six speed and one ton rear from a late model Dodge Cummins behind a proper vintage powerplant and you shouldn't ever break any parts behind the engine and clutch. Disk brakes too.

Whatever makes you grin...we are running the 1934 Dodge three speed top-loader behind the 218 inch flathead. May turn out to be a weak link, but we will be "period correct" except for the 8"ford rear axle with new brakes because I think stopping is important and like the idea of slightly stronger parts where the rubber will connect with the pavement.

Seems like the general consensus is that transmission (as long as it's manual (not automatic) and rear axle are open to whatever you wish to run.

[hotrodbob]

I guess I'm still stuck on the trans thing a bit since slush boxes were intro'd in the 40's and later manual trans can have much better ratios and strength... However, I did talk to the guy with my old flat head six and there may be hope for me yet. The MOPAR 3 speed behind my 218 ran ok.... Ok, here's a angle to really get things going... MOPAR Fluid drive? 3 speed stick connected to a torque converter.... It's a manual trans!!! 1948-54 production. They called it Dodge Gyromatic and Plymouth Hy-Drive. Just threw that in to stir the pot....LOL

[64 DODGE 440]

I guess I'm still stuck on the trans thing a bit since slush boxes were intro'd in the 40's and later manual trans can have much better ratios and strength... However, I did talk to the guy with my old flat head six and there may be hope for me yet. The MOPAR 3 speed behind my 218 ran ok.... Ok, here's a angle to really get things going... MOPAR Fluid drive? 3 speed stick connected to a torque converter.... It's a manual trans!!! 1948-54 production. They called it Dodge Gyromatic and Plymouth Hy-Drive. Just threw that in to stir the pot....LOL

Trust me Bob...as an late friend in the military vehicle hobby used to say, "you can make it as complicated as you want". The only thing a "Hy-Drive" would add to the equation is weight and sluggish acceleration. Automatics have already been flogged to death in the HA/GR forum and though they were made in the '40s the idea is to be out there "banging gears", not letting the car do it for you. Nice stir but these cars are more of the "shaken rather than stirred" variety.:p

[Skip Pipes]

Hi Guys,
I’m moving query and response over to this thread on the later Chevy 6. Just like to say I’m not trying to game anyone and in retrospect I appreciate Dick’s rational support for the later engines; however, this is not my first rodeo, so I’m fully aware someone (not me) will deliberately push the envelope with the later engine. What’s it they say “once the Camel has his nose under the tent.” Nonetheless, my only dog in this fight is that I built a car with a free engine that has put me outside the “friendly” territory and some are concerned. This is a “no drama” project for me so I’ll get rid of the free engine and the drama goes away. Therefore, the 292 comes out and the search for a suitable “Falcon” engine begins.
I might just keep the 292 though and slip it into a C/GD with some upgrades.
Thanks,
Skip Pipes

[hotrodbob]

Skip, let's keep in touch as I'm planning a Falcon engine car as well. We may be able to feed off each others mistakes and triumphs and we are both So Cal.

[64 DODGE 440]

Gentlemen...(hope I haven't offended anyone with that opener).

While I feel in part that Old6rodder has a valid point in accepting the 194" Chevy 6 as "Being manufactured before '62 as the model year is released in '61"...

My take on this whole basket of snakes reads like this.

Rule #12 states, "Flathead v8 or inlines, pre-1962 inline engines with stock cylinder blocks only. No exotic aftermarket inline six overhead valve heads (Wayne). No OHV V8s or V6s.

I haven't seen anyone so far who has said they found a 239" Ford Y-Block and even if it is an overhead valve V8, why can't they run it as it was manufactured in 1954, after all it's "only a 239". Folks argue that it's hard to find parts for the older engines...that speed parts aren't available, etc. etc. etc. and on and on. All this said, it just reinforces the concept...if it was easy, everyone would be doing it and there would be people complaining that it wasn't fun because there were so many cars out there they couldn't have much time racing. There are many cars out there with "owner built" intakes and exhausts have been built in the garage since the beginnings.

This class isn't all about the competition (sure, we all want to be the fastest and quickest, but realistically there are lots of easier classes to build for that fill that need). The class is designed to offer a "time machine", a chance to build and race in the 1950s and early 1960s and experience what it was like in the beginnings of our sport before corporate sponsorship and big rig transports were needed to run a car that might only make one pass before getting put on the trailer for the weekend.

