What are the "bolt-on only" rules
12-14-2007, 08:31 PM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Its as cast from GMPP (less the chunk of casting I ground off in one port). Who it still be a bolt on if modified a victor jr. intake to fit (I won't grind on it at all)?
I was waiting for the first person publically to cry "foul" since I was running a carb, I had a few people IM me and tell me that as well.
Thanks for the backup 1slowformula I appreciate it!
I was waiting for the first person publically to cry "foul" since I was running a carb, I had a few people IM me and tell me that as well.
Thanks for the backup 1slowformula I appreciate it!
I too was waiting for someone to say something about the intake being changed. Thus the "gray areas" in the bolt-on world!
IMHO the fuel injection set-up would be more efficient thus faster but that just my 2 cents. I wouldn't see a carb as being a huge advantage but whether it's a bolt-on or not considering it's no longer a stock long block is up for debate. I say to each his own.
12-14-2007, 09:07 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland, USA
Posts: 473
Seems like it must have been 10 years ago----(how time flys)----we were making the one and only super detailed 1/4 times page with all runs peer checked and verified for the Impala SS cult members.
LINK
The 1st few years we, (we as in me and a few friends), considered Bolt-on as stock untouched long block...no toughing the heads with rockers or valve springs. Seemed fair.
Then we got to thinking, where is the best place to put the guys that do put roller rockers and upgraded valve springs on their motor? They are not really "heads/cam" guys. They do have an advantage over true bone stock long block guys. The decision to place them into "Bolt-on" was easy to make after realizing that rockers are a common mod and that the overall goal is to make the cars faster and faster so allowing rockers actually encouraged people to make their cars faster so the 14 second Mustank will usually be killed by the 13 second heavy Chevy. So yes the rockers are an advantage but "bolt-on" was best fit.
We do another thing different than the Fbody guys in the bolt-on and heads/cam class for the Imp SS 1/4 times page. We allow the short block to have a rebuild but no block decking and no oversized pistons. The crank/rods/pistons must remain stock.
There are a lot of junkyard motor heads/cam 350LT1 cars being run with a precautionary new set of bearings or at least a new oil pump or oil pump relief spring. Those mods are sort-a preventative maintenance and not power producing. You don't see bearings and oil pump upgrades with the bolt-on guys basically because the motor has not left the engine bay yet.
Heck, I have a power robbing big block Chevy hv/hp oil pump in my "stock bottom" 350LT1 motor.
Looking at the heads/cam 350 list the top 9 cars all have something done to the bottom end such as oil pump/spring/timing chain/bearings, (accept one guy Ryan Ahart). We still consider the motors "stock bottom" though.
And who makes these decision? Well, again that is "we" (as in me and a few buddies). Someone has to do it. Some people hate me for my decisions. Most like the page and the classifications.
It would be very cool if the Fbody guys had a page as such where you could sort to your hearts content, (60', 1/4, mph, class, motor, gear, tranny, cam, etc). We have weight for the notable cars in the details section but soon will have a front page weight column.
Note the quickest Impala SS bolt-on car weighs in at 3925 and runs 12.36 @ 107.
Karl
LINK
The 1st few years we, (we as in me and a few friends), considered Bolt-on as stock untouched long block...no toughing the heads with rockers or valve springs. Seemed fair.
Then we got to thinking, where is the best place to put the guys that do put roller rockers and upgraded valve springs on their motor? They are not really "heads/cam" guys. They do have an advantage over true bone stock long block guys. The decision to place them into "Bolt-on" was easy to make after realizing that rockers are a common mod and that the overall goal is to make the cars faster and faster so allowing rockers actually encouraged people to make their cars faster so the 14 second Mustank will usually be killed by the 13 second heavy Chevy. So yes the rockers are an advantage but "bolt-on" was best fit.
We do another thing different than the Fbody guys in the bolt-on and heads/cam class for the Imp SS 1/4 times page. We allow the short block to have a rebuild but no block decking and no oversized pistons. The crank/rods/pistons must remain stock.
There are a lot of junkyard motor heads/cam 350LT1 cars being run with a precautionary new set of bearings or at least a new oil pump or oil pump relief spring. Those mods are sort-a preventative maintenance and not power producing. You don't see bearings and oil pump upgrades with the bolt-on guys basically because the motor has not left the engine bay yet.
Heck, I have a power robbing big block Chevy hv/hp oil pump in my "stock bottom" 350LT1 motor.
Looking at the heads/cam 350 list the top 9 cars all have something done to the bottom end such as oil pump/spring/timing chain/bearings, (accept one guy Ryan Ahart). We still consider the motors "stock bottom" though.
And who makes these decision? Well, again that is "we" (as in me and a few buddies). Someone has to do it. Some people hate me for my decisions. Most like the page and the classifications.
It would be very cool if the Fbody guys had a page as such where you could sort to your hearts content, (60', 1/4, mph, class, motor, gear, tranny, cam, etc). We have weight for the notable cars in the details section but soon will have a front page weight column.
