Hey! Randman I certainaly agree with you about the trans brake. as far as the trans we had a little trouble keeping the 3 speed together. sure made the automatic trans tempting. we will do what ever the rules say to do. Im in for getting together with all the guys to talk about a better guideline.
Naturally. And I do too... I mean, a thread with ideas going would be great. So, who is going to start one? If I paste the rules I came up with in a thread and titled it "HAMBsters rules thread" would that be ok with you Roothogg... Jim? Everyone else? Or does somone else want to? Sam.
We are talking about building one also but concedrned about the big money builds (ie glides and the like ?? put me on the list and Ill add one to the gasser group , Man I had a great time at the drags even for an old guy .......thanks
So I have a question for those that are interested... and those that participated. First off... what was the problem with the automatic tranny in the one car? Was it because it had a trans brake? Was it because it had a high stall converter? There's not much difference in performance between his set up and a good manual tranny set up. So the guy won... and as someone pointed out "that's not the point"... So if someone builds a car and blows everyone's doors off... is the guy going to be an outcast? I guess my reason for asking this is... what are peoples' reasons for having rules? To slow the cars down? To make them competitive? To make them safe? To keep costs down? All four? More? Now... was this guy's car FAST because it had the automatic tranny? Or was it FAST because it had a motor that was newer than the "pre 62" motor limit that I laid out in the original rules? Also, what are your reasons for building a car? My original post outlined my thoughts on why a guy would want to build one of these things. First, it's CHEAP. Second, it's a male bonding thing. Third, it's a easy entry level way to get into drag racing. And lastly, it's a way to get people off their computers and out into the garage... to gain the skills they need to build bigger and better things. Any ideas? Sam.
Not that I have anything against these motors, but I think they have to potential for just too much power for the cars. I even think inline overhead valve engines are a bit much, but since it has already started... The Vintage Timing Association segment of the Denver Flatheaders cuts off inline engines at '53 or '54 (sorry, I can't remember well enough). I'm not that familiar with inlines, but I think we need to really watch the power in a light fun car. We definitely need to avoid 12 ports and such. I don't have a problem with automatics or even high stall converters. It's easier to monitor power adders on the outside of an engine, like carbs, heads, and so on, rather than cams and other internal stuff. I kind of liked the old AHRA stock rules - any stock heads, any stock intake manifold, but I would go farther and allow about any internal modification on a flathead. Maybe displacement could be limited to something like 276ci.
I have asked Ryan to initiate the rules thread. My vision of the rules is to keep the class cheap so any couple of guys can have the same opportunity to have as much fun building and driving one of these like we did. We also have to keep them slow enough that they won't be banned due to liability. I think SamIYam's guidelines are basically just right but maybe just a couple of additions to keep it cheap and PRIMATIVE! I don't want it to stray from the original idea born right here on the HAMB. It is perfect. Brad
If you have to ask "what's the big deal about a trans brake", you just don't get it. Anybody cam let go of a button and hold on. His reaction times were around .105. He ET'ed great but didn't have an outstanding mph. Like Brad said the other day: "mph is a measure of hoursepower and ET shows how you are putting that to the ground". He cut three seconds off his time in Tulsa. Somthings going on there. Letting out the clutch and giving it the gas at the right time is more challenging and it's the way it would have been done in the early 50's. Keep it simple, safe and cheap.
I don't have a dog in this fight.(YET) But I would have to say that automatics (with T-brakes) should be out. I mean hell even an iron case push button t-flite has a tremendous advantage over a stick,much less a glide with a brake. A stick is definitely more of a challenge at the starting line and down track. Besides I think a stick is easier to come by and cheaper,granted it might be a bit more of a challenge for the engineering impaired,but more in the spirit of the thing anyway. Just my.02,T.OUT
I'm not gonna build one but I think there are tons of guys out there that have a lot of experience but may be too timid to post on the main board or would be intimidated by other frequent hambers. I have talked to a lot of guys out there with interest in this type of thing and a lot of them have far more experience than guys give them credit for. I would come up with a think tank thread and let it ride for a while. Then let the powers that be make the rules and hash it out, whoever that may be.