There are many ways to build a drag race car, have fun with it and enjoy the sport. Our class is one of few of those ways to "return to the roots" and though it may not be perfect, stretching the rules won't help achieve perfection. Adding more rules such as limiting modifications on later model engines or placing limits on displacement will just take away from the innovative concepts and cause more pissed off people.

The current rules leave plenty of room for pushing the limits and innovation and don't need to be changed. Build to your ideas within those parameters and have fun. If you would like to build outside those limits, there are classes you can run, but accept the fact that you will have "left the room" so to speak.

A bit long winded, I'm afraid, but my two cents on the debate.

[Old6rodder]

Adding more rules such as limiting modifications on later model engines or placing limits on displacement will just take away from the innovative concepts and cause more pissed off people.

I hadn't intended to say more on this but this point (well stated, Tom) may well be the strongest argument against me that I've seen. The divisive possibilities of "stretching the rule" are real and not to be taken lightly. It could quite easily boomerang on us and kill such unity as we've accomplished before it has a chance to mature. Then the whole thing'd morph into something else or just die out, neither being helpful to what we want to do.

I fully understand it to be a risky move. Nor do I claim to know the outcome.

I assume that's why the idea's being discussed, and why it's this close to the hearts concerned. :cool:

[Toymaker]

I am speaking only as a decision maker for Eagle Field and this reply only applies to Eagle Field. With that said the 3rd generation Chevy six will not be considered a HAMB Dragster powerplant, I'm in an uncomfortable position but the decision had to be made. HAMB "STYLE" Dragsters withe these style engines are welcomed, encouraged, begged, pleaded and wanted to join the fun at Eagle Field but the Eagle Field HA/GR will go to a Rule complying (as I see it) car. Dick Mosely is a good friend and the only car this applies to at the moment, he is welcome to run with us but the HA/GR final round (again at Eagle Field) will not have a 3rd Generation Chevy 6 in it.
Skip has asked me in another thread about his build and I encourage him to build with what he has and come join the fun, the 3rd gen chevy's can run in C/GD (bring your 9" slicks if you like:D) and then I'm open to a TOP Eliminator award.
The small Ford six has changed very little over the years and "ANY" 144 to 200 will be allowed to participate at Eagle Field in the HA/GR Category, NO 250's! http://classicinlines.com/history.asp Our 170 has a dual bolt pattern and is a '68 with Ford choosing to change the bolt pattern one more time in later years.
I can't speak for ANRA but we are welcomed to run the "Open Wheel" category (although a 12.50 et limit has been talked about) and I'll leave any special HA/GR awards to my friend "OLD6".
I'll finish with these words...........BUILD BABY BUILD:D Rocky

[jfaria78]

Some clarification please. I am in the midst of building a car with a flathead v8. Want to know some specifics as far as what is acceptable and not.

Carbs: are the new speedway 97's and edelbrock 94's ok?

ignition: My distributor is well 64 years old and it saw better days: is a msd or mallory distributor ok? It seems it would be cheaper to get an aftermarket one as opposed to a NOS or good condition old one.

Automatic = not allowed

Manual = allowed.... steel aftermarket bellhousing only?


FYI, I am 31 and very excited to be building this and run heads up in a class I can afford! Awesome!

[Toymaker]

Some clarification please. I am in the midst of building a car with a flathead v8. Want to know some specifics as far as what is acceptable and not.

Carbs: are the new speedway 97's and edelbrock 94's ok?

ignition: My distributor is well 64 years old and it saw better days: is a msd or mallory distributor ok? It seems it would be cheaper to get an aftermarket one as opposed to a NOS or good condition old one.

Automatic = not allowed

Manual = allowed.... steel aftermarket bellhousing only?


