Trophy Stock Intake Question?

RL Wiltshire · 10-18-1999, 08:22 PM

I just finished reading the 5.0 Mag article on Jamie Holten's TS car. I believe this is the second article I have read about his car in which INTAKE PORTING, not port matching has been referenced. Am I missing something? I understood from George that no porting was allowed other than the 1 inch into the runners from port matching. I have read the rules and it certainly does not address intake porting, so....is it porting or is it no porting? George? Jeff? Anyone?
Thanks
Randy
TS 34

10-19-1999, 06:28 AM

Technically, intake work is limited to the same one inch given to the heads for gasket matching. I know what you mean about the articles. If you read the article closely, you'll also find that Jamie was using stock E7TE heads that had been worked. In a recent Super Ford article that covered the Gainesville T/S winner, there was mention of ported heads also. Its pretty disappointing to read about these guys being outside the rules after they've taken the trophy & money home; especially since Jamie beat me in the finals at Atltanta. That could have been an article on me instead.

------------------
Jeff Chambers
T/S #4
12.40 Seconds/109.5 MPH
http://www.kellnet.com/chambers/default.htm

George Klass · 10-19-1999, 07:28 AM

I read it too. Several racers have also brought the article to my attention. This particular car was inspected at Atlanta in our usual fasion (remove intake manifold, disassemble lifter, check cam lift, pump engine, etc. Nothing was found amiss. The head was "port matched" the allowable 1". I have not seen the car for awhile and we will go over the car when he again shows up including the remeoval of one of his heads if we think that it needs it.
Magazines are not always accurate in reporting the info. For instance, Fox Lake may prepare a T/S head in a legal fashion and the magazine may report that as "heads ported by Fox Lake". Ask Bob Kurgan about the magazine article about his car when it was reported that he had "shaved door handles". That's the first we noticed it and he has gone through hell ever since then.

10-19-1999, 09:07 AM

The Gainesville winner was given a mild tear-down after the event, primarily due to the objections of the Trophy Stock racers as a group. Jamie Holten's car was not given any tear-down after winning at Atlanta other than the two of us being asked to remove the passenger's side kick panel to pull/inspect the computer.

Trophy Stock did a pretty good job of policing ourselves this year. We were trying to make sure that everyone was playing by ther rules. At Ennis, there was even a collective 'pooling' of the money to have the season champion torn-down to make sure he was getting the crown legally. Kevin took things in stride (especially since he wound up $250 richer) and everyone else was reassured that he was completely legal in winning the crown. We've got a good group of racers that are trying their best to play by the rules. People coming in next year can be reassured that we'll be scrutinizing them as well.

George is correct though in noting that the magazines may not be totally correct. They have a tendency to embellish the facts sometimes to make things more exciting to the reader. Personally, I'd rather have it noted that these guys have managed to push their 3300# Mustangs into the low 12's WITHOUT major head/intake porting. I think that's more impressive!

------------------
Jeff Chambers
T/S #4
12.40 Seconds/109.5 MPH
http://www.kellnet.com/chambers/default.htm

T/S # 25 · 10-19-1999, 08:23 PM

George, I was just wondering along with a few others if the cam lift was checked with a solid roller or not? Just a question, I don't mean to start a big debate.

Joe
T/S # 25 (#7 after this year)
12.80 @ 107.89

10-20-1999, 06:40 AM

Good point Joe. Checking the cam lift with a hydraulic lifter is fruitless since the lifter will bleed down and collapse; giving a false reading on cam lift. Cam lift needs to be measured with a solid lifter or at the very least a hydraulic lifter with the plunger reversed so that it acts as a solid lifter.

------------------
Jeff Chambers
T/S #4
12.40 Seconds/109.5 MPH
http://www.kellnet.com/chambers/default.htm

George Klass · 10-20-1999, 07:21 AM

No, a solid lifter was not used for this test. And yes, you ar correct about the solid being a more exact measurment tool. We elected not to use the solid lifter during '99 inspections because we didn't notify racers in advance, in the Rulebook about it. This has been rectified in the new Rulebook. This cam lift test was done like all of the other lifter/cam checks this year, with the lifter completely collapsed. This will be pretty close as a measurement tool. In the several cam lift checks done this year, all have been done in this way. Next year, we will use our solid lifter for these tests.