The HORNETS started out to build a Hudson 8 but quickly changed to a Chevy 6 when it was donated to us from a 1962 BelAir. We looked for a way to hook up a 4 speed but the cost of a good trans was prohibitive. We chose a powerglide because they are cheap and one of our members donated one with a converter. The main reason we didn't build a flathead v-8 is because I had already built one and ran it 2 years back at the nostalgia drags. it was a pig. 16.5 ET with a C-4 trans. I drove Fords with the stock drivetrains in high school and knew they wouldn't hold up to a lot of abuse. Have you priced an old Ford 3 speed? Way more than any powerglide!! The engine we ran at the nostalgia drags in Tulsa in July was only turning 3,600 rpm and had no compression. We found a 1958 truck engine (261 ci) at a salvage and rebuilt it. To date we have $2,800 cash in our car and with 16 members all sharing in the expense we think we have done a great job of "keeping it cheap". If you guys want to build a HAMBSTER, start a group and start collecting parts. We started in May and finished the car in July. If Bob Hindman and I had tried to build this car by ourselves it never would have happened. Too much money for one race a year. But we recruited a group of guys who all wanted to get involved and managed to pull it off. We had a great time at the race and will definitely be there again next year. I'm sure there will be a new car there that is even faster but who cares, we were the first NATIONAL CHAMPIONS in the HAMBster class and it felt great. Nailhead Mike for ( THE HORNETS )
Are you implying that I said that? I was asking "what was the problem" with the automatic in the one car that won. Was it because it was an automatic? Or because it had a tranny brake? Or because it had a stall converter? If it is because it has a converter and a brake, that's fine... I think a rule against brakes and converters is fine, it keeps costs down. But A rule against automatics is something we may want to discuss. They are CHEAP, they are SAFE and they work WELL. And a stock one doesn't have much of an advantage over a manual tranny. Remember the old "slush and slide powerglides"? I just as soon put a manual in mine... What about direct drives with clutches? Is there a problem with that set up? If you outlaw direct drive set ups... who's to say a guy won't go up there and leave in third? Just a few things to think about... and I pose these questions to get people thinking... not because I have a car in the works. Sam.
I'm sitting here with a 302 gmc about half done. Look's like I'd better kick it up into neutral until all of the sideliners get through yelling. I too had planned on using a powerglide. Mike is sure right about the extra help making things go a lot better. The Hornets had a great looking car and looked like they were having a great time. Congratulations to them. A 261 looked like it fit the rules to me. Pete
I also have to agree about leaving the autos in this class. I'm thinking of building one of these and that is one of the reasons I went to the drags this year(among others). I took pictures of all three of the hambsters to get an idea of what these guys did and to see how they did it. I think it is very possible to build one of these on the cheap and safe side. My opinion would be to let any pre 64 model engine(6 cyl) compete in this class. The idea of running only 6" wide bias ply tires to limit the speeds is great. Build one with a lot of horsepower and you will have trouble leaving the line, auto or stick. It would be hard to limit the cubuic inches unless someone wants to spend the money and start checking each and every one. It seems to me that the three that were there, put on one hell of a show, were very safe and seemed to have a good time. I know there was some friendly rivalry going on between the three and that is the way it should be. After all, this is the way drag racing got started, "my car is faster than your car", no one said how much faster, did they??
