Old 6 took his car to Bakersfield this past weekend, Only to be told that he couldn't run.. Needed 2 hoops on the roll cage, And rear suspension. What is this all about?? I went over to talk with PaPa Joe the tech Guru.. He said "All cages must have the 2 hoop configuration..If that is the case, I might as well scrap my chassis and start all over again. I know you guys go by some rule that states you only need ONE hoop. I told PaPa Joe that you guys ran all over the states with no problem. His comment, "Good" Here you need 2 hoops. I did notice that the Downunder bunch have 2 hoops..Can any of you guys give us Californians a rule or sumpin, to show these knuckleheads out here.. Thanks.. Thingy M aka Dick Moseley..
I didn't think that the 2nd hoop on the cage was required unless the car was going to run less than 12.00 seconds. As long as he's running slower than 11.99, then the 2nd hoop shouldn't be required according to our friend who does tech with the NHRA... Sounds like they are playing by their own rules???
What Lindross said. I know the Ramrods got their chassis inspected and tagged with one hoop. I hope you don't have to add a second hoop. I know why some guys do but to me it transforms these cars from the "bug" style to an altered. Try another track or call your local NHRA inspector and get a tag and letter of proof. Maybe that will be enough to let him run. Brad
Ditto what Lindcross said. Ironically, here in Oz we've been forced to have the two bars for our class, although, by our Aussie governing bodies own rule book says that up to the 12.00 sec 1/4 you only need the single hoop......their point being that that rule is for 'registered' (regular street driven) cars, and since these are purpose built race cars they automatically require the second hoop......we couldn't find that rule in the book, but, at the end of the day, that was a simple fix, we just added another hoop and now we're racing. Cheers, Drewfus
I missed the rear suspension part of your post. What the hell??????????? that makes no sense whatsoever. Brad
I've run a front engine, and a rear engine dragster, and neither required rear suspension. The front engine car ran 9.00's and the rear engine car ran high 7's. If NHRA recently changed that requirement at least 50 percent of the dragsters and roadsters won't pass tech. Sounds like the tech guy just didn't like the look of the car and passed judgement. I agree that the second loop changes the look of the car but I think from a safety standpoint it's a good idea. Same goes for bias vs radial speed rated tires. ( Forget I said that). Ron
After some asking , I found out that according to NHRA, "If it is LIKE a street driven machine. (insert suspension). Then you only need a single hoop. If it is a "Dragster like car, then you have to have the 2 hoop cage. Drewfus said "They just added another bar" and it was fixed.. The way Old6s car is built he would never be able to get in or out of it with the second bar. And mine is just built all wrong to add the second bar. So maybe we might have to go to war with the NHRA to get this fixed...
BTW The ANRA people that were putting on the race wanted to see it go down the track and say over the loud speaker, Now this is the way it use to be.. We will try again...
Photos of the car and cage on Old6rodders Barn Job build thread. As for the rear suspension........What kind of bullshit is that when they have cars running without front suspension?
I guess the only reasonable answer is for you guys to move out here to the midwest I had a phone conversation with a Californian rules comitee member of the SCTA. He said "you guys on the East Coast" (I'm in Arkansas) he mentioned several times how cars like mine may have been built in the EAST but their class was designed for "higher budgeted" vintage cars that raced on the west coast. According to their own rule book my car fits in their class in every way but their seems to be unwritten rules to make sure only the California "quality" cars can race their class at Bonneville. Now I have to wait while he presents pics of the car to the comitee so they can vote my fate. Makes me wanna go to Maxton or the Texas mile to set a record instead of the salt. Sorry for the rant......... not trying to steal your thread.. Brad
Must admit we do have some problems in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia. Between the Hollywood types and the politicians it can make one want to move, but it would be better if we could make some change towards realism. As one of the ones in the start of a build, it would be nice to be able to build in the spirit of the Bug, and not have to worry about the "tech nazis". Not wanting to build an unsafe car, just wanting some realistic guidelines to build to. After all, these cars aren't AA Fuelers. Hell they had a '62 Vette running up at Famoso Saturday night, running HA/GR speeds without any roll bar at all, and I doubt that the fiberglass top would offer as much protection as a single hoop bar.
