I was going to ask Brad where we could buy one of them. I am thinking more like one of the 900+HP 67s Thats rated at 750.
New Buick heads up class (67 turbo, etc...)
- Thread starter KevinB
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
I was going to ask Brad where we could buy one of them. I am thinking more like one of the 900+HP 67s Thats rated at 750.
Maybe ill run my GN1 headed RPE engine for all its worth with the 66 on it. It needs a lot more turbo than the 66 but it would be fun to see if i can get 140mph out of it. Hydraulic cammed, 3600 lbs, 200 4R, and AC. 5 years ago i doubt anyone thought TSM and TSO would be as fast as they are today. But they are and still getting faster.
Who went 150mph? Don went 149+mph last i knew.Try 150 mph now!If you have seen the car that ran that speed you'd think it was a stock GN from the outside and other than the safety stuff it looks like a stocker on the inside. It's a beautifle stock appearing car. It looks like someone took a GN off the showroom floor, put a rollbar in it and put down a low 9 at 150mph.
silentbutdeadly
Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 469
Steve Hughes ran a 150mph last week or week before.
9.28@150.44 We are shooting for Reynolds but 50/50 as of today.
- Joined
- May 26, 2001
- Messages
- 2,884
The only reason I mentioned the balancer was, that it might be a way you help spot stroker motors if in fact the CI rules were changed. Not many out there with stock untouched motors run BHJ balancers, and yes, I do agree, most people who build a stock block 235CI with a steel crank will run the BHJ, and there are those who in the name of safety and NHRA rules, will also run the BHJ. I'm not knocking that, I agree with the safety first aspect of the rules. Some of the guys in my office have been drag racing since NHRA beginning and have first hand knowledge of when and why the rules were instituted by NHRA. One of them was even the reason behind one of the safety rules. Boy the stories I hear from the drag racers at work.
I just see this class as one that anyone can purchase a stock motor car, put a well thought out bolt on combination together, and be competitive in a heads up class. (low 11's - 10.20s) Keep it simple.
With regards to the turbo, I am in favor of the 67 turbo ruling. It is a very popular turbo, heck, I wouldn't have one on my stock motor'd car if I didn't believe in it. Even if Kip decided to change it to the new HP6262 billet wheel dual ball bearing from PTE, I would be ok with down sizing it. The issue with the 67 turbo is this, if you merely say 67mm turbo, then that does open up a can of whoop ass when you throw in the GTQ turbine wheel equipped 67. And that wheel has been displaced by the even more powerful HPQ turbine wheel.
If you compare a 6776H to a 6780H, there is a significant difference in hp between the two when you start cranking the boost. We saw this difference in the beginning when it was tested, on everything from 4G63 Mitsu motors, Buick motors, 2JZ Supra motors, and even 281 CI Mod Motor Mustangs. This turbo kicks butt, but as good as it was, when you put the HPQ turbine wheel which is out right now, together with the 67 wheel, the hp goes up even further. Exactly what this ultimate number is, no one has said. And those results have not been made public.
The way I see it, if you allow 67 GTQ (These are the 6780E, 6780S, 6780H, 6780HP, 6780RE, 6780RS, 6780RH, 6780RHP part numbers from Precision), then you must take away the other big dawg items to slow the cars down. Such as roller cams, aluminum heads and 3.5" downpipes. Otherwise, you're only 20-30hp shy of what a PT70 GTQ or PT71 GTQ can currently make. (7080H and 7180H current TSM legal turbos) If you make the rules to the 6776 model, it is a legitimate 780-790 flywheel hp capable turbo. You only need 570 rear wheel hp in a 3650# car to run 10.50's. So this turbo is fully capable of providing that power level + some. Which we have already seen.
And you guys are right, this race will be during the heat of the summer in Ohio. (July 31st - August 7th 2009) Cars without Alky injection, will have a very tough time running nines. Cars with Alky shouldn't be affected as much. So if you take alky out of the picture, it will definitely help level the playing field. The only problem is, there are a ton of cars out there with alky and it could possibly hurt car count not to allow it.
I spoke with Kip today and I completely agree with what he has said. (Good conversation btw,) This is the first year for this class. Let's try to get the car count up and give a lot of people a place to race in a heads up class with thier street car. Not building the class around one car, open up the rules a little and let's see what happens. If someone shows up and blasts everyone out of the water with mid 9 passes, then we all know something has to change. In theory, these combos should run 9's, but in reality, with a slick track and hot summer temps, it's not so easy.