Note the quickest Impala SS bolt-on car weighs in at 3925 and runs 12.36 @ 107.
Karl
12-14-2007, 09:50 PM
#33
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: GENEVA, Ohio
Posts: 463
Karl,
I too would like to see a running list like the b-body guys do, its helpfull for those getting into it to gauge themselves against like combinations.
I do see a problem however with rebuilt shortblocks/longblocks, if I had Woodro Josey build mine and you bought yours from Gary Noname which would stand the chance to be "quicker" even though it was built to stock specs? I'm pretty sure some of the quicker f-bodies have run deep into the 10's (i know different cam design). Valve jobs are an incredible way to pick up horsepower as you know, they definately are stock heads however GM never cut those angles on stockers. just my humble opinion on longblocks.
I too would like to see a running list like the b-body guys do, its helpfull for those getting into it to gauge themselves against like combinations.
I do see a problem however with rebuilt shortblocks/longblocks, if I had Woodro Josey build mine and you bought yours from Gary Noname which would stand the chance to be "quicker" even though it was built to stock specs? I'm pretty sure some of the quicker f-bodies have run deep into the 10's (i know different cam design). Valve jobs are an incredible way to pick up horsepower as you know, they definately are stock heads however GM never cut those angles on stockers. just my humble opinion on longblocks.
12-15-2007, 08:44 AM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland, USA
Posts: 473
Karl,
I too would like to see a running list like the b-body guys do, its helpfull for those getting into it to gauge themselves against like combinations.
I do see a problem however with rebuilt shortblocks/longblocks, if I had Woodro Josey build mine and you bought yours from Gary Noname which would stand the chance to be "quicker" even though it was built to stock specs? I'm pretty sure some of the quicker f-bodies have run deep into the 10's (i know different cam design). Valve jobs are an incredible way to pick up horsepower as you know, they definately are stock heads however GM never cut those angles on stockers. just my humble opinion on longblocks.
I too would like to see a running list like the b-body guys do, its helpfull for those getting into it to gauge themselves against like combinations.
I do see a problem however with rebuilt shortblocks/longblocks, if I had Woodro Josey build mine and you bought yours from Gary Noname which would stand the chance to be "quicker" even though it was built to stock specs? I'm pretty sure some of the quicker f-bodies have run deep into the 10's (i know different cam design). Valve jobs are an incredible way to pick up horsepower as you know, they definately are stock heads however GM never cut those angles on stockers. just my humble opinion on longblocks.
Still, all good points. We keep an eye out for things like that and verify by either demonstrated honesty, reputation, lots of friends who can vouch for, etc. If the person is the least bit untrustworth they will not get posted (unless the car is just average fast I don't concern with verification as much). Also, once caught in a fib then forever a fibber so there are some people that will never get posted no matter what. (Joe Prince---remember him?).
There are a few stock eliminator Impala SS and other bbody cars and some are damn quick. I think one guy has run 11's. I've asked some people who know the guy, (can't remember his name), to give us the car specs so we can put it on the page, (knowing that he would not want to), but at least maybe we could get chassic combo and other neat info from him. Brent Darroch! found him. The guy runs 11.90's all the time and in all weather it seems and has to weigh 4200lb, all with "stockish" heads/cam. Amazing what a valve job will do, (and a monster duration cam)
Karl
12-15-2007, 10:13 AM
#35
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1998
Location: Charlotte,MI USA
Posts: 6,249
The whole idea behind the bolt-on category was to have a level platform to compare performance for the guys who just didn't have the money or the want to get ''into'' their motors in their stock f-bodies. And changing from fuel injected to carb really isn't fitting with spirit of the competition and technically with the ''rules'' as they were laid out by GM High Tech editors, one because it was supposed to be a fuel injected motor and two because the intake manifold touches oil.
12-15-2007, 05:46 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Haverhill MA
Posts: 2,307
The whole idea behind the bolt-on category was to have a level platform to compare performance for the guys who just didn't have the money or the want to get ''into'' their motors in their stock f-bodies. And changing from fuel injected to carb really isn't fitting with spirit of the competition and technically with the ''rules'' as they were laid out by GM High Tech editors, one because it was supposed to be a fuel injected motor and two because the intake manifold touches oil.
i just looked at it as a stock long block with stock intake...
12-15-2007, 08:23 PM
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Boy, this thread started out kind of slow but is picking up steam. I know where you're coming from Tom. My Impala is the one that Karl spoke of having Woodro Josey heads. I had a stock long block LT1 with 155,000 miles that went 12.80s. They kept me in the bolt-on category (see ET page under Scott Kaufman). In preparation for running IHRA Pure Stock I had Woodro do my heads which is basically a valve job ... NOTHING compared to NHRA legal stocker heads (completely different rules for cylinder heads in Pure Stock). After I did this they put me in the heads/cam category. What is so funny about all of it is that when I put the new $1,000 heads on the car it slowed down. 