Blue91gt · 10-20-1999, 08:11 PM

Umm, excuse me, but, I find a sentence that George Klass wrote above to be very interesting.

"Ask Bob Kurgan about the magazine article about his car when it was reported that he had "shaved door handles". That's the first we noticed it and he has gone through hell ever since then."

After all the races this season, no tech official noticed it till AFTER a mag article? You (GK) gave him hell at Cordova about it, yet still let him race, and he was given hell about it at Ennis and finally made a "fix" so he could run.

My question is, is it against the rules or not?

If it is, why did you only "give him hell" and not d/q the car at Cordova? He had no kind of "fix" for it at that time. If it is NOT a rule, why did you give him hell at all?

We know that it is against the rules. Its not good for safety, since the safety crews might have a hard time getting into the car in case something happened.

You should not let people who are against the rules race. Thats why there is a rulebook to begin with. You should tech people in by the rulebook, not by your judgement and b/c you are buddies with them. Rules are rules.

You might as well write the FFW rulebook in pencil and on a notepad so you can fit it in your pocket... pencil erases easily. You let him run with no handles and the 'infamous 4" exhaust' that was legal yet no one else knew it was legal. Hahaha. Nice job at Cordova

My point is ENFORCE THE RULES. Dont just let someone who is not following the rules run. Dont just "give them hell". Do your job.

Regards,

------------------
Fred Bingham http://blue91gt.351stang.com

[This message has been edited by Blue91gt (edited 10-20-1999).]

[This message has been edited by Blue91gt (edited 10-20-1999).]

10-18-1999, 08:22 PM	#1
RL Wiltshire Registered Member Join Date: Jan 1999 Location: Milford, Mi. 48381 Posts: 12	Trophy Stock Intake Question? I just finished reading the 5.0 Mag article on Jamie Holten's TS car. I believe this is the second article I have read about his car in which INTAKE PORTING, not port matching has been referenced. Am I missing something? I understood from George that no porting was allowed other than the 1 inch into the runners from port matching. I have read the rules and it certainly does not address intake porting, so....is it porting or is it no porting? George? Jeff? Anyone? Thanks Randy TS 34

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
stock GT40 head intake runner opening	mak375	Windsor Power	2	04-07-2003 09:14 PM
GT40P's with a stock intake?	Agent_4573	Windsor Power	3	09-15-2002 09:05 PM
Questions about hoses connected to stock intake	zepherman	Windsor Power	14	09-13-2002 05:05 AM
HP Question on Combo Cam, upper, lower intake. Work starts Monday	89FHPLX	Windsor Power	7	01-08-2002 01:42 AM
Trophy stock question	mustang_500hp	Racer's Club House	2	08-30-1999 09:03 PM

10-19-1999, 06:28 AM	#2
jchambers Guest Posts: n/a	Technically, intake work is limited to the same one inch given to the heads for gasket matching. I know what you mean about the articles. If you read the article closely, you'll also find that Jamie was using stock E7TE heads that had been worked. In a recent Super Ford article that covered the Gainesville T/S winner, there was mention of ported heads also. Its pretty disappointing to read about these guys being outside the rules after they've taken the trophy & money home; especially since Jamie beat me in the finals at Atltanta. That could have been an article on me instead. ------------------ Jeff Chambers T/S #4 12.40 Seconds/109.5 MPH http://www.kellnet.com/chambers/default.htm

10-19-1999, 07:28 AM	#3
George Klass Registered Member Join Date: Dec 1998 Location: Torrance, California, USA Posts: 104	I read it too. Several racers have also brought the article to my attention. This particular car was inspected at Atlanta in our usual fasion (remove intake manifold, disassemble lifter, check cam lift, pump engine, etc. Nothing was found amiss. The head was "port matched" the allowable 1". I have not seen the car for awhile and we will go over the car when he again shows up including the remeoval of one of his heads if we think that it needs it. Magazines are not always accurate in reporting the info. For instance, Fox Lake may prepare a T/S head in a legal fashion and the magazine may report that as "heads ported by Fox Lake". Ask Bob Kurgan about the magazine article about his car when it was reported that he had "shaved door handles". That's the first we noticed it and he has gone through hell ever since then.