Regarding the slicks vs drag radials issue, I too would like to see it as an all drag radial class, but what about all those guys out there that just bought new slicks and this is the only thing that would keep them from being legal? That might turn them off from running the class as well. At this power level, (under 700 rear wheel hp) a Mickey Thompson drag radial can get the job done just as well as a slick can with a properly sorted out suspension setup. Maybe even better with more MPH potential on the big end. I myself would have to sell my bias ply ET Streets and buy new drag radials, and I have first hand knowledge about Mickey Thompson and their supply issues with drag radials. And it's not going to get any better in 2009. A lot of you know how difficult it was to buy 275/60 and 275/50 Mickey Thompson drag radials this year. The 275/60 is our most popular selling tire. (I'm a Sales Rep for VSI Performance Warehouse in Hammond IN)
In the past, where issues such as these have occurred during peer teching, the Rules Administrators have let the drivers vote whether or not a certain car with whatever reason should or shouldn't be allowed. This might be one of those issues, as well as trannies and rear ends. The whole purpose is about creating a class where the average Joe can go race and have some fun. And not have to take out a second mortgage on their home to go racing. I really like how this class is shaping up, and know of quiet a few others who would be very interested in racing in it.
I am very interested myself, even if my car can't run mid 10's, I'd still want to race in it. Anything can happen in heads up racing, and yes, Kevin is right, heads up class racing is very addictive.
Keep up the good work Kip and Thanks to all of those who have spoke up with ideas and suggestions. Sorry I get so long winded sometimes.
Thanks for reading.
Patrick
I just see this class as one that anyone can purchase a stock motor car, put a well thought out bolt on combination together, and be competitive in a heads up class. (low 11's - 10.20s) Keep it simple.
With regards to the turbo, I am in favor of the 67 turbo ruling. It is a very popular turbo, heck, I wouldn't have one on my stock motor'd car if I didn't believe in it. Even if Kip decided to change it to the new HP6262 billet wheel dual ball bearing from PTE, I would be ok with down sizing it. The issue with the 67 turbo is this, if you merely say 67mm turbo, then that does open up a can of whoop ass when you throw in the GTQ turbine wheel equipped 67. And that wheel has been displaced by the even more powerful HPQ turbine wheel.
If you compare a 6776H to a 6780H, there is a significant difference in hp between the two when you start cranking the boost. We saw this difference in the beginning when it was tested, on everything from 4G63 Mitsu motors, Buick motors, 2JZ Supra motors, and even 281 CI Mod Motor Mustangs. This turbo kicks butt, but as good as it was, when you put the HPQ turbine wheel which is out right now, together with the 67 wheel, the hp goes up even further. Exactly what this ultimate number is, no one has said. And those results have not been made public.
The way I see it, if you allow 67 GTQ (These are the 6780E, 6780S, 6780H, 6780HP, 6780RE, 6780RS, 6780RH, 6780RHP part numbers from Precision), then you must take away the other big dawg items to slow the cars down. Such as roller cams, aluminum heads and 3.5" downpipes. Otherwise, you're only 20-30hp shy of what a PT70 GTQ or PT71 GTQ can currently make. (7080H and 7180H current TSM legal turbos) If you make the rules to the 6776 model, it is a legitimate 780-790 flywheel hp capable turbo. You only need 570 rear wheel hp in a 3650# car to run 10.50's. So this turbo is fully capable of providing that power level + some. Which we have already seen.
And you guys are right, this race will be during the heat of the summer in Ohio. (July 31st - August 7th 2009) Cars without Alky injection, will have a very tough time running nines. Cars with Alky shouldn't be affected as much. So if you take alky out of the picture, it will definitely help level the playing field. The only problem is, there are a ton of cars out there with alky and it could possibly hurt car count not to allow it.
I spoke with Kip today and I completely agree with what he has said. (Good conversation btw,) This is the first year for this class. Let's try to get the car count up and give a lot of people a place to race in a heads up class with thier street car. Not building the class around one car, open up the rules a little and let's see what happens. If someone shows up and blasts everyone out of the water with mid 9 passes, then we all know something has to change. In theory, these combos should run 9's, but in reality, with a slick track and hot summer temps, it's not so easy.
