Luv your images Tommy -- there seems to be no limit to your inventory AND that is most-likely the reason that this thread still remains active. To augment your pictures, it would be nice to hear a bit more about the cars/drivers depicted and/or to have some more information -- how bout it guys? And here's a thought -- some (Jr, Stock) 'tech talk' would be nice. Here's an example ... WHO was the first builder/'tuner'/racer to utilize this game-changing (1930s) feature into Junior Stockers? And then there's the Hoffman-conceived 'gas-ported' Dykes and the high-on-the-piston .043 top ring and the Teflon skirt buttons and the tapered wrist pins and the ... You get the idea.
56 Pontiac, I have a tech question. I was reading through the stock rules in a 68 and 69 NHRA rule book and under the exhaust rules it states "Headers accepted, but exhaust must be routed thruogh mufflers and tailpipes" "Open bypasses may be used, but must be installed in front of the muffler and direst exhaust away from the strip, tires and car body." "Outlets for open exhaust cannot excee 3.5" in diameter" I take this to mean that the exhaust pipe had to connect to the side of the header collector? Did the collector have to be opened to the pipe or could it be blocked off?
Thats what I figured but the question still stands. Did the collector have to be open to the exhaust head pipe or could it have been blocked off?
Yes, an 'opening' was required in the collector, so that 'theoretically,' if the header outlet was capped, exhaust gasses could in-fact exit through the mufflers and tailpipes. Seldom was this 'hole' in the side of the collector very large, but only big enough (1' or less!) to allow exhaust gasses to flow out the (minimalistic) 'street' portion of the exhaust system. A larger hole would clearly interfere with the 'smooth-flowing' intent of the collector This bothersome and useless 'street' exhaust-system rule was dropped by 1970, although I thought it was a bit earlier.
That image was taken in 1967 ... see http://dragnut.smugmug.com/George-C...xMwf/259161332_QCxjtq9#!i=259161332&k=QCxjtq9
Didn't Colesy post a copy of the Car Craft article "How to build the UltimateJr Stocker" earlier in this thread? I've been going through the pages for the last hour with no success. Anyone know the page number off hand??
Try some of his "Car Craft" posts listed HERE ---> http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...o=relevance&c[user][0]=28303&c[thread]=201085
I looked last night and found this referance to Colsey's post but could'nt find them either. I also ran across a couple of other posts by him that seemed to have been lost in the last transition or deleted. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/nhra-junior-stock.201085/page-178#post-4997530
I'm in the process of sorting all my magizines right now, I'll see if I can find them and get them scanned in the next couple of days.
Thanks Junior Stock. I'm missing the Sept 68 issue which covers the engine build. I hope to pick up that issue at a swap meet but for now that would be great if you can scan it! Thanks again!
LOTS of posts and images have been deleted by both the authors and the monitors -- for various reasons. But some have survived. Here's a great picture (watta way to travel!) from one of Bill's early posts.
That stands to reason that it was probably deleted. I'm 99% sure Colesy scanned and posted the article at one time on this thread but its gone now.
Another tech question. When it came to grinding a cam did the NHRA put out tech bulletins reguarding allowable cam specs for grinding and/or regrinding your specific cam or did you go by the factory specs?
If by 1967 (or certainly 1968) you were not running a cam made by Lunati, Sig Erson, Cam Dynamics. and a few other cam grinders/manufactures, you were 'out of the running,' These 'works of great engineering' met (NHRA checked) factory specs as far as lift, duration and overlap were concerned, but the not-measured (ever-so-important) *RATE OF LIFT (the 'ramp') configuration completely changed the game. Alas, when I built my car in '67, I (foolishly) opted for a stone-stock Crane "blueprinted" unit -- well made, but non-trick and it added nothing to the Pontiac's performance. The concept was pure genius and the right cam was a significant horsepower gain. And when measured, the total LIFT and DURATION checked out 'spot on,' but the RATE of lift (not to be confused with duration) was much faster. This was driven by a more 'generous' curve on the side or 'ramp' of the lobe.
I can never get enough of my daily fix of Junior Stockers. Back in the day they filled the pit area and put on one hell of a show. I guess I am showing my age but who cares!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Jalopy Journal
