Dr. Mayfield; I don't speak for the SCTA and anything I say is only my
thoughts. In 1978 I started running a twin turbo 270 GMC in a 32 five
window. At that time, as now, superchargers were defined as either engine or
exhaust driven. Some established competiters in the altered class felt this
was unfair and the no turbos in X and XX in a vintage body rule came to be.
Then Ron Main came out with electronic injectors and data recording
equipment in a roadster simular cries went up in the roadster classes. And
it came to pass that these things were called modern technology and cast out
of the X and XX roadster classes. The welding and reverse port cam had been
seen off and on for years just not as well done, and so was not considered
unfair. Rich Fox
-----Original Message-----
From: DrMayf <drmayf@teknett.com>
To: Richard Fox <v4gr@rcn.com>; land-speed@autox.team.net
<land-speed@autox.team.net>
Date: Monday, August 20, 2001 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: An Odd Question...
>Sure. Here is where I am coming from.
>
>Section II-1
>right after the engine displacement table
>
>" for reasons of ECONOMY and HISTORICAL authenticity, vintage engine
>modifications are restricted to older technology levels.....so far as
>practical."
>
>Now it seems to me that hogging out the blocks' valley and rewelding in a
>new and very sophisticated valley that lets the exhaust exit through the
top
>of the block, use of fuel injection and big honking new blower is bending
>the rules a bit to much. Even Jacls use of turbos' seem to me to be a
>stretch. And according to the program guide, both were in the same XF/BGS.
>Now none of this affects me in any way possible and I really do not care
one
>way or another. It was just a curious question to me.
>
>mayf, the red necked, ignorant desert rat in Pahrump.
>-----
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe land-speed
///
///
|