FYI, I am 31 and very excited to be building this and run heads up in a class I can afford! Awesome!
As I read the rules............
Yes on the carbs listed.
Your Distributor question is a good one and I'll let someone more qualified answer.
A 1/4 " thick steel plate shield extending forward to a point at least 1" ahead of the flywheel and 1" to the rear of the rotating components of the clutch and Pressure plate, completely surrounding the bellhousing 360 degrees and bolted to the frame is the minimum requirement until you run 11.49 an quicker.
We've been waiting for a V-8 Flattie, Rocky

[Toymaker]

I am speaking only as a decision maker for Eagle Field and this reply only applies to Eagle Field. With that said the 3rd generation Chevy six will not be considered a HAMB Dragster powerplant, I'm in an uncomfortable position but the decision had to be made. HAMB "STYLE" Dragsters withe these style engines are welcomed, encouraged, begged, pleaded and wanted to join the fun at Eagle Field but the Eagle Field HA/GR will go to a Rule complying (as I see it) car. Dick Mosely is a good friend and the only car this applies to at the moment, he is welcome to run with us but the HA/GR final round (again at Eagle Field) will not have a 3rd Generation Chevy 6 in it.
Skip has asked me in another thread about his build and I encourage him to build with what he has and come join the fun, the 3rd gen chevy's can run in C/GD (bring your 9" slicks if you like:D) and then I'm open to a TOP Eliminator award.
The small Ford six has changed very little over the years and "ANY" 144 to 200 will be allowed to participate at Eagle Field in the HA/GR Category, NO 250's! http://classicinlines.com/history.asp Our 170 has a dual bolt pattern and is a '68 with Ford choosing to change the bolt pattern one more time in later years.
I can't speak for ANRA but we are welcomed to run the "Open Wheel" category (although a 12.50 et limit has been talked about) and I'll leave any special HA/GR awards to my friend "OLD6".
I'll finish with these words...........BUILD BABY BUILD:D Rocky

THIS ONLY APPLIES TO EAGLE FIELD PARTICIPANTS
I want to clearify my post without changing it because I'm not backpedaling on it!
QUOTE "HAMB "STYLE" Dragsters withe these style engines (3rd generation) are welcomed, encouraged, begged, pleaded and wanted to join the fun at Eagle Field but the Eagle Field HA/GR (insert "AWARD") will go to a Rule complying (as I see it) car. Dick Mosely is a good friend and the only car this applies to at the moment, he is welcome to run with us but the HA/GR final round (again at Eagle Field) will not have a 3rd Generation Chevy 6 in it." ALL cars built in the "Spirit of the Bug", HAMB Style Dragsters are welcome to Come and Race with the HA/GR's at Eagle Field, HOWEVER the Trophy Round will not have a 3rd generation Chevy in it. This still leaves plenty of room for those who just want to come out and "Run for Fun" and allows those who followed the rules to compete for their chance at a prize. The event at Eagle Field is a "Grudge" style format and racers are allowed to come back and race round after round.

QUOTE "Skip has asked me in another thread about his build and I encourage him to build with what he has and come join the fun, the 3rd gen chevy's can run in C/GD (bring your 9" slicks if you like:D) and then I'm open to a TOP Eliminator award."
The C/GD dragster offer was to Racers with 3rd generation or non-complying engines who may want to compete for a throphy.

It is true the Slant Six can be a killer along with the big early Chevy and GMC six's, but I didn't write the rules and those who have built cars understood the options (me included) when we started. It just isn't fair to those who have built or started builds under the current rules to start allowing newer Chevy six's to race for a "Title". Those who are building with what they have are welcomed at Eagle Field as there is plenty of room to race for fun! I don't think anyone was afraid of Thingy's 194, it's the oppurtunity others see to build a 250 or even a 292 HA/GR. Rocky

[Old6rodder]

Hey Rocky, want me to freshen up that target you hung on your back? ;)

Sorry dude, I know what you've put yourself in for (I've done the same elsewhere) and I certainly sympathize, but I just couldn't resist the kick line. :D
You know how I love a joke. :o

Dick, I'm sorry you've decided to take it that way. Of course you've already been, and know you always will be, welcome (and wanted) to race with all of us in all the other classes we run (ANRA, Antique Nat's, Dragfest, etc).

You also know it's only the HAMBie runs that we're discussing having go by literal HA/GR rules.

[Toymaker]

Hey Rocky, want me to freshen up that target you hung on your back? ;)

Sorry dude, I know what you've put yourself in for (I've done the same elsewhere) and I certainly sympathize, but I just couldn't resist the kick line. :D
You know how I love a joke. :o

Dick, I'm sorry you've decided to take it that way. Of course you've already been, and know you always will be, welcome (and wanted) to race with all of us in all the other classes we run (ANRA, Antique Nat's, Dragfest, etc).

