I know it's been just a little over 30 years since the SCTA gave the vintage
engines a place to race. That struggle was hard fought. Like the splitting
up of the "XF's" and "XO's, a bitter battle. Personally I don't see the
need, very few of the flatheads Fords are really big and all of the records
are still using the common inch combinations of the past (hey remember I
measure them every year) All the XO's records are not all Jimmy's. As for
costs, only the original costs of the engine may be different. Head, block,
and crank work costs the same. Good pistons, rods, valves, springs, etc:
cost the same for all sizes. If there was a 260 in limit for a Jimmy I know
I'd spend the same $ as for a 320. The only reason Bill Carlson wanted to
run a in E/GMR was the record was open. Hey, I'm always open for
suggestions. Those of you who want it go out an petition the people and
write the rules committee. The SCTA doesn't have a problem so it doesn't
need a solution, you who want it do.
Subject: Re: vintage engine classes
> This idea was brought up, using incorrect means, a few years ago by Bill
> Carlson, Doug King, and myself. It came about after Bill and I were told
we
> could not run a 258 cid '50 GMC engine in E/MR we would have to run in
X/FR.
> The classic category does not allow for the competitor who wants to run a
> 235 Chevy, or a Chrysler six or any of many Vintage engines, all of which
> have to run in a 325 inch class.
|