For those of us who are in the building stage maybe we need a little clarification. If we put a second hoop on does that preclude us from running the HA/GR class? I agree that adding the second hoop makes the car loose it's old time flavor. I am sure that in the next season we will see lots of cars knocking at the door of 11.99. Next will be throttle stops I don't know the answer but I can only afford to do this once. I would like to travel around and race at different tracks but I want to be able to run. I lived in California from 1955 through 1965 and they did suffer from snottyness. Ask Don Garlits how he was treated at the first Smokers meet. Anyway it seems that it hasn't improved. How far apart does the NHRA rules say the hoops must be seperated? We need to get the rules straight because just like the auto trans thing we all need to be on the same page with this or it will die because of infighting. We need to compromise on those things that will make it easy to comply with and stand together on those things that are worth fighting for. A united front is always better. Roy
That's my point, Roy. We need some hard rules to build to so we don't end up dealing with the whims of whatever tech inspector we get at the track. If we have that as a base line, we can feel that we can build and not worry if we will be able to run when we go to a meet. A lot of any build is such that it can't be easily modified after it is done, as in Old6rodder's case, with the trans coupled direct to the rear axle, how can he add rear suspension? And with other classes running rigid axles at both ends, why do we need to?
They didn't say he HAD to have suspension. They said that IF it had suspension, It would have put the car in a different catagory and the one hoop would have been legal.WHAT??? Any time you have a solid mount rear. It puts it in the Dragster catagory.Then you need the two hoop. BTW The front hoop has to be 3" in front of your helmet..I have to get my Altered recerted soon. I'm gonna nail this guy down for some answers on our cars..
Did he say how far apart they had to be? I think you could add another right in front of the main hoop.
I thought we had this completely nailed down when the Ramrods got their car cert tagged to 11.99 with one hoop. Its the conflicting tech inspection in CA that's giving us the problem. The HA/GR cars with one hoop have run at Indy for God's sake!!!! This is the first I've heard of anyone giving any safety grief except when Tulsa track told me I had to wear gloves. Having 2 hoops won't keep a car from being in the HA/GR class as far as my vote is concerned and I don't think any of the other teams will care either. Its just a shame.......... Brad
Randy & Brad...There isn't any certain distance between the tubes, But it has to be 3" from the front of the tube to your helmet.. Hell I didn't want to build another "Race Car" I just wanted something for me to strap my butt in and have some fun. Another thing that was mentioned was how it was welded. Mig M/S and Tig C/M no arc welding..Hell a few yrs back there was no tig & mig..But if this double hoop has to be, then I have 2 chassis to scrap..
I feel for the guys who already have a chassis built or started. I don't know who to contact other than Ryan who I hope he chimes in here soon. I think that these cars are hitting the tracks and they aren't ready for nostalgia classes. NHRA is in this to make money and they will ease up if they think a buck can be made. Of course the insurance companies may have something to say. Although years ago I had a track operator tell me the insurance companies didn't give a hoot about the racers just didn't want any spectators hurt. If the tracks are going to make these cars conform to todays dragster classes then we are SOL. I want to have some fun without maxing out 3 credit cards to do it. I went to MO-Kan over the weekend and there were 7 HA/GR rails there and it was fantastic. Luck was what made the eventual winner. The faster cars red lighted. We had one wreck but no one was hurt. I took pictures and measurements so I think I can build one but I guess I can't use my wire welder. Oh well I'm going to sit on the sidelines until this is sorted out.
Do you guys having all the trouble with NHRA, have any other tracks that you can run at? I have run mine at several NHRA tracks and several outlaw tracks and have had no problems passing "tech". All of the tracks I have run at, looked at the car and wanted to know how fast it ran. I was one of the HA/GRs at Mokan, and having a second bar will not make the car any safer as far as I am concerned. After the wreck that happened at Mokan, does anyone think you can flip one of these cars over? If one could flip, I think this would have been the time it would have.
You sure can use your wire feed machine (mig) thats what they want you to use.. I just talked with Butch from ANRA and he wants this thing settled once and for all. He said he would love to have the HAMB cars run at one of his events. But wants us to have all the I's dotted and the Ts crossed so there wouldn't be another mess like this. Which I can't blame him. I think if all of us out here get to the right person, I think we can get it straightened out...