Seriously!! I think we can all have our own opinion about whether or not a carbed LT1 is considerd "bolt-on" or not but until you show up at a race, with predetermined and agreed upon rules, the point is mute. The Impala crowd did a good job of outlining such parameters.
Seriously!! I think we can all have our own opinion about whether or not a carbed LT1 is considerd "bolt-on" or not but until you show up at a race, with predetermined and agreed upon rules, the point is mute. The Impala crowd did a good job of outlining such parameters.
12-15-2007, 11:50 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 79
Actually, you could argue that a manifold is a bolt on. I know that you could argue just about anything is a bolt on, but to me "bolt on" means a stock long block, first and foremost. Yes, I know you can bolt a SC or nitrous to a stock long block, but that's just being silly.
Rich
Rich
I whole heartedly agree with Rich. An intake manifold was considered a bolt on long before that magazine shootout was put together. I don't see it being any differnent than when I tossed the cast manifold and quadrajet on my 79 Z and went with a performer rpm and holley carb. Way back then those were considered bolt on changes. I have a lot bigger problen with the roller rockers than changing induction. IMO, it's obvious that nitrous and blowers are classified as power adders, not bolt ons.
Personally I am very interested in this form of racing and it's good to see that others are as well. I for one would like to see someone start a list of the fastest bolt on LT1 F-Body cars. As far as I'm concerned whoever takes the time to organize the list could mediate the rules.
12-16-2007, 12:25 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Haverhill MA
Posts: 2,307
I whole heartedly agree with Rich. An intake manifold was considered a bolt on long before that magazine shootout was put together. I don't see it being any differnent than when I tossed the cast manifold and quadrajet on my 79 Z and went with a performer rpm and holley carb. Way back then those were considered bolt on changes. I have a lot bigger problen with the roller rockers than changing induction. IMO, it's obvious that nitrous and blowers are classified as power adders, not bolt ons.
Personally I am very interested in this form of racing and it's good to see that others are as well. I for one would like to see someone start a list of the fastest bolt on LT1 F-Body cars. As far as I'm concerned whoever takes the time to organize the list could mediate the rules.
Personally I am very interested in this form of racing and it's good to see that others are as well. I for one would like to see someone start a list of the fastest bolt on LT1 F-Body cars. As far as I'm concerned whoever takes the time to organize the list could mediate the rules.
12-16-2007, 07:32 AM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: GENEVA, Ohio
Posts: 463
Alright, who's making the list? If nobody minds I can keep the updates ongoing for it.
Another question for any other bolt-on type cars, what kind of rear wheel hp and torque are you making? I was in the low 300's for both prior to me finding a problem that existed when I took it to the chassis dyno.
CamaroRacing12, would you mind if I put the car on Digital Fuel Injection (DFI), those systems are far superior to factory FI and possibly better than a carb? I wouldn't have objection to running that and those in the know have discovered that was the key to unlocking the lt1 power potential in stock eliminator
Another question for any other bolt-on type cars, what kind of rear wheel hp and torque are you making? I was in the low 300's for both prior to me finding a problem that existed when I took it to the chassis dyno.
CamaroRacing12, would you mind if I put the car on Digital Fuel Injection (DFI), those systems are far superior to factory FI and possibly better than a carb? I wouldn't have objection to running that and those in the know have discovered that was the key to unlocking the lt1 power potential in stock eliminator
12-16-2007, 07:35 AM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 79
Intakes swaps have been considered "bolt ons" ever since the phrase came into existance. Magazines have doing bolt on articles since way back before Al Gore invented the internet. I just don't see why it should be changed now. The intake is NOT part of the long block assembly.
Does anyone know if the LS1 "Stock Internal" guys allow intake swaps?
12-16-2007, 09:06 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 79
Tom, I don't care who maintains the list, so long as it isn't me...lol. I think whoever does it should get in touch with a moderator about getting it stickied. It also needs to be decided what is the criteria for a submission. Is a picture of a time slip good enough? What other info should be included, weight, gears, stall, weather, track location, misc. mods? The rules should be clearly stated in the heading. Someone get it going and I'll participate.
12-16-2007, 10:04 AM
#44
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: GENEVA, Ohio
Posts: 463
I'll contact the moderator and see what needs to get done and if they will make it a STICKY.
Info included should be the following:
Car type
Car weight
Auto or stick (If auto what stahl)
Trans type
Gear
Tire
Misc other mods
Picture
Copy of timeslip would be nice, video would be better.
Info included should be the following:
Car type
Car weight
Auto or stick (If auto what stahl)
Trans type
Gear
Tire
Misc other mods
Picture
Copy of timeslip would be nice, video would be better.
Last edited by tomcowle; 12-16-2007 at 06:19 PM. Reason: spell
12-16-2007, 12:00 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: West Linn, OR
Posts: 1,752
I wouldn't mind maintaining it but I think there may be a conflict of interes since I am one of the guys trying for it, maybe we can ask someone impartial to look over the rules and weigh the choices...