I don't think the auto trannys will be ruled out, more likey just high stall converters and tranny brakes. After all, glides were available in the 50s. Personally I like the sticks. I am holding off on some mods I was gonna do to our motor until some firm rules are set. Brad
For sure there are many things to be kicked around and discussed before hard-and-fast rules can be drawn for all aspects of car construction. For example, I question the engine cutoff year of 1962 which provides a definite edge to Chevy sixes which had evolved into rather modern engines by that point. Why not set the cutoff year at 1953 (the end of flathead Ford/Mercury production) and let the Bowtie in-liners see what magic they can work in splash-and-pray lubrication systems? Of course, the flatheads would still have to deal with full-pressure 270/302 Jimmys which were giving them fits in the wayback. I think restrictions on fundamental internal engine modifications (camshaft, intake and exhaust tracts, bottom-end work, etc.) fly in the face of what drag racing has been all about throughout its history -- other than in stock classes. Drag motor building has always been about tricks -- finding and doing clever things to gain an edge . . . a horsepower or three here and there, improved reliability. . . and the folks who worked the hardest at it were invariably the ones who were successful. But, were they really having fun? You can bet your ass they were, and still are! Beyond all the fun and fellowship of building and racing a drag car there's another compelling reason to get involved -- learning. I've yet to meet a successful racer who is not a perpetutal, eager student. The more one has to learn, the more fun one has, and there's no on having any more fun than I am! The magic involved in drag racing at the level we're talking about with HAMBsters is more labor- rather than dollar-intensive. It's also the type of work that is easily passed along through show-and-tell, just as it has always been. There's enough talent on this forum to develop a comprehensive, focused hot-rod-building curriculum around the HAMBster concept. So, these are just a few of my thoughts about the program. I wish I'd been able to get to MOKAN this year, but family commitments took precedence. The many pictures and narratives tell me that the pioneer HAMBsters are well on their way to being a force to be reckoned with! You're doing a great job of it already, and it's time for others to get involved. Congratulations, guys! Mike
Mike....the original rule, as written, said "pre-'62" which means that the Chevys still had to run the old 235. '62 engines wouldn't be legal with that spec. I'd be O.K. with a transmission rule that was standard shift only. Too hard to police when you get into automatics. Besides, there were few, if any, automatics being used back in the day that these cars represent.
I love the idea of this type of racing, C9 what do you think of Chevy 216 with a full pressure conversion on the bottom end as that was around way back when as a tuners "trick"? I 'd love to get a stock 216 torque tube 3 speed set up digger going!
It seems to me some people are getting a little carried away with the " letter of the rule" instead of " the spirit of the event". If one or more teams get too serious, and start pushing the "rules", put them back to the end of the line... Otherwise, before you know it you'd have a complete Tech team checking these things for all the hidden tweeks. And those guys could be having fun with their own cars instead. Just my take on all of this...
Sorry for mis-remembering the year cutoff, but the point remains that the in-liner technology is a generation "newer" than it was when flatheads were last produced. I'd like to go on record saying I don't advocate that the Chevy in-liners be deprived of their out-of-period advantage. The flatheads are going to be kicking their butts soon enough!
How about elaborating with some specifics on what's bothering you about the comments on this thread thus far, things like "hidden tweeks?" I don't see anyone "getting a little carried away" with rules rather than the spirit of the event. I see some pretty good thoughts being tossed out so far, and it's probably not long before some of the core issues will begin to take shape. I think there's some good energy being put forth already, and this certainly can't hurt the spirit of the event. Just my take on all of this . . . Mike
Allright...I'll elaborate. From what I remember, this is supposed to be a Fun Lowbuck class. I dont recall ever seeing that work longer than maybe a couple of seasons ( admittedly in a different type of Racing...) It runs away from the original concept ( goodbye Low buck ), or it becomes heavily Regulated ( goodbye Fun.) And I dont think anyone should have to waste their time Keeping wannabe Smokey Unicks in line. That time is better spent helping other guys that are trying to get their Cars on the Track. So what I propose is giving everybody plenty of rope, and some of them will use that to hang themselfs, by outsmarting themselfs...
The thing I see is that the standard tranny would keep it cheaper I think.... I see both sides, if you have too many rules and it becomes too competitive, no much fun anymore. But, no one wnats to race a guy with a blown 302 GMC and a glide with a brake. That would be a little disheartening for the low buck guys. Gotta keep it cheap. Now with that said, I am not building one , so you can strike all of this if you want.
The Jalopy Journal
