stroked small blocks in the race cars?

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by 1795

Paul,

Scat is grinding a crank. I am trying to stay within the rules and would have to prove that prior racers had stroked their engines, something that would be hard to do as not many people would admit to having stretched the rules previously.


Jim

If I am interpreting what you are saying correctly Jim, the original racers were prohibited from running a stroker crank. Regulations not withstanding some chose to run the bigger cranks anyway. In addition to running the bigger cranks they made a conscious decision not to advertise the fact they were doing so.

It appears that nothing has changed. The rules still prohibit the cranks and, like the original racers who did use them, a current user could build his motor with the bigger crank, just like the original racers did and then race the car with the illegal crank, making a conscious decision not to advertise the fact they were using a stroker.

It is hard to get any more period correct than that — replicated vintage cheating without advertisement, pretty authentic ...


Ed


p.s. Follow on thought. If you get tagged for an illegal stroker crank (which shouldn't happen if you don't tell anybody), you should maintain you were replicating what some of the better known 'rules optimizers' were doing back in the day soooo, you are not cheating!

Your argument would continue, positing that in actual fact you are using a well known, period correct, true to life (and form) performance enhancing technique from back in the day that anybody can still do today — which obviously means the car is not only period correct, but a legal vintage racer from that time period inder the rules.

[1795]

Originally Posted by eschaider

If I am interpreting what you are saying correctly Jim, the original racers were prohibited from running a stroker crank. Regulations not withstanding some chose to run the bigger cranks anyway. In addition to running the bigger cranks they made a conscious decision not to advertise the fact they were doing so.

It appears that nothing has changed. The rules still prohibit the cranks and, like the original racers who did use them, a current user would build his motor with the bigger crank, just like the original racers did and then race the car with the illegal crank, making a conscious decision not to advertise the fact they were using a stroker.

It is hard to get any more period correct than that — replicated vintage cheating without advertisement, pretty authentic ...


Ed


p.s. Follow on thought. If you get tagged for an illegal stroker crank (which shouldn't happen if you don't tell anybody), you should maintain you were replicating what some of the better known 'rules optimizers' were doing back in the day soooo, you are not cheating!

Your argument would continue, positing that in actual fact you are using a well known, period correct, true to life (and form) performance enhancing technique from back in the day that anybody can still do today — which obviously means the car is not only period correct, but a legal vintage racer from that time period inder the rules.

Ed,

Will you be my legal counsel in case required? Unless someone complained, there would be no engine tear down or volume assessment. In vintage racing it is not like SCCA or other professional events in which the top three finishers go to impound to make sure that they were not cheating. There are several people who race vintage that everyone knows cheat, but given that there are no cash prizes nobody complains. Probably the only people that would complain are the ones that are cheating

Have a merry Christmas.

Jim

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by 1795

Ed,

Will you be my legal counsel in case required? Unless someone complained, there would be no engine tear down or volume assessment. In vintage racing it is not like SCCA or other professional events in which the top three finishers go to impound to make sure that they were not cheating. There are several people who race vintage that everyone knows cheat, but given that there are no cash prizes nobody complains. Probably the only people that wold complain are the ones that are cheating

Have a merry Christmas.

Jim

Merry Christmas & Happy New Years, Jim


Ed


p.s. Actually although I would love to, I am not licensed as legal counsel nor admitted to any state boards. That said however, Patrick is and it strikes me this is just the kind of argument he would derive immeasureable personal satisfaction not to mention pleasure from. Sort of like a cat playing with a mouse ...

[1795]

Ed,

I know that Patrick is a lawyer, thought that offering the job to you might get him interested....

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by 1795

Ed,

I know that Patrick is a lawyer, thought that offering the job to you might get him interested....

All that would achieve is a quadrupling of the fee.

[1795]

Merry Christmas Patrick.

You could use the extra money to do something special.....like repaint your cobra

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by 1795

Merry Christmas Patrick.

You could use the extra money to do something special.....like repaint your cobra

Originally Posted by eschaider

But Patrick, there is an unusually high level of perverse satisfaction possible in this sort of engagement. I would think that alone would be sufficiently attractive to spawn some level of interest.

Ed

I will leave the perverse spawning to you two.