You also know it's only the HAMBie runs that we're discussing having go by literal HA/GR rules.
No problem Dick, it was a tuff decision but I needed to speak up for those around here who are building HA/GR's to run heads up by the rules for Eagle Field. I only spoke for Eagle Field events but it sure got quiet. You know if enough "outlaw" HA/GR's came to Eagle Field we could have an Open class. O well just call me "Dick",:D Rocky

[64 DODGE 440]

No problem Dick, it was a tuff decision but I needed to speak up for those around here who are building HA/GR's to run heads up by the rules for Eagle Field. I only spoke for Eagle Field events but it sure got quiet. You know if enough "outlaw" HA/GR's came to Eagle Field we could have an Open class. O well just call me "Dick",:D Rocky

"Open Class"? How about HA/GRCC? Hambster Competition Coupe.......could start a whole new trend.:p Anyone got a Topolino or Bantam to donate to the cause? I'm digging it!:D

[uncle Dave]

Can someone please post a copy of the Hot Rod rules for Eagle Field??
ROCKY??
u.d........

[97]

Can someone please post a copy of the Hot Rod rules for Eagle Field??
ROCKY??
u.d........
Pretty simple

Eagle Field= pre 65 event, Hot Rod class at Eagle Field = Pre 48

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=413967

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=347626

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=345745&highlight=eagle+field

If you were looking for HA/GR rules they are at the top of this thread.

[64 DODGE 440]

Pretty simple

Eagle Field= pre 65 event, Hot Rod class at Eagle Field = Pre 48

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=413967

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=347626

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=345745&highlight=eagle+field

If you were looking for HA/GR rules they are at the top of this thread.

Amazing how someone half way around the world can find things so fast.:p

Hope the earthquake didn't shake you too bad. Our thoughts and prayers go out to all our Kiwi brothers and sisters.

[Skotz]

Rule #3. All cars must be equipped with a minimum four point roll bar of 1 3/4″ tubing with a main hoop higher than the driver’s head and 2 support bars down to the frame towards the firewall. Tubing must meet NHRA minimum wall thickness for application.

OK, I haven't seen it addressed,
Is 1 1/2" schedule 40 pipe/.145 wall/1.9"od.. been acceptable for roll cage material???

It is larger in diameter and thicker than what is in the NHRA rule book, but it is pipe vs tubing....thus less expensive and fits the dies that we have here at work for shaping it.

Getting started on a HA/GR project and am needing some clarification on the above material useage.

Thanks for your input

[bobw]

The NHRA rulebook specifies either Chrome Moly or Mild Steel. Nothing additional is stated for roll bar and roll cage material for cars slower than 10.00 seconds.
BTW the HA/GR roll bar rule will not meet NHRA requirements. The design and tube placement in the driver compartment is specified in the rule book and is very specific for open bodied cars.
I recently bent some 1 1/4" pipe in a 1 5/8" die, 5.5" radius and it cracked. Guessing a larger radius is needed.

[jcillch]

I AM GETTING PARTS TOGETHER FOR A HAMBCLASS RAIL. sorry for the caps lock... Question for you would be regarding my recently aquired engine. I found a 1961 through 1964 262 ford six cylinder from a truck. I cant verify exact age of the engine but I know it falls into the mentioned three year period. will this engine allow me to run in this class? I know it is not a "falcon" based motor but I think it should fit the year gap allowed... Please give me your input. Joel

[Old6rodder]

Howdy,

If the series engine was manufactured for and installed in a '61 model vehicle, you're good to go up until engineering improvements were added. This would apply to the block and head seperately.

As an example I'm familiar with; the slant 6 was unchanged (to any real performance extent) in the block until they went to a cast crank, and in the head until they deleted the drool (spark plug) tubes.

[ScottV]

*******Caution: Opinion Ahead*******

If I may I would like to bring up a point to ponder. I know there has been a debate over the 3rd generation Chevy 6 i.e. the 194 because of its availablity in the Chevy II early in the model year 1962. I have been considering a 153 four cylinder based engine in my recently aquired HA/GR and have looked at the rules several times and the conclusion that I have come to, based on the way the rule is "written" is that it would be OK. That is because the rules say:

12. Flathead v8 or inlines, pre-1962 inline engines with stock cylinder blocks only. No exotic aftermarket inline six overhead valve heads (Wayne). No OHV V8s or V6s. (If you are looking to run a straight 6 with exotic heads or a flathead with an o/h conversion, contact Ryan (http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/../?page_id=348) for some good news.)

