I can fully understand the reason for teardowns. Anyone that has raced (or knows someone that races) in a Stock Eliminator class knows that these racers can find 100 ways to śbend the rules”. At the Pure Stocks, solid lifter cars can easily have NHRA cheater cams, getting 50+ hp over the factory grind. On hydraulic cammed engines, the use of a hydraulic roller cam is virtually undetectable, and can produce another 50 ft lbs of torque with a substantial increase in hp. Only the owners know whatĂs in their own engines, but they seldom relay that info to anyone else. AllĂs fair in love and drag racing.
Since teardowns were never performed at the Pure Stocks, someone could easily build an engine using the lightest aluminum connecting rod (and pin) available, lightweight racing pistons, custom crank, and a roller cam. With less reciprocating mass, youĂll have an engine that will rev like your hitting it with a 50 hp shot of nitrous, and in conjunction with a roller cam, these śstock” engines can pump over 100 hp more than what they had off the showroom floor. Of course, the owner will just shrug his shoulders claiming ignorance as to why their car runs so fast.
Because of all the hype and press given to the winners of the Pure Stocks, itĂs inevitable that people would begin to build śpurpose built” cars from the ground up to win this event (just like the Nova SS was that won the 1999 Pure Stocks). Odd, because there was no prize money offered, but some people will spend an outrageous amount of money simply to have bragging rights. Those of us that are more śseasoned” Musclecar fans quickly realized that 69 Nova SS 396Ăs did not run low 12Ăs on street tires in stock trim. Quite the contrary, as some original 1969 magazine tests claimed they were disappointed at how the SS 396 Nova performed, and one magazine went as far as to call it a śpig”. They were fast, but not quite the 3000 lb. big block terror that people expected, and usually ended up running in the 14 to 15 second range off the showroom floor.
One thing that bothers me though, is that on some powerplants (most notably Pontiacs and Mopars), a very slight amount of head porting can increase swirl and cylinder filling substantially, increasing low lift flow, and that can be virtually undetectable in a teardown. Grind marks can easily be covered up, and unless the person doing the teardown has an intimate knowledge of that particular cylinder head, cheating can and will occur.
I like the idea of a teardown at the Pure Stocks, but people will still find ways to skirt the rules. The bottom end of an engine can have a multitude of race parts that will be undetectable. ItĂs sad I know, but even professional NHRA racers are caught cheating every once in a while. Because of this, itĂs very hard to accept the etĂs these Pure Stock cars run, but itĂs indeed fun to watch! I, for one, applaud Dan Jensen and Bob Boden for their efforts, and love seeing the results, and wide array of Musclecars represented every year. My only śbeef” with the Pure Stocks is that IĂve run across a few people that take the etĂs these cars run as gospel, and think thatĂs what these cars were capable of running back when they were new.
I agree that dealer prepped cars should have their own class! It would be a blast to see a Baldwin/Motion 454 Camaro running against a Fred Gibb prepped ZL-1 Camaro, or a Royal Pontiac prepped 69 RAIV Firebird
running a 69 Yenko Camaro. Most of the rules could go out the window with these cars because of the different levels of preparation and equipment the dealers used, but it would be great to see them running in their own separate class at the Pure Stocks.