Regarding the slicks vs drag radials issue, I too would like to see it as an all drag radial class, but what about all those guys out there that just bought new slicks and this is the only thing that would keep them from being legal? That might turn them off from running the class as well. At this power level, (under 700 rear wheel hp) a Mickey Thompson drag radial can get the job done just as well as a slick can with a properly sorted out suspension setup. Maybe even better with more MPH potential on the big end. I myself would have to sell my bias ply ET Streets and buy new drag radials, and I have first hand knowledge about Mickey Thompson and their supply issues with drag radials. And it's not going to get any better in 2009. A lot of you know how difficult it was to buy 275/60 and 275/50 Mickey Thompson drag radials this year. The 275/60 is our most popular selling tire. (I'm a Sales Rep for VSI Performance Warehouse in Hammond IN)
In the past, where issues such as these have occurred during peer teching, the Rules Administrators have let the drivers vote whether or not a certain car with whatever reason should or shouldn't be allowed. This might be one of those issues, as well as trannies and rear ends. The whole purpose is about creating a class where the average Joe can go race and have some fun. And not have to take out a second mortgage on their home to go racing. I really like how this class is shaping up, and know of quiet a few others who would be very interested in racing in it.
I am very interested myself, even if my car can't run mid 10's, I'd still want to race in it. Anything can happen in heads up racing, and yes, Kevin is right, heads up class racing is very addictive.
Keep up the good work Kip and Thanks to all of those who have spoke up with ideas and suggestions. Sorry I get so long winded sometimes.
Thanks for reading.
Patrick
The only way to limit the money required to run in this class is to limit turbo size. Minimum weight, and must be a G body should also be a factor.
We can race two ways here, one is with our pocket books. (I'll probably come in dead last)
Or we can race with ingenuity.
I'd gladly switch to a smaller turbo to keep the racing about the latter.
Of course I might have an unfair advantage in that regard (heh-heh)
We can race two ways here, one is with our pocket books. (I'll probably come in dead last)
Or we can race with ingenuity.
I'd gladly switch to a smaller turbo to keep the racing about the latter.
Of course I might have an unfair advantage in that regard (heh-heh)
As much as people dislike the 11.50 index idea
it makes sense to me,
No cage required = car count
11.50 index = easy tech, run what you brung, break out in eleminations your done.
11.50 index = reliability for all drivetrain
you can still tweak turbo size and other limitations but an 11.50 index will seperate the TSM cars and cater to the average joe's street car
I can't count the number of Family men that can not / will not cage their car
this would be a class for them and the (Budget) racers.
Look at the number of cars in the 11s that should speak volumes
it makes sense to me,
No cage required = car count
11.50 index = easy tech, run what you brung, break out in eleminations your done.
11.50 index = reliability for all drivetrain
you can still tweak turbo size and other limitations but an 11.50 index will seperate the TSM cars and cater to the average joe's street car
I can't count the number of Family men that can not / will not cage their car
this would be a class for them and the (Budget) racers.
Look at the number of cars in the 11s that should speak volumes
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 4,849
Don't know why I'm being picked on, grumpy himself said he could run a 9.7 with a 67 turbo, and patrick said a 67 could be within 30hp of a 70, so I don't think I was too far off.
Looks like Kip is firming up the rules. I just thought I'd give my $.02. I hope it is a successful and fun class.
Brad we are all just adding our .02s :biggrin: they need input and they are getting it from all sides
Not picking on you Brad. I am only correcting your info. I think its great that Grumpy thinks he can run 9.70s. I would prefer to see it done within the class rules in the heat of competition than assume it can. The 67 v/s 70 I am not assuming. I have done the work and know the diffrence. We have done the back to back 67hpq and 70hpq test on 4.6 cobra. There is 100+ more ponies in the 71GTQ.
Instead of all this back and forth stuff, make it a FAST class. Agree on a turbo and tire size and traction aid.
Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com
Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 4,849
You are right, I'm going on theory, and just want a solid fun class. I don't see where my info needs to be corrected. You called me out about a 67 turbo which is rated at 750 saying there is no way it can pull 900 hp, yet a 70 turbo which is rated at 850 hp (750 vs 850, your 100 hp spread) is pushing close to 1000 hp to be able run an 8 second run, and we both know White and Cruz plan on doing that at Reynolds.
I guess my main point is that I thought this was going to be more of a street class. That is what I get for assuming. I really don't care how the class shakes up in terms of rules as long as it gets a lot of participants. I was just giving my opinion on what I thought the average joe GN enthusiast would like to see in a class. Again, my input was to keep the cars in this class out of the 9s. Tim, last year, was told not to run faster than 10.0 at columbus by tech. This year, do to him having an NHRA license, certified cage, and all other things needed to go 9s, they didn't bother him.