So you could buy a Chevy II in September 1961 with the 153 meaning the engine would have been built somewhere around late June early July of 1961 making it a pre-1962 inline engine. My point is that the way the rule is written, it does not say "model year".

As for this being "in the Spirit" or not, let me remind everyone that back in the day racers of all types spent hours trying to creativly interpet the rules to gain what little advantage they could, so I say this is VERY in the Spirit.

Now mind you this is as much my OPINION as it is anything else, besides who's afraid of a little four cylinder anyhow ???!!!???:p


**********************

[bobw]

If you're going to run with the California HA/GR boys the engine (design) needs to be found in a 1961 or older model vehicle.

If you intend to run the HAMB drags at MoKan (once a year) as a HA/GR car, see the statement above.

If you have an engine that is a design newer than 1961, such as your ChevyII 4 banger, I believe you can run at the HAMB drags but not compete as a HA/GR car.

If 99% of your racing is going to be Test and Tune or local bracket racing, use whatever engine you desire,

That's my interpretation.

[hotrodbob]

All this crap about being careful to get the right year engine is WHY bracket racing started. NO PROTESTS.. The cost of protests and the nit picky rules issues. Yep, you have brought back the old days...arguments and all...and all for one damn race?

[Old6rodder]

Howdy Scott,

The way it wound up accepted out here is that the rule implies, and is understood to mean, "model" year. Thus a '62 model available in late '61 doesn't make it, it's officially a '62.

The very argument you've made is what was made for the first generation 194. The reasons it was voted down were; the difficulty in policing it to strictly first generation, and the ease of "cheating" it.

It was first proclaimed only at Eagle Field, by that promoter. It has since come to be generally accepted out here. Elsewhere there's been NO "official" ruling, not by any vote, proclamation or agreement. I believe however, that it may eventually come to be generally accepted across the board.

Unfortunately, one of our guys built one prior to that decision, and though being personally invited, and more than welcomed to run, wasn't interested. The lone drawback? Not being allowed to claim the HA/GR "trophy" we have.

Rules parsing is indeed an historic and honorable drag racing rite. But getting shafted by drag racing's rules refinements is also an old and well known result of sailing too close to the boundaries, just ask anyone who built a three wheeled rail, an open funny car, a reaction engined car, etc, etc. It's a game within the game.

Myself, I'd go ahead and build it, the only thing you'll be out should you make it to our neck of the woods is our "HAMBie". You'll be welcomed, befriended, and raced, in damn short order just the same. Even faster if you're buying the hot dogs. :D

[ScottV]

I found out recently that "meant" and "implied" are seen differently when it comes to rules (law). I wanted to do something different and have fun, but also be in "the spirit" and be legal. It is probably just because everone is afraid of being beat by a four cylinder !!! :p

Even faster if you're buying the hot dogs. :D

As long as they're ...

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h268/VETRAN_883/Ballparklogo.jpg

[Old6rodder]

I found out recently that "meant" and "implied" are seen differently when it comes to rules (law). I wanted to do something different and have fun, but also be in "the spirit" and be legal. It is probably just because everone is afraid of being beat by a four cylinder !!! :p



As long as they're ...

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h268/VETRAN_883/Ballparklogo.jpg

But of course my good Sir, can you just imagine the incredible shame of falling prey to two thirds (or worse still, half) the engine they're running? :D

Oh wait, that's right, my 225's been beaten by a mere 170 on occasion. Where shall I hide my head. :o

[nexxussian]

Oh wait, that's right, my 225's been beaten by a mere 170 on occasion. Where shall I hide my head. :o

Mine hides pretty good in my helmet. :D

Glad to hear there is some decision in progress on this, sort of. :D

If I ever get even somewhat caught up with all this and my recent career change, I'ma gunna hafta build me ona dese. :)

[Old6rodder]

Mine hides pretty good in my helmet. :D

Great idea, perhaps if I get a really dark face shield as well ........... :cool:

[64 DODGE 440]

Great idea, perhaps if I get a really dark face shield as well ........... :cool:

Just get a ski mask.:p

[spanners]

Over here in Oz-bloody-stralia where it's always sunny except when it's raining, some of are using the locally produced 132.5 and 138 cu.inch inline sixes. They were good for about 60b.h.p. on a good day so you could imagine what a sludge-atratic-transmagression would drain out of it.
Power to the cogbox I say.
Wish I had the money to bring it over there to race it when finished.