Gentlemen, I'd like to address the concept in motion here. At this point it looks this way to me; We're building a style of car that modern sanctioning bodies have no classification for. That's due to the simple fact that these cars haven't been around for longer than those sanctioning bodies have been. Thus, they are (naturally enough) trying to cram'em into an existing frame of reference, and the classification they're using (at least initially) is a poor fit to say the least. As "open body, dedicated racing" cars the only classes and rules structures they have are in effect for far faster, far more powerful, much narrower and seriously more dangerous cars. The very fact that they're setting us those standards rather than more applicable ones of other existing classes could suggest that other issues may also be at work here but it's much too early to make that assumption (particularly remembering the classic definition of the word). Most of NHRAs present classings are e.t. related, and that means they're based primarily on speed and stability factors. As mentioned on another thread we noted cars in other classes running at and well above our best hoped for rates with no such considerations. The reference of the other segments of their own organization that have already adopted more viable rules has indeed fallen on deaf ears so far. This is pretty much where it's at for the moment out here. It doesn't mean it's over, only that it's begun. Our team had already made several decisions regarding this very situation should it arise, and regarding most of the ways it could fall as well. We intend to race and enjoy our car. That is why we built it ....... Where and when are simply unanswered questions for now. This discussion's about the class so I won't address the particulars of our car here, as that's more suited to the build thread on it. Butch, with his ANRA work, is trying to put on a certain show and would love to have us as a part of it. Whether we're something he can use is what is to be determined. It would be nice if we could. The NHRA is the sanctioning body whose insurance is in use at most of whats left of the drag strips out here, and thus the rules set we will meet most often. How they deal with the class will therefor have a large impact on what becomes of HA/GR here (and indeed, ANY efforts to reclaim the original attractions of drag racing). It won't deter any of us "die hards", but will indeed have a lot to do with how "public" it becomes. Judging by the attendance we see these days it would be worth it to both sides to be patient and see if this can lead somewhere. Modern drag racing doesn't seem to have as much flavor to the public as the older styles did, and simply dressing its electronic mania in older body repros doesn't seem to be doing much better. We've watched previous tries at "retro racing" succumb to modernizing 'til they were no longer even a reflection of their intent. Some so far as to be no more than mobile museum pieces even though they're literally new. We certainly don't want that for our class. And that is most likely a result of invoking the "promotion" of it for paying public consumption. That does tend to consume ... It may well be that we're to remain an underground (from the public at least) sport, relegated to those involved and a small base of afficianados. If so, then so be it. I for one, have no problem being out of the limelight (having had 61 years of practice so far). If we can be considered for something here and public it would be very nice, but our teams goals of Mokan and a couple other out-of-state meets next year are still in place. We're definitely low-buck, so it won't be much ....... but for us it will be something and it will be FUN ......or it just won't be. OK, piece said. Have at it .............
The standard approach for the Denver Flatheaders that run a number of dragsters with single hoop, three point cages, is to remind the tech people that they run under E.T. rules. Under E.T. rules a single roll bar is acceptable for cars running up to 11 seconds flat and in "dune-buggy-type cars" running 12.00 or slower. It never says what "dune-buggy-type cars" running quicker than 12.00 are required to have nor does it define what "dune-buggy-type cars" actually are. You may have some trouble if "roll bar" is strictly defined since NHRA only talks about rear bracing requirements. I once tried to get that cleared up, but only got an evasive response. So, it seems to me that unless you plan to run quicker than 12.00, you are pretty well covered even if you call yourself a "dune-buggy-type car." Actually, I think I'd call it an E.T. car and not remind them about dune buggies. According to the NHRA rulebook, a cage is not required until you have exceeded 10.99 or 135mph and there are no exceptions mentioned except that certain full bodied cars can go even quicker with just a roll bar rather than a cage. There is no construction mentioned in the NHRA rulebook that is something between a roll bar and a cage. You either need a cage or you don't. I'm thinking that you don't. By the way, I wouldn't rely on the single experience of one crash to suggest that an HA/GR can't go in its head. Believe me, any car can get upside down if conditions are right.
The Jalopy Journal