10-19-1999, 09:07 AM	#4
jchambers Guest Posts: n/a	The Gainesville winner was given a mild tear-down after the event, primarily due to the objections of the Trophy Stock racers as a group. Jamie Holten's car was not given any tear-down after winning at Atlanta other than the two of us being asked to remove the passenger's side kick panel to pull/inspect the computer. Trophy Stock did a pretty good job of policing ourselves this year. We were trying to make sure that everyone was playing by ther rules. At Ennis, there was even a collective 'pooling' of the money to have the season champion torn-down to make sure he was getting the crown legally. Kevin took things in stride (especially since he wound up $250 richer) and everyone else was reassured that he was completely legal in winning the crown. We've got a good group of racers that are trying their best to play by the rules. People coming in next year can be reassured that we'll be scrutinizing them as well. George is correct though in noting that the magazines may not be totally correct. They have a tendency to embellish the facts sometimes to make things more exciting to the reader. Personally, I'd rather have it noted that these guys have managed to push their 3300# Mustangs into the low 12's WITHOUT major head/intake porting. I think that's more impressive! ------------------ Jeff Chambers T/S #4 12.40 Seconds/109.5 MPH http://www.kellnet.com/chambers/default.htm

10-19-1999, 08:23 PM	#5
T/S # 25 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: Pinellas Park, FL. Posts: 280	George, I was just wondering along with a few others if the cam lift was checked with a solid roller or not? Just a question, I don't mean to start a big debate. Joe T/S # 25 (#7 after this year) 12.80 @ 107.89

10-20-1999, 06:40 AM	#6
jchambers Guest Posts: n/a	Good point Joe. Checking the cam lift with a hydraulic lifter is fruitless since the lifter will bleed down and collapse; giving a false reading on cam lift. Cam lift needs to be measured with a solid lifter or at the very least a hydraulic lifter with the plunger reversed so that it acts as a solid lifter. ------------------ Jeff Chambers T/S #4 12.40 Seconds/109.5 MPH http://www.kellnet.com/chambers/default.htm

10-20-1999, 07:21 AM	#7
George Klass Registered Member Join Date: Dec 1998 Location: Torrance, California, USA Posts: 104	No, a solid lifter was not used for this test. And yes, you ar correct about the solid being a more exact measurment tool. We elected not to use the solid lifter during '99 inspections because we didn't notify racers in advance, in the Rulebook about it. This has been rectified in the new Rulebook. This cam lift test was done like all of the other lifter/cam checks this year, with the lifter completely collapsed. This will be pretty close as a measurement tool. In the several cam lift checks done this year, all have been done in this way. Next year, we will use our solid lifter for these tests.

10-20-1999, 08:11 PM	#8
Blue91gt Registered Member Join Date: Oct 1999 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 6	Umm, excuse me, but, I find a sentence that George Klass wrote above to be very interesting. "Ask Bob Kurgan about the magazine article about his car when it was reported that he had "shaved door handles". That's the first we noticed it and he has gone through hell ever since then." After all the races this season, no tech official noticed it till AFTER a mag article? You (GK) gave him hell at Cordova about it, yet still let him race, and he was given hell about it at Ennis and finally made a "fix" so he could run. My question is, is it against the rules or not? If it is, why did you only "give him hell" and not d/q the car at Cordova? He had no kind of "fix" for it at that time. If it is NOT a rule, why did you give him hell at all? We know that it is against the rules. Its not good for safety, since the safety crews might have a hard time getting into the car in case something happened. You should not let people who are against the rules race. Thats why there is a rulebook to begin with. You should tech people in by the rulebook, not by your judgement and b/c you are buddies with them. Rules are rules. You might as well write the FFW rulebook in pencil and on a notepad so you can fit it in your pocket... pencil erases easily. You let him run with no handles and the 'infamous 4" exhaust' that was legal yet no one else knew it was legal. Hahaha. Nice job at Cordova My point is ENFORCE THE RULES. Dont just let someone who is not following the rules run. Dont just "give them hell". Do your job. Regards, ------------------ Fred Bingham http://blue91gt.351stang.com [This message has been edited by Blue91gt (edited 10-20-1999).] [This message has been edited by Blue91gt (edited 10-20-1999).]