[64 DODGE 440]

Over here in Oz-bloody-stralia where it's always sunny except when it's raining, some of are using the locally produced 132.5 and 138 cu.inch inline sixes. They were good for about 60b.h.p. on a good day so you could imagine what a sludge-atratic-transmagression would drain out of it.
Power to the cogbox I say.
Wish I had the money to bring it over there to race it when finished.

We would love to have you at one of our meets over here. :D

[Twisted6]

Mummer so much for my tripled carbed 250 lol guess i'd just have to find a 194 for it. lol

[64 DODGE 440]

Mummer so much for my tripled carbed 250 lol guess i'd just have to find a 194 for it. lol

As the 194 issue has been flogged here previously...save yourself the problems and find a 235.

Dick, at the risk of offending a friend I have to say I disagree with your reasoning on the issue of 1962 and later Chevy engines in HA/Gr. We have a reasonable engine rule for the class, "pre 1962" not to be confused with engineering or R&D dates that will be completely arbritrary. Simple and easy to understand, pre 1962.
As for your 3 opinions supporting the inclusion of these late (modern) engines I would offer the following:
#1 Displacement is not the issue (try policing that) vintage is.
#2 Old style techniques that we should promote will fall by the wayside in favor of . parts inter-changeability with modern high performance Chevy engines.
#3 There is no shortage of pre 1962 GM I-6 engines. if we keep it simple they will come.
Joe

Gentlemen...(hope I haven't offended anyone with that opener).

While I feel in part that Old6rodder has a valid point in accepting the 194" Chevy 6 as "Being manufactured before '62 as the model year is released in '61"...

My take on this whole basket of snakes reads like this.

Rule #12 states, "Flathead v8 or inlines, pre-1962 inline engines with stock cylinder blocks only. No exotic aftermarket inline six overhead valve heads (Wayne). No OHV V8s or V6s.

I haven't seen anyone so far who has said they found a 239" Ford Y-Block and even if it is an overhead valve V8, why can't they run it as it was manufactured in 1954, after all it's "only a 239". Folks argue that it's hard to find parts for the older engines...that speed parts aren't available, etc. etc. etc. and on and on. All this said, it just reinforces the concept...if it was easy, everyone would be doing it and there would be people complaining that it wasn't fun because there were so many cars out there they couldn't have much time racing. There are many cars out there with "owner built" intakes and exhausts have been built in the garage since the beginnings.

This class isn't all about the competition (sure, we all want to be the fastest and quickest, but realistically there are lots of easier classes to build for that fill that need). The class is designed to offer a "time machine", a chance to build and race in the 1950s and early 1960s and experience what it was like in the beginnings of our sport before corporate sponsorship and big rig transports were needed to run a car that might only make one pass before getting put on the trailer for the weekend.

There are many ways to build a drag race car, have fun with it and enjoy the sport. Our class is one of few of those ways to "return to the roots" and though it may not be perfect, stretching the rules won't help achieve perfection. Adding more rules such as limiting modifications on later model engines or placing limits on displacement will just take away from the innovative concepts and cause more pissed off people.

The current rules leave plenty of room for pushing the limits and innovation and don't need to be changed. Build to your ideas within those parameters and have fun. If you would like to build outside those limits, there are classes you can run, but accept the fact that you will have "left the room" so to speak.

A bit long winded, I'm afraid, but my two cents on the debate.

[Twisted6]

Not a big deal I was only pulling on the chain.I understand the rules on it.194s are still fairly easy to get ones hands on.And i can work over the stock 194 head just as well as any other. thank you.

[derbydad276]

*I was interested in doing this untill I read all the (rules)
nice idea if you still have these engines in your area
these are few and far between
and expensive in the detroit area

I'm thinkin build what i want and have fun with it

250 chevy and slip and slide hard to break!!
8.8 axel from a what ever
and go out and have fun with it

[hotrodbob]

Some how the thought process here is to set an arbitrary date and then limit it to what they want. Engine family and logic in transmission is not an option. I sold my car partly because of that. I was going to use a Ford 200 and Ford-o-matic. The trans was old enough, but not a weak stick and the 200 was a couple of years to new though from the same engine family as the 144-170. Rules is Rules...Build what ya want and enjoy.