I'll more than likely be at Columbus next year spectating. If nobody runs a 9, swing by and say "I told you so!"
Black Power
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 4,617
Ah man no 4.1L blocks? 
I'll more than likely be at Columbus next year spectating. If nobody runs a 9, swing by and say "I told you so!"
I never said no one would run a 9?. You said easy 9.50 class.
I think 10.50 and the guy on his game a hi 9.90.
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 4,849
Point out one post where I said "easy 9.5", didn't happen. I think the best I said was 9.7. That's all it takes is a 9.99 before you have to spend a lot of money to run this class "legally". That is all I'm saying. Keep this class cheap, so people can run it. I'd hate to see the winner of this class at Columbus run a 9.98 and get kicked out of the track cuz he isn't legal. Like I said. If nobody runs a 9 in this class I'm happy cuz they aren't breaking safety rules.
It's not going to be cheap for the guy that has to replace his 67 for a smaller turbo. Kip is trying to get car count. I do not think there is anyone out there that will swap their 67 for a smaller turbo just to race 2 races in '09 with no guarantee of any THS races in '10. If the 9 second 67 car is going to go 9's at a THS event, he should have the safety equipment in place anyways, not just for the THS class.
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 4,849
I agree with both of you. I've said it many times. Run the class that will get the most people involved.
I agree that a 61 turbo is not cheap, but a halo bar, chassis certification, balancer etc is much more expensive. This class also allows alky. An alky system is almost as much as a 61 turbo. Yes, money will have to be spent by anyone wanting to run in this class. My input was only to keep that money to a minimum.
I've always wondered why it boiled down to TSO and TSM for the big races. I'm glad to see another class come on line. That's is why I've been a little vocal. I'm not trying to battle anyone here. I'm just trying to give a guy's input that doesn't have ready access to tuners and builders. I'd love to have a "ronnie" help me out, but I don't.
I agree that a 61 turbo is not cheap, but a halo bar, chassis certification, balancer etc is much more expensive. This class also allows alky. An alky system is almost as much as a 61 turbo. Yes, money will have to be spent by anyone wanting to run in this class. My input was only to keep that money to a minimum.
I've always wondered why it boiled down to TSO and TSM for the big races. I'm glad to see another class come on line. That's is why I've been a little vocal. I'm not trying to battle anyone here. I'm just trying to give a guy's input that doesn't have ready access to tuners and builders. I'd love to have a "ronnie" help me out, but I don't.
affordablegn
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Messages
- 256
Turbo Hot Street (THS)
Kip,
I am still up in the air on a TSM or THS car.
It sounds like the only differences are the turbo and the motor size???
Am I correct on my interpretation between TSM & THS?
I don't want to build a car to run at only 2 events.
How many events will THS be run at in 2009?
Are the payouts going to be similar to TSM?
Are the rules final now?
Can you relist them for everyone to see if they are.
It's looking more and more like TSM for me!
I thought this was a street class not a "SLOW TSM CLASS"!!!
I don't know if the rules are still up for discussion???
I still think turbo size should be 61-62mm maximum.
I ran my 61mm turbo into the high 10's.
Now I am into the low 10's with my 67mm turbo.
Drag radials only and 200r4 transmissions should be allowed.
Either way, I will be racing in one or the other!!!
Like KevinB said, "It's not going to be cheap!"
Just my 2 cents!!!
Thanks,
Jason
AffordableGN
Kip,
I am still up in the air on a TSM or THS car.
It sounds like the only differences are the turbo and the motor size???
Am I correct on my interpretation between TSM & THS?
I don't want to build a car to run at only 2 events.
How many events will THS be run at in 2009?
Are the payouts going to be similar to TSM?
Are the rules final now?
Can you relist them for everyone to see if they are.
It's looking more and more like TSM for me!
I thought this was a street class not a "SLOW TSM CLASS"!!!
I don't know if the rules are still up for discussion???
I still think turbo size should be 61-62mm maximum.
I ran my 61mm turbo into the high 10's.
Now I am into the low 10's with my 67mm turbo.
Drag radials only and 200r4 transmissions should be allowed.
Either way, I will be racing in one or the other!!!
Like KevinB said, "It's not going to be cheap!"
Just my 2 cents!!!
Thanks,
Jason
AffordableGN
